rants the assertion and justifies our prediction for its future success. We, the representatives of the national and international trade unions and farmers' organizations, represented in this conference, call upon the Executive Council and upon all labor to use every possible legitimate effort to secure for the workers their inalienable liberties and their proper recognition as a vital portion of the fabric of our civilization. We pledge ourselves to use every lawful and honorable effort to carry out the policy agreed upon at this conference. We pledge our industrial, political, financial and moral support to our own members and to our friends wherever found, not only for the present time, but for the continuous effort which may be necessary for success. We pledge ourselves to carry on this work until every industrial and political activity of the workers is guaranteed its permanent place and usefulness in the progress of our country. Let labor not falter for one instant; the most grave and momentous crisis ever faced by the wageworkers of our country is now upon us. Our industrial rights have been shorn from us and our liberties are threatened. It rests with each of us to make the most earnest, impressive and law-abiding effort that lies within our power to restore these liberties and safeguard our rights for the future if we are to save the workers and mayhap even the nation itself from threatened disaster. This is not a time for idle fear. Let every man be up and doing. tion consistent, action persistent, action insistent is the watchword. Ac REPRESENTATIVES OF NATIONAL SAMUEL GOMPERS. President. JAMES O'CONNELL, Third Vice-President. MAX MORRIS, Fourth Vice-President. WM. D. HUBER, Seventh Vice-President. JOSEPH F. VALENTINE, Eighth Vice- FRANK MORRISON, Secretary. Executive Council, American Federation of Labor. GEORGE L. BERRY, NORMAN C. SPRAGUE, International Printing Pressmen's Union. JOSEPH F. VALENTINE, JOHN P. FREY, Iron Molders' Union of North America. G. M. HUDDLESTON, International Slate and Tile Roofers' Union. RICHARD BRAUNSCHWEIG, Amalgamated Wood Workers' International Union. B. CHARLES R. ATHERTON, A. GROUT, Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers and Brass Workers' Union. JERE L. SULLIVAN, J. F. McCARTHY, T. J. SULLIVAN, Hotel and Restaurant Employes' International Alliance. W. R. FAIRLEY, THOMAS HAGGERTY, United Mine Workers of America. JAS. F. SPEIRS, THOS. C. NOLAN, WM. GRANT, Brotherhood of Boilermakers and Iron Shipbuilders. F. J. KELLY, International Photo-Engravers' Union. WM. D. HUBER, JAMES KIRBY, GEO. G. GRIFFIN, JOS. REILLY, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners. G. W. PERKINS, SAMUEL GOMPERS, THOS. F. TRACY, L. B. KUHN, Cigarmakers' International Union. J. T. CAREY, International Brotherhood of Papermakers of North America. JNO. F. BREEN, Hodcarriers and Building Laborers' International Union, MAX MORRIS, J. A. ANDERSON, HERMAN ROBINSON, D. F. MANNING, Retail Clerks' International Protective Association. JNO. F. TOBIN, JNO. P. MURPHY, Boot. and Shoe Workers' Union. WM. SILVER, Granite Cutters' International Association. J. C. BALHORN, THOS. McGILTON, Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers of America. CHAS. C. BRADLEY, E. E. DESMOND, American Wire Weavers' Protective Association. JNO. A. DYCHE, International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union. WM. J. SPENCER, United Association Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steam Fitters, and Steam Fitters' Helpers. JOSEPH N. WEBER, American Federation of Musicians. T. L. MAHAN, ED. L. SCHRACK, International Plate Printers. JOHN MANNING, Shirt Waist and Laundry Workers' International Union. WM. H. FRAZIER, V. A. OLANDER, FREDERICK BENSON, International Seamen's Union. A. MCANDREWS, E. LEWIS EVANS, Tobacco Workers' International Union. W. F. COSTELLO, H. T. ROGERS, International Steam and Hot Water Fitters' and Helpers' Union. JAMES O'CONNELL, ARTHUR E. HOLDER, A. McGILRAY, International Association of Machinists. M. O'SULLIVAN, THOMAS F. RYAN, Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' International Alliance. J. E. PRITCHARD, International Pavers and Rammermen. THOMAS T. MAHER. Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' International Alliance. J. L. FEENEY, J. B. EPSEY, M. J. KELLY, International Brotherhood of Bookbinders. C. M. BENNETT, O. D. PAULEY, American Society of Equity. TIMOTHY HEALY. N. A. JAMES, F. M. NOURSE. International Brotherhood of Stationary Firemen. REZIN ORR. W. D. MATON, Amalgamated Street and Electric Railway Employes. JOHN A. MOFFITT, MARTIN LAWLOR, F. M. RYAN, Bridge and Structural Iron A. B. LOWE, J. B. DAVENPORT, A. B. WILSON, International Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes. M. J. SHEA, JAMES J. FREEL, International Stereotypers and Electrotypers' Union. JAMES L. GERNON, JAMES WILSON, Patternmakers' League of North Amer ica. J. M. MCELROY, Brushmakers' Internanational Union. T. A. RICKERT, B. A. LARGER, United H. P. PERHAM, A. T. MCDANIEL, W. J. GREGORY, J. H. WILLIAMS, Order of Railroad Telegraphers. of T. J. DUFFY, FRANK H. HUTCHENS, DANIEL J. KEEFE, THOMAS GALLA- J. J. FLYNN, P. J. FLANNERY. Interfor Freight Handlers and Warehousemen's Union. W. J. MCSORLEY. R. V. BRANDT, Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers' International Union. P. J. MCARDLE, JOHN WILLIAMS. Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. JACOB FISCHER, FRANK K. NOSCHANG, Journeymen Barbers' International Union. JOHN GOLDEN, ALBERT HIBBERT, United Textile Workers of America. DANIEL J. TOBIN, International Brotherhood of Teamsters. MATT COMERFORD, JAMES J. Mc- CRACKEN, International F. A. DIDSBURY, Pocketknife-Blade EDWARD W. POTTER. HOMER D. CALL, H. L. EICHELBERGER, A. L. WEBB. Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workers of North America. FRANK GEHRING, Lithographers' International Protective and Beneficial Association. J. F. MURPHY, International Union of Elevator Constructors. JOHN H. BRINKMAN, Carriage and Wagon Workers' International Union. P. F. RICHARDSON, International Car Workers. JOHN WEBER, Bakery and Confectionery Workers' International Union. JAMES H. HATCH, Upholsterers' International Union. The protest to Congress was presented to the presiding officer of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives. The address to workers was distributed throughout the country. Mass meetings were held by the workers in nearly every city and town in the United States. Resolutions were literally poured in upon Congress demanding legislative relief from these wrongs before adjournment. Congress adjourned without passing any measures according the relief demanded, and to which the toilers were entitled. We held a meeting of the Executive Council and decided upon holding meetings at Chicago and Denver for the transaction of business which came before it, and for the purpose of urging the Republican and Democratic conventions, respectively, to adopt as part of their platforms the relief which labor asked. These are embodied in the following: party We therefore pledge the to the enactment of a law by Congress guaranteeing to the wage-earners, agriculturists and horticulturists of our country the right of organized effort to the end that such associations or their members shall not be regarded as illegal combinations in restraint of trade. We pledge ourselves to the enactment of a law to prohibit the issuance of injunctions in cases arising out of labor disputes, when such injunctions would not apply when no labor disputes existed; and that in no case shall an injunction be issued when there exists a remedy by the ordinary process of law. and which act shall provide that in the procedure for the punishment of contempt of court, the party cited for contempt shall when such contempt was nct committed in the presence of the court, be entitled to a trial by jury. We pledge the party to the enactment of an amendment extending the existing eight-hour law to all government employes, and to all workers, whether employed by contractors or subcontractors, doing work for or on behalf of the federal government. ...... We pledge the party to the enactment of a law by Congress, as far as the federal jurisdiction extends, for a general employers' liability act for injury to body or loss of life of employes. We pledge the party to tho enactment of a law, to the extent of fed adopted a plank as follows: "The Republican party will uphold at all times the authority and integrity of the courts, state and federal, and will ever insist that their powers to enforce their process and to protect life, liberty and property shall be preserved inviolate. We believe, however, that the rules of procedure in the federal courts with respect to the issuance of the writ of inJunction should be more accurately defined by statute, and that no injunction or temporary restraining order should be issued without notice, except where irreparable injury would result from delay, in which case a speedy hearing thereafter should be granted." The Democratic party convention at Denver adopted a plank as follows: The courts of justice are the bulwark of our liberties, and we yield to none in our purpose to maintain their dignity. Our party has given to the bench a long line of distinguished judges who have added to the respect and confidence in which this department must be jealously maintained. We resent the attempt of the Republican party to raise a false issue respecting the judiciary. It is an unjust reflection upon a great body of our citizens to assume that they lack respect for the courts. It is the function of the courts to interpret the laws which the people create, and if the laws appear to work economic. social or political injustice it is our duty to change them. The only basis upon which the integrity of our courts can stand is that of unswerving justice and protection of life, personal liberty and property. If judicial processes may be abused we should