The star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1908-1909, 1909-02-02
NATIONAL FUR
FELT HAT MAKERS
TELL THEIR SIDE
CONTINUED from First Page.)

-
journeymen, and made the settlement,
at which time the phrase "in Boston"
was fully discussed, and it was abso-
lutely understood that the arbitrated
bill applied to the hats made in Bos-
ton.
AS two wage schedules were made
it OF course follows that such hats as
We're made in Boston We're to cost the
amount specified in the Boston sched-
ule and those made in Philadelphia
were to cost the amount specified in
the Philadelphia schedule.
The agreement made by the union
with the Manufacturers Association
plainly reads that the label will not be
taken out of the factories of any of our
members without ten days notice to
us, and the Guyer Hat Company has
been and still is a member in good
standing in our association.
Our association received no notice
Whatsoever of the intention of the of.
ficers of the union to take the label
from the Guyer company. This certain
ly was a distinct and absolute viola
ton of h signed trade agreement,
which should have been held sacred.
Calls Union Statements Absurd.
L "a SldIClifClll ny the OIllCcIS "
the union that they did not take the
label away from the new Guyer fac
tory because the new Guyer factory
never mad it, is so foolish on the face
of il that a reply seems Unnecessary.
Certainly the factory building itself
never used the union label, nor is it
reasonable for the union label to go
with the building, but it certainly does
go with the Guyer Hat Company, as
an organization, which has always used
it on the merchandise they produced.
Even if such a ridiculous contention
would hold, as a label belonging to a
factory building, it is an absolute fact
that hats were produced in the new
Guyer hat factory by union labor, UNI
der the Philadelphia wage schedule,
and union labels were placed in the
hats by the people working thereon.
HI claim hat men worked by mis-
take does not alter the situation, for
if'claiming a mistake would absolve one
from wrongs committed, we would have
no need for policemen and courts.
Whatever may have beer the right or
wrong of the above case, 1t was a dis
pute, and it could and should have been
arbitrated as agreed.
In our effort to have the questions
in dispute settled ~peaceably and by ar
bitration, in the manner agreed upon,
n distinctly SO stated in your by
laws, 1t was officially suggested to your
officers ON January the 9th that they
place the label and the men, whom
they called out from the Guyer com
pany, Jack again, and that they then
Immediately notify us of their inten-
tion to take the label out after the
time agreed upon as being considered
due notice.
A further committee met by appoint
ment your national officers on Thurs
day, January the IA, at 10 a. m. and
made additional efforts to the same
end. On the same day, at about ]
p. m, and after the resolution had beer
passed, your officers were again re-
quested to put the label and the mer
back Ina the Guyer factory, in which
case the resolution passed would not
become operative. This and all other
proposals looking towards an arbi-
trated settlement were scornfully re-
I fused.
AT the joint meeting of the executive
officers of both associations, December