The daily morning journal and courier., 1907-09-14
Mw HAVEN MORNING COURIER SATURDAY. SEPTEMBER i4

duStrial conditions nave peeH Sledul- Iy growing better just as fast as the have combined and have stood by each other unselfishly and thus gained increased power.
 I have known these people intimate ly for many years. It is unfair and l unjust to make the general and sweeping assertion that they "hate the man who pays them money" They i have hated the man who ground them 1 under his heel This assertion by you, you also deny, for you say that when they are working under the good industrial conditions which you claim for the Battle Creek Idea, they | are affectionate towards the old boss" There are, of course, eXcep- tions, but in the main I find that the question of love and hate is largely determined by the conditions under which men work.
 I admit that there is too often the spirit of hate" I can also readily see that present day employers are suffering, in part, for the sins of their fathers. I believe that the spirit of hate, so far as it exists, exists largely in the nature of an inevitable reaction against centuries of oppression. So far as 1t is being perpetuated, it is largely because there are still em- ployers who inherit the ideas of their predecessors.
 The things which you mention as incidental to this spirit do not repre- sent the general spirit of present day unionism.
 I admit the most you say in your eulogy of your own creation. The trouble with your appeal is that its note seems to be, Every man for himself" I know that many men participate in strikes against their own personal interests. Whatever else may be said for 1t, it should be said that it is an unselfsh act They are disposed to stand by the other fel- lows. If their employers suffer by 1t, | 1t is the fault of other employers who still do wrong. The question with the wage -earner is often this, Shall stand by my fellows or my employers? It is to my own personal interest to stand by my employers, but is 1t not | in the larger interest or humanity to stand by my fellows ?" Again and again these men are forced to put this question to themselves and answer it according to their own consciences and their own humanitarian sense. I fear that when men have deserted the unions and gone to such places as Battle Creek, they have often simply consulted selfish interests and have forsaken' their fellowmcn.
 Granting that the Battle Creek Idea is all that you say it is, am in- elined to feel that it is we'll to have such an institution as a living example to set before employers. Such a con- dition is, as you say un illustration of better day between capital and labor"
 Until that day comes, however, I do lnot believe that organized labor can lay down it's work
 It Is true, as you say, that workmen have lost millions in strikes My study of history, however, shows me clearly that while doubtless there have been wrong and unfortunate strikes, 1t has been largely by such means that organized labor has been obliged to gain it's ends, You must not forget history, If you will turn its pages back as far as the last days of serfdom you will clearly see that in the long run. and in general the betterment of industrial conditions has been parallel with the increased power of organized labor. To see what it has done, you have only to compare conditions then and now.
 l have thoughtfully compared the tenor of your letter with what find to be the general tenor of organized labor, viewed in the light of history. l find great deal of seltishness in both, just as l do everywhere in humanity. But on the whole I find this to be the contrast; the appear of your letter is entirely selfish It says to the union men of exceptional and good ability; Quit your fellows, never mind those hwho are getting down to the bottom or who are nearly there; find a Battle Creek heaven for yourselves and get safely in.
 Organized labor says, on the con trary, to such men: We know you can do better for yourselves by such re- course but we plead that we all stand together until the other fellows have lalso gained their rights.
 I am sorry to say that your kind oi appeal used to be in some part the
 message of the pulpit Our younger
 preachers, however, do not feel satis-
 fled to get few choice souls safely ir
 heaven. We have larger ideal. |
 is that of bringing in the Kingdom oi God on earth everywhere.
 I think that on the whole the spiri
 of unionism is far less selfish thar lthe spirit of your appeal,
 Of course, you revert to the mis
 takes that have been made by unions Being composed of human beings i was inevitable that they should make mistakes. Again, however, my his
 torical study does not reveal so man!
 mistakes on the part of present da!
 unionism, as 1t does on the part 0
 blind, stupid and blundering employ
 CTS, especially in the earlier days O
 the conflict.
 think you made your appeal to tn,
 wrong parties. I wish you would writ,
 another letter and make the appeal t.
 all employers. There are yet many o
 them left who need such an appeal
 until they adopt all the good meas
 ures which you claim for the Rattl i lCreek Idea
 So far as the ideal which you SC