guard them against abuse. Experience has proven the necessity of a modification of the present law relating to injunctions, and we reiterate the pledge of our national platforms of 1896 and 1904 in favor of the measure which passed the United States Senate in 1896, but which a Republican Congress has ever since refused to enact, relating to contempts in federal courts and providing for trial by jury in case of indirect contempt. Questions of judicial practice have arisen, especially in connection with industrial disputes. We deem that the parties to all judicial proceedings should be treated with rigid impartiality, and that injunctions should not be issued in any cases in which injunctions would not issue if no industrial disputes were involved. The expanding organization of industry makes it essential that there should be no abridgment of the right of wageearners and producers to organize for the protection of wages and the improvement of labor conditions to the end that such labor organizations and their members should not be regarded as illegal combinations in restraint of trade. We favor the eight-hour day on all government work. We pledge the Democratic party to the enactment of a law by Congress, as far as the federal jurisdiction extends, for a general employers' liability act covering injury to body or loss of life of employes. We pledge the Democratic party to the enactment of a law creating a Department of Labor, represented separately in the President's cabinet, which Department shall include the subject of mines and mining." At our Chicago meeting the report of the Legislative Committee was considered and approved, and both for your information as well as its historic importance, we submit it to you here. It is as follows: REPORT OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE. The American Federation of Labor Anti-Injunction Bill, H. R. 94, was introduced by Mr. Pearre, of Maryland, on the first day of the recent session of Congress. From time to time other socalled anti-injunction bills have been introduced by various members of Congress, none of which, however, contained any provisions favorable to labor; consequently they did not recei e the approval of the American Federation of Labor. All of these anti-injunction measures were referred to the House committee on Judiciary, of which the Hon. John J. Jenkins, of Wisconsin, is chairman. This gentleman, on many occasions, in personal conversation, attempted to make it appear that he was friendly to our interests, but every act of his as chairman of the House judiciary committee proved the contrary. Early in the session Chairman Jenkins divided the committee into a number of subcommittees, of one of which he made that notorious enemy of organized labor. Congressman Littlefield, of Maine. chairman. On numerous occasions, both on the floor of the House of Representatives and in public functions which he has addressed at various places, Congressman Littlefield expressed his hostility, not only to our anti-injunction bill, but to labor in general. On one occasion he is reported as saying that he had the American Federation of Labor's Anti-Injunction Bill in his pocket, and that he intended to keep it there. Mr. Littlefield has never denied these reported public utterances nor complained that the statements were incorrect. Notwithstanding his well-known hostility to labor and to its demands for relief from the abuse of the writ of injunction in labor disputes by the courts, our bill, together with the others that were introduced on this subject, were referred to the subcommittee of which he was made chairman. The arguments presented to the subcommittee in the hearings on the Pearre anti-injunction bill are in print and can be obtained upon application to the various members of Congress. Following the decision rendered by the United States Supreme Court in the Hatters' case, the situation being a grave and dangerous one, a conference of the representatives of organized labor was called in Washington, and after a two days' session documents were drafted and presented to Congress which stated clearly and definitely labor's position on the following measures, viz.: The Wilson Amendment to the Sherman Anti-Trust Law, H. P. 20584. 94. The Pearre Anti-Injunction Bill H. R. The bill extending the operation of the eight-hour law to contractors and subcontractors, and a Clearly defined General Employers' Liability Law. This declaration was submitted to state federations of labor, central labor unions, local affiliated unions, and all the local unions affiliated with the national and international unions in the United States, together with a request that meetings be held upon April 19 and 20, and that the unions and their members and friends petition their Senators and Congressmen, asking for the enactment of this legislation before the adjournment of the first session of the present Congress. These meetings were held generally all over the country on the dates above mentioned, and