3
I
MM
TRADES lilCQUNCILo)
VOL.3
lilNCOIiN, NEBRASKA, AUGUST 22, 1908
NO. 21
AN OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESSMAN ERNEST M. POLLARD
to quit work either singly or in a body if the wages they receive are
not satisfactory and say that the courts have so held. And, too, the
courts have held directly the opposite. I cite for proof the order of
the federal judge in St. Louis who enjoined railroad men from quit
ting work to resist a reduction in wages; also the well-remembered
Union Pacific case wherein the federal judge enjoined the men from
striking to resist a wage reduction. But I would call Representative
Pollard's attention to the fact that wages are not all that we are con
tending for. We insist upon our right to strike against intolerable
working conditions, against too long hours, against discrimination
against a hundred and one things in which the matter of wage cuts
no figure.
"Injunctions are always issued to prevent illegal acts," says
Representative Pollard.
This is so absurdly false that you. Representative Pollard, ought
to be ashamed to father its utterance. The injunction writ is purely
an equity writ meant to be used only in extraordinary cases.
Equity is meant to supply that wherein the law, by reason of its
universality, is lacking. As union men we do not now, and never
have, opposed the writ of injunction as an equity measure. It is the
prostitution of the writ of injunction to base and selfish ends to
which we so strenuouslj' objeet.
"It seems to me," you said, "that it is the duty of every man
who belongs to a labor union, which is engaged in a strike, to pro
tect human life and private property." That is quite correct, and
labor unions so teach. The fact that unions are made up of fallible
men is responsible for the fact that sometimes the union's members
yield to the impulses of human nature. But you continued and said :
"When a strike is conducted in this manner it is not interfered with
by the courts." That is a statement so utterly at variance with the
facts that you had no earthly excuse for making it. I again cite
Judge Taft's injunction in the Phelan case as proof that yon mis
stated the facts. In addition I call your attention to Judge Taft's
interference with the strike of the Brotherhood of Locomotive En-
The parade on Labor Day will move
promptly at 10 a. m., and will form on
Ecuth Eleventh street, between K ana
M streets.
The Tailors' Union, many of whose
members are now locked out, will be
given the post of honor at the head of
the parade. All other unions will be
given positions by lot, the three Have
lock unions being bunched in one sec
tion of the procession at their own
rv-quest.
There will be two bands of twenty
Lincoln, NVbr., August IS. 1908. Ernest 31. Pollard. M. C
First Nebraska District: I read with great amusement, not unmixed
with surprise, your speech on "injunctions" in particular and the
labor questiou iu general, at Havelock last night. After carefully
reading the Journal synopsis of that speech. I am forced to the
conclusion that either you are so ignorant of labor history and the
injunction record that you were foolish to undertake a discussion
thereof, or else you hold that the average union man is so ignorant
that it matters "not at all what a candidate for office says in advo
catiug his own position. !
Quoting the democratic platform's approval of the measure
which passed the senate in 1S96. relating to contempts in federal
iinrt von said:
"They say they are in favor of the bill that passed the United
States senate in 1S96. What that bill is no one seems to know.
When I first read the platform I immediately wrote a letter to the
document clerk of the house of representatives requesting him to
send me a copy of that bill iu order that I might know just what
they meant in their platform. I received a reply from this official
stating that the copies of this bill were all exhausted and he could
not comply with my request. To this day I do not know what the
bill provides. If the democratic party wants to be honest with the
laboring man. why did they not state iu their platform the principle
involved in this bill so the people might know what they meant!"
If you will pause aud think consecutively for a couple of minutes
you will doubtless object to having your mental ability measured
"by the above quotation. The mere fact that the document clerk
reported the exhaustion of copies of the particular bill is proof that
a great many people have informed themselves concerning that
proposed measure. But had you been one-half as anxious as you
pretend to ascertain the provisions of that bill, you would not have
leen deterred by the inability of the house docnnieut clerk to pro
vide you with a copy. There are, I believe, files of the Congressional
Record at the state house, at the University of Nebraska library, at
the Lincoln city library, and in the possession of several ex-congressmen
frotu this district. I am only a workingman, making no pre
tense of deep knowledge of political history aud economics, but I
had no trouble at all in informing myself concerning the contents of
this particular bill. Neither will any man. who has brains enough to
consult an iudex to the Congressional Record and then turn to the
pages mentioned, have any difficulty in iuforming himself. The bill
in question, which passed the senate ou June 10, 1S96. merely pro
vided that in cases oft contempt committed outside the presence of
the court, the accused could, if he so desired, have a jury trial. The
sentiment in favor of the bill was so nearly unanimous that it passed
the senate without .roll call, although a call of the house immediately
aftcrwards revealed the 'presence of a quorum, including the repub
lican leaders of the senate.
