for the loss of an animal would have to be replaced by purchase. It is costly.

Human life in our country has been so totally disregarded in relations of employers and employee that there must step in some power, some factor, which shall mitigate such a condition of affairs.

Mr. STAFFORD. May I just break in on you there for a moment. Take the State of Wisconsin, as to the legislation that our legislature has passed to protect the workingmen in their industrial employment. I would like to ask you, Mr. Gompers, if European nations are much further advanced in the protection of the life and the security of the workingmen than the legislation which we find in Wisconsin, and the resultant security that that legislation gives to the workingmen in the State of Wisconsin?

Mr. GOMPERS. We are, in the United States, not less than two decades behind many of the European countries in the protection of the life, health, and limb of the workers.

Here and there considerable improvement has been made, and even in Wisconsin the improvements have been made within the past 10

years.

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes.

Mr. GOMPERS. And to what without want of recognition and appreciation of the service rendered by public-spirited men, to what is attributable the protection which has come to the workers even in Wisconsin, except the agitation and the organization of the workers who have created the public sentiment and demand for the enactment of these laws? Without the associations of labor, without their activity before the legislatures and before the Congress they would be still working their 12 or more hours a day, and there would be no protection to life and limb and health in their work.

Workingmen's compensation-much progress has been made in the last two or three years in the United States upon that subject, but we are behind England 10 years; we are behind Germany 20 years.

Now, look how there still exists in our States, in some of the jurisdictions, the employer's defenses, the negligence of fellow employees, contributory negligence, the assumption of risks, or as the courts of the State of New York decided in the case of a woman who lost her arm in her work, that it was an assumption of risk when she took employment, and she was nonsuited, but she lost her arm. Railroad accident cases might be cited. A man at a telegraph office at a way station fails to give the proper signal at the proper time. The railway engineer is killed by reason of it. Instead of compensation the plea is put forth that it was the fellow employee's negligence.

I mean to say this, that if there were not some power, some factor, to check this mad greed of employers, there would be no telling where the people of our country would drift industrially and commercially and politically, and particularly humanely.

The labor movement of America, crude as it is, poorly organized as it is, poorly officered as it is, is the only movement of a practical character which takes into consideration these conditions, and protests, and protests, and protests against the wrong and the slaughter of the humans, insists upon a better recognition and the safeguarding of the men and women who give their services that society may proceed and progress.

And that brings me to the second thought, and that is what I wanted particularly to emphasize, and it is this investigation by the House and the investigation by the Senate. I think that any man or association of men that use money corruptly, or corrupt means, or corrupt methods, ought to be hailed to the bar of the courts or the Congress and dealt with as they deserve. But to make a hue and cry about what is termed "lobbying."

Those who are in antagonism to our labor movement and who call themselves interested in the cause of labor-there are some who stigmatize us not only as labor conservatives, but who say that our movement is the barrier to their social revolution-it is they who charge us with begging and lobbying in Congress, and as one man has said, "He has worn out his knee pads in begging Congress to do justice to his fellow workers." We have never called our representatives who have asked for legislation a lobby. We have given them the dignified ↳ name of a legislative committee, a committee seeking the furtherance of legislation in the interest of the common people of our country. There is not a piece of legislation that any man can charge us with advocating which is not in the interest of every man, woman, and child of the United States. It is not confined to men of organized labor. It is the men of the organized-labor movement who stand sponsor for it and bear the brunt and expense of it, or who go down into their pockets in order to do it, or who give their efforts, many of them voluntary, many of them without payment and without hope of reward, many of them who devote their time and attention and talent to the work, and who, if they devoted the same time and attention. and talent to business, might be made wealthy or might possibly figure in public office.

