basis that they are not protected, and are doing business with prospects of profit remotely secure, and not that they are to be protected to-morrow and next day and next day, without any possible chance of loss from want of protection, and they have got to charge accordingly; and it seems to me it is a natural consequence if we lack this protection from injunction we have got to charge more for our goods and pay less for our labor. I know that the advocates of this bill believe that it will increase wages. To me it seems certain that it will decrease wages, simply because we can not continue to manufacture at present margins.

For one reason, capital that is not in manufacturing will stay out. For another reason, I am only an example of thousands of manufacturers who, if they make a dollar, put it right back into the business, and they are as poor after they are accounted millionaires as when they started business. They have not an extra dollar in the bank when they are millionaires over what they had when they started. I speak from my own experience and that of many of my friends. They put the money that they make in the business, and hire more men and take more chances; and they are taking risks as long as they dare. But under this proposition a man is a fool who does not take out of his business all that he dares. He will seize every opportunity of extracting his capital and putting it in safer places. That must mean that there will be less money left in the business, and that that money will be able to get larger returns, except as trouble comes; and that is his loss. And as against the possibility of an extreme loss and the destruction of one's business any time in the day or night, he must make an attempt to get very large margins to justify the chance.

Just one thing it seems to me justifiable to say. Only recently have the manufacturers awakened to the situation. It is only a generation or two ago that this country was agricultural. It was not manufacturing and it did not have even its own respect, to say nothing of the respect of other nations, as a manufacturing nation. The employer might well be likened to the shoemaker who sits making a pair of shoes upon his own knees, and about him a dozen other shoemakers are doing exactly the same thing and differing from him only in that he takes all the risks of the business, and they have a fixed compensation. In those days the manufacturer went by the rule of thumb in his conduct with his workmen. The manufacturer knew all the troubles of the workmen, and they knew all his troubles. The change that has come since then has been astounding, and we have not allowed for that. It has not occurred to ourselves that there would be any such change as has occurred. The employer has gotten very far away from his employees, and he has got to get back closer to his employees, and I do not think anybody knows it better than the employees themselves, and they do not know it any better than the manufacturer. Both sides know it and both sides understand it, and there is only one question, and that is how he is to do it, but he is not going to do it by your taking from him the protection of the law.

The day I was asked to come down here I had three other invitations that seemed to me of equal importance. They were from national organizations seeking to better the conditions of labor, and so far as I know the brains and the energy and the courage of the country is bringing itself to the solving of this difficulty, as it did once to the straightening out of the slavery question, and as it has done before

with the most momentous questions that have presented themselves to our people. Only one or two generations ago the manufacturers of the country had accomplished little, but in these one or two generations past we all know that they have brought us to the front as a commercial and a manufacturing nation. They have met a great many difficulties and they have solved those difficulties; and without any special pride, without saying a word to the special credit of the manufacturer, we may simply note that he has met all the difficulties that he has so far met, and now he is up face to face with probably a greater difficulty than he has ever met before, and he has got to meet that and solve it or he has got to perish. And I may say that he has not the slightest fear that he will not solve it, or will not do it alone. I would not say one word for any manufacturer in the United States except as it also applied to his employees.

I have not the slightest thought that the employee can do anything but absolute and fair justice to us. The relations are not understood. We all know the outcome of the Bryan and McKinley campaign, and we all know that for three months before that final election in November the vastly greater part of the male population of this country trembled as in the throes of death, thinking that the country had met its Waterloo, that the 50-cent dollar would obtain, and that the credit and property of this country would go to nothing. But then a campaign was started. I was in New York the night of the election and saw brave men tremble at the thought of what might happen; but the result was what they most hoped for. That campaign of from three to five months in duration changed the entire thought of the people, and I know that many associations are now forming and are now lining up. absolutely determined to sacrifice their means and their energy and their brains and their lives to the solving of this labor question; and I believe that it is fair to ask of you gentlemen that you shall not, before we have found ourselves, and just at the time when we need to be helped and encouraged, deprive us of the protection of the law, but that you shall let us progress and work on with our men and see where we land within twelve months.

There is one other little feature. This determination on the part of the employer and the employees to get together is instanced by the tremendous movement now going on under the head of citizens alliances. I belong to one where there are three or four times as many workingmen who are members as there are employers. I do not know the exact proportion. But the laboring men in great numbers are joining the manufacturers in the mutual effort to solve this question, and this country will go to ruin unless we can solve it and solve it under the law and not in spite of the law. There so far has been an effort to solve it largely in spite of the law and without reference to

the law.

