national, but these organizations are based on different purposes and have different methods. They do not act in concert and in unison. What is re

quired is a strong organization throughout the length and breadth of the United States which, in its activity should be patterned after political organizations.

"What this organization ought to be, in detail, remains for the keenest minds among the employers to work out, but, in a general way, I believe. it ought to have certain features similar to those of the great political parties and certain features, also, similar to those of the American Federation of Labor.

"The political parties have their precinct and county organizations and above these their state and national organizations. In county, state and nation are central executive committees to which these final problems are submitted, and in which the majority vote determines the policies to be pursued. I believe the employers ought to organize similarly, even, if necessary, to the precinct organization.

"The feature of The American Federation of Labor organization which appeals to me as one which the employers ought to follow is that the Federation is supported after one method or another, by the international labor unions which compose it. If, in an organization composed of employers this plan were followed, it would systematize the method of contributing to both national and local work. The national work in the hands of a national body composed of representatives of, or men appointed by, state organizations, for instance, would depend upon the state organizations for its funds. An estimate of what was needed would be made and a proper assessment levied upon the state organizations.

"An immediate and most desirable result of this would be that the manufacturer or other employer would make one contribution to the work and would be immune for a year, provided, of course, that the contribution was sufficient, and that it should be suffi

cient could be determined by the state and national bodies in advance.

"As it is now, the business man is continually beset for contributions. to the work. One Cleveland manufacturer, for instance, may be asked to contribute to the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Council for Industrial Defense, the American Anti-Boycott Association, the Ohio Manufacturers' Association, the Ohio State Board of Commerce, his own trade association, the Cleveland Industrial Association and other organizations and, as well, to a number of publicity enterprises of one sort or another in aid of the cause. All these agencies do a good work and deserve support, but they are not allied, and the work, as a whole, does not go forward through them as one thing. In other words, organization is lacking. The business man is annoyed by these many applications, his time is unduly taken up and his money once given is diverted into several channels to be used by a number of associations, often in parallel work.

"When I entered upon my work as Secretary of the Employers' Association of Cleveland, the predecessor of the Cleveland Industrial Association, I naturally informed myself as to the extent of organization. I found the Ohio Manufacturers' Association with about forty members in Cleveland, the Ohio State Board of Commerce with perhaps seventy-five and the National Association of Manufacturers with possibly one hundred and fifty. When one considers that there are 4,000 manufacturers who are employers of labor in Cleveland alone, this does not seem a large representation in organizations of employers.

"Realizing as I do that the industrial question is the biggest problem of the day and that it has its equities which all just men must recognize and respect, I believe that the industrial question must be fought out in the open. Nothing in the way of lasting or permanent and good results can be obtained by working behind closed doors. It is, of course, true that here and there an isolated strike or other labor difficulty can be ironed out be

tween employers and employes behind closed doors, but this does not by any means mean the settlement of the industrial question, nor does it get down to the root of anything of anything basically wrong. There must be an open, free and unlimited consideration of the in

dustrial question. It should be discussed in all public places, in papers and magazines and in every possible way. That it will ultimately be settled, and settled right, in this way I cannot and do not doubt. It is only a question of when.

"Employers of labor must realize several things when they approach this work. In the first place they must not ask for anything they ought not to have. If a business man wants to take advantage of a situation for gain to which he is not entitled, of course, he cannot and will not work openly, and open work is the only thing that will count in the long run. Moreover,

he ought to gain his point and cannot expect the support of fair-minded employers who would otherwise co-operate with him unless he seeks only that to which he is fairly entitled.

"Again, the employers must realize that the work to be done is just as important and vital to their business interests as the daily work of preparing and marketing their several products, for upon the doing of this work depends the maintenance of good business conditions.

