New-York tribune. [volume], October 12, 1920, Page 10, Image 10

About New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
?km Sorti Qfrilnmc
Fl?m t* Last?the Truth: New?*?Edl?
tortais?Advertisement?
?C U? Audit nur.au of ClrcuUttea*
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1929.
Onae and ?ubUftiad dxi'.r tr Naw Tark Trtknn?
?ne. ? New Tark Corporawon Ot?ar. Redd. Traal
imt; O. Varsof Ro?an, vie? rroaldaot: Halaa
llamara Mat?. S^txtarr. K K. Maxfltkd. TnanitK.
kdtrarn, Trikun? Bulldtn?, lit N'aaaau Strait. Sam
tent. T*i?phont. BkIibu sit?.
?ctmcrtption ratks-?By ??n. t*?u?tM
fa?UM, IN TUB I MTKI) STATT?.
9*et at Mlaa'.aaippl Kixir.' On? Six On*
B? ?fail, iv.wil. Tear. Month?. Ntral*.
Dai'.j and Buiid?^.J17 et $??? flH
0?* meat 3ic
D?tlji ?nly . Ill? t.H M
Ob? ?Mk, 34c.
Irada* u-. ; . 4 ?9 I.M .4?
tuadajr ?mr. Canada. ? ?? <*.M M
FORIION RATIB
?an? *?d aunda?.$2? it fisse n-*?
Dall? ?oi? . 17 It 1.71 1??
??uaJa? ?cl? . 1.7} *.ll *?
M th? roitofBo? ?1 N*w Tart a?
Claa? Mall Maiut.
GUARANTY
ram aaa ?urefiiM m?rekandl>? adaatilaa* In TNI
TRIBUNE with abialu!? tafab?f?r If dlatatltta?.
!.'?? rMult? In ?n> cata THE TRIBUNS luarMhw?
I? ?a> y?ur mmr, kaak u??n rimiHt. N? rat t?l*
N* ?ulbkllnt. W? mak? ?H*d ?r?m?tly l( tk?
?iv?nliar iaaa nat.
lODfBEX OF TilB AirdOCTATKTJ FRXSS
Tk? AMOcUtcd J'rca? 1? ex?-lualT?l? anUUad aa UM
ji? tat ?publication or all nfwi dUyatcha? crodlud
:* II ar not othtrw!?? credited li? tbla papar, ?ad
ilt* tk? local oaw? u.' apontaaecua ?ruin ?uklt?k?d
GnU.
AI. rtftit? o7 rrptibllcatla? <M ?'.! ?UK* aiatt?it
???ralb ?law ar? rtatrrad.
A Confession
President Wilson, having chal?
lenged the accuracy of the French
official text of his speech in th?
peace conference on May 31, 1919,
now presents not the official Eng?
lish text, of which he admits pos?
sessing a copy, but a private version
offered by F. A. Carlson, an Ameri?
can stenographer, who was present.
The Carlson text, although more
circumlocutory than the translation
of the French text, fully supports
Senator ?Spencer. The only differ?
ence between it and the text used
by Senator Spencer is microscopic.
One speaks of the obligation on the
United States to send her armies
over the eea to protect the Ruman?
ians and the Serbs, while the other
acknowledges that the Rumanians
and Serbs expected American as?
sistance and argues that because of
this expectation the settlement must
be such as the United States would
be willing to guarantee.
By not challenging the validity of
the expectation, and referring to It
as a reason why his hearers should
accept his advice, the President, of
course, indorsed it. To say otherwise
would be to accuse him of an argu?
mentative trick.
The President presented the as?
surances of military support to be
given the Rumanian and Serbian
states as entitling the major powers
to ask for a quid pro quo?namely,
the concession by Rumania and
Serbia of racial minority guaran?
ties. That was the whole purpose
of the President's argument.
The major powers were enlarg?
ing Rumanian and Serbian terri?
tory and obligating themselves to
respect and defend the new boun?
daries against external aggression
(the specific pledge to do so being
contained in Article X of the cove?
nant of the league). Why, then,
the President insisted, shouldn't
Rumania and Serbia accept minor?
ity guaranty limitations on their
sovereignty as a fair offset to the
military protection which they were
to eitjoy?
