being given to each and every act of each and every industrial combination, to the end that the interests of the investors, the interests of the consumers, and the interest of the wage earners be safeguarded.

It is claimed by many that the trade union is in itself a trust, and the phantom of a vast trust monopolizing the labor of the country has terrified a number of newspaper editors. If by this is meant that labor is organizing in such a manner as to deal collectively, it may freely be acknowledged. If, however, it is meant that trade unions are building up a monopoly, then it is entirely false.

Monopoly is the policy of the closed door with the monopolist and the key inside. The policy of trade unionism is the open door without a key. Trade unionism stands for unity and solidarity, but not for monopoly. A trade union is no more a monopoly than are the public schools, which any child may enter. Any wage earner who wishes to join a labor organization can do so upon practically the same terms as those upon which men already in were admitted; and the members who are now in will have no advantage over those who enter at any future time. The men who capitalized the Standard Oil Company are not willing that any other individual should buy their stock at the price which the originators of the company paid for it. No one may enter the company on the terms on which Mr. Rockefeller entered it. The great monopolies have capitalized their franchises and immersed them in water. The trade unions, on the contrary, have nothing which is not free to all, which may not be shared by any and every capable workman. The American unionists have invested in their organizations a large capital composed of gratuitous efforts and unrecorded sacrifices, but those who have been faithful from the beginning are willing to throw open the door to those who wish to enter at the eleventh hour. If this is monopoly, the enemies of unionism may make the most of it.

CHAPTER XXIV

UNIONS AND POLITICS

Political Methods and Industrial Methods. A Separate Labor Party Inadvisable. Concessions from the Dominant Parties. Labor Leaders in the Legislatures. Political Duties, not Political Preferment. The Advantage of Political Isolation. The Policy of Position grabbing. Its Dangers. The Necessity of a better Political Organization for Workingmen. Political Needs of Labor. Industrial Organization by IndustriesPolitical Organization by Territorial Districts. The Strengthening of the American Federation. The State Federation and the City Central Bodies. Program and Propaganda. The Unionist at the Polls and in the Primaries. Summary.

TRAD

'RADE unionism can secure its legitimate aims in two ways, by industrial methods, that is, by strikes, boycotts, or peaceable negotiation with employers, or by political methods, that is, by action on the part of the

state.

Much controversy has arisen concerning the wisdom of the participation of trade unions in politics. The diversity of opinion concerning this matter is due to the vagueness of thought upon the whole subject. The very men who claim that unions should not engage in politics advocate, and actually secure, reforms through political action. The reason of this apparent discrepancy is that they do not distinguish between various kinds of political action. There are certain steps in politics which it would be wise for unions to take and other activities which all unions should avoid.

There can be no question of the advisability of unionists being represented in the councils of the nation. The only possible question is the method and manner of that representation. A certain section of the working class population believe that workingmen have interests that cannot be harmonized with those of other classes of society and that, as a consequence, a labor party should be created, which would devote itself entirely to the

1

purpose of securing labor reforms. This plan of action might be advisable, if political conditions in America were like those in France or Germany, where the votes of the country are divided among a dozen or more different parties, each representing the interests of more or less distinct classes. In France, as in Germany, the welfare of the workingmen might perhaps be best conserved by the creation of a separate political party devoted exclusively to labor interests. Even though this party were not sufficiently strong to commit the government to a strictly labor policy, it might be powerful enough to secure, in conjunction with other parties, some measure of legislative protection for workingmen.

