REO "30"-$1250.
See the 1911 5-passenger Touring Car,
the car that always goes and
always "comes back."
The REO "30" Roadster with toy
tonneau, at same price, is a beautiful
car with one hundred cents' worth of
value for every dollar it costs you.
OVERLAND
We have the general agency for this great line
of automobiles for the Southeast Platte country, and
we want local agencies for this territory. We will
have both the Reo and the Overland on display at
the Automobile Pavilion at the fair grounds during
the State Fair. ,
Lord Auto Co.
1200 P STREET
7IS5LER'Sjl
LU- '
t The WAGEWORKER'S DELIGHT when you
sit down to your meals and find QUAKER BREAD.
It's fresh every day. Insist on your grocer giving you
Quaker Bread. The red tag on every loaf.
FOR SALE AT ALL GROCERS
111
The Lincoln Feed & Fuel Co.
Wholesale
and Retail
HAY, GRAIN AND COAL
Lincoln, nebr.
50 Second Hand Cook Stoves and
Ranges for sale at a Bargain
Also 100 Second Hand Soft and Hard
Coal Heaters which Must be sol J
Cash paid for 2nd hand goods
S. M. BYERTS
I
Bell Al 301
1626 Q
True's Chicago
Bakery Co.
. W. H. TRUE. Mgr.
WHOLESALE
AND RETAIL.
Auto 3045
807-9 South Uth St.
Lincoln .. Nebr.
THREE
LOCATIONS
Warehouses and
Yards 16th and Y
Stores at 313-315
South 9th and
16th and 0 Streets
STREET
Auto 4504
EVILS OF FACTIONALISM. "
Trades Unions Should Present a Solid
Front to Their Foes.
There is altogether too much fac
tionalism iu tho world of labor.
Of course every faction seeks to keep
in stock n shop worn set of alleged
excuses for its failure to get in line
with the big family of unions, but
none of them will stand aualysis, be
cause no logical reason can be given
to justify any split in labor's ranks.
Quarrels over personal opinions or
ambitions are personal affairs and
should not affect the attitude of the
workers toward the labor movement,
uor should they prevent the workers
from fully realizing the value and ne
cessity of unity.
The moment a group of workers an
nounce their independence of the gen
eral labor movement they convict them
selves as being either Ignorant or filled
with selfishness of the narrow type
that hopes to secure some temporary
trivial advantage for a select few at
the expense of the many.
The desire to hold office is perhaps
the most common cause of factions
among unions, but it is not a good
reason.
The labor cause is of vastly more
Importance than any individuals in it.
and when any alleged labor man advo
cates division of the forces of labor
It is pretty clear that such a man
holds his opinions and selfish interests
as of more importance than the cause,
and. that he is unworthy of support.
Such differences of opinion as may
exist between members of labor unions
as to correct union laws or policy
should always be settled within the
union and never be made a pretext for
factionalism.
When differing opinions are discuss
ed within the union, the discussion is
educational and beneficial, because the
constant grinding of one intellect
against another is broadening in its
effect, serves to put the adherents of
each side on their mettle and very
probably will result in correct action.
But if the union splits, each faction
being composed of men who think alike,
deprives both factious of the education
al effect which can only come through
debate. Thus there is lost not only the
unity essential to success, but also the
broad educational influence of discus
sions based upon divergent opinions.
Imagine that members of a union
seek to make some change iu union
rules or laws and when defeated they
secede. They were very sure they
were right, but when they seceded they
took all the adherents of their pet re
form out of the union and left the union
to go uureformed. Now, assuming they
were really right, if they had stayed in
the iiniou they would surely prevail in
the end. Thus secession or factional
ism not only tends to render the union
weak, but to deprive it of the benefits
of suggestions of reform, some of which
might be valuable and might finally be
adopted.
And labor needs unity now more than
ever before, in spite of the progress
that has been made, because our oppo
nents are becoming better organized
and because the pay envelope is not
keeping pace with the increasing cost
of living.
The old saying that "there is a time
for everything" does not apply to splits
In the forces of labor, because there Is
no time appropriate for labor to split.
Bear and forbear in the discussion of
your differences, but preserve unity.
Say to yourself, to nonunionists and
to Independent factionists, that labor
has no time to spend In factional dis
cussion except to unite the factions
that have already been created, and
that the time to unite is now. Shoe
Workers' Journal.
