Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1918-07-13
NO DIVISION OF
LABOR ON DRINK
Assumption of Liquor Inter-
ests Is Disproved by
the Facts

New YOrk.-The recent contention
made by the Central Federated Union.
and embodied in an appeal sent to
President Wilson, that the proposed
prohibition legislation now under
consideration would throw large
numbers of workingmen out of en-
ployment. seems to have been a mere
attempt to delude labor into the be-
lief that prohibition would not be to
their best interests. but would, on the
other hand, work hardships upon
them. At their meeting held on July
3, in Union Square, there were not
more that 1900 present. according to
Charles Stelzle, of the Federal Coun-
Gil of Churches of Christ in America.
They assumed" said Mr.. Stelzle, ito
represent $4,000 trades unionists. AS
a matter of fact, in spite of the great
of the 1000 or 1900 in the audience,
there were probably not more than
300 bona fide trade unionists. the rest
being made up of passers-by and oc-
cupants or park benches, fact
which did not show much agitation
on the part of the workingmen as to
what was to become of their drinks.
This is quite in line with the gross
Misrepresentation of the liquor men
practically all the time when they
assume to speak for organized labor.
1t is fact that many labor unions
will not pay benefits if the member
suffers an accident while intoxicated.
Many suspend or expel members who
come to meetings intoXicated; some
VIII not admit to membership habitu-
al drinkers or men engaged in the
sale of intoxicating liquors, and still
others have clauses in their contracts
permitting employers to discharge a
man instantly for drunkenness.
GAS TO the question, will 1000, 900
workingmen lose their jobs when the
saloons are closed" survey of the
shows that there are employed in
the manufacture of liquor of all sorts
only 62,920 wage-earners, and fewer
than one-fourth of them are brewers,
malosters. -distillers and rectifiers.
The remainder are teamsters, carpen-
machinists and other mechanics, all
of whom can ply their trade without
the breweries. The brewers and dis
tillers themselves might get employ
ment in the soft-drink plants which
are now increasing so largely as
many brewers are converting their
factories into such plants.
"Of the money now invested in the
manufacture of liquor were to be
transferred to other industries, it
would mean that four times as many
workers would be employed, that is
250,00 wage-earners that, collec-
lively, they would receive four times
as much money in wages; and that
would be required for their output
of finished products. How could a
labor panic be possible under such
conditions as these? And these figures
are not those of the advocates of pro-
hibition, but of the United States cen
sus.
at has been argued that If towns
should go dry the workmen would
leave their jobs. Such a theory is
not warranted by the facts of the
case, as shown by various reports
made by big shipbu!lding companies.
For example. a Newport News, Va
company says that Prohibition affects
this company favorably, rather than
otherwise We do not have any
trouble securing capable mechanics
because of prohibition. Another. on
the Pacific coast, at Portland, Ore,
states: Prohibition has not affected
our business in any way adversely.
We think men are altogether more re-
liable and Industrious. They have
more interest in the work and more
ambition to succeed A company in
Duluth, Mimi, reports: we have had
no difficulty in securing men. and
are yerv much in favor of prohibit
ton. Shipyards operating in Supe-
rior. Wis, across the bay, are expert
encing serious difficulty with their
men on account of liquor Others
might be quoted. And Josephus Dan
ieis. Secretary of the Navy, in reply
TO a telegraphed question. answered:
Il would say that the experiment. has
been made, and the removal of the
saloon is an advantage in every way,
both to Industries and the home.