Conditions, however, in the United States, as apparently in England, are entirely different from those existing in France or Germany. In the United States, there are, practically speaking, but two parties, the Republican and the Democratic, and the entire electoral vote for the president is usually divided between these two. There are, of course, a number of other parties, such as the Socialist and the Prohibitionist, which poll each year a few thousands or scores of thousands of votes, but these parties are not sufficiently strong to obtain even a single electoral vote. The third parties which have arisen from time to time have either disappeared or been merged into other parties already existing, so that with but few exceptions, elections in the United States have been decided by the comparative strength of two contesting political parties. I do not wish to pass judgment upon this system, or to say whether or not the two-party system is advantageous. It appears, however, to be a permanent part of our political institutions. The effect of this two-party plan is to compel groups of men with special interests to seek concessions, not by direct action, but from one or the other of the two dominant,parties. A strong, well-organized group of men determined upon a given line of policy can usually obtain either all or a portion of their demands from one or the other of the parties by maintaining neutrality between them. Each party is necessarily thrown upon the adherence of any large, compact, well-organized group of voters, and, as a rule, the group, if well-directed, can secure

pledges and obtain their fulfillment. I therefore do not believe that for the present at least a third or labor party would be of benefit to the workingmen. Such a party, even if it secured the adherence of every organized worker in the United States, would not obtain a majority and could not, therefore, enforce its will upon the community at large. It is true that the presence in Congress of even a few men absolutely and completely committed to a distinct labor policy would be advantageous, since they would leaven the mass of legislators and would compel a vote and a show of hands upon any question involving the welfare of the laboring people. In my judgment, therefore, the wage earners should, in proportion to their strength, secure the nomination and election of a number of representatives to the governing bodies of city, state, and nation. And workingmen who are members of trade unions--whether they be laymen or officers-should be appointed to fill such positions as Commissioner of Labor, Commissioner General of Immigration, Chiefs of Bureaus of Labor Statistics, Factory and Mine Inspectors, and many other positions in which, by the enforcement of laws enacted especially for the protection of wage earners, the interests and the welfare of the working classes could be safe-guarded.

At the present time, trade unions can in all probability secure greater advantages and more important concessions from the existing political par-l ties than by forming a third party. To a certain extent, both parties are desirous of securing the labor vote, and much legislation is proposed and carried out along these lines. There does not appear to be any clear division as between two dominant parties in this country, the Republican party being more favorable in some states and the Democratic party more favorable in others. Trade unionists should adopt a policy of building up a strong outside sentiment, and in this way influence the nominations of the two parties. The Anti-Saloon League and several other organizations adopt these methods, and their success justifies them in so doing. In declaring against a third labor party, however, I wish it to be understood that this refers only to the immediate policy of the unions. One cannot foresee what the future of the dominant parties in the United States will be, and

if it should come to pass that the two great American political parties opposed labor legislation, as they now favor it, it would be the imperative duty of unionists to form a third party in order to secure some measure of reform. I regard the formation of a third party at the present time as inadvisable, owing to the clearly marked disposition on the part of the two dominant parties to grant a large number of the requests of the workingmen; but if these conditions should cease to exist, then it would be advisable for the unions to organize a third party.

One of the great disadvantages of the organization of a third party is that it means, at the same time, the organization of all men opposed to or apathetic to labor unions. The creation of a party means the establishment of a shining mark for the attacks of all persons antagonistic to unionism and the alienation of the sympathies and the loss of the support of the present parties. A third party should, therefore, be formed only in case. of absolute necessity.

While, however, the workingmen could not as a separate party secure a majority or even a respectable minority of the legislators, they could do far more efficient work and could influence legislation far more effectively, by organizing with the purpose of influencing one or the other or both of the dominant parties. If the workingmen of the country were properly organized at the present time and were imbued with the absolute necessity of insisting upon wise labor legislation, neither of the dominant political parties could resist them, and wise legislation benefiting the toilers would undoubtedly be enacted. There is no doubt in my mind that the purposes of the workingman can better be attained by the formation of a solid group of men united in their political aspirations and their political demands, but not committed to the policy of forming a third party, than in any other way. It takes a majority of workingmen in any district to elect their own representative, but it takes only a small minority to insist upon the election of a proper man by one or the other of the parties already constituted.

Another form of political activity which the trade unions should avoid is that of committing the movement to any one political party. No union