Page images
PDF
EPUB

wholesome sentiment of shame by shippers against asking or receiving special favors from public servants, the rebate difficulty would stop. The committee suggested, and will probably recommend such action, that there seemed one more piece of legislation necessary in this direction-the bringing of the private car lines and the so-called "terminal railroads" under the provisions of the Elkins Act.

On the far more difficult, larger and wider problem of governmental regulation of freight rates, the result of the hearing is practically unsatisfactory— but probably what most people expected it would be. In the neighbor

hood of five-sixths of the witnesses examined were opposed to granting any rate-making power to the Interstate Commerce Commission. This is practically what our Order in convention has upheld, as have all the other railroad brotherhoods whose conventions have been held since the agitation began.

So far as the hearing before this committee is concerned, we admit that it is subject to the charge of being ex parte, or that the advocates of rate legislation have no case. It would, however, be a bold statement to make that the advocates of rate legislation have no case; still, so far as the general public is concerned, we very much incline to the belief that rates, rebates, discriminations and special favors are very intimately associated and badly mixed. Nor is this to be wondered at, because even a casual inspection of the subject will convince one of its far-reaching intricacies. As, for instance, there is a general public feeling, which is shared by railroad managers and owners, that rates should be uniform; nevertheless, the witnesses before this committee, for the railroads,' frankly admitted the existence of wide discriminations between localities, but claimed that they were justified because they "promoted business." Commenting upon this point editorially, the "World's Work" for July says: "The lay remonstrants also opposed any interference with the railroads, because it would 'hurt business,' and the members of the committee, as

might have been expected, were unable to get past this argument for particular interests to the real problem of the common interest of shipper and railroad and consumer, who in the end pays the freight. The responsibility of stating clearly whether the railroads exist to aid trade, or trade to contribute to the financial advancement of the railroads, is one which legislators have always shrunk from assuming. The railroad problem must remain in its present unsettled condition till they gain courage to make a definite statement of policy.

"This cautious attitude will undoubtedly be reflected in a policy without aim or purpose in the next Congress unless there be some strong protest from the people. The feeling of the committee is amusingly summed up in the remark of its chairman: 'You have got to satisfy the people.

gress is here for.'

That's what ConSuch a feeling will at

the utmost find expression in some mildly soothing legislation calculated to allay what another member calls 'the temporary excitement of the people,' without any damage to the interests of the public-service corporations."

There is a well grounded belief among railway employes that present rates are reasonable; that the very great prosperity and progress of this country has been established and maintained by cheap transportation; that grave danger inheres in giving any political commission authority to make and the power to enforce railway rates. This latter is a fundamental objection and has its taproot in the larger question of personal rights and liberty of action. On the question of reasonableness of rates in this country, it is probable that Prof. Hugo R. Meyer, in his recent testimony before the Interstate Commerce Committee of the United States Senate, stated the whole story in a few words when he said: "American railway rates are the result of arbitration and warfare; they have been heated and forged and welded and pounded and hammered into their present shape, and they are about as nearly right as practical people can make them."

Much of the confusion, and perhaps

As a

intolerence, manifested by people in regard to this question would vanish if a thorough discrimination were made by writers and talkers between the terms rate-making and rate regulation. broad proposition, the details of which could no doubt be arranged in workable form, we believe railway employes would regard as eminently fair one which left the rate-making power in the hands of the railroads, with a competent commission appointed by the president empowered with rate-regulation. Such commission should consist, not of politicians or lawyers, but of railroad experts, men trained in the traffic, operating and financial departments of railways, so that they could give to the court the technical assistance necessary for it to determine intricate and complex matters of fact which would come before it, and a specially created court of final jurisdiction, to which both could appeal, the status quo to be maintained in case of appeal until such appeal had been passed upon by the court. The establishment of such court would be necessary on account of the congested condition of other competent tribunals and for the need speedy action.

