« ПретходнаНастави »
money to defray the expenses of this organization campaign. The lumber industry is perhaps the third largest industry in the United States and yet it has been practically untouched by organized labor, excepting the shingle-weaving department.
"Owing to the shifting nature of the business and the migratory habits of most of the laborers engaged in it, and to the peculiar conditions under which they live and work, it was long considered as difficult to organize.
Men Are Well Treated "Moreover, it has always been an industry in which the men are particularly well treated. Lumber camp “grub” has long been famous for its quantity, variety and quality, and whenever business has been good the pay has been generous. After years of heartbreaking depression the industry has suddenly become prosperous. Laborers are now getting from $3 to $3.50 a ten-hour day, with pro rata overtime pay, as against half as much a year ago.
In the camps and bunk houses they pay $4.50 a week for board and 50 cents a week and
for sleeping accommodations. In the remote places, where there is little or no diversion, it is claimed that the men are eager for overtime and would rather work ten hours than eight.
Government Will Suffer “If now the Northwestern lumbermen yield to the demand made on them in the name of patriotism and concede the eighthour day, somebody has got to foot the bill for the difference. Temporarily, the government, that is to say, the people at large, will have to pay. The government must have lumber for ships, cantonments and airplanes.
Not more than 15 per cent of a log yields the quality required for ship building and planes. The rest of the lumber obtained from the log must be sold in competition with Southern pine. Uncle Sam will have to allow a price for the portion of the log he takes that will be large enough to yield a good profit on the whole log. So long as the government continues to buy large quantities on this scale all will be well.
"The appalling labor situation in the Pacific Northwest, 'says the Seattle Business Chronicle,' has passed beyond the limits of a legitimate wage controversy and is now nothing less than anarchy.”
“The issue is clear cut. Organized Labor stands forth in hideous nakedness revealed as the half-brother of the I. W. W.
“We have here a situation covering a wider territory and a greater number of industries than has ever before been known in the United States. It has daily been growing worse, and the crisis can not now be far off. There is not an employer of labor, a business man, a property owner, anywhere in the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, who is not threatened, either directly or indirectly, by conditions unparalleled in a long recital of labor disturbances.
“The newly created shipbuilding industry which has been the marvel of the country, and has brought Seattle its first taste of prosperity in many years, is doomed, unless this industrial anarchy be checked. It has been estimated there are $200,000000 of contracts for ships to be built on the Pacific Coast. Workmen at the steel shipbuilding plants in Seattle have threatened to strike August 1--not for higher wages—but to force the companies to cease using the “unfair” product of the Washington Iron Works, because that concern will not become a closed shop. Some 15,000 shipbuilding workers, according to the daily papers, have threatened to go on strike-not for higher wages—but as a sympathetic strike to force closed shop on the Traction Company. These men have agreements with their employers, have asked and received wage increase after wage increase, have bands to play for them while they eat, free garage space for their automobiles in which they come to work, baseball grounds provided for their recreation; they are engaged in work which is considered of vital importance to America's success in the war—yet what care they when the paramount question of union recognition and closed shop comes up with a body of workers with whom they are in no wise affiliated.
“There is not an employer of industrial labor anywhere in the state that can go to bed at night knowing for certain that his plant can operate on the morrow.
“Closed shop is the question at issue-not wages or working conditions. Thus Organized Labor is dropping its sham pretense that organization is merely to obtain a living wage. And the worst part of it is that a goodly portion of workingmen are law abiding citizens who, against their will, are forced to go on strike through fear of personal violence from within their own ranks.
"No one will deny the right of the workingman to organize and belong to a union whose aims and methods are not contrary to public policy. No one will deny the right of the work
ingman to leave his employment if he cannot procure a wage commensurate with the service rendered. But how Organized Labor justify its un-American position that a man shall not be allowed to earn his living unless he belongs to a union?
“Seattle stands to-day, before the country, as those offus who see Eastern papers know to our sorrow, as a hot-bed of anarchy, with a city government, honey-combed with socialism, a police department that mutinies, and a city from which it is desirable to stay away."
Senator Ashurst of Arizona recently denounced the I. W. W. in the Senate. “I know what the meaning of the three letters is,” said he, “they stand for 'Imperial Wilhelm's Warriors.' They also stand for murder and perjury.”
The senator also read into the record an editorial of an
Arizona newspaper, which gave the following lines as an extract from the I. W. W. songbook:
"Onward Christian soldiers, rip and tear and smite,
"Most of the I. W. W. leaders are outlaws,” says Senator Poindexter.
Senator Hollis, in urging drastic action against the I. W. W. says: “They teach resistance to all authority, to laws, to order. They are advising everyone to disregard Federal laws, particularly those laws dealing with the conduct of the war, such as the draft.”
In an editorial entitled, “When Labor Helps the Kaiser," the Detroit Saturday Night says:
“Just as it is possible for the individual to be guilty of treason to his government, likewise is it possible for the government to so conduct itself as to lay itself open to the charge of treason to the best interests of the individual. In the former instance the punishment quite properly, is summary and explicit; in the latter, it is inevitable that the government should suffer a lessened degree of confidence among its subjects.
“Though the federal authorities were quick and diligent in their explanation that the government did not participate directly in the settlement of the Pelham Bay Park strike, it cannot escape the responsibility for the derogatory results that must inevitably result from that settlement. The statement of Rear-Admiral Harris reads so much like an apology on the part of the government, or an attempt to evade responsibility, that it cannot help but have the effect of making the criticism of the government more immediate, if not more condemnatory than it otherwise might have been.
“Notwithstanding the promise of President Gompers of the American Federation of Labor that there would be no strikes on government contracts during the period of the war, the carpenters engaged on the marine cantonment at Pelham Bay Park, near New York, did threaten to cease work unless their demands were complied with. So serious did the situation