Theodore Roosevelt and Labor in New York State, 1880–1900 9780231898263

Table of contents :
PREFACE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I. THE NEW YORK LABOR SCENE
CHAPTER II. LABOR VERSUS CAPITAL
CHAPTER III. ASSEMBLYMAN THEODORE ROOSEVELT
CHAPTER IV. THE MAYORALTY CAMPAIGN
CHAPTER V. POLICE COMMISSIONER ROOSEVELT
CHAPTER VI. THE GOVERNORSHIP
CHAPTER VII. THE GOVERNOR AND INDUSTRIAL UNREST
CHAPTER VIII. ROOSEVELT ON CLASS WAR
CHAPTER IX. LOOKING BACKWARD
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX

Citation preview

STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC LAW Edited by the FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

NUMBER 500

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND LABOR IN NEW YORK STATE, 1880-1900 BY

HOWARD LAWRENCE HURWITZ, Ph

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND

LABOR IN NEW YORK STATE, 1880-1900

B Y

HOWARD LAWRENCE HURWITZ, Ph.D.

NEW COLUMBIA

YORK

UNIVERSITY

PRESS

LONDON : P . S . K I N G & S T A P L E S , L T D .

1943

COPYRIGHT, 1 9 4 3 BY COLUMBIA U N I V E R S I T Y

PRESS

PRINTED I K T H E UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

I N M E M O R Y OF MY

M O T H E R

W H O FONDLY LOOKED FORWARD TO T H E COMPLETION OF T H I S WORK

PREFACE THE movement of labor toward a higher standard of living has always stirred opposition. In New Y o r k State, 1880 to 1900, workingmen began a powerful drive to win a better life and equal bargaining rights in industry. Weapons of industrial warfare were further developed and vigorously wielded by wageworkers and employers. Disputes in the industrial arena were reflected in the conflict of pressure groups in the local and State legislatures. Labor sought through independent political action and persuasion of representatives of the major parties to secure passage of laws which would improve its status in society. During the period there emerged a figure who was to become the outstanding American of the first decade of the twentieth century. Theodore Roosevelt, member of an old and distinguished New Y o r k family, actively engaged in politics at a time when labor was beginning to feel the strength which comes from organization. Did he help or hinder labor organizations in their attempts to improve working conditions? How strong was the labor movement in the Empire State ? How did Roosevelt's actions compare with his public statements ? Did labor regard him as a friend? W a s Roosevelt concerned with labor's attitude toward him? T o what extent did his ideas change before he became President of the United States? These are a few of the questions which interested the writer. I have described the labor movement in New Y o r k State, 1880 to 1900, and have made a detailed examination of Roosevelt's relations with that movement. In other words, it has been my purpose to determine Theodore Roosevelt's attitude toward labor and labor's attitude toward him. T h e study was prepared under the supervision of the Faculty of Political Science of Columbia University. It was guided by Professor Merle Curti of the University of Wisconsin (formerly of Teachers College, Columbia University) to whom I am deeply indebted not only for his criticism of the manuscript, 7

8

PREFACE

but for his warm interest in the many problems which confronted me. I am grateful to Professor Harry J. Carman of Columbia University, who read the completed manuscript and offered valuable advice. His assistance was indispensable to the writer, who entered the Army Air Forces while the book was being prepared for publication. I am under obligation to Professors Theodore Abel, John A . Krout, Arthur W . Macmahon, Dwight C. Miner, Allan Nevins, and Leo Wolman of the same institution. They read the manuscript and helped to improve it. Mr. Meyer Schifrin, Esq., has been a constant critic and has saved me from many errors. I appreciate the aid of Miss Nora E. Cordingley, Librarian of the Roosevelt House, New York City. Her intimate knowledge of the largest collection of Rooseveltiana in the world facilitated my researches. Thanks are due Dr. St. George L. Sioussat, Chief of the Division of Manuscripts, Library of Congress, for permission to use the Theodore Roosevelt Papers; Miss Florence Thome for permission to use the Samuel Gompers Papers and the American Federation of Labor Boxed Letters; Mr. Milton H. Thomas for use of the Seth Low Papers; the New York Historical Society for use of the Abram S. Hewitt Papers; the New York Public Library for use of the Henry George Papers; Mr. David K . Rothstein for suggesting methods of dealing with manuscript material. Passages from Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography, have been quoted with the permission of Scribner's Sons; and passages from Samuel Gompers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor, Vol. I, with the permission of E. P. Dutton and Company. For assistance in the tedious but essential chore of reading proof, I am indebted to Mr. Meyer Schifrin, Esq., and to my wife, Nettie Schifrin Hurwitz, who helped in all phases of research, writing, and publication. HOWARD LAWRENCE HURWITZ M I T C H E L L FIELD, N E W SPRING,

1943.