shortly afterwards petitions began to pour in to the Senators and Congressmen, asking that they give their influence and their vote for the legislation desired. At first little or no attention was paid to these petitions by many members of Congress, but as time went on the thousands and thousands of petitions that were being received brought forcibly to their attention the necessity of some favorable action. At the same time, the legislative committee being enlarged by the addition of five members, a systematic canvass was made of the entire membership of the House that could be reached, asking them to clearly and specifically declare themselves either for or against the pending legislation. An effort was made to reach every member of Congress who was in the city, or who was not ill with the result that over 250 members declared themselves as being in favor of the legislation asked for and pledged themselves to vote for these bills. While a majority of the members of the House of the dominant party had promised to vote for our bills, when they were given the opportunity in a Republican caucus or conference to vote our bills out of the hands of the committee, they failed to do so, and thereby convinced your committee that they were not sincere in the promises given. It being evident that "the powers that be," viz., Speaker Cannon, Representatives Dalzell of Pennsylvania and Sherman of New York, who constitute the Republican members of the House committee on rules, and Representative Payne of New York, the floor leader of the majority, and others, controlled the legislative programme, and, in order to compel them to commit themselves, an effort was made by Representative Williams, the floor leader of the minority, and Representative De Armond of Missouri, the Democratic members of the House committee on rules, to force some action. Representative Williams made several demands upon the House for the immediate passage of certain measures, among which were included an insistent demand for an anti-injunction bill, but all to no avail, the majority members were stubborn and would not be per suaded. Under the ordinary rule of the House of Representatives, the first and third Mondays of the month were known as "suspension days," when bills could be called up under a suspension of the rules and passed by a two-thirds vote. To offset the efforts that were made to bring about the passage of our bills and other legislation, the majority members of the rules committee, as above named, reported the following amendment to the House rules: "Resolved. That during the remainder of this session rule 28 should be, and hereby is, modified in the following particulars: "First. The use of the motion shall not be restricted to the first and third Mondays of the month. "Second. The vote on agreeing to the motion shall in all cases be by majority instead of by two-thirds:" thereby giving the Republican membership in Congress the advantage of passing any measure by a majority instead of by a two-thirds vote. In discussing this rule. Representative Sherman of New York said boastingly: "I tried to make clear the other day, Mr. Speaker, and I repeat now, that the Republican majority is anxious that the country should know that we are responsible for both what is and what is not done. I tried to make it clear the other day that the Republican party in this House, as well as the Republican party in the United States, is not seeking to avoid responsibility but accepts full responsibility for all that is done, as well as for all that is not done." Similar statements were frequently made with great gusto hv Representative Payne, and on each occasion these statements were received with great applause by the Republicans of the House. Some of the Republican members realizing that it was necessary that some action be taken, particularly on the subject of an anti-injunction bill, caused a petition to be circulated, asking for a conference of the Republican members. to discuss various measures that had been introduced. This action was taken after the Republican members of the House had been personally informed by the legislative committee of the American Federation of Labor that a "vote to adjourn would be considered a vote against labor's measures." Official notification to this effect was also given in a communication to the Hon. Charles H. Brumm of Pennsylvania. That communication was published in full in the June issue of the American Federationist. The first of these conferences was held on Wednesday evening, May 20, and was over three hours in duration. Any action was bitterly opposed by Representatives Littlefield of Maine, Jenkins of Wisconsin and Parker of New Jersey, all three of whom are prominent Republican members of the House judiciary committee, to which these bills were referred. Considerable of the time of that session of the conference was taken up in a denunciation of the American Federation of Labor and its executive officers by Mr. Littlefield. The next