and Shoe Workers' union. Some time prior to last November, a local of the United Shoe Workers' union, of Lynn, was organized with about forty or fifty operatives.

Fully a year and a half before, Cincinnati shoe manufacturers installed new stitching machines, which worked. much faster than the old, and put down the price for stitching from a cent and a half to a cent and a quarter a pair of shoes. Under the new arrangement wages rose and the men made from $25 to $40 a week.

"The pay-rolls," said William Tateman, secretary of the Cincinnati Boot and Shoe Employers' organization, at few days before the fatal shooting, "proved that after the readjustment of wages to meet the new conditions, the men made more money than ever before and everything was lovely until the United Shoe Workers' union, of Lynn, came along. This union declared a strike in three factories, involving, at first, 21 operatives, which number increased to 250 by sympathetic strikes in five other factories.

"Those 250 operatives are still out. Of course, from our standpoint, the strike is over, because we have filled all the places of the strikers and the factories are running full-handed. Forty or so men still picket every factory involved, and whenever they can find one of our workmen alone, they beat him up.

"In the months since November, we have caused some fifty arrests, but have been unable to secure a single conviction. That is extremely unfortunate. It is, of course, due to politics that we cannot obtain convictions.

"The United Shoe Workers' union, of Lynn, pursues the tactics of the Industrial Workers of the World. It is not affiliated with that organization. as yet; indeed there is no I. W. W. local in Cincinnati; but in my judgment, it is only a question of time. before the Lynn organization will join the I. W. W

"The Industrial Workers of the World, or something like them, will be, I think, the force with which more and more the employers will have to contend in future labor troubles.

I

believe that the American Federation of Labor has reached the zenith of its power. The McNamara affair was a terrible blow to it. However, these I. W. W. people are worse. The A. F. of L. may have been guilty of acts of violence, but the I. W. W. openly teaches lawlessness. Of course, anybody who knows anything about labor troubles knows that the strikers fully realize that picketing is practically unavailing unless a few bricks are thrown. That is one thing, happening now and then, and it is bad enough, but to have a central national or international organization teaching lawlessness is much worse.

"Some of the boot and shoe manufacturers here and there about the country have been suggesting that the National Boot and Shoe Manufacturers' Association be asked to take cognizance of labor matters. It never has, but there is no reason why it should not. Labor, like everything else that enters into the manufacture of shoes, is an item of expense. Varia

tions in its cost in the sections where shoes are manufactured is of itself a reason why the national organization ought to deal with it. The national organization will meet next January. It usually holds its meetings in New York at the Waldorf. The subject will no doubt be presented by someone at that time, though no organized plan for presenting it has yet been made."

Rioting at New Bedford

A disorderly demonstration by a crowd of 1,000 strikers and strike sympathizers occurred, July 17, 1912, before the gates of the Butler mill, at New Bedford, Mass., in connection with a strike affecting twelve cotton cloth mills of that city and resulting in 13,000 persons being out.

For more than an hour strikers and their sympathizers held a position near the mill and refused to allow operatives to enter the gates.

Nearly every one participating in the demonstration either wore the emblem of the Industrial Workers of the World or a button bearing the likeness of Joseph J. Etter, the imprisoned. leader of the Lawrence strike.

ARE INDIFFERENT Manufacturers Disregard Labor Problem,

A. C. Marshall Says

"Only about 125 manufacturers in the country take the interest they ought in the labor problem," said A. C. Marshall, secretary of the Dayton Employers' Association, a few days ago. I could, if I desired, pick you out those men and then take you over to the national foundrymen and to the metal trades workers' associations and show you the very same few men active there that are active in the National Association of Manufacturers.

"The other side is not so indifferent. Go into any news dealer's place of business and ask him what he has in the way of Socialist literature and he will show you shelf after shelf of it. I believe there are 350 local Socialist papers in the United States. One has been started in Dayton within a month.

"The large manufacturers," continued Mr. Marshall, "have money for everything except their own interests in the labor field. They go to the club because they have fun there. They go to church because there they receive spiritual consolation. They subscribe to charity because they think they ought. If one of them is a society man, his money goes that way. If he is a baseball fan, he spends his money at the national pastime.

"When it comes to getting him to spend to protect his own business interests in the labor field, it is the hardest work in the world. I have been in this work many years and I have made up my mind that he is so lukewarm because the whole subject is disagreeable and therefore distasteful to him. The labor question is troublesome.

He does not like to think about it. He would rather consider a subject that is not disagreeable and he would rather spend his money for something that gives him pleasure.

"The National Association of Manufacturers has 3,100 members. How many of them, do you believe, really take a live part in labor matters, generally speaking. As I have said, not 150. Less than that number comprise

those sure to be found at the gatherings of the National Association of Manufacturers. Far less than that number listened to President Kirby's annual address in May."

means.

Mr. Marshall is the father of employers' associations. Twelve years or so ago he was engaged in a large manufacturing business. He noticed that his heart was troubling him. His physician advised him to quit work. He retired, a man of some little Almost simultaneously with his retirement virulent labor troubles broke out in Dayton. Mr. Marshall was seized upon as about the only available man in the city with the time to organize the employers and look after their end of things. In a fortnight he was working just as hard as he had in his own business. He became secretary of the Dayton association, the first of its kind to be organized in the country, and has been its secretary ever since. He has worked for the cause continuously, in season and out, locally, in the state and nationally. Mr. Marshall is now 72 years old, but one would not believe it, in spite of his snow white beard. He is apparently in the best of trim and good for many more years of effective work.

