The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1908-07-08
RESPECT THE LABEL,
Union Stamp Must Receive Sup
port Of Labor.
CONTROVERSIES THAT HURT

Nothing but Harm Can Result From
Such Disasrssments as Recently oe-
CURED In Boston and Vieinity-Unity
Alone Makes Labor Strong.
The recent controversy Of the Bos-
ton Newsboys' union with the Boston
American has presented the peculiar
spectacle Of organized labor. or at least
a portion OF 1t, boycotting product
using union labor exclusively and bear.
iRg the unlon label.
Regarding this controversy the ex-
ecutlye council Of the American Fed
eratien Of Laber at Washington adopt
ed the following resolution:
Whereas. The A. F. OF l.. has at all
times diseountenencsd any attempt to de-
clare unfair the product OF any employer
that is produced By union labor; and,
Whereas. The right Of the employer to
fix the aeAing price Of the finished prod
net Of the employer has been recognized
BY the A. f. OF l.. and,
Whereas. The Boston American. a daily
newspaper, 10 q product Of union labor
and tho preprietors Of such publication
have the right 60 fix the selling price OF
said paper; therefore be IL
Resolved. Ey the executive council Of
the A. f. Of L., That we declare said Bos-
ton American as a fair paper and en-
titled 10 the patronage of all persons who
believe In union wages and union condi-
tions: and
Resolved, That no union, central labor
body or ssnte federation has any right TO
declare unfair said Boston American Ell
Their BY erect action In declaring said
paper unfair or by ANY indirect action
that brings the same result
The Boston typographical union, No
10, has Reproduced the above resolu
ton in atriilar to the various unions
in New England.
1t seems 10 be well settled that the
labor used In the production Of the
American was entirely union from top
to bottem, but because the American
advanced the price Of the paper the
newsboys struck.
The Typographical union thinks the
newsbOys are merchants ia that they
do not do any productive labor, but
merely buy and sell the product of
other persons labor, aud that they
have no right to interfere with the EN-
ploying industry represented in the
Boston American.
whichever view is correct, 1t is
deplorable exhibition TO present to the
view Of the general public when any
article bearing the aRien label of the
chief industry involved is publicly at
tucked by labor bodies or men.
1t was not so long ago that the print |
ers' union began to boycott the George
e. Keith company OF Brockton, which
company employs several thousands of
union shoe workers, because in the |
Keith cempany's printing department
there were six men who did not belong |
to the Typographical union.
We do not uphold these six men:
neither do we believe in the employ
ment of nonunion laber, but we do call !
attention to this fact-that because six
nonunion printers were employed as
an incident to large shoe business /
the printers union declared the prod
ucts Of the shoe company to be unfair |
and proceeded to boycott. and this was
done without any conference with the
leaders of the union representing the /
thousands of union shoe workers EN-.
ployed.
Regardless Of any question as to who
was right in either of the cases cited, /
the lesson brought home TO US all is
that the union label should be respect
ed by US all to the extent that we will /
at least make every effort to satisfy /
the various elements before rushing /
into public conflict with an employer
who in his chief industry gives employ
ment to union men exclusively at un.
ion wages.