Tire Carlson record is thus in
meaning in full accord with the
French official version. It shows
that the major powers intended to
guarantee the peace settlements by
military force. This is exactly what
Senator Spencer declared.
The retranslation of the Frerfch
official version into English Is
phrased a little differently from the
Carlson version. But there is no
difference in meaning or intent. In
the Carlson version quite as much
as in the other the President uses
the Rumanian and Serbian expecta?
tion of the arrival of the Ameri?
can army and navy in order to
clinch his quid pro quo demand.
Did he intimate that such an ex?
pectation was unjustified? He could
not and did not. On May 31, 1919,
he was talking without afterthought,
giving tys original and natural in?
terpretation of the meaning of the
garanties of Article X. And this
article, of course, now has exactly
the meaning itftiad when the Presi?
dent expounded its beauties to the
?Rumanians and Serbs, though then
he said to all small nations that if
they would agree to the peace condi?
tions the big powers insisted on,
then the big powers, including the
United States, would go to war in
their behalf.
The Truth About Rheims
Perhaps it was to be expected that
in time the Germans would convict
themselves out of their own mouths
concerning the bombardment of the
Rheims Cathedral. Anyway, the
conviction has come in the reminis?
cences of Baron Hausen.
The excuse of General von Biilow
was that the French were using the
towers of the cathedral for an ob?
servation post. Even if this had
been.true, the attempt to destroy one
of the great monuments of the Mid?
dle Ages, a shrine cf peculiar sacred
nesa to France, would have deserved
condemnation. The warring hordes
of a far less civilised time respected
Rheims. But General von B?low's
excuse was a mere subterfuge.
Baron Hausen was the commander
of the Saxon army. It was after his
hussars had entered Rheims and the
French had withdrawn that von
B?low began the indiscriminate
shelling of the city. Baron Hausen,
protesting, was told that this was a
reprisal for the detention by the
French of a Prussian parlementaire.
\ Having no faith in this assertion,
; Baron Hausen caused a careful in?
vestigation to be made, from which
the fact developed that no Prussian
parlementaire had ever been in j
Rheims. It was sheer barbarism ?
that dictated the bombardment.
Even the peril involved to German
troops could not avert von Billow's
Berserker rage.
The Rheims brutality was only
one, of course, of many similar in?
stances, though the circumstances
made it more conspicuous than most.
Germany went into the war fully
resolved to carry out to the letter all
the infamous instructions in her of?
ficial war book. Yet even a Ger?
man cannot quite escape a decent re?
spect for the opinions of mankind.
The effect of German savagery upon
the rest of the world could not be
wholly ignored. It was necessary to
invent reasons for shameful acts.
The reason for the bombardment of
Rheims was no less plausible or more
untruthful than the rest.
Why Vote for Harding?
Desperate by reason of the. scor?
chalked up against them, Messrs.
Wilson and Cox, Siamese twins of
politics, are making a feverish effort
to stimulate a ninth-inning rally.
The old properties, frayed and
worn, are exhibited. The lacerated
heart of the world; the Wilson
league, the blessed Wilson league
which the President holds he can kill
in March and have alivo in Novem?
ber; the bones of Article X, the re
makable reversible article which one
audience is told commits us to noth?
ing and the next that it commits us
to everything.
And what do the people say, as
they turn away frfjm this beating of
dilapidated tin cans? That they in?
tend to vote for Harding.
(1) Because they are sick of per?
sonal governments They have had
eight years of it. It is enough!
(2) Because they are tired of in?
capacity in high places, of the genius
for mess and muddle which the Wil?
son Administration has disclosed.
The spectacle of mental meagerness
strutting around in the clothes of
authority makes a dull "movie."
Only little men would have endured
errand boy treatment and little men
are costly.
(o) Because, with respect to for?
eign relations, they have confidence
in Harding for the promises he does
not make. Exact pledges could be
easily made, but unless willing tc
play autocrat Senator Harding
knows he could not redeem them
The Senate exists. It will exist
after March 4. The vote of two-thirds
of its membership is necessary tc
ratify a treaty. The only chance ol
realization of the league idea is ir
free consultation with the Senate.
(4) Because of Cox.