This is the bill which the democratic platform commends, which
the republican house of representatives refused to pass, and whose
provisions are bitterly and sarcastically assailed by Judge Taft in
his speech of acceptance.
... i .1. - i 4i .1... : . .,!.. I
Representative toiiaru. you meu quotcii me uram-muc pieces each in the procession, one at
form plank which declares that " injunctions should not be issued in tl)e bead and on? in tte -j-y
any cases in which injunctions would not issue if no industrial dis-jv;U union bands, too.
pnte were involved." and proceeded to say: j There will be no speechniaking at
" Every one knows who is at all familiar with judicial procedure the celebration,
that that is the case now. This plank iu their platform means noth- a grand basket picnic supper win
ing, as under the law as it is such temporary injunctions are not i l.t held at Capital Beach in the even
issued except where it is shown that irreparable injury wi'l result, ing. and everybody is urged to come
I strenuously object to having my meutal ability or my knowl-.wUb. well filied baskets,
edge of judiciarprocedure measured by the Pollard standard as ex-J The above are some of the matters
hibited in the above quotation from that Havelock speech. Mr. general interest that were decided
Tft. ;,.!;..; . 1 -....l th Pnntrarv .if v,mr statement. I l'Pu at tne meeting of the Labor Day
for it was Judge Taft who. as judge of the United States circuit
court, in ISM issued an injunction that would not have been issued,
nor even asked for. had there been no industrial dispute involved.
The case "referred to is the celebrated case of Frank W. Phelan. an
organizer of the American Railway Union. Acting under orders
from his uuiou. Phelan went to Cincinnati.' Judge Taft's home, to
organ u.e the employes on the Cincinnati Southern railroad, the fa
mous strike of 1S94 then being in its infancy. The manasreemut of
the Cincinnati Southern applied to Judge Taft for an order restrain
ing Phelan from further attempts to organize its employes, aud with
out giviug Phelau a heariug, Judge Taft issued the order. Phelan 1 75 yards,
disregarded the order and continued his work, lie was thereupon Misses' race,
haled before Judge Taft and sentenced to six mouths in jail for
contempt "of court. Because of the then growing strike of the Amer-j
ican Railway Union on other roads. Judge Taft issued this order.'
lie saul that he sent l lielan to jail because he was inciting a peace
able strike among employes of one fail road in order to help em
ployes of another railroad." and declared that while Phelau had a
right to organize a strike for a wage increase, he had no right toj
organize for the purpose of promoting a sympathetic strike. In
other words, had there beeu no industrial dispute no injunction
would have issued in this case. I am unwilling to accept even your
own admission tif your inability to grasp the real inwardness of these
facts. I prefer to believe that you would rather admit ignorance
than to make any admission calculated to injure your standing as a
thirk-and-thin supporter of the republican party.
Representative Pollard, you then proceeded to tell us that you
and other republicans endeavored during the last session of congress
In secure the enactment of a law providing that no injunction should
issue without a hearing, except where irreparable injury would follow-delay,
and that where temporary injunction was granted final
hearing should be had within five days. I cheerfully admit that
would be pretty good, but when you attribute the failure of that
bill to pass to the fact that there was a street car strike on in the
city of Cleveland, you presume entirely too much upon the ignorance
of the union men of this country. The failure of other relief meas
ures asked for by organized labor can not be attributed to a strike
that did not take place until after the measures were turned down,
and when you attribute the failure of this measure to the Cleveland
strike you merely convict yourself of a species of petty-demagogy
that illy becomes a representative in congress.
Representative Pollard, you concede the right of laboring men
NOW FOR LABOR DAY
committee last Monday evening.
The committee on sports made a
r-port which was accepted. The fol
lowing contests have been decide!
upon:
Ball game between picked nines
f.om Havelock and Lincoln.
Fat Men's race 75 yards.
Sack race 50 yards.
Xovelty race 50 yards and return.