Why should we not have our labor representatives here as our legislative committee? Why should we not have representation in Congress? Why should we not have a representative in the Cabinet of the United States? In not less than eight countries in Europe, and in several countries in America, there is a department of labor, with a distinctively labor man, growing out of the ranks, or rather still in the ranks until selected for high office, at the head of the department. It is a recognition of the transition of society. It is an acknowledgment of the extending of this transition of society from the merely and purely political to the industrial and social. The men of labor were those who made the protest for the children; not me, not any of us who are living, but the men who have gone before. They made the first protest against the slaughter of innocents in industry, and we have simply taken up the work they did, and we are appearing here, appearing before Congress, appearing before the legislatures, purely as men and women who have this vital interest at heart, with the one dominating thought to make the life of the people better worth living; the exercise of our rights as men and citizens, our vote, our franchise, our judgment, our conscience, our power of speech, our power of thought, our power of association, in order to accomplish the best that can be accomplished in the interest of the entire American people.

I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

(Thereupon, at 6.10 o'clock p. m., the committee took a recess until 8.15 p. m.)

EVENING SESSION.

The committee reassembled, pursuant to the taking of recess, at 8.15 p. m.

The CHAIRMAN. Before you proceed, Mr. Ralston, I want to make a suggestion with a view to shortening the testimony, and that is that the members of the committee permit Mr. Ralston to get entirely through with his examination before members of the committee ask any questions, and then when the committee reaches the questioning that we observe the rules that we have adopted. I believe that will expedite the proceedings. I simply make that suggestion in that interest.

Mr. RALSTON. I shall only ask Mr. Morrison two or three questions, Mr. Chairman. I think the federation has said practically all it desires to say on its own behalf through Mr. Gompers, who, as you know, has been very thoroughly examined. I simply want to ask Mr. Morrison a few formal questions, and then I will turn him over to the committee.

TESTIMONY OF FRANK MORRISON, SECRETARY OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR.

(The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.)

Mr. RALSTON. Mr. Morrison, what is your occupation, please? Mr. MORRISON. I am secretary of the American Federation of Labor.

Mr. RALSTON. How long have you filled that position?

Mr. MORRISON. Since the 1st of January, 1897.

Mr. RALSTON. Fifteen years?

Mr. MORRISON. Sixteen years, going on seventeen.

Mr. RALSTON. And you have served continuously during that time?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. RALSTON. And during how much of that time has the federation been located in Washington; that is, had its headquarters in Washington?

Mr. MORRISON. During the whole of that time, with the exception of about two weeks in the first part of January, 1897.

Mr. RALSTON. What, in a general way, are your duties as secretary?

Mr. MORRISON. My duties as secretary are to receive the moneys and draw warrants and pay out all moneys on regular warrants drawn through the treasurer.

Mr. RALSTON. I will ask you one or two more questions. Do you account at regular intervals for all the money coming into your hands as secretary?

and

Mr. MORRISON. I account for all the moneys to the convention, except any money that may be raised for any special purpose; then that is accounted for to the executive council.

Mr. RALSTON. Is there any other officer authorized to receive money on behalf of the federation except yourself?

Mr. MORRISON. No, sir.

Mr. RALSTON. And is there any other officer entitled to pay out money except yourself?

Mr. MORRISON. No, sir.

Mr. RALSTON. How frequently are your accounts published? Mr. MORRISON. Monthly in the Federationist and yearly in the proceedings.

Mr. RALSTON. Do you take vouchers for all moneys paid out by you as secretary?

Mr. MORRISON. Receipts and bills.

Mr. RALSTON. And are your accounts regularly audited?
Mr. MORRISON. Yes.

Mr. RALSTON. How often?