Draft Injustices
In executing the conscription act
of 1917 the War Department nulli?
fied the law which ordered the draft
apportionment to be based on popu?
lation. It was apparent at the
time that the apportionment en?
forced by Secretary Baker was
scandalously unjust and discrimi?
natory, but the inequalities went
uncorrected.
The announcement of the popu?
lation totals of the states permits a
comparison between the fictitious
draft population figures imposed by
the War Department and the actual
population figures. The department
had available in 1917 the estimates
of population which the census
bureau issues annually. These are
not very trustworthy. It also had
at hand the various state censuses
of 1915. But it chose to disregard all
these and to obtain its draft popu?
lation totals by the simple method ol
multiplying the registration figure;
! of each state by an arbitrarily
? fixed integer. It thereby put f
premium on under-registration anc
i imposed a penalty on full registra
I tion.
This system worked out to the
| exclusive benefit of Dem?crata?
I states, where registration was con
ducted slackly. The extent of thii
sectional discrimination is now ap
parent.
Here are some of the most glarinj
examples. Arkansas had a popu
lation in 1910 of 1,574,449. It
draft population was put at 1,594,
835. Its population in 1920 i
1,750,995. Tennessee's population i:
1910 was 2,184,789, her draft popu
lation was fixed at 2,024,893 an?
her 1920 population is 2.337.45?
Kentucky's figures were: 191t
2,289,905; 1917, 2,024,353; 1921
2,416,013. Alabama's figures were
1910, 2,138,093; 1917, 1,940,536
1920, 2,347,295. Mississippi ha
1,797,114 inhabitants in 1910, wa
credited with only 1,501,345 in 191'
and had 1,789,354 in 1920. Louisian
had 1,656,388 in 1910, was credit?
with 1.688,862 in 1917 and ha
1,797,798 in 1920. Georgia's 191
total was 2,609,121. It decreased t
2,486,544 in 1917 and skyrockete
back to 2,893,955 in 1920.
South Carolina's also showed
mysterious falling off for war pui
poses and a quick recovery aftc
the armistice. Her total in 191
was 1,615,400, in 1917 1,884,208 and
in 1920 1,688,662. North Carolina
was similarly affected. Her total
wan 2,206,287 in 1910. It fell to
2,146,266 in 1917 and soared to
2,556,486 in 1920. Virginia had
2,061,612 inhabitants irf 1910, was
credited with only 1,951,521 in 1917
and had 2,306,361 in 1920.
In contrast with the artificially
decreased draft totals of these states
many Northern states bore a gross?
ly exaggerated burden. New York's
population in 1917 was put by the
War Department at 11,187,798. Its
real population three years later
was only 10,384,144. Pennsylvania's
draft figure was 8,981,682, her popu?
lation in 1920 8,720,159. Michigan's
artificial 1917 total was 4,015,053.
Her census return in 1920 was only
3,667,322. Ohio's draft population
was 6,074,771; her real population
three years later was 5,759,368. Con?
necticut was saddled with an enor?
mous draft population of 1,719,623.'
Her census total in 1920 was only
1,380,365. Illinois was credited
with 7,227,952 inhabitants in 1917.
In 1920 she had only 6,485,098. I
These extraordinary sectional ?
over-drafts and under-drafts viti- !
ated the purpose of the universal
service law, which is based on
equality of obligation. The law
couldn't have been administered
any more effectively toward the end
secured if it had contained a clause
giving Democrats exemption and
compelling Republican states to
make good the deficits.
Because a Man of Sense
Washington expresses curiosity as
to why former President Taft is not
supporting Cox on the league issue.
Mr. Taft's good humor is celebrated.
Yet his laugh must come a little
slowly over the impudence of the
query.
Mr. Taft was an advocate of gen?
eral arbitration treaties, interna?
tional peace organizations and of a
league to enforce peace when Presi?
dent Wilson was shouting for a
hermitlike isolation and thanking
?God for the 3,000 miles of cool
ocean that separated us from Eu?
rope. Many hours Mr. Taft labored
to open the mind of Woodrow to
the peace thought. It is trying for
a teacher to find himself rebuked
for backwardness by one long at the
foot of the class.
Why does Mr. Taft not support
Cox? Because he is a man of sense.