I have made it a considerable point that we should have protection and not damages. To my mind a policeman is a living injunction. I do not know that I would have come from the Treasury Department down here this afternoon except that I knew that there were policemen on every corner and that I would be protected, and that no man would knock me down and rob me or injure me, even although I could sue him for damages. I not only knew that there were policemen, but what is far more important, I knew that the ill-disposed people in this town knew that there were policemen everywhere on the streets, and

that any ill-disposed, evil-minded person would know that it was best for him not to attack me, and therefore I felt confident that he would not attack me.

Now, I have never read an injunction that did not say that a grievous wrong was about to be done. We do not want to use injunctions except as grievous wrong is, in the opinion of the court, about to be done us, and when that grievous wrong is about to be done we want protection, and we want it before the fact; otherwise the wrong is done, an inestimable wrong, an uncertain wrong, that can not be measured in money, and can not be measured in any way, and for which we are asked to get what little we can in the way of damages, providing we are alive six months after the event.

(Thereupon the committee adjourned.)

Bill of complaint.

STATE OF ILLINOIS, County of Cook, ss:

In the superior court of Cook County.

To the honorable, the judges of said superior court, in chancery sitting:

The Dearborn Duster Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois, with its principal office at 122 South Green street, in the city of Chicago, county of Cook and State of Illinois, brings this, its bill of complaint against the Feather Duster Workers' Union, Local No. 1, Edward Low, its president, William Boldt, its secretary, and Annie Huffman, Louise Bjornson, Josie Galvin, Barbara Schaller, Hannah Christiansen, Rose Jahour, Annie Swanson, Kate Huberty, Elsie Brack, May Pudil, Cordelia Rochon, L. Huberty, C. Munch, Belle Schaller, Joseph Reinhofer, L. Bell, Frederika Oppenlander, Maggie Delaney, Sarah Nelson, Maggie Cleary, Sarah Sadville, Dottie Klema, John Crosby, Sophie Frost, Maud Brynolson, Mrs. M. Dooley, Jos. Klema, Annie Leab, Alta Rice, J. Russlin, Sarah Brashvitzky, Lizzie Klema, Martin Christiansen, Mary Hora, Mary Brom, Mary Dore, Lucy Garcia, Ida Ganley, Linda Wicks, Tillie Luepke, Lena Heller, Annie Hatchavan, Rose Schoole, Jennie Gentile, Louise Frogener, Martha Rose, Mary Leffey, Belle Kelly, Josie Chole, Lena Choler, Emmie Rags, Lena Chinkavella, Clara Henkie, Julia Higgins, Annie Moffert, Annie Windhausee, Mary Vochie, Mary Pipper, Moses Levy, James McGinnis, Jack Taylor, members of said Feather Duster Workers' Union, Local No. 1, and all other members of said union whose names are to the orator unknown, and also the Chicago Federation of Labor, W. G. Schardt, its president, and Edward H. Nockels, its secretary, and makes each and all of said parties defendants to this bill of complaint, and thereupon your orator, humbly complaining, says:

That your orator is a corporation organized for the purpose of manufacturing and selling feather dusters and has been engaged in the said business in the city of Chicago aforesaid for more than twenty-three years last past, and by its industry and business integrity has developed a large business extending all over the United States and Canada, from which said business your orator has heretofore realized and will continue to realize a profit of several thousand dollars per annum, if permitted to conduct its business as it is under the law entitled to do, free from the interference and molestation on the part of the defendants herein named and their confederates and co-conspirators as hereinafter set forth.

Your orator further shows that the defendant, The Feather Duster Workers Union, Local Nc. 1, is a union of workmen and workwomen engaged or skilled in the making of feather dusters, and that nearly all of the employees of your orator, aggregating quite a large number, are members of said union; that on or about the 6th day of February, A. D. 1904, said union, by its president, Edward Low, acting for and on behalf of the employees of your orator and the members of said union, presented an agreement for your orator to sign, containing a wage scale for one year and various other provisions and conditions and demanded that your orator sign the same; but said agreement contained conditions and provisions so onerous that it was impossible for your orator to sign the same and successfully conduct its business, and therefore your orator, by its officers, refused to sign said agree

ment; and subsequently, to wit, on or about the 13th day of February, A. D. 1904, said union, acting through its officers for and in behalf of members thereof, and of your orator's employees, ordered what is commonly called a strike against your orator, and in pursuance thereof the employees of your orator failed and refused to return to work subsequent to said 13th day of February, A. D. 1904, and have quit the employment of your orator; and your orator is informed, and believes it to be true, that the Chicago Federation of Labor, acting by and through its officers, William G. Schardt, president, and Edward H. Nockles, its secretary, is advising and assisting said Feather Duster Workers Union, Local No. 1, its officers and members in said strike, and is advising, directing, and assisting in the unlawful acts hereinafter set forth.