YORK,

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PREFACE

7

CHAPTER I The New York Labor Scene 1. 2.

Ji

Characteristics Trade Union Organization

II 20

C H A P T E R II 36

Labor Versus Capital 1.

Labor Legislation

36

2. 3. 4.

The Courts Labor's Weapons Anti-unionism

49 56 64 C H A P T E R III

Assemblyman Theodore Roosevelt

75

1.

Middle Class Background

2.

Tenement House Cigar Workers

79

3.

Convict Contract Labor

89

4.

Wages and Hours

5.

Roosevelt and Reform

75

95 104

C H A P T E R IV 111

The Mayoralty Campaign 1. 2.

Labor's Unrest Roosevelt's Part in the Campaign

111 119

3.

Significance of the Campaign to Labor

140

CHAPTER V 146

Police Commissioner Roosevelt

146

1.

Roosevelt Takes the Job

2.

Roosevelt on Labor's Violence

154

3.

The Police Board and Labor Disputes

163

4.

The Campaign of 1896

175 9

IO

T A B L E OF

CONTENTS PAGE

CHAPTER

VI

The Governorship

188 188

1.

The Rough Rider Captures New York

2.

Social Reform

191

3.

Labor Appointments

203

4.

The Governor's Labor Policy

214

CHAPTER

VII

The Governor and Industrial Unrest

226

1.

Hours and Wages

2.

Strikes

226 239

3.

Vice-Presidential Candidate

255

CHAPTER

VIII

Roosevelt on Qass War

260

1.

His Attitude Toward " Classes "

260

2.

Immigration

279 CHAPTER

IX

Looking Backward

285

BIBLIOGRAPHY

299

INDEX

310

CHAPTER I THE NEW YORK LABOR SCENE A new power [the trade union] has entered into the industrial world which must be recognized. It is apparent that this power cannot be destroyed by force or violence unless society be destroyed with it. It must be heard. Its just demands must be heeded. This is the voice of reason. 1 ABRAM S.

I.

HEWITT

CHARACTERISTICS

TOWARD the close of the nineteenth century Samuel Gompers,

in a letter to the Commissioner of the United States Department of Labor, said that the trade union movement was " practically in its infancy." 2 Viewed from the vantage point of today, this statement was essentially true even though there was a long and varied history of labor from colonial times to the last quarter of the nineteenth century. 3 It was during the period under study (1880-1900) that the labor upheaval became widespread, and America witnessed the emergence of the trade union movement as a new and potent force. 4 New Y o r k workers in these two decades took part in 6,460 strikes. This constituted slightly more than twenty-eight per cent of the total number of strikes in the United States. 5 1 Statement before Church Congress in Cincinnati, October 18, 1878, quoted in Allan Nevins (ed.), Selected Writings of Abram S. Hewitt ( N e w Y o r k : Columbia University Press, 1937), p. 277. 2 Letter to Carroll D. W r i g h t , March 4, 1896, in Samuel Gompers Papers, American Federation of Labor Building, Washington, D. C. ; hereafter cited as " Gompers Papers." 3 See John R. Commons and Associates, History of Labor in the United States, Vols. I and II ( N e w Y o r k : The Macmillan Co., 1918). 4 Lewis L. Lorwin, The American Federation of Labor, History Prospects ( W a s h i n g t o n : T h e Brookings Institution, 1933), p. 13.