Another aspect of this question is that curiously enough there exists a preponderating feeling among people that managements of railways are dishonest and grasping and shippers are supine and pluckable. As in affirmation of this, note what the Chicago Record-Herald recently said editorially: "The question is, can any individual or group of individuals, with a necessarily selfish interest, be permitted to hold a power so despotic that he or they may absolutely control the destiny and welfare of nation and people, may ruin this town, city or state and bring prosperity and plenty to that?" Now, as taking all the vitality and foreboding of dire calamity out of the above, note what Mr. Midgley has

to say: "The average traffic man is polite but perfectly independent in dealing with the small shipper. He is extremely conciliatory to the frequent shipper of goods or produce in car-load lots. But he is on his knees to the shipper who sends his goods in regular train-loads." It will be seen by this short but graphic account what all powerful factors the large shippers are in demoralizing rates and forcing discriminations upon the railways, or as Mr. Midgley further says, "It is too often the case that the large shipper either dictates or controls the rate under which his goods are shipped. It will be seen by this that often the railways would gladly welcome a higher authority by which they could maintain their rates.

Speaking upon this subject, President Roosevelt recently said what we heartily endorse: "The proper exercise of that power is conditioned upon the securing of proper legislation which will enable the representatives of the public to see to it that any unjust or oppressive discriminating rates are altered so as to be a just and fair rate and are altered immediately. I know perfectly well that when you give that power there is a chance of its being occasionally abused. There must be a certain trust placed in the common sense and common honesty of those who are to enforce the law. If it ever falls to my lot (and I think it will) to nominate a board to carry out such a law, I shall nominate men, so far as I am able, on whose ability, courage, and integrity I can count,-men who will not be swayed by any influence whatever, direct or indirect, social, political, or any other, to show improper favoritism for the railroads, and who, on the other hand, if a railroad is unjustly attacked, no matter if that attack has behind it the feeling of prejudice of 99 per cent. of the people, will stand up against that attack."

SOME INTERESTING HISTORY.

Some interesting history is contained in the following extract from an editorial by Mr. Samuel Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labor, in

the American Federationist for July, 1905. This is of particular interest just now when Mr. Debs and others are actively engaged in an effort to build up a new

labor union, universal in its membership and antagonistic to all trades unions and trades union principles. And we include the Railroad Brotherhoods in the term "trades unions." Surely the railway employes will not be misled by this movement or by those who have misled everyone who has followed their lead.

Mr. Gompers says:

Conscious of their power, the British trade unions nearly a half century ago declared that the defense of trade union

ism was unnecessary. The American Federation of Labor in its early years emphasized that declaration, but time has shown that the declarations were premature. It was scarcely conceived then that men posing as friends of labor would make false and malicious representation of the trade union movement and trade unionists. It is today almost inconceivable how bitter and relentless and cunningly devised is the antagonism of some of the most conspicuous socialists of the country in their efforts to divide, undermine, or destroy the trade union movement.

As evidence of the purpose and tactics employed, the call for the so-called Chicago congress as well as the socialist publications may be cited. All of these, however, have been outdone by Mr. Eugene V. Debs, the socialist candidate in the last campaign for the Presidency of the United States, in a letter written by him to a Mr. Peter Damm.

Before considering Mr. Debs' letter, it may not be amiss to say that Mr. Damm about three years ago was engaged in the delectable work of trying to divide and destroy the International Carriage and Wagon Workers' Union, and it affords us the keenest gratification to be enabled to say that through the issuing by us of a circular to the local unions of that craft, the entity and integrity of that international union were saved. We prefer to deal with the purport of Mr. Debs' letter, to which we shall fully refer, but for the purpose of clearness, a preliminary statement of a few heretofore unpublished facts is

necessary.

It is common knowledge, of course, that Mr. Debs was president of the

American Railway Union; but little is known of how that institution was conceived. Perhaps it may be interesting even to Mr. Debs to learn. It surely must be to all interested in the cause of labor.