TO SAVE THE CHILDREN.
Wisconsin Labor Commissioner Makes
Recommendations.
After carefully investigating the
cases of C,000 children working under
permits from the state factory Inspec
tor in Wisconsin, J. D. Beck, labor
commissioner of the state, has Issued a
bulletin In which he makes recom
mendations to the governor. Chief
among these recommendations are the
folio wing:
More vigorous and thorough enforce
ment of the truancy law.
Extension of industrial education.
A maximum working day of eight
hours for children.
Itequirement of a minimum amount
of school attendance before children
are allowed permits to work.
State agents and officers should be
allowed broader discretion in refusing
working permits for children.
Employers should be held more strict
ly responsible for the physical and mor
al environment of children who are em
ployed by them.
Tentative bills along the foregoing
lines are now In process of preparation
at the hands of persons and societies
interested In the "saving of the chil
dren." Belgium's Factory Laws.
The laborer In Belgium is poorly
paid and poorly treated. There Is lit
tle 'In his working conditions to com
mend them to American workmen, ex
cept the precaution taken to protect
him from needless slaughter In work
shops and factories.
Belgium has very strict factory in-l--Mon
laws. Every employer is sup
;sfJ to know what Is required of
blm. if, when an inspector visits the
shop, he finds what he may regard as
n wilful failure to provide proper, safe
ty ulnit nil places where there is dan
ger the employer is immediately or
dered to appear in court.
Pressmen to Have School.
The International Printing Pressmen
and Assistants', union has .decided to
establish a technical school in Chicago.
THE OPEN SHOP VERSUS THE CLOSED SHOP
By Louis F. Post, Editor "The Public."
Most persons have come to know the
meaning of the terms "open shop"
and "closed shop." But greater cer
tainty of being understood may be as
sured if we explain what the terms
mean. Their origin is unimportant.
The thing to know is what they mean
now.
"Closed shop," then, is the term for
a shop, factory, store, or other indus
trial place where workmen cannot ob
tain employment without being mem
bers in. good standing of the labor
union of their trade. This is demanded
by the unions. Objecting to working
in cooperation with "scabs," "rats,"
"strike-breakers," or other non-union
workmen, they insist that the shop
shall be "closed" against all employes
who, not already belonging to the
union of their trade, refuse to join it.
If the union is able to coerce the em
ployer, or he is friendly enough to yield
without coercion, this demand is grant
ed and that establishment is conse
quently a "closed shop."
But if the employer will not yield
without coercion, and the union is un
able to coerce him, theu non-unionists
as well as unionists may obtain em
ployment there and the establishment
is consequently known as an "open
shop. ' '
No term has come into vogue for
establishments which exclude unionists
from employment. The reason probably
is that few employers make this ex
clusion. The issue usually raised is
between the "closed shop," which em
ploys only unionists, and the "open
shop," which employs unionists and
non-unionists without discrimination.
And the reason why employers, how
ever inimical to labor organizations any
of them may be, seldom insist upon
excluding unionists for being unionists,
is because freedom to employ non
unionists is, in present conditions, suf
ficiently destructive of unionism.
Both sides of the labor controversy
realize that the issue of "closed shop"
versus "open shop" practically in
volves the issue of union or no union.
Consequently "open shop"" or "closed
shop" has become the issue over which
workingmeu's unions and employers'
unions are struggling.
Without taking the space at this
time to discuss the question of moral
right or wrong, of freedom or coercion,
of liberty or autocracy, which the is
sue of "open shop" versus "closed
shop ' ' involves, we invite an impartial
comparison simply of the probable in
dustrial results of either policy.
Much that is being said and writ
ten about the inherent right to work is
for the most part pure hypocrisy, when
not crass ignorance. Those who say
it and write it are usually not worth
arguing with, because in their hearts
and heads they don 't mean it. What
they do mean is that non-unionists have
an inherent natural right to work
when employers want to use them to
break strikes.
This idea of the right to work is
true enough as far as it goes. We do
not deny it. But the broader one, that
all men not merely strike breakers in
strike times, but all men at all times
have an inherent natural right to work,
is still more true, because more com
prehensive; and this doctrine is de
nied by the same speakers and writers,
whenever its assertion seems hostile to
the interests for which they speak and
write.
