Evening journal., 1914-05-04
Clash Of LABOR
DELAYS WORK ON
FARMERS BANK
Union Marble Workers Balk
at Setting Slabs on Non
Union Bricklaying
UNION PLASTERERS may
REFUSE TO co Ahead

Because Of a conflict between union
and non-union labor, the erection Of
marble work on the new Farmers
Bank building at Third and Market
streets has been stopped, and a gem
eral tie-up Of construction work there
is threatened.
The contractor for the bricklaying
work is Joseph S. Hamilton. of this
city, who employees non-union brick
layers. Part Of the brick laying has
proceeded to a point where the mar
BILE slab work and coping are to bo
placed in position. The contractors
for marble work are Ridgway 4 Son,
Of Philadelphia, who employees only
Z, union men.
Recently efforts have been made by
the Bricklayers' Union to induce Mr..
Hamilton TO become an employer Of
union bricklayers only. Conferences
we're held. but Mr.. Hamilton was not
won over by the Union men and he
continued to use nOn-union bricklay-
ers on the Farmers Bank operation.
AS an outcome of this, the Union
marble workers and settlers OF Ridg-
way and Son have refused 10 erect
the marble work on or against bricks
/ laid by non-union men.
Two carloads Of marble have ar
rived from Philadelphia, but the
Ridgway employees have made no
move to erect IL, and work is prac-
tically at a standstill as a result.
Il was said today that the union
marble workers and plasterers will
refuse TO work on the bank building
unless union bricklayers are en-
ployed
The situation Is such, it was learn
ed, that the directors of the bank
have the matter under consideration.
Mr.. Hamilton, the contractor, today
said he did not care 70 make a state
ment about the clash.
The following letter has been re-
ceived:
To the Editor Of THE EVENING
'JOURNAL.
Sir: Our attention has been called
70 an article appearing IN your paper
In reference to Bricklayera working
on Delaware College for Women az
Newark where the ratio OF non resi-
dent bricklayers Is given by an in
terested bTicklayer and the reply Of
Mr.. Hamilton. We are satisfied AIr.
Hamilton is in error. Mr.. Hamilton
goes further and claims residence for
some bricklayers in Wilmington that
we assert do not live here, notably.
his foreman, who has not exercised
the right Of franchise in this State
for fifteen years and whose home
and family are in West Chester, Pa.
His foreman Is Joseph Daley In
addition a man named LaZalere, Of
J Elkton, and Reese Pyle, of Penns-
grove, also are employed by him. He
p clGssifies them as local men. We as
sert they are nOn-residents. Mr.
+ Hamilton the past week has had also
outside help employed on the Farm
ers' Bank building in this city. This
We challenge him to deny. Mr.. Ham.
ilton also states his local employees
prefer TO remain In this city to work
ing I'm Newark. That is probably
4 true; but does not Mr.. Hamilton
prefer outside bricklayers chiefly FOL
the reason that he is not required e
! pay carfare each dey for his l0ca
men, and outsiders would he required
to remain in Newark each day. a saw
ing OF 60 cents per day by the EN-
. plOyment OF non-residents. We de
, sire to offer to Mr.. Hamilton the fol
b lowing: Mr. Hamilton states he em
ploys % bricklayers constantly IL
, the city (non-union mem. Tit
/ Bricklayers' Union is composed o
=. 125 members. We will donate S2l
to any hospital the editor o
1 THE EVENING JOURNAL Designate
in this city II Mr.. Hamilton can fur
2 nish him the names and addresses o
20 journeymen bricklayers, RESIDENT
OF this city, on his payroll from Jan
. uary 1. 1914, TO date.
Y Yours truly.
8 Arbitration Committee Bricklayers
Union, George Sauter, Secretary.