New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-08-20

strike a delegation waited on the fresl-
dent. Mr.. Theodore P. Shonts, and in
formed him that of the 2,56S motormen
and conductors employed by the COM
pany 2.423, or over "a per cent, had sig
nified their loyalty. This delegation OF
loyal employees" later assured the
Mayor that they wanted to stick that
they had been treated fairly and were
satisfied with conditions. "All we
want" said their leader, a picturesque
conductor named Rusty Livingston,
sis to help the public and be assured OF
protection. We don't believe in violence
or crime. or you would not see gold
bands on the sleeves of the men before
YOU" Yet on the next day not single
car was running, although there was
ample police protection and no violence.
1t is probable that Mr.. Shonts and
other officers Of the company were not
entirely surprised at the overwhelming
protestation of loyalty. The loyal petit
ton had been sent to the car barns by
the company, and each motorman and
conductor on leaving his car had been
asked by the starter or some one else IN
authority to affix his signature. If the
conductor or motorman refused to sign
he would incur the animosity of his I'M
mediate superior and might be forced
to work seventeen hours a day, or be
piven bad runs or be fined, disciplined
or discharged. One conductor or mo-
torman is no match for the New York
CITY Railways Company. Being weak
individually he gave in temporarily. II
Paris was we'll worth mass, surely the
mans lob was worth an unmeaning sig
nature to a lying document, obtained
under compulsion. Even the unionists,
who were collectively agreed on strlk-
ing, put their names to the loyalty
pledge. A moral hero would have stood
out alone against the great railway COM
pany. but moral heroes are not in de-
mand as conductors and motormen.
Whether Mr.. Shonts really believed,
or merely wished the public to believe,
that "a per cent of his employees were
overlooking with loyalty is psychology
cal problem of no universal consequence.
The mental attitude that would even
casually entertain such a hypothesis is
of importance only because the men who
think in this way have so extraordinary
and abnormal an influence over our
whole industrial life. When such men
speak of loyalty they think of humble
subordination. The conception fuses
with that of feudal allegiance, fealty,
homage, the dutiful respect of the in
ferior for the superior, the unthinking
response of the true and faithful and
rather stupid servant, who shall not be
without his reward, once the officials of
the company can satisfy mob Of ext
gent stockholders and really afford to
act benevolently towards these men
with the gold bands on their sleeves. In
ordinary life Mr.. Shonts does not ex-
pect loyalty of the seller TO the buyer or
of the lessor to the lessee. He asks
merely for fair dealing and common
honesty between any two parties to a
contract, and he does not demand that
a bargainer sacrifice his interest out Of
loyalty to the party of the second part.
Why, then, does he ask loyalty Of the
motorman or conductor, who gets more
or less from his contract in proportion
to his bargaining power. and who US
ually gets less because he is forced to
bargain alone?
At first glance one might believe that
Mr.. Shonts and his fellow officials were
merely hypocritical in assuming that
their employees were loyal. They might
easily have learned, if they did not al
ready know, that wages on their lines
were far below those in other cities and
absurdly inadequate to the maintenance
of decent standard of living in New
York They might also have learned
that men were kept uselessly and with
out pay about car barns; were liable at
4 1. -