Talk with David M. Parry on Organized Labor
(Copyrlsht, 19 4, by Frank CI. Carpenter.)
EW YOKK. Jan. 12 (Sih.-cIhI Cor-
I respondence of I'm Dee.) The
I trades union me. f. th United
Htutes look uiKn Ci1.' M Parry,
the president of the National
Association of Manufacturers, as nn enor
mous hull, on overgrown golden calf,
Which Im dashing about In the china shop
of the labor organizations, shattering the
Images. They call him a bloated cap
italist with horns, and think he In seven
teen feet high and weighs a ton. The rcul
David M. Parry measures 6 feet 6 Inches
and he tips the beam at Just 125 pound.
If lie has horns I have not discovered litem.
Kin Muck hair Is well brushed back from
a high forehead, his dark face l smooth
haven and his eyes are as gentle and his
voice as suave as that of any business
man I know.
Mr. I'arry has made himself noted as the
chief antagonist of organized labor In the
United States. lie has no use for labor
Unions In any shape, and ho docs not hesi
tate to say so. lie not only opposes them
himself, but he Is now the president of the
Manufacturers' association, which has a
membership of 3,000 of the leading fac
tories and corporations of this country,
covering every part of the United States,
lie tells mo that they represent capital
runnitig high Into the billions of dollars
and that each pays '0 a year to the asso
ciation as membership dues. The asso
ciation largely represents the anti-union
sentiment of the country, although I ven
ture many of its members would not en
dorse views so radical as those of Mr,
I'arry.
It was In the oflloes of the association
that I met Mr. I'arry. 1 had come for an
Interview, and ho answered my questions j
at once. Bald he:
"You ask me why I oppose organized ,
labor. I do It because as It exists in the
United States It Is revolutionary. It makes
the Declaration of Independence and the
constitution obsolete documents and de
clares all of us who aro so old-fashioned as
to believe In Individual liberty the op
pressors of labor and the enemies of the
race. I believe many of the labor leaders
would guillotine us If they could."
"That Is rather strong language, Mr.
I'arry," said I.
"Yes, but I believe In calling things by
their right names. Organized labor as it
now Is Is a standing mob engaged In acts
Of open rebellion against the government.
It drliei the constituted authorities and
tries to nullify Individual and property
rights. Such rebellion Is worse than that
which had the secession of the states for
Its object, and I think It Is high time the
country was waking up to the fact.
"Why, look at It," Mr. Tarry went cn.
"We have had a series of labor insurrec
tions during the past year known as
Strikes, In which the unions have tried to
force their authority by mob law. They
denounce the government officials who try
to restrain them, they are keeping their
members nut of the militia, and they hive
even attempted to make the president of
the United States violate tils oath of office
to please them. In their crusade against
the exercise of Individual rights they have
blustered, threatened, arsaulted and mur
dered. They even threaten help'ess women
and children. I know the leaders of the
labor unions will disclaim responsibility for
Such crimes, but they are nevertheless the
accomplices of the brutal and Ignorant
men whom they have Incited to commit
Such outrages."
"What right have you to rpeak ogilnst
labor, Mr. I'arry?" said I. "Have you ever
been a worklngman yourself?"
"I have the right of both a worklngman
and an employer," was the reply. "I have
worked all my life, and I work now. I be
gan to work on the farm as a boy and I
know all nbout farm work, from the dig
ging of post holes to hauling manure. I
have clerked In a store, sold goods on the
road and had a hardware store of my own.
I am now an employer of labor, having
several thousand hands; I am also a con
sumer, and every man has a right to dis
cuss matters In which he Is so vitally In
terested." "How about working at a trade? Do you
know anything of mechanics?"
"I make buggies and I understand every
thing connected with my business and have
worked at every branch of It."
"Could you set a wagon tire?"
"I have set thousands of them. I have
worked with my men, and I think I know
Something of the worklngmen of the United
States. It Is not right to look upon th;
unions as representing American labor, for
86 per cent of our workmen do not belong
to them. I am a friend of the worklngman,
but not of him as a trades unionist."
"Have you had any personal experiences
with unions In your work?"
"If you meen lit my factory I have not.
X have always run an open shop, and so far
the unions have refrained from making any
demands upon me. In my capacity as an
employer. Since I have been denouncing
their methods, however, I have had one
little experience which shows that the agi
tators were looking for an excuse to ruin
rny business. It Is a little matter and
hardly worth mentioning.
"A painter one day asked m for a Job.
1 Mv - rj -
DAVID M'I,F!AN PARRY OP INDIANAPOLIS,
ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS.
PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL
I had nothing for him In the factory and
told him that he might paint the steps of
my house, although they hardly i. ceded It.