Policies,

5 U . S. Commissioner of Labor, Sixteenth Annual Report: 1901 ( W a s h ington: Government Printing Office, 1901), pp. 26, 31. During the last two decades of the nineteenth century, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Massa11

12

THEODORE

ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

New York ranked first in four of the six principal pursuits in which " breadwinners " were engaged. These were the mechanic trades, commerce, trade and transportation, personal and domestic service, and professional service.8 Of the three hundred and fifty-four industries recognized by the census of 1900, three hundred and twenty-eight were represented in New York. 7 The pre-eminence of New Y o r k as a manufacturing state was manifested not only by the magnitude of its interests in important industries, leading to its supremacy over all rivals in three-fifths of the great classes of industry in the United States, but also by the notable variety of its products.8 Of ninety-nine leading industries in the United States, the Empire State occupied the first rank in thirty-six.* The rapidity of industrial expansion following the Civil W a r was accompanied by increasingly severe labor disturbances, which were aggravated by uncompromising opposition to working class organization by capitalists.10 So great was the distress in New York City in 1876 that a committee of workingmen appealed for aid to the Mayor, who bluntly told them that the government was under no obligation to furnish work. 11 In chusetts, and O h i o contained forty-five per cent of all the manufacturing establishments in the United States, and had seventy-five per cent of the 22,793 strikes in the United States. M o r e than half of these were successful, and another thirteen per cent succeeded partly. T h e average duration of all strikes w a s 23.8 days (ibid., pp. 16, 28, 35). 6 Adna F . Weber, The Growth of Industry in New York ( A l b a n y , 1904), p. 3. It is not t o be inferred f r o m the statistics presented that N e w York w a s the only industrial state in the United States. T h e mass production industries were centered in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Ohio. 7 N e w York State Department of Labor, Report on the Growth dustry in New York ( N e w Y o r k : T h e A r g u s Co., 1904), p. 6.

of

In-

8 Ibid., pp. 5-6. 9 Ibid., p. 6. 10 A l m o n t Lindsey, " Paternalism and the Pullman Historical Review, X L I V (January, 1939), 272. 11 Samuel Gompers, Seventy E . P . Dutton, 1925), p. 138.

Strike,"

American

Years of Life and Labor, V o l . I ( N e w Y o r k :

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR

SCENE

13

1882, another depression came in gradually, without the usual financial

panic, and lasted for several years. 1 2 A t the depth of

this depressed period there were close to a million unemployed workers in the United States. 1 3 In N e w Y o r k many factories closed, and w a g e s were reduced. 1 4 W h i l e it w a s impossible accurately to estimate the number of unemployed in the State, it may safely be said that f r o m one-third to one-half were idle in all industries. 1 5 T h e depression of 1893 to 1897 likewise took its toll of breadwinners. A g a i n , the unemployed approximated one million, with the percentage of unemployment higher in N e w

York

State than in the country as a whole. 1 6 In 1897, 25.3 per cent of the organized workers in N e w Y o r k were unemployed. 1 7 F i g u r e s for the unorganized must have been greater during the depression years, because they were generally semi-skilled and unskilled, where the percentage of unemployment was usually higher. 1 8 T h e r e was a decline in unemployment by 1900, with up-State conditions more favorable than conditions in the city. 1 9 General unrest was stimulated by the intensive use of improved machinery, the development of monopolistic industrial 12 George A . Stevens, New York Typographical Union No. 6. Study of a Modern Trade Union and Its Predecessors ( A l b a n y : J . B. Lyon and Co.,

1913), P- 3 " 13 Bradstreet's, quoted in John Swinton's Paper, J a n u a r y 4, 1885. 14 John Swinton's Paper, J a n u a r y 6, 1884.

15 Ibid., January 20, 1884. 16 Paul H . Douglas, Real Wages in the United States, 1890-1926 ( N e w

York: Houghton Mifflin, 1930), p. 44a 17 Ibid., p. 406. 18 Ibid., p. 407.

19 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, September, 1899, pp. 89, 91. It was difficult for women over forty-five, and men over fifty years of age, to find employment (U. S. Industrial Commission, Report on the Relation of Conditions of Capital and Labor Employed in Manufactures and General Business including testimony so far as taken November 1, 1900 and digest of testimony, Vol. V I I [Washington: Government Printing Office, 1901], Digest, p. 30).