He knows that the surest way to
prevent entry into any sort of a
league is to elect Cox; that there is
about as much chance of an air?
plane flight to Jupiter as to get the
Senate to ratify the Wilson covenant
as written. To get two-thirds of
the Senate to swallow the Wilson
plan whole, as Cox demands, is not
in the realm of possibilities.
Mr. Taft wants a league. He
would have the United States as a
member of it. He is not bothering,
about personal credit or partisan?
ship. He did not object to Article
X until it appeare'd that its pres?
ence prevented ratification. When
it was manifest that it was a Jonah
as a rational person he recognized
the need of sacrificing personal
views and first choices.
As to the future Mr. Taft sees
plainly enough that it will be difficult
to get two-thirds of the Senate for
any part of the bedeviled Wilson
project. This leads him to recognize
the weight of practical arguments in
favor of making some sort of new
start. Perhaps it is not logical to
prefer a new label, but it is In; man.
So Mr. Taft is not for Cox?per?
ceives that so far as a league is con?
cerned he leads the way to a
slaughterhouse.
Lookers and Looked At
A great deal of brain power and
debate is being devoted to the indict?
ment drawn by a correspondent of
the Mayor's charging the short skirt
with the slaughter of gaping males
mown down by automobiles upon
our streets. The accuser offered no
moral judgment in the premises and
left the question in doubt as to
whether ho considered the skirt
guilty of wanton homicide or ths
gaper guilty of sinful negligence. He
merely asserted the fact.
The answer to the letter, as indeed
to all those critics of the Parisian
mode now belatedly conquering these
.shores, is simply to point out the
fact that cynosures are necessarily
?hort lived, born to die and gone
before you can fairly get your moral
sentiments in type. Perhaps a
gaper or two did get run down in
the first hours of the short skirt.
But to-day a dozen blocks on Fifth
Avenue are enough to reduce any
pedestrian to the status of the most
blas? of Fifth Avenue bus drivers,
as portrayed in the ancient jest to
the effect that ankles were no treat
to such as he. If there are any, in
this respect, unsophisticated souls
still at large in our town they must
be wearing blinders.
Thus both the moral and the homi?
cidal aspect of the short skirt will
not bear analysis. Rather, we sug?
gest, is the indictment now to be
shifted to the long skirt?become
the cynosure of all eyes and the
subject of endless speculation. What
is newly revealed can he a nine-day
wonder. What is concealed is an
eternal mystery that deepens into
the source of the liveliest curiositj
when the concealment is exceptional
and contrary to the custom of the
day. Therefore, if our philosophers
wish to write to the Mayor, let them
inveigh against the long skirt and
insist upon a municipal, ordinance
requiring that all skirts be a fixed
number of inches above the pave?
ment. His Honor is a great believer
in the city's capacity to do almost
anything, and who knows but that
the municipally regulated skirt
might be welcomed to his program?
Calvin Coolidge Says
(From his speech accepting the Re?
publican nomination for Vic?'
President, July 27, 19X0)
Another source of the gravest public
concern has heen tho reactionary tend?
ency to substitute private will for the
public will. Instead of inquiring what
tho law was and then rendering it full
obedience, there has been a disposi?
tion on the part of some individuals
and of groups to inquire whether they
liked the law^and, if not, to disregard
it, seek to override it, suspend It and
prevent its execution, sometimes by
the method of direct action, for the
purpose of securing their own selfiHh
ends. Tho observance of the law is
the greatest solvent of public ills.
Men speak of natural rights, but I
challengo any one to show where in
nature any rights ever existed or were
recognized until there was established
for their declaration and protection a
duly promulgated body of correspond?
ing laws. The march of civilization has
been ever under tho protecting Egis of
the law. It is the strong defense of
the weak, tho ever-present refugo of
innocence, a mighty fortress of the
righteous. One with the law is a ma?
jority. While the law is observed the
progress of civilisation wilJ continue.
When such observance ceasce chaos and I
the ancient night of despotism will i
come again. Liberty goes unsupported |
Or relies in its entirety on the main?
tenance of order and the execution of
the law.