Boys" race, over 12 and under 17
under 15 50 yards.
Married Women's race 50 yards.
Single Women's race 50 yards.
Shoe lacing contest.
Watermelon eating contest-
Pie eating contest
Baseball throwing, for women.
Boat race, double.
Boat race, single.
Swimming contest.
Yacht race.
Tub race.
In addition special contests will be
pirlled oft as time permits. The list
of prizes has not yet been arranged,
hut the prize committee gives assur
ance that the prizes will be well
worth contending for.
It should be understood that all
these contests are limited to union
nien and women, or the members of
the families of union men. Every ef
fort will be made to provide contests
in which children may take part. As
a matter of fact, the committee is
using every effort to make such ar
rangements as will give the good
wives an opportunity to enjoy the
day. The space set apart for the
land contests will be roped off so
that everybody will have an oppor
tunity to see what is going on, while
the contestants have ample room for
a display of their abilities. There
will be no crowding.
In making np the formation of the
procession the positions will be as
signed by lots. The names of all
i r:ions announcing an intention to
participate will be thrown into a hat,
end positions will be awarded as the
names are drawn, except as above
noted in the case of the Tailors"
Union.
Next week the prize list will be a&.
rounced. In the meanwhile the ad
vertising committee will get busy and
have the big colored posters out in
Lincoln and all surrounding towns
The marshals will ride prancin;
steeds and wear pretty sashes, and
ike committeemen will wear appro
priate badges.
If hard work will make the Labor
Day celebration a success, just count
upon success for the members of
the committee are hustling to beat
the band.
The committee will meet again
Monday evening at the hall at 1031
O street, and all members should be
present.
Secretary-Treasurer Norton was
prevented by illness from attending
the meeting Monday night, and T. C
Kelsey officiated in that dual position.
Speaking of the secretary-treasurer
rails to mind the interesting fact that
not all of the unions have come
across with the 10 cents pr capita
asked as a guarantee fund. This is
important and should be attended to
a l the next meeting.
UNFAIR PRINTING.
Model License League Does Business
With "Rat" Louisville Shop.
The attention of the union bar
tenders of the country is called to
the fact' that the printing sent out
by the Model License League, in
v.hich an especial appeal is made to
union meu, is done by the unfair shop
ef the George C. Fetter Co., Louis
ville, Ky. In writing to labor papers
the Model License League uses enve
lopes and letterheads bearing the
label but the "copy" accompanying
the letter, which the labor papers are
asked to publish, is printed by "rats."
This is a matter that should be con
sidered by the bartenders.
The Photo-Engravers' International
Union has adopted a label, and here
after it should be demanded upon all
classes of that work. The label will
be found on the bevel of the plate
cr on the base. A list of the houses
entitled to use this label fails to dis
close the name of any Omaha or Lin
coln firm.
gineers and Brotherhood of locomotive Firemen, in 1393. against
the Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Michigan railroad. This vm purely
a case of an injunction in an industrial dispute that would not have
been issued had there been no industrial dispute at issue. In the ease
in point Judge Taft issued an order compelling Grand Chief Arthur
of the Loeomotive Engineers and Grand Chief Sargent f the Loco
motive Firemen to "refrain from issuing, promulgating or continuing
in force any rule or order of any kind umlVr the rules of the associa
tion known as the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, or the m!e
or regulations of the association known a the Brothrrhood of Loco
motive Firemen, or otherwise, which shall require or command any
employes of any of the defendant railway eompanie to refuse to
receive, handle or deliver any cars or freight in course of transporta
tion from one state to another, from and to the Toledo. Ann Arbor k.