14

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND LABOR

combinations, and the increased bargaining power of merchants and manufacturers over consumers and wage earners.20 The labor market was thrown into " chaotic and depressing competition " by increased technical efficiency, the failure of wages to rise, the influx of people from rural areas, and, during 18841886, by reductions in pay. 21 That this state of affairs sometimes caused disorder was admitted to a Senate committee by a trade union advocate.22 The New York State Bureau of Labor Statistics, investigating technological unemployment in 1894, found that there had been a great growth in the use of machinery in New York State, but that the percentage of increase in the number of workers employed had been very small.23 Samuel Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labor, testifying before the United States Industrial Commission, held that machinery tended permanently to displace workers. He insisted that this condition could be corrected by trade unions which fought for reduced hours of toil.24 Among those who found employment, working conditions in too many cases were miserable enough to call forth the protests of even the conservative press.28 A high daily wage was $4.50. This was enjoyed only by the highly unionized brownstone and 20 Peter A. Speek, The Single Tax and the Labor Movement (University of Wisconsin, Bulletin No. 878, Vol. VIII, No. 2 [Madison, Wisconsin, October, 1917]), p. 296. 21 Lorwin, The American Federation 0} Labor, pp. 14-15. 22 U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, Report of the Committee of the Senate Upon the Relations between Labor and Capital, Vol. I (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1885), pp. 783-84. 23 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Twelfth Annual Report: 1894, P- 237. 24 U. S. Industrial Commission, op. cit., VII, Digest, 30. The typographical union of New York City practiced what trade union leaders preached. When confronted by the introduction of typesetting machines, the union decided not to oppose the new methods, but to secure for their members reduced hours, at the regular union scale, in a closed shop (Stevens, New York Typographical Union No. 6, pp. 327-29, 371-72). 25 U. S. Industrial Commission, op. cit., VII, Digest, 186.

T H E NEW YORK LABOR S C E N E

15

marble cutters of New Y o r k City. 28 With the cost of living proportionately low, this was considered respectable. Other building workers earned a daily wage of $2.50 to $4.00. 27 This would have been enough to support a family, but work was seasonal. Even in good years, such skilled workers might expect to be employed for thirty weeks or one hundred and eighty days. At $4.00 per day, the annual wage was $720. Fixed costs of living did not change during the out-of-work season, and rent for a family of bricklayers remained at about $ 1 7 monthly or $204 per year. This left $ 5 1 6 , or less than $ 1 0 a week, for food, clothing, fuel, and other necessities for the worker and his family. This just about supported life on the subsistence level. These figures are based on the highest wage of bricklayers and the lowest estimate of living costs. The same conditions held for printers, plasterers, and others. Laborers, in New Y o r k , the best of whom earned $ 2 . 5 0 per day, were even worse off. 2 8 Especially vile in the matter of working conditions were the New Y o r k City sweatshops. The basis of the sweating evil, exemplified in the New York clothing industry, was the system of petty contractors who, with little or no capital, agreed to make a certain quantity of goods for a particular price. The contractors, due to excessive competition, were only slightly less miserable than the workers to whom they assigned tasks. The process was carried on chiefly in tenement house quarters. Nearly all the clothing in the State was manufactured under this system, and New York was the leading clothing market in the United States. 29 Trade union organizers in the New Y o r k clothing industry were confronted with almost insurmountable obstacles in their efforts to organize sweatshop workers who were largely foreign 26 John Swinton's Paper, April 6, 1884. 27 Ibid., November 18, 1883. 28 Ibid., November 18, 1883. 29 U. S. Industrial Commission, Report on ... Capital and Labor Digest, 182, 183, 185.

VII,

l6

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND

LABOR

born. The language barrier was made more difficult by their ignorance, poverty, and the fact that they were not working together in large factories. 80 In an effort to meet the problem of organization, trade unionists recommended the regulation of immigration, the passage of uniform sweatshop legislation in the different states, and public discrimination against the products of sweatshops. 81 T h e conditions which pinched clothing workers were true of cigar, tobacco, and bakery employees. T o discomfort was added danger to life, for industry generally ignored safety devices. T h e number of workers killed in 1 8 9 7 , in the country's railroad industry alone, was five times greater than the total number of American soldiers killed in the Spanish-American war. 8 2 Statistics relating to industrial deaths may have presented a picture somewhat less dark than might otherwise have been the case had not employers tended to evade the law requiring that-accidents be reported. All the more accurate figures indicated that the frequency of accidents in the United States exceeded that in Europe. Union workers being better paid, and including the more skilled and competent workmen, enjoyed a comparatively low accident rate. 88 T h e labor movement was handicapped in its efforts to accomplish its aims by internal bickering. T h e comparatively strong cigarmakers' union of New Y o r k City set the tone for the State and nation by dividing over the question of whether to support pro-labor candidates among the existing political parties or nominate independent labor candidates. A so-called progressive group, led by socialists, seceded from the main body of cigarmakers and maintained an independent existence during the greater part of the period.84 The conflict almost de30 Ibid., p. 1S5. 31 Ibid., p. 188. For the circumstances under which Theodore Roosevelt signed a sweatshop law, infra, pp. 191-94. 32 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Seventeenth Annual Report: 1899, P. 557.

