The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1906-01-13
A STATEMENT.

Local Branch No. 40, Internation-
al United Brotherhood of Leather
Workers on Horse Goods, refutes the
statement published in The Hides and
Leather Journal, relative to the.
strike at the kins= Campbell COM
pany, Cincinnatf,T Ohio.
We take this opportunity of refut-s
ing an article that appeared in the
last issue of The Hides and Leather
Journal. The article was to the ef-
feet that the firm of Perkins-Camp-
bell Co. had about IS men employed,
and according to applications at
hand, expected to have at least 100
mon at work within a week. They
claim that they are not taking any
but live, energetic and sober me-
chanics, and have every confidence
that they will soon be in as good q
position, as far as the factory Is con-
cerned, as before the strike.
Now, the facts in the case are that
the Perkins-Campbell Co. have at
the present time only about ten men
who might possibly be construed as
having some mechanical ability, and
about forty men and boys who know
positively nothing about the harness
business, as they had never been in
side Of harness factory before, and
do not know the difference between
a hame strap and horse collar; they
are there simply for the purpose of
making a showing. AS to the num-
ber OF applications at hand, will say
that it Is all bOsh, as every mechanic
In the country will very readily ap-
preciate the fact that mechanics are
not to be had simply for the asking,
as they don't grow on trees.
Their statement goes on to say that
while it should never be forgotten,
that there are always two sides to-
every dispute, the fact remains that
the men who struck at the Perkins-
Campbell Co. had no grievances, ap~
parently, so far as wages and hours
OF labor are concerned, but quit be-
cause they refused to work under a
newly appointed foreman whom
they were not satisfied with. The
attitude Of the strikers is unreasona-
Bile and unfortunate. as 1t at once in
wolves the great and vital questions
as to whether employers shall run
their own. shops, with such men as
thoy see fit to employ, or be at the
mercy of the employees in this re-
spect.> $
Now, then, as to the last named
statement, will say that we positively
deny the statement that we are at
all unreasonable; on the contrary,
we hold that we now have and al
ways have had the best of feeling to-
wards the firm. We have at no time,
in looking to our interests, lost sight
| of the fact that our employers best
! interests are our own as we'll. In
| ksubstantiation of this statement, we
beg leave to lay the causes, leading
up to the present controversy, before
the public, and would ask them,
through a spirit of fairness, to- de-
! termine as to whether or not we are
unreasonable in this matter. -" ~
On or about October 1tSh, 1905,
the firm of Perkins Campbell CO.;
made proposition to Brother Chas.
Schumard, who, by the way, was at
that time, and had been for the past
nineteen years, head cutter in that
department, that he accept the posi-
tion Of foreman in said department..
with the understanding that he sever
his connection with our organization.
Now let It sbe understood that. q part
Of our Constitution provides that in
Iordsr fora member to, retire from