Cox's Newspaper Says
(From The Dayton Daily News,
October 6, 1910)
It Justice Hughes should be elected,
he would, if he is a man of conscience,
take Germany to task for the sinking
of the Lusitania. He would even at
this late day, if lie is a man of con?
science, protest to Germany against her
cccupation of Belgium. It would be too
late to oppose her invasion of Belgium,
but Germany is still occupying Bel?
gium, and if, as Mr. Roosevelt says,
and as Mr. Hughes approves, the United
States should have protested ngainst
the invasion, she should also protest
now against occupation.
It is said that if Justice Hughes is
elected President Theodore Roosevelt
will be made Secretary of State. In
fact, it is generally understood that
such will be the case; it has frequently
been mentioned and never denied.
Theodore Roosevelt's first act as Secre?
tary of State would be to give Ger?
many so many hours to get out of Bel?
gium. Mark that. He wouldn't be Sec?
retary a week until a formal notice
would be sent to Germany with a time
limit to get out of Belgium. Germany
would, of course, refuse, and the gov?
ernment of this country would have
nothing to do but to attempt to put her
out. A state of war would exist; that
is all there is to it. There Is one choice
as against peace, and that is war.
The Harding "League of Peace"
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: My reading or Senator Har
ding's speeches is that he would substi?
tute for Mr. Wilson's proposed super
government of the world a league of
peace?an association of nations, each
whereof agrees that it will not attack
the other. This is far removed from
the conception of force which is pre?
sented to us in the guise of a League
of Nations.
Arnerica has always been ready, will
always bo ready, to join a league of
peace. Has ever sought to make such
agreements with other nations. But
America must, if she would continue
to preserve her integrity and indeed
her very existence, avoi? all leagues
founded upon the theory that she shall
maintain with her force one or the
other side in all the quarrels of other
nations. To epigrammatize it one might
say: Whenever there is a league of
peace to join America will join it. So
long as there is a League of Nations
to avoid America will avoid it.
The two conceptions differ funda?
mentally. The first is, in legal phrase,
a "several undertaking," the other a
"joint obligation."
The other nations recognize and re?
spect America'3 view in this respect
and have so indicated, and no fears
need be entertained of any of the dire
results with which we are threatened if
we "stay out" of the covenant; they are
bugaboos to frighten children with.
CHAS. STEWART DAVISON.
New York, Oct. 10, 1920.
Butte? Up and Down
To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Reports of commodity prices
state that while many other things are
lower butter prices are higher.
This is true only on the surface.
While about 6 per cent of the supply
of butter is higher in price than is
usual at this timo of the year, 95 per
cent of the wholesale butter supply is
offering at the lowest price in over
twelve months.
As an illustration, good grades of
fresh firsts are offering in the whole?
sale market in practically unlimited
quantities at 50c. to 52c. Yesterday
this grade of butter (storage stand?
ards) flold for December delivery ir
Chicago at 51*4c, which means about
49c. to 50c. net on account of carrying
charges.
The fact is that the butter industrj
in this country is in a practically de
moralized condition, and both manu
faoturers and dealers face very heav;
losses. F. F. LOWENFELS & SON.
New York, Oct. 9, 1920.
The Conning Tower
THB GROANING BA1D
la Lard Maeaulay'u noble work
I chanced to tem? this bit of xiewm}
That Warren Hastings wrote a ffotae
Each morn before he donned hta shoe?,
And at the matutinal board
He read it while the tea waa pound.
Sometimes It waa a madrigal.
Sometimes It. took the ?onnefa fora;
The brieflsb epic, ?too, waa tried?
Whato'cr it wan It caused a atona
Of wild applause to rend the air
Surrounding those assembled there.
And If, for cause, he failed to brin?
His morning verso?but that waa rare??
His matutinal board waa ?ad?
Gloom hit the bunch assembled there.
In Lord Mainulay's book I ?read
AH this good stuff, as I have said.
I rather like old Haatlngs'a ?tunt?
'Twas quite a ?lever thing to do.
Nor could I read at breakfast tint?
Some pome?but, Boss, it's up to you.
And if I don't?what gloom, what gloom
Will nil our little breakfaat room!
Tamim.
Iitttlo aid w? dream that we ?ever
would be a crafty politician; but Sat?
urday night we plied a potential Cox
voter with food until ha forgot to
register.
The esteemed Cleveland team, ap?
parently, is doing It for th? Wives
and the Kids.
THB INSOMNIACS
A bunch of the boys ware whooping It up
With Edna St. Vincent Millay.