Your orator further shows that in pursuance of said strike, said persons herein named as defendants, together with a large number of other persons whose names are to your orator unknown, have gathered around and continue to gather around the place of business of your orator and have inaugurated what is commonly known as a system of picketing, and have begun a systematic course of intimidation of the persons in the employ of your orator and of persons on their way to your orator's place of business seeking employment from your orator, and have urged, and continue to urge, said employees and said persons so seeking employment to refrain from working for your orator, and call said persons so in the employ of your orator and so seeking employment from your orator "scabs" and other abusive names and threaten them that if they do not cease or refuse to work for your orator that they, the said defendants, by their agents and confederates, coconspirators, and other persons now unknown, will do them, the said employees and persons so seeking employment, bodily injury, and such persons herein named as defendants have congregated and continue to congregate upon the public streets and alleys in and about your orator's place of business in such numbers and with such a display of force and hostility as is calculated to intimidate, and does intimidate, the persons desirous of entering the employ of your orator and does deter and prevent such persons from so entering the employ of your orator, although desirous of so doing.

And said persons herein named as defendants, together with their confederates, coconspirators, and other persons to your orator unknown congregate in large numbers in and about the streets and alleys in and about your orator's place of business, and intercept the employees of your orator on their way to and from their work and by force and intimidation engage such persons in conversation and argue and persuade such employees against their will, endeavoring thereby to induce said employees that in case they do not quit the employment of your orator, they, the said persons herein named as defendants, will inflict bodily injury upon them and compel them to do so. And said persons herein named as defendants, together with their confederates and coconspirators, have intercepted and are intercepting the employees of your orator upon the public streets of said city, and have struck them with their fists and thrown chunks of ice and other missiles and struck them upon the head and body and otherwise abused and threatened said employees to such an extent that said employees have been compelled to flee for their lives and have become so terrified and in fear of bodily injury that they refuse to continue working for your orator until they are furnished with adequate and complete protection.

And by reason of said persuasion, threats, abuse, force, and violence on the part of said persons herein named as defendants, and their servants and coconspirators, your orator is unable to secure proper and sufficient help and is suffering great financial injury and has been compelled to practically cease business and permit its plant to become inoperative;

Your orator further shows that the said persons herein named as defendants are pecuniarily irresponsible and not able to respond to your orator in an action at law for damages which your orator will sustain and may sustain by reason of the unlawful acts and doings of the said defendants and their confederates;

Your orator further shows that it has on hand orders for goods which it will be unable to fill unless it is permitted to conduct its business free from the interference and unlawful acts on the part of said persons herein named as defendants, and their coconspirators, and it will suffer great financial loss and injury in its said business unless such defendants and their coconspirators are prevented by this honorable court from further continuing their unlawful course.

Forasmuch, therefore, as your orator is without remedy in the premises except in a court of equity, and to the end that the said defendants, the Feather Duster Workers Union, Local No. 1, Edward Low, its president, and Wm. Boldt, its secretary, and Annie Huffman, Louise Bjornson, Josie Galvin, Barbara Schaller, Hannah Christiansen, Rose Jahour, Annie Swanson, Kate Huberty, Elsie Brack, May Pudil, Cordelia Rochon, L. Huberty, C. Munch, Belle Schaller, Joseph Reinhofen, L. Bell,