"What the organization, as I view it, ought to be, I have already indicated. That organization, once effected, ought to perform a very much more extended work than has ever before been attempted. Hitherto the great bulk of work undertaken by associations of employers has been to work in Congress and in the state legislatures to secure the passage of certain laws and to prevent the passage of other laws. This is exceedingly important, but it is only a part of the entire big industrial problem. Laws which last are backed by public sentiment. Creation of right thinking is the thing of prime importance. cannot escape the firm belief that more and more as time goes on industrial differences will be settled and

I

industrial understandings will be reached, not depending on laws and lawmakers, but on the ground between the employers and their men, directly and openly.

"I urge effective centralized organization and work through that organization toward the improvement of conditions both for the men who employ and the men who are employed. I believe that employers should send their office men, trusted employes and business associates out into literary, church and educational societies and into the clubs where such men belong, to tell frankly and truthfully such facts as they know, bearing on the industrial question. I believe they

national, but these organizations are based on different purposes and have different methods. They do not act in concert and in unison. What is required is a strong organization throughout the length and breadth of the United States which, in its activity should be patterned after political organizations..

"What this organization ought to be, in detail, remains for the keenest minds among the employers to work out, but, in a general way, I believe it ought to have certain features similar to those of the great political parties and certain features, also, similar to those of the American Federation of Labor.

"The political parties have their precinct and county organizations and above these their state and national organizations. In county, state and nation are central executive committees to which these final problems are submitted, and in which the majority vote determines the policies to be pursued. I believe the employers ought to organize similarly, even, if necessary, to the precinct organization.

"The feature of The American Federation of Labor organization which appeals to me as one which the employers ought to follow is that the Federation is supported after after one method or another, by the international labor unions which compose it. If, in an organization composed of employers this plan were followed, it would systematize the method of contributing to both national and local work. The national work in the hands of a national body composed of representatives of, or men appointed by, state organizations, for instance, would depend upon the state organizations for its funds. An estimate of what was needed would be made and a proper assessment levied upon the state organizations.

"An immediate and most desirable

result of this would be that the manufacturer or other employer would make one contribution to the work and would be immune for a year, provided, of course, that the contribution was sufficient, and that it should be suffi

cient could be determined by the state and national bodies in advance.

"As it is now, the business man is continually beset for contributions to the work. One Cleveland manufacturer, for instance, may be asked to contribute to the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Council for Industrial Defense, the American Anti-Boycott Association, the Ohio Manufacturers' Association, the Ohio State Board of Commerce, his own trade association, the Cleveland Industrial Association and other organizations and, as well, to a number of publicity enterprises of one sort or another in aid of the cause. All these agencies do a good work and deserve support, but they are not allied, and the work, as a whole, does not go forward through them as one thing. In other words, organization is lacking. The business man is annoyed by these many applications, his time is unduly taken up and his money once given is diverted into several channels to be used by a number of associations, often in parallel work.

"When I entered upon my work as Secretary of the Employers' Association of Cleveland, the predecessor of the Cleveland Industrial Association, I naturally informed myself as to the extent of organization. I found the Ohio Manufacturers' Association with about forty members in Cleveland, the Ohio State Board of Commerce with perhaps seventy-five and the National Association of Manufacturers with possibly one hundred and fifty. When one considers that there are 4,000 manufacturers who are employers of labor in Cleveland alone, this does not seem a large representation in organizations of employers.

"Realizing as I do that the industrial question is the biggest problem of the day and that it has its equities which all just men must recognize and respect, I believe that the industrial question must be fought out in the open. Nothing in the way of lasting or permanent and good results can be obtained by working behind closed doors. It is, of course, true that here and there an isolated strike or other labor difficulty can be ironed out be

tween employers and employes behind. closed doors, but this does not by any means mean the settlement of the industrial question, nor does it get down to the root of anything basically wrong. There must be an open, free and unlimited consideration of the industrial question. It should be discussed in all public places, in papers and magazines and in every possible way. That it will ultimately be settled, and settled right, in this way I cannot and do not doubt. It is only a question of when.

