Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-02-20
Answers critic of Union.


sir--The attention of the officers OF
Hat Finishers' Local Union No. n
United Hatters of North America, OF
this city. was called to the following
letter, which appeared in the Star I'M
der date of February Is. 1913, slgneo
by one Mrs. Leahy, of Albert street.
North Arlington:
I'm reply to a latter published III
the Newark Evening Star of Febru-
airy II, wish to say that all this let
! ter contained is the truth concerning
the strike going on In Arlington. II
would be a good thingsf those in TINS
strike would be moved by our good
Fathers Westman and Rigney and go
back to their work. l am speaking
from experience, fully knowing that
strikes are no benefit to the work
ing man or woman. The walking dele
gates are the ones who benefit from
a strike. I had $3.50 kept from me one
year ago because my deceased brother
left the ranks of a hatters' union and
returned to his bench. At his death l
had to pay the money as fine be-
cause he did not stick. I would like
to know who got this money.
MRS. LEAHY.
ALBERT street, North Arlington"
The statement Is SO unfair to or
ganized labor in general, so insinuat-
ing as to the honesty of the officials
of the local and national hatters'
union, and so absolutely false, that
we cannot let it go unanswered.
In order to get the official proofs
that would stamp this letter as I'M
fair and misleading, we were obliged
to send to our national office in New
York and to the ex-treasurer of this
local for the checks and receipts
which bear signature of Mrs. Leahy;
hence the delay in giving the facts to
the public, and we earnestly request
space to present the true facts in the
case, which are as follows:
The brother referred to in Mrs.
Leahy's letter tore up his union card
many years ago and went to work in
a non-union shop at Orange, thereby
severing his connection with the Hat
ters' Union. After working a number
of years for the non union concern,
in October, 1901, he again applied for
membership In the Hatters' Union
and was accepted. Coming to New
ark shortly after receiving his card
in Orange, he either could not or
would not work, and our local loaned
him in 1904, on four different occa-
sions, small sums of money, aggre-
eating $40, the last of which was paid
back to our local by his sister, Mrs.
Leahy, on May Is, 1911, when she also
paid 1925, the balance due the Orange
union on his initiation fee from 1901.
At the same time she paid $3.50 back
dues to our local and national union,
the only dues we received for her
brother since he received his card.
The total amount she paid two
months before her brothers death,
which occurred July q, 1911, was
Sl1.0S, for which she received from
our local union 5000 and from our
national union $50. total of $780,
Was she entitled to it?
Our national association pays death
benefits as follows: For five years
membership or under. 500, and $40
for each additional year up to total
of $500.
Mrs. Leahy's brother was a MEM
bef of the Hatters' Union for ten
years-19o1 to 1911-was entitled to
and received from the national union
$3.50.
At that time the local union paid
fiat death benefit of 5000, which she
was entitled to and received.
We have checks and receipts bear
ing Mrs. Leahys signature as evil
dence that all claims against our
local and national unions have been
paid the local union 5000 and the
national union $3.50, a total of $3.50.
All books. checks and receipts bear
ing on the case are open to public in
spection.
After explaining our mortuary laws