Let us, then, confine this discussion
strictly to the question of industrial re
sults. What would be the effect of the
"Closed shop," and what the effect of
the "open shop," on both working
men and employers?
To avoid prejudice and the play of
selfish impulses either way, we shall
find it advantageous, iu an inquiry
involving so much feeling, sordid and
otherwise, to be as abstract as the con
crete nature of the question permits
For this purpose, then let us resolve
industrial society into employers with
jobs to give, workingmen with a life
and death necessity for' getting jobs,
and a dragon to consume ' ' surplus ' '
products. And for simplicity and tran
sparency of diseussiou let us suppose
that the ratio of workingmen to jobs
is as 10 to 9, and that 9 of the work
ingmen are unionists.
The figures are important only for
comparison of greater with less; and
the dragon may be ignored for the pre
sent.
Now, in those circumstances, what,
in the first place, would be the in-.
dustrial result of the "open shop"
policy strictly enforced?
Every shop would be open to the 1
non-union man. But as there are only
9 jobs, his taking a job would dis
employ one of the 9 union men.
This would compel the union to sup
port their idle member. If they did not,
he would have to leave the union and
underbid one of their number for his
job, and the latter in his turn would
have to leave the union and underbid
another, and so on, until the union
had been completely disrupted.
But if the union did support its first
disemployed member, the wages of the
unionists would be by that amount
diminished and they thereby weakened
iu their contest with employers, whose
sole object as to them is to get as much
product for as little wages as possible.
As that is the employers' object, it
is to be presumed that the non-unionist
is getting less than the man he dis
placed. But if the. non-unionist takes
less than the unionist he displaced, an
attack has been made upon wages. Yet
the unionists cannot complain. As the
establishment is an "open shop" they
cannot object to lower wages for
the non-unionist, so long as their own
wages are not reduced.
After awhile the shop which employs
the non-unionist finds it expedient to
reduce its force. Whom will it dis
charge? Certainly not the cheaper pro
other idle member during the period of
the- unionist. This is not discrimina
tion against unionism; it is discrimina
tion in favor of economy of production.
And now the inion must support an
other idle member during the priod of
stagnation (when jobs are temporarily
less than 9), or have him leace the
union and underbid them. In due time,
however, demand for labor rises again
to 9. But will the employer who re
dced his force offer to pay the old
wages? Why should he? What object
could he have in paying more to the
unionist seeking a job than to the
non-unionist who is already at work?
He will not pay more unless coerced;
and the unien, with two idle members
on its hands, is in no trim for coercive
action. So the union strains a point
and consents to the return of the union
man to work at non-union wages.
But now this employer has an ad
vantage over the others; he can under
sell them in the market. So they de
mand a downward revision of the wages
scale. They are good natured about it,
for they offer to arbitrate; but as they
really are at a disadvantage under. the
old wages scale, they win in the arbi
tration, and the whole level of wages
is reduced.
The ratio of workingmen to jobs,
however, remains unchanged. There
are still 10 men and only 9 jobs. If,
then, the "open shop" policy con
tinues, what is there to prevent a fur
ther reduction of wages through the
samt process, and then another and an
other, until the union collapses, and all
the 10 men are in a continuous un
organized, helter-skelter, cut-throat
struggle for these 9 jobs? Nothing.
And what of the employers? As
wages fall, general purchasing power
declines, for workingmen are great con
sumers, and by the time the working
men are reduced to pauperism the
employers, with an abundance of pro
ducts spoiling on their hands, are
ruined by sluggish trade.
The tendency thus briefly and candid
ly illustrated, is the inevitable tend
ency under prevailing industrial cir
cumstances, of the "open shop" policy.
If the illustration is imperfect in any
determinative respect, we should be
glad to have the defect pointed out.
But would not the result of a strictly
maintained "closed shop" policy,
under conditions similar to those of the
above illstration, be the very reverse?
Incsntestably.
In those circumstances the "closed
shop" policy, generally and strictly
maintained, would raise the wages of
the workingmen and maintain an active
market for the employers, and this
without lessening opportunities for
employment of the. non-unionist.
