Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

Abolition of Government--Haywood

Virtual Anarchy Suggested by Real Head of The I.W.W.
Church, Politics and Trade Unions Denounced

The abolition of government itselfanarchy-is suggested in a recent interview with the most militant labor leader in the United States.

In the New York World, issue of Sunday, June 2, 1912, William D. Haywood, the real head of the Industrial Workers of the World, was interviewed on the general attitude of his organization toward the relations between between capital capital and labor. Ascribing all misdeeds and violence. to the employing classes and discrediting the church, politics, organized civic effort toward industrial peace and trades unions in contradistinction to industrial union, Haywood told of the beauties of a social system worked out by industrial autonomy by which the producer shall have all production and the man who by his mentality. affords the opportunity for production shall be left high and dry outside the scheme and shall have nothing.

Haywood is just as much in the limelight today as he was half a dozen years ago, when he was on trial for his life in Idaho on the charge of complicity in the murder of former Governor Frank Steunenberg, of that state. Monthly magazines are telling of his powerful personality, his methods, his ways, his appearance and his beliefs. So are the daily papers in special articles.

Here are some of the things Haywood said in the New York World interview:

"The workers have been betrayed by the church. They have been betrayed by the politicians. They have been betrayed by the so-called social agencies.

"The church is like every other instituttion in that its existence today depends upon economic considerations. The churches are not built for the laboring classes. Nor are the cushioned seats rented by the poor. Under present conditions neither priest nor

preacher can tell the truth from the pulpit nor teach the gospel of Christ, because if they did they would lose their jobs. Their prayers are not for the multitude, but for the rich.

"Christ himself was an agitator against the conditions under which the poor and humble were compelled to live as the virtual slaves of the property owning class; but you'll find pretty few pulpiteers today who can be accused of being agitators, except on points of doctrine and dogma. The church may have done something in the way of doling out soup and blankets to the poor, but it has never faced and sought to remedy the abominable conditions of private ownership which alone are responsible for the existence of a class needing charitable aid; in fact, charity is the pillar of poverty.

"The politicians might perhaps have done something for the people if they were elected by the people. The whole business of politics is, however, a sham and a fake, and very few legislators, either state or national, are really elected by the people.

"Even if this were not so, politics is not a field in which the workers can hope, under present conditions, to achieve anything serious in the direction of bettering their lot, because a very large portion of the workers have no means of expressing their demands through political channels. There are eight million women and children who work, but have no vote; there are four million black men and some millions of foreigners who have either not been vested with a vote, or, as in the case of

the negro, have been vested with a vote,

then been deprived of the right to use it, and all of these people are industrial factors.

"The social agencies like the National Civic Federation are trying to accomplish the impossible: they're trying to reconcile two irreconcilable forces. All they are doing amounts to about this, that they want to get the capitalist to give up one cent out of each five dollars he steals from his workmen, and then to persuade the workman that as he was formerly robbed of five dollars and is now only being robbed of four dollars and ninety-nine cents, he is being treated with great consideration and fairness and that the dawn of a new era is upon him, an era in which all is to be fair play and brotherly kindness between the private owner and his slave.

"The other social agencies which are trying to bring about closer relations between the employers and the laborers are all tarred with the same brush. With much effort they get nowhere. All their suggestions have met with the same failure.

"There is only one solution, and that is that the producing class shall receive the full social value of their labor; that there can be no peace as long as the few are living in luxury and the many in poverty; so long as the many are producing in toil and wretchedness and the few enjoying their wealth in idleness and unproductiveness.

"The trades unions are selfish and selfcentered. They take into consideration only the favored few, who are able to get membership, and they see to it that the numbers shall be few by adopting restrictive measures to limit the numbers of persons learning the trade.

"In order to bring this (the ultimate hope of the I. W. W.) about, we believe that the use of any and every weapon is justified. We believe in direct action and that means action by the mass, and anything the people do in mass is the right thing at the time, for it gives expression to the conditions of the time among the

masses.

"Nothing can make a capitalist so enraged as to see a working man with his hands in his pockets, or a working woman with her hands folded, or a child playing with its dolls, when he, the capitalist, wants their work for the purpose of making profits for himself.

"It is not the policy of the Industrial Workers of the World to develop the idea of identity of interests between the employer and the employe. They are trying to infuse into the workers a spirit of open hostility toward the shareholders and the blood-sucking class, the sources of all the trouble."

When Haywood reaches his millenium, he would classify industries in six departments, as follows:

Department of Raw Materials, Agricultures and Fisheries;

Department of Mining;

Department of Industrial Manufactures; Department of Construction, which looks after housing and the industrial plants;

Department of Transportation, and Department of Public Service, which includes sanitation, hospitals, education, literature, art, music and entertainment.

Haywood said, in concluding his interview:

"If this industrial power is sufficient to compel the government to do things against its will and against the interest of the ruling classes, that same industrial power is strong enough to abolish the government itself.”