A little more than twelve years ago, when engaged in an organizing and lecturing tour in the interest of the trade union movement, we had occasion to be in Kansas City and there met Mr. George W. Howard, formerly of the railway conductors. After he addressed a meeting of railway men belonging to the various brotherhoods, he unfolded to us a plan that he had in mind in substantially the following language: "I have a plan to organize the railway workmen of America into one union. All they need pay is one dollar a year, and in less than three years we will smash the brotherhoods."

He asked for our coöperation in that effort, urging it because the brotherhoods were not affiliated to the American Federation of Labor. We called his attention to the attitude of the American Federation of Labor toward all international unions. We stated that we were extremely anxious, and recognized the necessity for the affiliation of all of them. Yet we believed that this was to be brought about by a natural development rather than by antagonism or invasion of an international's autonomy and independence; that the time would come when the railway brotherhoods would see the advantage and necessity of affiliation. In any event, their amalgamation or federation, was one of time and growth; that such a scheme as Mr. Howard proposed was inimical to the interests of the railway employes, and it could not be successfully carried into effect. He contended that it could, and that success depended entirely upon his persuading Mr. Debs to accept the presidency. Then, with the true Colonel Mulberry Sellers manner, he declared that "the organization would be launched, it would be successful, and that there would be 'millions in it'." He pooh-poohed our expressions of confidence in Mr. Debs, that he was too loyal to the organization of which he was a trusted officer to be

come a leader in another organization that would be instituted to rival or destroy it. Further argument was of no avail, with Mr. Howard.

We next learned that Mr. Debs, notwithstanding he was secretary of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and editor of its official magazine, had joined forces with Mr. Howard in launching the scheme for the American Railway Union, an organization formed to rival and disrupt all existing organizations of the steam railway employes of the country, his own included. The A. R. U. was formed, and among its membership were not only railroad employes, but men following numerous other trades, vocations, and professions; even the petty professional pot-house politicians of all sorts and calibers.

While it is true that we thought the movement unwise and did not believe the effort could be successful, we emphatically repudiated the statement Mr. Debs makes in his letter to Mr. Damm or to any other that we uttered one word or did one act that could in the slightest degree be construed hostile to the A. R. U. Though time has verified the opinion we first expressed so far as the A. R. U. itself is concerned, we can not but express our appreciation at the sympathy manifested, even though unwisely, by the A. R. U. in its strike of 1894.

Mr. Debs, in his letter to Mr. Damm, states that we were openly hostile to the A. R. U. strike. This is absolutely untrue, as is also his charge that when we left New York for Chicago, we stated that we were about to "attend a funeral." It is true that this falsehood was pub-. lished in the newspapers at the time, but we not only publicly repudiated the misrepresentation, but we also stated it to Mr. Debs in the presence of the gentlemen who participated in the conference.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Nor is it true that we refused to answer the call to go to Chicago. Several telegrams were received from persons entirely without authority, requesting us to go to Chicago; to these, of course, we could not respond, but when a conference of trade unionists, including Mr. Mahon, of the street railway men; Mr. Kidd, of the woodworkers; Mr. Dold, of the cigarmakers; Mr. Sovereign, of the Knights of Labor, and many others, was held in Chicago, and a united authoritative request for our presence in Chicago as President of the American Federation of Labor, was received on Monday morning, July 9, 1894, we invited the Executive Council of the American Federation of Labor, as well as the officers of representative international unions, to a conference in Chicago on Thursday morning, July 12. At that conference with us the following participated:

C. L. Drummond, Jas. Brettell, P. J. McGuire, Wm. H. Marden, vice-presidents; Chris. Evans, secretary; John B. Lennon, treasurer, all of the American Federation of Labor, and the following representatives of international unions: Thos. I. Kidd, of the woodworkers; G. W. Perkins, of the cigarmakers; M. F. Fox, of the iron molders; J. W. Kenney, of the painters; T. Elderkin, of the seamen; G. L. Horn, of the bakers; E. Kurzenknabe and C. F. Bechtold, of the brewery workers; P. McBryde, of the United Mine Workers; M. C. Carroll, of the typographical union; Owen Miller, of the musicians; Charles Baustian and