"Employers of labor must realize several things when they approach this work. In the first place they must not ask for anything they ought not to have. If a business man wants to take advantage of a situation for gain to which he is not entitled, of course, he cannot and will not work openly, and open work is the only thing that will count in the long run. Moreover,

he ought to gain his point and cannot expect the support of fair-minded employers who would otherwise co-operate with him unless he seeks only that to which he is fairly entitled.

"Again, the employers must realize that the work to be done is just as important and vital to their business interests as the daily work of preparing and marketing their several products, for upon the doing of this work. depends the maintenance of good business conditions.

"What the organization, as I view it, ought to be, I have already indicated. That organization, once effected, ought to perform a very much more extended work than has ever before been attempted. Hitherto the great bulk of work undertaken by associations of employers has been to work in Congress and in the state. legislatures to secure the passage of certain laws and to prevent the passage of other laws. This is exceedingly important, but it is only a part of the entire big industrial problem. Laws which last are backed by public sentiment. Creation of right thinking is the thing of prime importance. I cannot escape the firm belief that more and more as time goes on industrial differences will be settled and

industrial understandings will be reached, not depending on laws and lawmakers, but on the ground between the employers and their men, directly and openly.

"I urge effective centralized organization and work through that organization toward the improvement of conditions both for the men who employ and the men who are employed. I believe that employers should send their office men, trusted employes and business associates out into literary, church and educational societies and into the clubs where such men belong, to tell frankly and truthfully such facts as they know, bearing on the industrial question. I believe they

The predictions by the opponents of the measure as to how the laborites would regard the passage and approval of that "rider" on the recent sundry civil appropriation act which provides that no part of the $300,000 appropriated for the enforcement of the anti-trust law shall be used in the prosecution of labor organizations for doing things forbidden by that law, have already been fulfilled, at least by President Gompers, of the American Federation of Labor. In an editorial in the last number of The American Federationist, he says:

"Labor for years had used every effort to secure the enactment of constructive legislation which would afford relief from a law endangering the very existence of labor organizations. An immediate opportunity presented itself whereby Labor's principle might be recognized in a declaratory way and enacted into law, though for limited duration. Still the representatives of organized labor realized that the effort to add this amendment as a limiting proviso to the sundry civil appropriations bill would center public thought and discussion upon Labor's wrongs and contentions, and that the adoption of the amendment would give prestige to the cause. Under these circumstances, it would be extremely quixotic to refuse to take advantage of the opportunity afforded by rider legislation because that was not the theoretically correct manner of gaining the end. The practical lawmaker finds himself in a position very similar to

that of the musical composer who has studied the theory of harmony, counter-point and fugue, and has learned the rules of composition only to find the most effective way of breaking them when expressing his own musical

ideas.

"This amendment is in accord with the declarations to which the Democratic party pledged itself in 1908 and again in 1912. President Wilson was nominated after the Democratic party had adopted its 1912 platform, accepted the nomination, and made the campaign upon that platform. Party pledges are sacred" (but not the ethics of law-making?) "according to a spokesman for the administration in a speech at Harrisburg, who most emphatically condemned 'a man who violates a party platform and betrays his party and the people'. However, this amendment is only a partial redemption of the party pledge; it is only the reaffirmation of a policy and does not affect the terms of the law which has been so frequently and so unjustly invoked that labor organizations might be impeded and restrained in their activities and purposes. Accepting this amendment as an earnest that the Democratic party intends to be true to its plighted faith, Labor confidently awaits the complete fulfillment and will be satisfied only when the Sherman anti-trust law is amended in a satisfactory manner or repealed.

"This amendment, though inadequate to meet Labor's demands and needs, nevertheless is of tremendous import. If any one doubts the significance to Labor of the amendment which is now law he need only consult the editorials of well-known papers which oppose all reforms in behalf of labor and advocate the propaganda of the interests. The daily editorials of these organs, such as The New York Times, demonstrated their keen appreciation of the significance of the signing of this bill containing Labor's amendment. This victory is a stepping stone to the accomplishment of Labor's full purpose-the restitution of fundamental rights of human liberty."