North Michigan Railroad company," etc, etc. Further, the order
restrained there Brotherhoods from enforcing the rules f the said
Brotherhoods and compelled them to rescind sueh rules as did not
meet with the approbation of Judge Taft. The order goes on to say;
In the manner customary and usual to the Brotherhood of Locomo
tive Engineers," the officers of that organization "shall cause to be
known and published that the law, by-law, mle or regulation of said
Brotherhood requiring its members to refuse to handle the ears of
the Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Michigan Railroad company is not
in force and effect against the said railroad." In other words, seiz
ing upon the pretext that there is an industrial dispute. Judge Taft
issued an order in which he usurps the functions of a great organiza
tion and compels its officers to use the machinery cf their organiza
tion to set aside the organization's laws and exeente the will of a
federal judge. In that now famous case Judge Taft decided in effect
that men engaged in a quasi-public occupation had no right to quit
work in a body, although the employers had a right to discharge
without notice or explanation. Grand Chief Sargent of the Brother
hood of Locomotive Firemen, writing in the May, 1S93, North Amer
ican Review, said:
"It has hitherto been conceded that railroad employes possessed
all the rights as citizens which attached to their employers; that is
to say, that if the employers possessed the right to discharge em
ployes when it pleased them to exercise such authority, the employe
also possessed the right, unchallenged, to quit work when be elected
to exercise that right. If a judge of the United States court may
abolish this right of an employe, he remands him. unequivocally, t
a servitude as degrading as th Spartans imposed upon their helots,
and it is this phase of the str?3je whieh aroused such intense con
cern and alarm."
I have quoted Judge Taft in opposition to the "sympatbetie "
strike," but I desire at this point to call yonr attention to a "sympa
thetic strike" whieh no judge interfered with, and which everybody
applauded. Our war with Spain was purely and simply a "sympa
thetic strike," and not all the sophistry of a Pollard nor the in
genuity of an injunction judge can ni ike anything else nt of it.
Representative Pollard, yon concluded yonr remarkable Have
lock speech by this still more remarkable utterance:
"In this connection I desire to call yonr attention to the fact
that the injunction issued by Judge Taft was so favorable to the
rights of labor and set forth so clearly the true rights of labor, that
ever since that time this decision has been quoted by lawyers repre
senting labor unions. The law as handed down by Judze Taft in
that decision contains the principles for which organized labor is
contending today."
By what authority or right do yon. Representative' PoIUrd.
speak for organized labor? What nnion claims yon as a member?
IIow much dues do you pay to support the cause of organized labor?
Your declaration in this connection is absolutely untrue a fact
which you could have easily ascertained by studying "the record.
"When a labor dispute is taken into the courts," said Representa
tive Pollard, "It is the attorneys for the labor nnions that refer t
the decision of Judge Taft. and not the attorneys for the corpora
tions." And this statement from a congressman who has at hand
the records of the case! The contrary is trne. and the record proves
it. I cite the ease of Moore & Co., vs. the Bricklayers ITnion of Cin
cinnati. Moore & Co.. asked Judge Taft for an order restraining the
Bricklayers' Union of Cincinnati from interfering with their busi
ness by "picketing," "persuasion." or ' interference with employes."
Judge Taft issued the restraining order without a hearing. Later
he awarded Moore & Co.. damages to the amount of several thousand
dollars, whieh the Bricklayers Union had to pay. Did tLe attorneys
for the Danbury hatters quote this decision of Judge Taft's in their
argument before the supreme court of the United States in the now
famous or infamous ease of Lowe-vs. The United Hatters of North
America ? Not at all it was the attorneys for the corporations who
quoted it, and upon this precedent set by Judge Taft the snpreme
court issued its order against the United flatters and virtually de
cided that a trades union was an organization in restraint of trade
thus outlawing the organizations whieh yon claim Judge Taft love
so well. It was Judge Taft's decision and restraining order in the
Phelan case that was quoted at length in the case of Bucks Stov
and Range Co., vs. the American Federation of Labor not by the
attorneys for Gompers, Morrison. Mitchell. Duncan, et aL, bat by
the attorneys for the Buck company, and upon this Taft precedent
was based the opinion of the court of the District of Columbia that
an organization's officials had no right to inform the organization's
members through its official journal that certain firms were unfriend
ly to' the organization. In other words, avennes of information are
closed to union men if that information is calculated to interfere
with the profits of a corporation. .
"Judge Taft is a true friend of labor," declared Representative
Pollard.
Let the ghost of the imprisoned Frank Phelan make reply. Let
the ghost of P. M. Arthur answer the claim. Let the record in the
Ann Arbor case, the Bricklayers ease, the Danbury hatters" ease
and the American Federation of Labor's case make answer. .Let
the dismal record of injunctions restraining organized labor from ex
ercising the privileges of citizenship guaranteed by the eonstitotion
all founded upon the injunction precedent set by Jndge Taft
stand out to refute the false claim of the statesman who. according to
the Congressional Directory represents the intelligent people of
the First Nebraska district. WILL M. MACPTX.