Since the non-unionist would be
locked out of every job by the "closed
shop" policy, he would have to join
the union. This might be an infringe
ment of his rights, it is true but the
concrete economic result to him, and it
is that and not his abstract right that
we are now considering, would be infin
itely better than under the "open
shop ' ' system. When he had joined the
union the 9 jobs would by trade union
principles, be distributed so that in
effect nine-tenths of each job would be
done by one of the 9 men and one-tenth
of each job by the 10th man. This
would reduce wages below the natural
standard, if every man wanted to work
full time; but the reduction below that
standard would be only one-tenth,
whereas under the "open shop" it
would be down to the lowest limit of
subsistence.
Of course the 9 men might exclude
the 10th man from membership. But
that point is not involved. Trade
union' principles demand the admission
of all workers. Even competency is
not a requisite. Suppose, however, that
we consider the possibility.
Remember, we are not discussing
natural rights. What we are discuss
ing is industrial results.
Suppose, then, that the union arbi
trarily refuses to admit the 10th man
to membership, and consequently that
he cannot get employment, the "closed
shop" policy prevailing. What would
result? Why, the 10th man would die.
But now there being only 9 men for
the 9 jobs, the employers could not
coerce the men, nor could the' men
coerce the employers. Bargaining
would be on equal terms, wages would
consequently be at the level of the
earnings of the warkingmen, trade
would be brisk, employers would pros
per, and everybody would get what be
longed to him, except what the dragon
exacted, and we are not now consider
ing the dragon.
Considered simply with reference to
industrial results, is it not evident that
the ' ' closed shop ' ' policy is preferable'
to the "open shop" policy?
Do we favor a "closed shop," then?
ioi at an. t
While, under the circumstances sup
posed, which we believe illustrate fairly
the industrial conditions of our time,
we should prefer the "closed" to the
"open" shop, simply as a matter of
industrial results, we do not prefer it
as a matter of just social relations. We
object to the principle of the "closed
shop." But we object to it totally
not only to its use by and for work
ingmen, but also to its use in subtler
ways to the disadvantage and undoing
of workingmen.
The greatest shop on this planet, the
one with limitless jobs, with jobs so
limitless that there could never be more
men than jobs if it were not a "closed"
shop, is the earth itself. Yet the '
earth has by law been made and is still
maintained as a " closed ' ' shop, the
gates of whieh can be opened only with
a golden key. .
Break down those gates, which en
close mineral deposits, farm sites, build
sites, make this earth-shop, with all
its industrial possibilities, an "open"
shop and there would be continuously
more jobs than men. As an industrial
result there would be limitless op:
portunity for emplayment in all legiti-.
mate vocations, full earnings for wages,
brisk trade for employers, and io
periods of stagnation. In these cir
cumstances there would be no further
contests over "open" or "closed"'
shops in any of the comparatively little
shops regarding with these contests
rage now. 'With the big shop "open"
no shop could be "closed."
There would be no such contests then,
because the demand for workers in all
lines would be so much greater than
the supply, all the time, that no work
ingman would wish to keep out another,
and every workingman would be his
own labor union.
When these employers and their
spokesmen who now decry the ' closed "
shop whieh labor unions try so
ineffectually to establish- when such
men rise up with equal enthusiasm
against the laws that make a "closed"
shop of the earth, they may count us
with thein. So long as they only de
nounce the "closed" shop with which
labor unions try to neutralize the in
dustrial ill effects of the great "closed"
shop which Nature freely offers as an
"open" shop, they deserve neither
support nor sympathy. While they
maintain that attitude, they are not
objecting to unfair things because they
are unfair, they are only complaining
because their own ox is gored.
ALBERT J. BRUSE, LINCOLN
Musicars' Union
TOGO RESTAURANT.
In these days of advanced art, culi-'
nary holds no mean place, in fact prop
erly cooked food is necessary to good
digestion, and good digestion is the
first and last step to success, hence it
behooves us to select our place of eat
ing with care and intelligence. . The
Togo Restaurant in their new location,
1028 P Street, requires no introduction
to the people of Lincoln. They know,
how to provide "good things to eat."
This fact is attested by their large and
constantly increasing patronage. Noth
ing is too good for their patrons and
they serve the best the market affords
at all times. Their experience in the .
UUC . U L 1. 1,.. 1 1 11 j, i. v . . . n .
public and serving them acceptably is
too well known to need comment. Give
them a trial. . ..