33 Ibid., pp. 563, 565, 57534 John Swinton's Paper, October 21, 1883; Commons, History of Labor in the United States, II, 399-401.

THE

NEW

YORK LABOR S C E N E

17

stroyed the usefulness of the organization in New York City.*5 The cigarmakers were further disturbed by the objection of Bohemian workers to the union policy of excluding women from membership. In the old country, the wife was the cigarmaker ; but in America, the husband had adopted the trade as a matter of necessity. Since almost half the cigarmakers in New York City were Bohemians, the union was in disfavor with an important number of workers.38 A more favorable attitude toward the weaker elements among workers was adopted by the Order of the Knights of Labor. At Richmond, in 1886, the right of a Negro representative from New York to full participation in the proceedings was defended. It had been the plan of the New York delegates to have the Negro introduce the Governor of Virginia to the Knights, but Grand Master Workman Powderly vetoed this move as a violation of community customs. As a compromise the Negro delegate introduced Powderly to the convention. This action brought forth a storm of abuse from the Southern press, which Powderly refuted on the ground that race prejudice was unjustifiable inasmuch as " no human eye can detect a difference between the article manufactured by the black mechanic and that manufactured by the white mechanic." 87 Since cheap Negro labor was a menace to the labor movement, particularly in the South, the incident in Virginia was regarded as deeply significant. The infiltration into the United States of European revolutionary ideas was slight. Small societies, affiliated with the European International, and composed almost exclusively of German socialists, were formed about 1868 in New York City, Chicago, and San Francisco. A more rapid growth of " sec35 George E. McNeill, The Labor Movement. The Problem of Today ( N e w York: M. W . Hazen Co., 1888), p. 605. 36Jacob A. Riis, How the Other Half Lives 1912), pp. 137, 139-

( N e w York: Scribner's,

37 Terence V. Powderly, Thirty Years of Labor, 1859-1889 Ohio: Excelsior Publishing House, 1889), pp. 651-60.

(Columbus,

l8

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND

LABOR

tions " of the International took place during the 'seventies. Several cities had " sections," but the N e w Y o r k and Chicago " sections " were particularly active. T h e total number of enrolled members in the country was only about five thousand, and they were composed of Irishmen, Germans, Frenchmen, Scandinavians, and Bohemians. A German socialist, F . A . Sorge, became the leader of the International in the United States. Dissension caused the dissolution of the International in 1876. T h e following year, the Socialist Labor party was formed. It became the dominant factor in the socialist movement in the United States during the period 1880-1900. Only about ten per cent of the members were native Americans. A l l the rest, including leaders, were foreigners insufficiently acquainted with American institutions. T h e party sought to " Americanize " the socialist movement through the trade unions and political activity. 38 Bona fide trade unionists were frequently called upon to discuss the relationship of their movement to communists and socialists. Samuel Gompers, testifying before a congressional committee, patiently explained that while there were some socialists in the trade union movement, their individual views must not be " confounded with those of whole organizations." Socialist attempts to capture the trade union movement, he continued, had for the most part failed. " T h e more radical elements in society," according to Gompers, had been held in check by the trade union movement. 39 H e attributed the intensity with which " class lines " were being drawn to employers who were " ever on the watch to see whether they cannot take advantage of their employees." 40 Similar views were expressed by the fiery 38 See Morris Hillquit, History of Socialism in the United States (5th ed., revised; N e w York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1910), pp. 187-214. According to John McBride, President of the American Federation of Labor in 1893, socialist hostility to the Federation helped to perpetuate the division in the ranks of organized labor (Letter to Daniel Harris, August 14, 1895, Gompers Papers). 39 U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, Report ...on... Labor and Capital, I, 374-7540 Ibid., p. 376.