William T. Tilden, 2nd.
? a a
How happy could I be with either
Wero Edna St. Vincent Millay.
0. w. w.
? ? ?
The breaking waves dashed high
On Viola Brothers Shore.
Just tell them that you saw me, Viola
Brothers Shore.
Just tell them I'm Viola Brothers Shore.
Just whisper, if you get a chance, "Viola
Brothers Shore."
I love her as Viola Brothera Shore.
She w?ae happy till she met you,
Waa Viola Brothera Shore.
Viola Biothhj S ho??,
Opening letters containifjj attempted
additions to "Tho Insomniacs" is cut?
ting into our slumber hours, so the
series is ended. It is not, as the poet
says, always Millay.
Another grave without victory may
be hoped for by the patrons of Fair
child Sons, Brooklyn funeral directora,
who advertise "The dignified and
capable manner in which a funeral can
be cared for at our chapel makes it
very desirable."
The Diary of Our Own Samuel Pepys
October 9?To the courts with C.
Merz, and beat him easily enough, five
setts; but W. Jones beat me two setts
in three; after which I could play only
doubles, and S. Spaeth, and I had good
?success. Home, and I brought some
dinner with me, of roast chicken, and
we had a merry time of it, I playing
for my wife and Katharine on my new
concertina.
10?Met with S. Spaeth, and played
lawn tennis with him, and he beat me;
and so took my wife for a ride, and
to dinner, and early home, and worked
until 11; and read in A. Bennett's
"Our Women," an interesting book, but
as to the soundness of his theories I
know nought,
11?All day at the office, going there
by subway, my wife having driven to
Yonkera in the petrol-waggon, to make
some jelly againjst the winter.
"Who," the young man asked us,
"writes that page in The Sun?"
"Which page?" was our question.
"This one here," said the young man.
"That," we said, paternally, "is only
a column?one-eighth of a page."
"Well, you know what I mean," he
Mattered.
"What is the use of signing a column
day after day, for years?" we asked,
"if you don't know who does it?"
"Well," he said, "who does it?"
"This man," we pointed to Don Mar?
quis's name,
"Who's he?" asked the tennis player.
"He's the man who writes that
column," we said to the registered
voter.
Face the East, and Pray
Sir: Why all this craze for lucidity, any?
way? Why must you want to know "In
what subject?" and "What were the ques?
tions 7" First thing we know we'll know
everything. In the window of a book store
on Fifth Avenue there is a painting "by
one of America's greatest painters," and
it is ??aid to be a portrait of a "Charles
Dickens." Should not the sign read: "Por?
trait of an Englishman by one of America's
Rreateit painters"? Of course, everybody
knows who Dickens was. He used to be a
newspaper man himself, didn't he? Now, I
suppose you will want to know who the
painter was.
Hut I um strong for better blurbs on book
jackets. I went in one of our best book
stores to get the latest book on Bringing
Up Father, and Mutt and Jeff, entitled "In?
sect Adventures," which I saw in the win?
dow. Imagine my surprise when I found
it was all about bugs and spiders and things,
by a fellow named Fabre. What should I do ?
Tes kill?.
On one of the wide benches . . .
a man and woman were sitting. They
had strolled slowly from the tennis
court, where half a dozan young per?
sons were violently exercising them?
selves.?From "Harriet and the Piper,"
by Kathleen Norris.
Mixed triples?
NOSTALGIA
In France, beside the sunny Loire,
A maiden fair to see,
Looks westward toward the setting sun?
And nigktly thinks of me.
I met this maiden once a week,
Beside the rustic well,
And though we scarcely spoke ? word,
My secrets she knew well.
She used to wash my soldier-clothes,
This laundress, young and thrifty;
And some day I'll go back, because
1 owe her four francs fifty.
H. A. H.
We string along with our old C." O.,
Lieutenant Colonel Herbert Parsons,
whose motto appears to be "Any one
who scraps the League has got mo
to scrap."
Warren or James? Warren or James?
I'll watch the returns from the world's
series games.
Who, we wonder, but for Christopher
Columbus, would now be the 100 per
cent red-blooded Americans?
P. P. A.
ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE SUBSTITUTES FOR GASOLINE
THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WORKING VERY WELL
Copyright. 1920, N>w fork Tribune Inc.