Frederika Oppenlander, Maggie Delaney, Sarah Nelson, Maggie Cleary, Sarah Sadville, Dottie Klema, John Crosby, Sophie Frost, Maud Brynelson, Mrs. M. Dolley, Jos. Klema, Annie Leab, Alta Rice, J. Russin, Sarah Brashvitsky, Lizzie Klema, Martin Christiansen, Mary Hora, Mary Brom, Mary Dore, Lucy Garcia, Ida Gauley, Linda Wicks, Tillie Luepke, Lena Heller, Annie Hatchavan, Rose Schoole, Jennie Gentile, Louise Frogener, Martha Rose, Mary Leffey, Belle Kelley, Josie Chole, Lena Choler, Emmie Rags, Annie Windhausee, Mary Vochie, Mary Pipper, Moses Levy, James McGinnis, Jack Taylor, members of said union of the Chicago Federation of Labor, Wm. G. Schardt, its president, and Edward N. Nochels, its secretary, and each of them may full, true, and perfect answer make to this bill of complaint, but not under oath, their oath and each of their oaths being hereby expressly waived, and that said defendants and each of them, and each and every of their servants, and all persons aiding and abetting said defendants or any or either of them, and all persons now or hereafter aiding or abetting said defendants, or any or either of them, and any and all persons now or hereafter confederating with and acting in consort with said defendants may be restrained and enjoined from in any manner compelling or inducing, or attempting to compel or induce by threats, intimidation, persuasion, force or violence, any of the employees or prospective employees of your orator, to leave the employment of your orator, or persons seeking or desirous of entering the employment of your orator from so entering such employment, and from congregating in such numbers upon the streets and alleys in and about the place of business of your orator with such a display of force and hostility as to tend to intimidate persons of ordinary prudence desirous of entering the employ of your orator and prevent them from so doing, and from congregating in numbers upon the streets in and about the place of business of your orator for the purpose of unlawfully interfering with the business of your orator, and also from doing any act whatever of any conspiracy or combination or design to obstruct said business of your orator, or preventing your orator from the uninterrupted control of its business and affairs, and also from further aiding, assisting, abetting or unlawfully persuading in any manner any person or persons to commit any or either of the acts aforesaid, and from interfering with the employees of your orator in going to and from their daily work at the said place of business, and from either picketing, patroling or crowding the streets, avenues or approaches to the place of business of your said orator for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, abetting or unlawfully persuading any of the employees of your orator, or any person or persons seeking employment from your orator from continuing in or seeking such employment, and that on the final hearing of this cause, a perpetual injunction be issued against such defendants and each of them, and against all persons now or hereafter aiding or abetting defendants, and any or either of them in doing the wrongs herein set forth. May it please your honors to grant to your orator the people's writ of injunction issued out of and under the seal of this court both provisional and perpetual, according to the statute in such cases made and provided and directed to the Chicago Federation of Labor, Wm. G. Schardt, its president, and Edward H. Nockels, its secretary, and the Feather Duster Workers' Union, Local No. 1, Edward Low, its president, and Wm. Boldt, its secretary, and Annie Huffman, Louise Bjornson, Josie Galvin, Barbara Schaller, Hannah Christiansen, Rose Jahour, Annie Swanson, Kate Huberty, Elsie Brack, May Pudill, Cordelia Rochon, L. Huberty, C. Munch, Belle Schaller, Joseph Reinhofen, L. Bell, Frederika Oppenlander, Maggie Delaney, Sarah Nelson, Maggie Cleary, Sarah Sadville, Dottie Klema, John Crosby, Sophie Frost, Maud Brynelson, Mrs. M. Dooley, Joseph Klema, Annie Leab, Alta Rice, J. Russin, Sarah Brashvitzky, Lizzie Klema, Martin Christiansen, Mary Hora, Mary Brom, Mary Dore, Lucy Garcia, Ida Gauley, Linda Wicks, Tillie Luepke, Lena Heller, Annie Hatchavan, Rose Schoole, Jennie Gentile, Louise Frogener, Martha Rose, Mary Leffey, Belle Kelley, Josie Chole, Lena Choler, Emmie Rags, Lena Chinkavella, Clara Henkie, Julia Higgins, Annie Moffert, Annie Windhausse, Mary Vochie, Mary Pipper, Moses Levy, James McGinnis, Jack Taylor, members of said union, their conspirators, assistants, agents, and servants, commanding, enjoining, and restraining them and each of them, as your orator has herein above prayed, that they be restrained and enjoined, and that your orator may have such other and further relief in the premises both interlocutory and final as the needs of the case may require and as shall to this court seem to be agreeable to equity and good conscience.

May it please your honors to grant a writ of summons in chancery, directed to the sheriff of said county, commanding him that a summons of said defendants, the Chicago Federation of Labor, Wm. G. Schardt, its president, and Edward H. Nockels, its secretary, and the Feather Duster Workers' Union, Local No. 1, Edward Low, its president, and Wm. Boldt, its secretary, and Annie Huffman, Louise Bjornson, Josie Galvin, Barbara Schaller, Hannah Christiansen, Rose Jahour, Anna Swanson, Kate Huberty, Elsie Brack, Mary Pudil, Cordelia Rochon, L. Huberty, C. Munch,