Mr. MORRISON. Well, always before each convention by an auditing committee that is appointed in this way: In accordance with the constitution, President Gompers writes to the presidents of three affiliated organizations and requests them to select one of their delegates to that convention to act on an auditing committee and a credential committee. Now, they meet at the headquarters prior to a convention and audit the books and report to the convention. Mr. RALSTON. Have you kept all the vouchers for expenditures made by you since you became secretary of the federation?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir; I have all vouchers belonging to the federation, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. RALSTON. You also performed the ordinary duties as secretary, I presume?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir; attend to the correspondence, and I am secretary of the executive council and secretary of the convention. Mr. RALSTON. You are, by virtue of your office, a member of the executive council, are you not?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. RALSTON. I think that is all I desire to ask, Mr. Chairman, by way of introduction.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Russell, will you examine Mr. Morrison?
Mr. RUSSELL. You are the secretary of the federation?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. RUSSELL. What other business have you to perform in addition to your business for the federation?

Mr. MORRISON. Well, to assist in any way, under the direction of the president, in any of the work in connection with the federation. I also take care of the organizing work and direct the organizers.

Mr. RUSSELL. Is all of your work here at the Capital, or do you go out into the States?

Mr. MORRSION. If there is a matter or a proposition that is serious, and one that we are familiar with at headquarters, and Mr. Gompers is unable to go, or perhaps some of the members of the council can not go, I am often instructed by Mr. Gompers to go and adjust such matters. Once in a while, not very often, I have occasion to go sometimes before some of the committees of the State legislatures, although there is only one committee I have ever appeared before, and that was in New Jersey, the judiciary committee.

Mr. RUSSELL. That was a committee of the Legislature of the State of New Jersey?

Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. RUSSELL. You went before them to argue some bill in which you were interested?

4858-VOL 4-13- -20

Mr. MORRSION. And to clear up a false impression that had been made by the representative of the manufacturers' association.

Mr. RUSSELL. The greater part of your work is here in Washington? Mr. MORRISON. Yes, sir; I am the office man and am in the office nearly all the time, although I am sent out sometimes. I go to different cities and run out for a day or two.

Mr. RUSSELL. You mostly direct the work that is done here at the Capital through the office of which you have charge?

Mr. MORRISON. President Gompers is the directing force in everything pertaining to the office; but the federation has grown since my time. When I came into office, there were only 265,000 members, and the membership has grown to over 2,000,000, and with that great growth has come an increased amount of work, and I assist in every way I can in the general work of the federation; assist President Gompers.

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, as secretary, you are ex officio a member of the legislative committee, are you?

Mr. MORRISON. Since well, no and yes. Since 1906, when the labor representation committee, consisting of President Gompers, Vice President O'Connell, and myself, was organized, it has been our duty, to a certain extent, to look out for legislation, and there are occasions where we have taken an active interest in legislation. I might say that up until about 1905 I took very little interest in the endeavor to secure legislation from the Congress of the United States. I believed it was in some manner a waste of effort. That is my personal belief. I was of the opinion that labor people were given very little consideration; that while we went to a Congressman in a respectful way and talked to him, he would of course treat us kindly and tell us that he would look into it. That is about all we got out of it.

Mr. RUSSELL Since that time have you given more time and attention

Mr. MORRISON (interposing). In 1905, when the manufacturers started in a campaign to destroy the labor unions, and when the result of their work appeared to reach considerable proportions, and when I realized that they seemed to have great influence in preventing legislation, I said to President Gompers that the wageworkers of this country should bestir themselves to secure recognition, and secure the election of labor men to Congress, men who knew what they wanted, and after that we started the campaign of 1906 Since that time I have taken an active interest in trying to secure results along the policy adopted by the federation of nonpartisan political action, as some term it. We are partisan to a principle, but not to a party. That is, where we had a Republican who was favorable to legislation, and indicated a desire to be what we termed fair, we supported him; and a Democrat likewise We believed that there are many million wageworkers, and that it was necessary, if we desired to do away with the unrest in this country, that the wageworkers should receive some consideration It appeared to me that all the consideration was given to great industries-railroads, the Steel Trust, the Sugar Trust, the Packing House Trust, if you please. I am not blaming the Congressmen. This is a condition which came in, and gradually these great corporations became so powerful that everything had to give way, and it appeared to me that even the Representatives in Congress feared to offend them.