Mitchell Sentenced

The

John Mitchell, of the American Federation of Labor, was sentenced by Justice Wright, of the supreme court of the district of Columbia, on July 22, 1912, to serve nine months in jail for contempt of court. sentence was in the same connection in which, several weeks before, Justice Wright sentenced Samuel Gompers to a year, and Frank Morrison to six months in jail; the disregard of the order of the court as to printing discriminating matter against the complainant in the American Federationist, in the Buck Stove & Range Co. boycott case.

Mitchell was not in court, but sent a written paper waiving his right to be present. He appealed and furnished a $4,000 bond.

Australia is in the grip of domineering arbitrary and unjust labor organizations, which evidently are pampered by office-holding politicians of that country. Some of the things contained in the last number of Liberty and Progress, published in Melbourne, seem incomprehensible. One editorial deals with a public official who, it seems, has advised the laborites that a certain military bill is designed to arm them so they can defend themselves in case of a strike. This editorial reads in part:

A good deal of grumbling is going on in labor circles against compulsory military service. This unpleasant state of affairs appears to be forcing the labor government to tell the truth to their supporters about this military business. What they really had in their minds when they established compulsory military service was obvious enough at the time. Pledged unionists as they are, they knew that unionism could never be successful in any great industrial disturbance owing to its inability to overturn law and order. There was always the militia to keep them in check and the militia, being a volunteer movement, was chiefly composed of men who had nothing to do with unionism. They could, therefore, be depended upon to put down unionism whenever it assaulted the peace of the community. Knowing all this, Mr. Fisher and his far-seeing colleagues said to themselves: "Our men will never train when left to themselves, so why not make everybody train and then our men, with their training and their guns, will be ready for any emergency in which unionism may be placed." That was the ulterior motive which induced them to adopt compulsory military training as part

But they

of the policy of the party. have hitherto always been afraid to say so. On the night before the battle of the Tasmanian elections, however, Mr. Fisher, the postmaster general, addressing a great meeting of the union forces at Hobart, thought it advisable to let the cat out of the bag. He said: "They had started training the youth of Australia and under this system everyone would have a rifle. If there were strikes in those days, the man who was on strike would have a rifle the same as the other fellow." There was great cheerIt took so well ing at this statement.

that in all probability at the next federal election we shall have the prime minister and all his colleagues going about among their dissatisfied supporters and saying: "See what we have done for you; we have started a splendid military system under which. you will all have guns and then you can go on strike and do what you please." We are getting on very well indeed when have a minister of the Crown, actually boasting of the steps his government has taken to enable unionism to hold the community at bay at any time with its guns and to embark upon civil war or revolution.

CHILDREN IN HOSPITALS SUFFERED

In order to deliver ice to hospitals and the homes of the sick, an ice company in Australia was obliged to get the permission of a strike committee. The thing was done under the greatest restrictions and with the utmost difficulty. The story is thus told in Liberty and Progress:

According to the prime minister of the commonwealth, the Brisbane general strike was a just step taken in the

interests of humanity. The strike was so humane, indeed, that sick and dying people were deprived of ice in the middle of the heat of the summer, owing to the action of the strike committee. The following is an actual copy of a permit to distribute ice issued under pressure by the strike committee on the second day of the strike: "Permit No. 48. This is to certify that the City and Suburban Ice Distributing Company has permission to distribute ice to hospitals, provided that such work or goods supplied is carried out solely by unionists.

"1.-All work to be solely carried out by unionists.

"2.-The said unionists not to receive any remuneration direct from you, but such remuneration is to be forwarded to the strike committee, who will pay strike allowance to such employes on application, provided they produce fidelity voucher signed by you. Any infringement of the above provisions will render the permit liable to forfeiture. (Signed) J. A. Moir."

As may be imagined, the ice company found great difficulty in getting ice around under these conditions, so much so that two days later the following advertisement was published in the Brisbane newspapers:

"The committee of the Hospital for Sick Children desire it to be known that unless ice is permitted to be supplied to the hospitals, the lives of many of the little children will be endangered."

On the same day the advertisement appeared, the manager of the ice company obtained permission from the strike committee to use one of its carts to attend to the hospitals, but even then did not receive permission to manufacture ice, so that he had to ask the hospitals to be very economical in order to make his existing stock of ice go as far as possible and to last as long as it could. On a further application, four days later, to the strike committee, the manager of the ice company was actually granted permission to also supply private homes with ice, where there was sickness, but not to deliver it. Those requiring it were to obtain it themselves at the company's office and they were to pro

duce a doctor's certificate before the company could supply it to them.

It hardly seems credible that human beings could have acted in the manner of the strike committee where sick or dying persons were concerned; but the facts cannot be challenged, horrible as they are. The prime minister of the commonwealth, who lives in a luxurious house, and no doubt always has ice when he wants it, gave this with the whole proceedings of the strike. his formal and official approval on the hustings.

PUNISHED FOR CRITICIZING UNION

On another page, the Australian

paper says:

The workers' position is easily to be judged by the fate inflicted on Frank O'Loughlin, a cripple employed at the Freemason's hotel at Broken Hill, where half a dozen waitresses had indulged in a "sympathetic" strike because one Maggie Millan had deserted her work. The girls were not allowed by the union to return until the employer had consented to pay them their wages for the whole time they were away, with their personal expenses into the bargain; and, in addition, the unfortunate man had to discharge Frank O'Loughlin, not for anything he had done in connection with the strike, but for presuming at a meeting of the union, to criticize its actions. For this offense they expelled him from the hotel and from the union and warned all unionists to have nothing to do with him and to refuse work at any place where he found employ