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR

SCENE

19

labor journalist, John Swinton. H e called attention to the " sharp lines," which were being drawn between employer and employee, and warned workers who did not wish to be at the mercy of their " masters " to be prepared for action " before it is too late." 41 T h e dangerous pitch to which labor unrest had risen in the middle 'eighties was noted by the United States Senate, which undertook to investigate its causes so as to arrive at " such remedies as may seem best calculated to relieve the difficulties and disturbances that now exist in the relations between labor and capital."

42

T h e Senate committee was useful only to the

extent that it gave labor leaders a chance to air their grievances. T h e wage earning class, by the close of the period under study, was " permanently separated from the middle class. W a g e consciousness permanently displaced middle class panaceas such as productive cooperation, currency and land reform."

43

T h e prominence of the labor question during the period was reflected in politics, legislation, literature, and economic thought. N o platform was regarded as complete which did not contain a declaration upon the labor question. Set speeches at conventions were full of carefully phrased references to the same theme. Newspapers gave increased space to news having a bearing upon the labor movement. Editorial references to the same topic correspondingly increased. Even in the pulpit discussions were not infrequent. 44 It was not, however, until after 1902 that the " public at large became accustomed to view the labor question in a matter of course, non-hysterical light." 45 41 John Swinton's infra, p. 34.

Paper,

October 21, 1883. F o r a sketch of

42 U. S. Senate, op. cit., I, 565. 43 Commons, History 44 Bradstreet's,

of Labor in the United States,

October 16, 1886.

45 Commons, op. cit., II, 528.

II, 519.

Swinton,

20

T H E O D O R E ROOSEVELT AND LABOR 2 . TRADE U N I O N

ORGANIZATION

The cradle of the modern American labor movement was New York City, where the first efficient American trade unions developed during the 'eighties and 'nineties.49 In 1883, there were one hundred thousand union men in New York City.47 More than fifty New York City trade unions, ranging from bricklayers to waiters, sent in their times and places of meeting to John Swinton's Paper.*6 In all, there were about one hundred trade unions in New York City in the early 'eighties.49 With trade unions meeting from one to four times a month, Swinton editorially urged the construction of a hall devoted to union meetings so that rent on hiring halls might be saved.80 Despite uncertain business conditions, such New York City unions as the typographical, hod-hoisters', lathers', varnishers', cabinetmakers', custom tailors', granite cutters', plasterers', bricklayers', tin and slate roofers', plumbers', and others showed distinct signs of increased strength. 81 Union growth in the State was not confined to New York City. In Cohoes, a busy knitting mill center, the Knights of Labor and trade unions were on the best of terms with each other, and ten hours of work was general.82 From Corning, word came that a new union had increased to thirty-two members, and that supplies and stationery were needed.88 A Salamanca union leader mailed his per capita tax to the New York office and asked for the by-laws of some labor union and a directory 46 Gompers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor, I, 61-62. 47 John Swinton's Paper, December 23, 1883. 48 Ibid., November 11, December 16, 1883. 49 Ibid., January 13, 1884. 50 Ibid., December 23, 1883. 51 Ibid., October 14, 21, November 18, December 9, 1883. 52 Ibid., March 27, 1887. 53 John T. Cassidy to Chris T. Evans, October 29, 1891, American Federation of Labor Collection, basement of A. F. of L. Building, Washington, D. C.; hereafter cited as A. F. of L. Letter Collection.

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR S C E N E

21

of the different organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. 6 4 Another " out-of-town " union leader proudly invited the President of the American Federation of Labor to a local labor convention. 55 A Brooklyn leader apologized for being late with the per capita dues because the amount was too large to trust to the mails. H e had been unable to send it registered, because the post office closed too early, but promised to bring it in person. 56 All was not bright in New Y o r k , for other correspondents reported that some charter members never attended a meeting. 5 7 A Watertown union secretary was under the " painful necessity " of reporting the collapse of his union. H e wrote: " W e have tried to hold on as long as possible but since we have not members enough to fill offices, we have decided to surrender the charter."