Wncn he got through I paid him what he
asukd, but a few days later a walking dele
gate of the Talnters' union called upon me
and said that my steps had been painted
at a rate less than the union scale. I told
lilm I knew nothing about his union scale
and cared less and showed him out of my
office. Then the Painters' union applied foe
a national boycott on my factory. Tho
application passed through the Central
Labor Union of Indianapolis and was sent
up to President Oompers of the American
Federation of Labor. Mr. Gompers came
out to Indianapolis to see my front door
st'ps, aid in a speech there gave forth
the startling Information that the boycott
had been granted upon the petition of the
painters. Thua the I'arry Manufacturing
compe.ny was to be sacrificed for my
personal act, a good example of the sense
of Justice which animates the strike
bosses. Well, I was boycotted. The boy
cott vus an advertisement and my busi
ness has never been larger than since It
was declared."
"How about strikes. Mr. Parry? Do
they pay the laboring man?"
"No," was the reply. "They do not
benefit the employer, the employe nor the
consumer. They lessen our respect for
the law and they shako our fulth In the
perpetuity of our government. Take the
anthracite strike. The mob dominated
the mining regions for months and the
whole military power of Pennsylvania
could not or did not maintain law and
order. In that strike It is estimated that
$25,000,000 were lost in wages. I am' not
certain as to the figures. I know thit
the operators lost enormously, but the
loss of both Is as nothing In comparison
to that of the consumers. Every house
holder had his coal bills almost doubled
by that strike, and even now the prices
have not come down to the normal figures
of before the strike. The public has al
ready paid millions and It Is still paying
Its tribute to the organization of United
Mine Workers."
"Have you ever estimated the money
cost to the consumers, Mr. Parry?"
"I have tried to," was the reply. "Wo
know that It caused a shortage of 25. COO, -000
tons of hard coul. That much coal
was not mined on account of the 150,0(10
men who were Idle during the four or
five months of the strike. The loss would
have been Just the same if the coal had
been mined and dumped Into the sea, and
putting the price of the coal at 5 per ton
it was $125,000.000 almost enough to com
plete the Punnnia canal. That shortage
raised the prices of all kinds of fuel and
the people had to pay the bill. The mat
ter was submitted to at U.t ration, nnd In its
settlement the national arbitration board
stated that the miners were already re
ceiving wages that compared favorably
with those of men In other industries.
Nevertheless, they gave them an advance)
of 10 per cent on their wages, and every
laboring man of the United States now has
to help pay that 10 per cent when he light
his kitchen fire. He also pays for It in
t-very bit of manufactured goods made
with steam. The whole public Is taxed
by tho men working In those mines. That
is one of the beauties of arbitration."
"Then you don't believe in the law of ar
bitration, Mr. Parry?"
"I do not. The constitution of the United
States Is a good enough law for me. Either
a man has a right to run his own business
or he has not. If he bus not we ought to
strike the clause referring to our property
lights cut of the constitution. The Idea
of arbitrating the question whether an em
ployer can employ a man who does not be
long to a union is absurd. It Is revolution
ary. It means that Individual liberty Is
destroyed and that wc must bargain wl h
a lot of irresponsible blatherskites for such
liberties as we may be allowed to posse -s.
How public men can lend their voices and
Influence to arbitration Is beyond my com
prehension. I can only account for it on
the theory that they ore afraid of th?lr
shadows or are willing to sell their pa
triotism for the sake of money and polit
ical power."
"What do you think of the charge that
the present business depression is caused
by the demands of organized labor?"
"I think It is largely so," said Mr. Parry.
"The unions have caused the strikes thit
we have had, and the losses arising from
them have become a national disaster. I
believe that 1903 will go down In hUtory as
the year when the labor agitators put a
chock to a period of unparalle'ed pros
perity. The strikes they originated have
caused an enormous loss In our aggregate
production, and you must nlways remem
ber that the consumption Is regulated by
the amount produced. You cannot divide
more than you have to divide, and anyone
with a thimbleful of brains can see that
cutting down the production is not the way
to make the people rich. In times like
this it is tl'.e masses who Buffer most. The
capitalist can shut down his business and
still have enough for his personal wants.
The laborer has only his work, and he
who Is roorcFt suiters most nnd longest."
"But you do not deny labor the right to
strike, do you?"
"No. I do not. They have that right as
Individuals or collectively, but they have
no right to Interfere with the business of
their employers or with the men hired to
take lhir places. Many of the demands
for strikes are so unreasonable that they
cannot be granted and tho business go on.