W. Dolpheide, of the carriage workers; M. M. Garland, of the iron and steel workers; T. Kurtzer, of the furniture workers; P. H. Morrissey, of the railway trainmen; and F. W. Arnold, of the locomotive firemen. It will be observed that Mr. P. M. Arthur was not present at the conference, as stated by Mr. Debs.

The general situation was discussed and Mr. Debs invited to the conference. Accompanied by George W. Howard and Sylvester Keliher, he presented a document which he wanted President Gompers to submit to the Railway Managers' Association. The matter was freely discussed for fully three hours, Mr. Debs participating and thanking the conference for the cordiality and courtesy extended to him.

It was then decided that Mr. Debs be advised that the conference would authorize him to select any one or more officers or members of the conference to act with him and others for the presentation of the document to the Railway Managers' Association. This, of course, included, though it did not specify by name or title, the president of the American Federation of Labor. To this Mr. Debs never vouchsafed so much as a reply or acknowledgment.

However, in the interest of truth and for the better understanding of all, we publish here the document which Mr. Debs and his colleagues desired the conference to instruct the President of the American Federation of Labor to submit:

CHICAGO, July 12, 1894. To the Railway Managers' Association.

GENTLEMEN: The existing trouble growing out of the Pullman strike having assumed continental proportions, and there being no indication of relief from the widespread business demoralization and distress incident thereto, the railway employes, through the board of directors of the American Railway Union, respectfully make the following proposition as a basis of settlement: They agree to return to work at once in a body, provided they shall be restored to their former positions, without prejudice, except in cases, if any there be, where they have been convicted of crime.

The proposition looking to an immediate settlement of the existing strike on all lines of railway is inspired solely by a purpose to subserve the public good.

The strike, small and comparatively unimportant in its inception, has extended in every direction until now it involves or threatens not only every public interest, but the peace, security, and prosperity of our common country. The contest has waged fiercely. It has extended far beyond the limits of interests originally involved, and has laid hold of a vast variety of industries in no wise responsible for the differences and disagreements that led to the trouble.

Factory, mill, mine, and shop have been silenced. Widespread demoralization has sway.

The interests of multiplied thousands of innocent people are suffering.

The common welfare is seriously menaced. The public peace and tranquility are in peril. Grave apprehension for the future prevails. This being true, and the statement will not be controverted, we conceive it to be our duty as citizens and as men to make extraordinary efforts to end the existing strife and avert approaching calamities whose shadows are ever now upon us.

If ended now, the contest, however serious in some of its consequences, will not have been in vain. Sacrifices have been made but they will have their compensation. Indeed, if lessons shall be taught by experience, the troubles now so widely spread will prove a blessing of inestimable value in the months and years to come.

The difference that led up to the present complications need not now be discussed. At this supreme juncture every consideration of duty and patriotism demands that a remedy for existing troubles be found and applied. The employes propose to do their part by meeting their employers half way. Let it be stated that they do not impose any condition of settlement except that they be returned to their former positions. They do not ask the recognition of their organization or of any organization.

Believing this proposition to be fair, reasonable, and just, it is respectfully submitted in the belief that its acceptance will result in the prompt resumption of traffic, the revival of industry, and the restoration of peace and order. Respectfully,

EUGENE V. DEBS,
President.

G. W. HOWARD,

Vice-President.

SYLVESTER KELIHER,

Secretary, American Railway Union.

We invite a careful rereading of this document with the further information furnished by Mr. Carroll, representing the International Typographical Union, that the proposition that Mr. Debs sub

« PreviousContinue »