meeting was held on Thursday, May 21, and lasted for a longer period of time. Notwithstanding that an effort was made to have some action taken on some of the bills referring to injunctions, this conference determined by a decisive vote not give labor any legislation whatsoever, and the conference adjourned sine die on motion of Representative Sherman of New York. Much of the time of this conference was taken up by Speaker Cannon in making a personal attack upon the President of the American Federation of Labor for his advocacy of the Pearre anti-injunction bill. to It may be interesting to note that the day prior to the calling of this first conference that the Senate "steering committee" served notice upon the House leaders that they would "stand" for no more "bluff" legislation, and that if the House decided to pass an anti-injunction bill that the Senate would take its own good time in considering it, thus compelling Congress to remain in session. Senate the It is important that a brief explanation of this "order" served by the "steering committee" be made. Oftentime the House, in order to get rid of legislation which to it was undesirable, and not leave the members open for criticism, would pass certain measures with the idea in view that they would quietly sleep in the committee room of the Senate and no further action be taken. This procedure gave the members of House an opportunity to "square" themselves with their constituents by pointing to the fact that they had voted for the legislation desired, but that the matter had died in the Senate and they were not responsible. It is very evident that the Republican leaders in the Senate had become tired of such methods and proposed to make the House share the responsibility for non-action on its part. That it was not the intention of the majority of the Senate to pass any antiinjunction legislation was demonstrated by a question of Senator Culberson of Texas, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, to Senator Aldrich of Rhode island, the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, in whicn he was asked if he could give any information as Lo the probability of passing at this session the anti-injunction bill, to which Senator Aldrich replied in part: "That unless the Senate is willing to stay here for months I find (and I say I am only expressing my own individual opinion) it would be impossible at this session to pass an act of that kind." The action of the mouse conference in adjourning without any action being taken as to this measure, the reported announcement of the Senate "steering committee," together with the answer of Senator Aldrien, all go το prove that it was not and never was the intention of those who are responsible for legislation or lack of legislation" in the first session of the 60th Congress to give any remedial reef to the is from which labor suners. The Wilson bill, H. R. 20584, which calls for an amendment to the Sherman antitrust act, was referred to the House judiciary committee, and was in turn referred by Chairman Jenkins to subcommittee No. 7, consisting of Representatives Bannon of Ohio, Malby of New York and De Armond of Missouri. Notwithstanding the fact that many efforts were made on the part of the legislative committee to have Mr. Bannon call his subcommittee together for the purpose of taking action upon this measure, he refused to call the committee together at any time during the session of the 60th Congress just closed. Believing that it might be well to have the organizations of labor in the district in Ohio which Mr. Bannon represented know of his refusal, and as the primaries for renominations were about to take place in his district, labor and its friends communicated with. Suffice it to that in the primaries Mr. Bannon was defeated for renomination. were say It is advisable to briefly review the action of Congress and its treatment of important labor measures that have been introduced in the various Congresses during the past number of years in which the dominant party has been in power and in a position to grant the desired legislation. In 1900 a bill was introduced known as H. R. 10539; it was intended as an amendment to the Sherman antitrust act. During its consideration by the House committee on judiciary, representatives of the American Federation of Labor requested the committee to include this amendment: "Nothing in this act shall be so construed as to apply to trade unions or other labor organizations, organized for the purpose of regulating wages, hours of labor, or other conditions under which labor is to be performed." The committee declined to accept this amendment, but when the bill was reported to the House this amendment was offered on the floor by a minority member, and upon a record vote of 259 in favor and 9 against* the amendment was forced upon the House and passed, only Among the nine members of the House who voted against this amendment were Joseph G. Cannon and Chas. E. Littlefield.-Editor. |