The labor organizations do not eons der
that. They act as though labor had no in
terest whatever in the business, and if op
postd they try to attack their employer
through the consumers of his goods, and
by boycott dog him from one end of the
country to the other. They prevent o.h?ra
from di Irg the work they will not do them
selves, and I? they succeed In destroying
him, as they sometimes do, a chorus of
glee got s up from the labor agitators nnd
their followers throughout the whole coun
try. They think they have won a great
victory, when they have actually kill d
the goose which has been laying their
golden eggs. They remind me of the man
who tried to Improve his personal appear
anco by cutting off his own nose."
"How about the working day, Mr. ParryT
Can the United States be run on an eight
hour basis?"
"I think not The majority of men work
ten hours, and that Is an Indication that It
requires a ten-hour day to produce enough
to satisfy the needs of humanity. If you
cut the working day to eight hours, you
cut off one-fifth of the total production,
and this means that the people will have
to be satisfied with four-fifths of the com
modities that they now get. Organized
labor does not look upon it in that way.
It Insists upon more of the necessities and
comforts of life for its own peculiar class
and therefore demands that it shall have
ten hours' pay for eight hours' work.
This Is practically a 25 per cent Increase
of wages, nnd If granted It must come out
of the consumers. So, you see, organized
labor is bound to have a good bargain
even if that bnrgaln is rather hard on the
rest of the population."
"Rut, Mr. Parry, John Mitchell and Sam
uel Gompers say that a man can do as
much work In eight hours as he can in
ten."
"Yes, I know that, but upon the same
logic he can do as much In six hours
as he can In right, and ns much In four as
he can In six. Indeed, you might go on
and prove that a man can do as much by
not working at all as ho can by working
ten hours, which in ridiculous. I am es
pecially opposed to granting the eight-hour
day ns to government work. I see no
reason why the government should give
ten hours' py for eight hours' labor, any
more than an Individual should be com
pelled to do so, nnd think that those who
favor that law are In favor of robbing the
public treasury."
"But, Mr. Parry, speaking of wages. Is
not labor capital's partner? And if so,
does it get Its share of the profits?"
"It gets n big share," replied Mr. Parry,
"and far more, proportionately, than the
capitalist. What are the average divi
dends of our big industrial organizations?
Those which do a safe, steady business do
not pay more than 4 per cent. That is, 4
cents on every dollar. That Is the
profit of the capitalist. The balance of
the earnings are spent for raw materials,
rent and labor. As time goes on and capi
tal accumulates, It comes Into competition
with other capital, and Its profits decrease,
while at the same time the real wages
that Is, the amount that a man can pur
chase from a day's work tend to rise.
Labor gets more and more and capital less
and less every year."
"What do you think of giving the work
lngman a share In the business?"
"I don't believe In It. He will never be
lieve that he Is fairly treated, and If
money Is lost he will not be willing to take
his share of the losses. He looks upon it
as a matter of charity, and it Is a bad
thing all around. We had a manufacturer
at Indianapolis who called his men together
a year or so ago and told them that his
profits had been such during the past
twelve months that he could afford to make
them a present of 5 per cent of his earn
ings in addition to their wages and at the
end of the speech each man was given an
envelope containing his share. After the
employer left the men held a meeting and
one of them got up and said:
" 'How do we know the old man is telling
the truth, and that we are getting our full
6 per cent? I think we ought to have a
committee appointed to go and look at his
books.
"This was done, and a committee called
on the employer and asked for the books.
"The employer looked up In surprise, say
ing: 'I don't understand.'
" 'Well,' replied the committee, 'you say
we are partners and that you have given
us 5 per cent of the profits of the business.
How do we know that we got our full S
per cent? We should like to see the books.'
"This almost paralysed the employer,"
continued Mr. Parry. "He waited a mo
ment nnd then said: 'Why, men, that
money was a present from me. You are
not entitled to any more than your wages,
and I need not have given you a cent." He
thereupon dismissed them, and that was
the last time he took his men into partner
ship." FRANK Q. CARPENTER.
Had the Label
A Joke on D. M. Parry, the Indiana man
ufacturer who lias become widely known
for his Invectives against organized labor,
was perpetrated recently In tho law office
of Senator Beverldge, at Indianapolis.
Mr. Parry entered there wearing a new
suit of clothes. &tt Whltcomb, who Is in
Mr. Bevcrldge's law office and knows Mr.
Parry intimately, chaffed the manufac
turer about his new clothes and suggested
that they were made by organised labor.
"No," said Mr. Parry, "I think not this
time."
But Whltcomb pushed back the lapel of
his friend's coat, and on the inside, sewed
In a conspicuous place, was th urdoa
label. Washington Post.