The High Cost of Slrikes
Chapter XI.
Strikjng for Monopoly Control of Necessaries by a Class
B\> Marshall Olds
(This is one of a scries of thirteen
articles appearing on this page daily.)
Copyright, 1920, New Yurk Tribune Inc.
When Louis Fridiger, counsel fcr tho
B. R. T. union, was pleading passion?
ately with the men not to begin the
Brooklyn car strike his argument in?
cluded nothing as to the best interests
of the people of Brooklyn?it did not
even discuss the best interests of the
workers?his big urgtrment and basic
plea was that "such a strike will break
up the best union in the country."
Louis Fridiger also made another re?
mark at the same time which is as
typical of the labor leader's attitude of
tc-day as "the public be damned" was
typical of the trust baron's attitude a
generation ago, when he warned labor
not to pay any attention to government
officiais, "because their first duty is to
the public."
More Power Than President
Neither the President of the United
States nor any officer or group of of?
ficers in our entire government pos?
sesses the possibility of such
power to injure all the rest of
the people as is possessed and was ex?
ercised by tho coal union leaders. The
basis of that power is the fact that
with the $11,000,000 a year dues they
can maintain an organization that dom?
inates an industry that is vital to the
whole nation.
In Russia the small minority labor
class to-day completely dominates the
whole government. In Germany the
labor class minority has a dispropor?
tionate voice of the government and
has in certain crises absolutely domi?
nated the policy of the government. In
England the* labor class minority is
frankly and openly working toward tho
domination of the majority of the rest
of the people.
Now the rnoans by which labor mi?
norities have dominated or sought tc
dominate in other countries has nol
been through orderly processes of gov?
ernment, but through getting control
of the production of the necessaries ol
life and then threatening to cut of!
the necessaries of the people until thej
obtained the individual or class ad
vantages which they sought.
Dominating the Government
Powerful labor leaders in America
to-day have exactly such a control in
the basic coal industry and exercised
exactly this kind of control in the coal
strike. The government itself ordered
the union leaders to call the strike off.
The leaders went through the form of
sending telegrams to the local unions
which i#w5 not and could not bear the
official union seal without which, under
union law, no union document is offi?
cial. These telegrams, therefore, were
not meant actually to cali off the coal
strike as the government ordered.
They were not understood by the men
as an order to call off the strike, but
merely as a subterfuge, and they did
not call off the coal strike. The gov?
ernment said it would not treat witk
the union leaders till the men had gom
back to work. But the government
did depose Mr. Garfield, the fuel ad
min?8trator, from power at commanc
of the union leaders and' not onl;
treated but made agreements with th<
union leaders before the men wen,'
back to work. The union leaders di<
not get all they tried to get out of th?
coal strike, but they did dominate th?
government itself sufficiently to iqak
it back down from tfie position it had
publicly taken.
Now it is perfectly obvious, if
the organization of 500,000 men and
the collection of $11,000,000 annual
dues can give labor leaders such
power through the control of the coal
industry to use for their own or their
class interests, that just in proportion
as they can organize other great basic
'industries they will have just that
much greater power with which to fur?
ther their own or their mere class in?
terests.
While the great majority of Bkillec
workers, who are always able- tc
keep their jobs and get good pay or
their own merits, are generally unior
members and firm believers in union
ism^as a constructive force in industry
they have never been believers in th
labor chauvinism of the German o
Russian type that has been responsibl?
for so many of our own most eostl
strikes since the war.
The big body of new and nondescrip
workers, on the other hand, who cam
into the unions in such numbers dui
ing the war and who feared that th
end of the war meant the end of thei
war jobs and high war pay, became in
mediato converts to all forms of unie
radicalism and gave radical leaders <
all types a weight of following whlc
made it possible for them to get coi
trol in the union organizations in mar
of our greatest industries. In othe
it made them powerful enough to for
the less radical leaders to adopt radie
programs tp keep their power.
The first big strike after the w;
to increase the power of unionism
a big basic industry, in which uni<
leaders changed their poIicV of mere
trying to keep the hi<rh war wag
and for these strategic reasons c
manded a big increase of wages, w
dir. c'lnthinc strike.