Fewer Idle in New York

New York state labor reports show less idleness due to labor disputes in the last half of 1911 than in the same period of 1910.

"The returns from representative unions," an editorial in the March, 1912, bulletin of the New York state department of labor says, "would indicate much less idleness on account of labor disputes during the last half of 1911, as compared with 1910. The returns as to all strikes and lockouts collected by the bureau of mediation and arbitration show clearly that the last three months of the year 1911 were much less disturbed by industrial disputes than the corresponding months of 1910. Thus only 29 disputes, involving 9,822 employes, were recorded for that quarter of 1911, as compared with 57 disputes and 27,968 employes in 1910. Disputes were also less numerous and much less extensive than in 1909. During the last three months. of 1911 the bureau of mediation and arbitration intervened in ten disputes, in seven of which conferences of the parties were arranged and in seven. of which settlements were directly affected. The corresponding figures for 1910 were 16 interventions, seven conferences arranged and four settlements."

Post Speaks For Peace

"Men moving in unison to better conditions bring forth great results," said C. W. Post, recently. "Communities where the industries are run steadily without strikes and where the workmen receive standard wages and good treatment, are to be congratulated, for the workman's family is cared for by steady employment, and that brings prosperity to the merchant and the entire citizenship of the community. The hate engendered by strike organizers is a most destructive element to all concerned. Better that employers do complete justice to workmen and they in turn keep out the paid agitator. The reign of peace on earth, taught by the spirit of the Christmas time, is well worth cultivating for 1912."

Court Decisions

In this department of THE AMERICAN EMPLOYER will be found decisions of courts in the United States and the Dominion of Canada on issues of law of interest to employers of labor. Of those in this number the two first given, under the same head, are of the greatest importance. They are instances in which courts in New York, one a state and the other a federal tribunal, restrained efforts on the part of the carpenters' organizations to boycott goods made in open shops; an attempt at boycott with the added serious feature of threats not to handle material unless the same were made under union conditions, a deliberate attempt to injure business and business good will.

CAN'T USE BOYCOTT

Instances In Which Courts Have

Issued Restraining Orders

That a strike may not be used as a means of unlawfully injuring business good will is legal doctrine enunciated by Justice Blackmar, of the supreme court of New York, in a decision. The case involved attempted boycott of goods handled in the building trades. It was this: The Newton Co., of Brooklyn, manufacturers of doors, sashes and other wood trim, ran an open. shop. The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America. and the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners of America, gave notice to builders of New York City. where the company's product was mainly sold, that material would not be handled unless made under "strict union conditions", and also proceeded to call strikes against builders and contractors, who used the company's material. A preliminary restraining order was secured by the Newton com pany, and later Justice Blackmar granted a permanent injunction.

Discussing the struggle between capital and labor, Justice Blackmar said: Fortunately, the warfare is such that the municipal law and society is strong enough to impose its terms on the combatants. Certain methods and weapons the law permits. Others it prohibits. It permits the strike on

the one hand and the lockout on the other. But each combatant must respect the rights of the other guaranteed by our constitution. Among these are life, liberty and property. Violence against persons and tangible property will not be permitted. Neither will attacks on intangible property rights, like business, good will or trade, be permitted. One cardinal principle must be borne in mind, that any element of illegality essential to a scheme or combination, makes the whole illegal. This principle the defendants have overlooked. They have found a lawful means, namely strikes. and an ultimate lawful end, namely the improvement of labor, but they have forgotten that the very turning point in their scheme, and which alone. makes it effective, is the coercion of plaintiff by injuring property rights. This is exactly what the defendants intended, it is what they have done, and it is unlawful.

An order may be entered enjoining the defendants, their attorneys, agents, servants, confederates and all persons acting in aid of or in connection with them, or any of them, from conspiring, combining or acting in concert in any manner to injure or interfere with plaintiffs' good will, trade or business, for the purpose of coercing it to employ union labor, either:

First: By sending to any customer or prospective customer of plaintiff any letter, circular or communication, printed, written or oral, which

in terms or by inference suggests that labor troubles will follow the use of materials purchased from plaintiff or from any person, firm or corporation declared "unfair", or whose material does not bear union labels, meaning the plaintiff thereby; or

Second: By ordering, directing, requiring or compelling by any by-law, rule or regulation or any act thereunder to any person whatever to refrain from or cease working for any person, firm or corporation because they use material purchased of or furnished by plaintiff; or by any person, firm or corporation declared "unfair" or whose material does not bear the union label, meaning plaintiff thereby.

But nothing herein is to be construed to prevent peaceful strikes except those directed against customers or prospective customers of plaintiff for the purpose of injuring or interfering with plaintiff's good will, trade or business. Newton Company vs. Erickson et als.

