The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-05-26

sincere is contained in the follow
Mason, then secretary of Subj
trict, Dec. 6, sometime before he
split with Alex Howat and took
up with John L. Lewis.
The Harrington letter, which the
DAILY WORKER is making public,
defends Tom Meyerscough of the
Pittsburgh district of the ISLANDERS
Lewis men were heaping upon him
and assails a certain Ed. Week as one
who worked along the same lines as a
labor spy. This Ed. Wieck-a Lewis
man-worked hand in hand with Far
rington at the Peoria convention in
villifying the DAILY WORKER. Far
rington said in this letter, that Week
was unworthy of belief. What must
have been his private opinion of
Weeks statement at Peoria that the
DAILY WORKER was just a mass
of lies"
The letter follows:
81 am informed that at your last
monthly meeting, Ed. Week intro
duced a letter alleged to have been
signed by Thomas Myerscough and
others in the Pittsburgh District
and in which the mine workers in
District No. were urged to attend
the meeting to be held in Bentley's
Theatre, Monongahela City, Deem
Der A, 1921, to give consideration to
the advisability Of accepting the
1917 wage scale.
obviously, Weeks purpose in in
Producing this letter at your meet
ing was to make it appear that the
President of District No. 10 was
consorting with men who favor a
wage reduction, also to descredit
Myerscough and Guilor who were
responsible for giving publicity to
certain documents exposing the
fraud and corruption that took place
in the Pittsburgh District during the
last international election.
Calls Him "5Iathersklte."
Il am also informed that Week
stated to the meeting that he was
honor bound not to reveal the name
of the person from whom he secured
said letter. This fact in itself would,
among thoughtful men, brand
Week as being one who is totally
unworthy of the confidence of men.
1t is indeed a strange state of af-
fairs when Week assumes to give
publicity to the contents of a letter
and yet declares that he cannot re
veal the source from which he re-
ceived the letter. Why the neces-
sity for any secrecy about the letter
if everything is open and above
board? If Week is honest and is
trying to protect the interests of
the mine workers, why should there
be any necessity for him concealing
the names of those who are helping
him in his work of protection? His
act in reading the letter referred to
and then declaring that he could
not reveal the source from which he
received it, thoroly indicates that
there is something wrong and that
Week is not acting in good faith
and that he is no more than bla-
therskite and an imposter who is
resorting to deception in order to
weedle his way back into the con-
fidence of the mine workers in the
Belleville district.
Has the Goods On Week.
Unfortunately for Mr.. Weeks
plan to discredit me, but fortunately
for me, happen to have some cor
respondence concerning the same
letter read by Mr.. Week at your
meeting and for the information of
your next meeting, / am enclosing
herewith copies of correspondence
marked Exhibits A, B, c, d, f. and
F. Exhibit A is a copy of letter
which accompanied Indof's letter
and which is copy of the same let
ter that was read to your meeting
by Week Exhibit G is copy of
letter wrote to Frank ]. Indof. Elk
hibit d is a copy Of letter | wrote
10 NlyCIbCOu6n. A1AnlbAt II 10 q COpg
of Myerscough's answer to my let
ter and Exhibit F Is a copy of let
ter addressed to the President and
Secretary of District No. 5, by
Myerscough. All of these communi-
cations are self explanatory and go
to prove that Week is party to a
conspiracy to discredit the enemies
of John l.. Lewis.
A Lewis Conspiracy.
III you will examine the enclosed
exhibits, you will notice that all of
them are dated previous to the time
Week brought the matter to the at
tention of your monthly meeting
and they should prove to the salts
faction of any thoughtful man that
Weeks great revelation of the plan
that is afoot to force a reduction in
the miners wages, is no more than
n