58

A Geneva trade unionist, of slighter literary

stature, conveyed a similarly sincere message. I write to notify you that our union has been obliged to temporary suspend for awhile as the most of our members have left town or about to leave and there will not be enough members here to keep up the meetings and we want to now what we owe you as we believe we owe you a tax but we do not now how mutsch it is will you please write as soon as you can and let us know. 59 T h e smaller industrial centers of the State bore their reverses well. T h e growth of their unions was aided by the industrial upsurge of the late 'nineties, and by the turn of the century there were one hundred and thirty-five towns in New Y o r k 54 J. J. Wright to Evans, December 20, 1890, A. F. of I.. Letter Collection. 55 James Cawley to Gompers, June I, 1892, A. F . of L. Letter Collection. 56 Patrick S. Byrne to Evans, March 3, 1891, A. F. of L. Letter Collection. 57 J. T. Cassidy to Evans, May 17, 1892, A. F. L. Letter Collection. 58 E. G. Hazzel to Gompers, February 16, 1891, A. F. of L. Letter Collection. 50 J. H. Young to unnamed New York official, probably Chris Evans, December 18, 1890, A. F. of L. Letter Collection. Misspellings and punctuation have been followed in all their inconsistencies.

22

T H E O D O R E ROOSEVELT AND LABOR

State with one or more labor unions. 80 The predominant position of New Y o r k City in the labor movement was, however, clear. The metropolis, in 1900, contained 47.3 per cent of the total State population and 69.2 per cent of the aggregate membership of labor organizations. 81 Buffalo was second with 10.8 per cent, and Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Troy, and Utica trailed far behind.82 A t the close of 1900, there were 1,636 labor organizations in New Y o r k State with a membership of approximately 245 .ooo. 63 Of this number, women represented 4.8 per cent, a steady increase over earlier years. 64 The trade union movement in New Y o r k State had been at a standstill between 1896 and 1898. It had taken on new life by the close of the period under study. 65 Between 1894 and 1900 almost one hundred thousand workers were added to the union ranks, with the largest additions in the building trades. 86 Important numbers of unionists were also in such trades as clothing and textiles, metals, machinery, shipbuilding, and transportation. 67 The average size of a union was one hundred and fifty in 1900, with thirty-two unions reporting memberships over one thousand. 68 So infectious was the union germ in the late 'nineties, that an International Farmers' Union was organized at the Central Labor Union Hall in Binghamton. The purpose of earlier 60 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: p. 442.

1900,

61 Ibid., p. 443. 62 Ibid. 63 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, December, 1900, p. 267. 64 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: p. 44«-

1900,

65 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, December, 1899, p. 157. 66 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: 1900, PP. 435-438, 444-45. The building trades comprised 32.7 per cent of the New York trade unionists. 67 Ibid., pp. 444-4568 Ibid., p. 444.

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR

SCENE

23

cooperative asociations and agricultural societies had been to attain favorable terms in buying implements. T h e new organization, in contrast, sought to create a better market for their products through the adoption of the union label and an alliance w i t h the organized mechanics of the country. It declared its intention of affiliating with the A m e r i c a n Federation of L a b o r ; but because employing farmers were so numerous in the organization, it was not admitted to membership. H o w e v e r , the movement w a s praised at the annual convention of the A m e r i c a n Federation of L a b o r and the label of the International F a r m e r s ' U n i o n was recommended to trade unionists. In return, the farmers declared their intention of demanding union labels on goods of all kinds. 89 Individual unions were not alone in attempting to improve labor conditions. T h e y were assisted by central labor organizations made up of trade union leaders and delegates f r o m the district assemblies of the K n i g h t s of Labor. O n e of the most effective central labor organizations, which arose in 1882, w a s the Central L a b o r Union. It recruited its membership f r o m N e w Y o r k City, Brooklyn, and Jersey City. B y 1886, t w o hundred and seven unions were represented, with the building trades dominant. T h e delegates met to discuss matters of general interest to all trades and to take common action on matters that a single trade alone could not very well determine. It did a great deal in the w a y of holding public meetings, mass meetings, parades, festivals, and generally stirring up public opinion upon the labor question. It assisted trade unions in their strikes by raising contributions from trade union organizations, while its o w n financial support came voluntarily f r o m its member o r g a n izations. T h e decrees of the Central L a b o r U n i o n , according to an enthusiastic member, were enforced by " a feeling of loyalty which prevails in the organizations." T h e r e was no president and a chairman was elected at every meeting. T h i s w a s done in 69 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, December, 1899, p. 186; ibid., March, 1900, p. 49.