Similar issues were involved in a case in the United States circuit court for the southern district of New York, in which Judge Coxe granted a preliminary injunction. This decision was afterwards affirmed by the United States circuit court of appeals. The complainants were the Paine Lumber Co. and seven other concerns, and the defendants the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, five manufacturers and a large number of building contractors. The court was asked to restrain the defendants from refusing to handle material produced by the complainants or taking any action to boycott the complainants. The court said:

The complainants are manufacturers of doors, frames and other varieties of wood trim, their manufactories being located in states other than New York. They are citizens of these states. They operate so-called open shops, employing union and non-union labor and giving employment to any competent workman who is honest and faithful. They make no discrim

ination for or against him by reason of his affiliation with any of the labor unions. They do a large business in interstate commerce. Six of the complainants supply material to customers in New York and vicinity and the other two are prepared to do such business if not prevented by the unlawful acts of the defendants. Twentyfour of the defendants are officers and members of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America. or of its subsidiary bodies, known as joint district councils of New York and vicinity.

Five of the defendants are manufacturing woodworkers, operating factories in the city of New York or vicinity. The remainder of the defendants are building contractors, operating in New York and vicinity, who employ skilled carpenters and require such materials as the complainants manufacture in the erection of their buildings.

The complainants ask for an injunction restraining the defendants.

First, from conspiring and confederating together to refuse to handle or to work upon materials produced or manufactured by the complainants, because they are not made under union conditions and from attempting to enforce the provisions of the by-laws of the district council of New York and vicinity, providing for a fine of $10, to be imposed upon any member found guilty of working for any person or on material declared to be "unfair".

Second, from publishing or enforcof the by-laws of the United Brothering or attempting to enforce that part hood of Carpenters, which provides. in substance that it shall be the duty of district councils and local unions to prevent the members from encouraging the use of "unfair" material.

Third, from inflicting or attempting to inflict any injury or penalty in the nature of a fine or expulsion from any labor organization upon any person who works upon "unfair" material.

Fourth, from inducing or attempting to induce any person or persons to decline employment or to cease employment under any person, firm or

corporation, because such person, firm or corporation has purchased or proposed to purchase material made by complainants.

Fifth, from making or circulating any statement to the effect that the defendants will refuse to work upon any materials unless constructed under strict union conditions and from requesting customers of the complainants not to purchase their products. on the ground that they employ nonunion labor and do not use the union label.

the

Sixth, giving notice orally or in writing to any person, firm or corporation to refrain from purchasing merchandise manufactured by complainants under threats that if such merchandise is purchased the defendants will cause the purchasers loss and trouble.

Seventh, from circulating directly or indirectly orally or in writing any statement that the complainants or any of them or their products are "unfair".

Eighth, from conspiring, agreeing or combining to restrain or destroy the interstate commerce of the complainants to compel them to employ union labor exclusively.

The affidavits and papers presented tend to substantiate the complainants' contention that their business will be interfered with as above indicated.

The defendants admit that they are organized substantially as alleged in the complaint, but deny that they or either of them have done any illegal act or act of oppression. They admit that the United Brotherhood controls a paper called the Carpenter, published for the benefit of the members and that a by-law provides for fining members ten dollars who work on "unfair" trim, such as is produced by complainants. They admit that the joint district council of New York has adopted a rule that members shall not work upon such trim, but they assert that they know of no instance where the fine has been imposed. They also admit that at the city of New York they have prepared lists of union mills for the use of contractors.

After announcing that it is a rule. of equity practice that a preliminary

injunction shall not issue in a doubtful case the court says there are exceptions to the rule, as for instance to prevent destruction of property or its removal beyond the jurisdiction of the court. Judge Coxe said:

It must be conceded, I think, that the papers disclose a situation which, if sustained by proof, indicates that the complainants' rights to conduct. their business in a perfectly legitimate manner may be interfered with and impaired by methods which are indefensible.

The right of every American citizen, whether employe or employer, to gain an honest livelihood by his own toil and endeavor is inherent in our organic law and should be protected with all the power of the government. The case which most resembles the case at bar is the Irving case, supra, which held in substance that an injunction should issue to prevent workmen from threatening owners, builders and architects that their contracts would be held up if they used the products of another employer which had been declared "unfair". Judge Ward says:

"The right of workingmen to unite for their own protection is undoubted and so is their right to strike peaceably because of grievance; but their right to combine for the purpose of calling out workmen of other employers, who have no grievances, or to threaten owners, builders and architects that their contracts will be held up if they, or any of their sub-contractors, use the complainants' trim, is quite another affair. To take the converse of the proposition: Will the defendants admit that employers may combine to prevent any employer from using union labor?

"Either of these propositions is destructive of the right of free men to labor for or to use the labor of any one the laborer or the employer wishes. See the language of Justice Harlan in Adair VS. United States, 208 U. S., 161, 174: If the struggle is persisted in between capital and labor to establish a contrary view, ultimately either the workmen or the employers will be reduced to a condition of involuntary servitude."

Judge Coxe closed by saying:

After giving the question the best thought of which I am capable, I have concluded that the present status should be maintained pendente lite and that the rights of all the parties will be protected by an order substantially similar to the order entered in the

« PoprzedniaDalej »