Conservative Labor
It has long been a fundamental
union policy to work for a more and
more comp.ete control of our big basic
industries. But while unionism was
under the control of conservative
leaders who had a considerable respect
for the power of public opinion, its
methods were usually to go slow and
wak for favorable opportunities. It
generally let the workers themselves
take the initiative, and if a cause for
which they were striking was just and
was otherwise susceptible, with the
right kind of presentation, of gettinc
public sympathy, the big amalgamated
or federated unions would come in as
tho champions of the oppressed worker:
who were not strong enough to fight
their own battles, and in that waj
build up their power in that industry
But for the radical labor leaders wh<
now dominate organized labor or an
in sufficiently powerful positions t<
force conservative leaders into radica
policies in order to keep their jobs thi
process is entirely too slow.
Former^' any group of labor coul?
not be depended on to go immediately o:
strike because some outsider told ther
to strike for some grievance whic
they had never thought of themselv?
or for a union not yet in existenc?
But to-day the strike epidemic has be
come so widespread that great classe
of labor will stop work on practicall
any pretext and on practically anj
body's say-so.
Moreover, radical leaders think the
have found out that the public wi
stand for almost anything, or at leai
is not organized or united enough to
make its opinion count
Finally, whereas under the old
strategy of waiting till the worker?
had a real grievance and themselves
took the initiative in striking :t took
years to completely organize an in?
dustry and to build up the power snd
the millions of dollars' income which
the organization of ?rea* industria
gives, radical labor leaders * -day do
not see why, with labor's w.'.'.ir.gnes*
to strike and the public's supinencM,
they cannot grab off a whole industry
and make millions of dollars in dues
available immediately at one strok?.
In fact, the idea is so intriguing tc
the imagination of powerful hboi
groups that they are to-day compel?
ing with each other for the privil?fi
of attempting to organize ctrtair
great industries and are already fifht
ing over the prospective spoils,
j The Next Steel Strike
In its secret session at Atlantic City
I early in August the executive council
! of the American Federation of Labor
i mapped out a tremendous campaign
?to unionize the great Bteel industry
? next year. Several interesting facts
1 have already leaked out. Thirty
i unions have been let in on the drive.
j The Amalgamated Association of Iron,
j Steel and Tin Workers at first refused
j to help such a movement unless it
! received a 61 per cent control of the
j organizing committee which presuma
: bly mejnt 51 per cent of the power and
j the income if the drive went ever.
j Whether this particular faction ne
| ceeded in getting these demands or
not has not been announced. There
; is, of course, to be a largo war fund
I used, of which Secretary Morrison re
I fused to state the size. Nor did he
, say how it had been subscribed, how
| it, was to be used or what prom.?es
[ had been made to those who pub
scribed it. Secretary Morrison, how
? ever, most casually and naively, did
I say: "I should not say that a strike
is contemplated. I should rather tty
; that organization is the objective."
In other words, the b:g steel indus?
try, which is almcst as important to
I the country as the coal Industry, i?
1 next year to bej the victim of tre?
mendous labor agitation, artificially
| forced from outside. The men who
are forcing this agitation are not
themselves connecte i with the steel
! industry, nor have they bren elected
I or given any authority we know of by
i the steel workers to represent them,
i They certainly do nt represent the
| users of steel" or the | .-nersl.
These men in their preliminary an
! nouncement, moreover, make no men
| tion of any consideration of public
; interest. They make no mention of
what it is proposed to do for the steel
workers. They seem to be concerned
chiefly with maneuvering and jockey?
ing with each other for special pre?
ferred positions.
A Stranglehold
The last steel strike cost the publie
nearly $500,000,000. A bigger bettet
organized steel strike would probably
cost the public far more than this.
But with, or perhaps without, s
strike ?it is admittedly merely a mat?
ter of strategy whether the publie
must bear the cost of a steel strike or
not?-there is the chance that labor
'eaders can get a stranglehold on so?
other great basic Americcn industry,
through which they can still further
threaten or punish the whole people
as they have through their control of
?he coal industry; there is a chance
that 600,000 new members- may &?
brought under their control who would
pay about $10,000,000 a year into treas?
uries they control. The publie be
damned!
(To-morrow's article: "Striking ?#*?
the Roots of Americanism.";