24

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

order that no man could have the power to " sell out " the union to any political party. 70 The Knights of Labor, which flourished during the 'eighties, was less outspoken in its condemnation of capitalism, although it held that labor was " the only creator of values or capital." 71 The Order was made up of local assemblies which consisted of skilled and unskilled workers in all industries. During the 'seventies it was so secret that the name was never written, but was indicated by five stars whenever it was necessary to refer to it with pen and type. 72 A s late as 1881, Powderly's proposal to abolish the oath of secrecy was resisted by New York members who feared that they would be discharged or victimized by employers if their membership was known. Powderly argued that abolition of secrecy would permit greater education of workers, and that there was no reason why the names or identity of members in any locality needed to be made more public than in the day when the greatest secrecy was practiced.73 A t its height, in 1886, the Knights reached a membership of over seven hundred thousand.74 Its decline was rapid, due to 70 See testimony of P. J. McGuire, a trade union man, in U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, Report ...on... Labor and Capital, I, 502-03, 808-10, 812-13; Commons, History of Labor in the U. S., II, 441-44; John Swinton's Paper, October 14, 21, 1883. In the late 'eighties, the Central Labor Union split up. The Socialist Labor party gained control of the newly organized Central Labor Federation which consisted of seventytwo trade unions. In 1900, the two organizations consolidated and assumed the name Central Federated Union. Similar central labor bodies sprung up all over the United States. Other central trades councils in N e w York, dominated by socialists, were the United German Trades of the City of New York and the United Hebrew Trades. The struggle of the Socialist Labor party to gain a foothold in the great national confederations of trade unions was unsuccessful (Hillquit, History of Socialism in the United States, pp. 285-88). 71 Commons, op. cit., II, 198. 72 A. M. Simons, Social Forces in American History Macmillan Co., 1911), p. 314.

( N e w York: The

73 Powderly, Thirty Years of Labor, 1859-1889, pp. 559-61. 7 4 L e o Wolman, The Growth of American Trade Unions ( N e w York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1924), p. 32.

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR

SCENE

25

wildcat strikes, inefficient leadership, and the nature of the membership which entered the organization from 1885 to 1888. 75 Its quarrel with the American Federation of Labor took the form of jurisdictional strikes. T h e Knights called strikes against trade unions affiliated with the Federation, and the latter reciprocated. 78 These tactics hastened the death of the Order. 7 7 It retarded the g r o w t h of trade unionism at a time when industrial conditions were such that unity in the labor movement might have prevented further membership losses. A socialist writer, looking back at the Knights of Labor, felt that with all its faults it might in capable and intelligent hands have proved a very successful proletarian organization. 7 8 Trade unionists, who were content to labor under the existing economic system without harboring thoughts of its overthrow, busied themselves with efforts to secure favorable labor legislation. The Workingmen's Assembly of the State of New Y o r k , organized in 1865, was such an organization. It had its origin in a protest meeting against a bill, introduced in the New Y o r k Legislature, which would have made the strike a conspiracy. A mass meeting was held in New Y o r k City with some fifteen thousand workmen present. Petitions were signed, sent to the Legislature, and, after hearings forced by trade union pressure, the bill died in committee. A s a result of this experience, the labor unions of the State sent delegates to a convention at Albany. There, the first State organization of labor unions was founded under the title, " New Y o r k State Trades Assembly." This was soon changed to " Workingmen's Assembly of the State of New Y o r k . " 79 In 1897, it amalgamated with the State 75 U . S. Industrial Commission, Report

on . . . Capital and Labor

V I I , Digest, 109. 76 Wolman, op. cit., p. 30. 77 Commons, op. cit., II, 482. 7 8 A u s t i n Lewis, The Rise of the American Charles H . Kerr and Co., 1907), p. 135.

Proletarian

(Chicago:

7 9 E m a n u e l Koveleski ( c o m p i l e r ) , Illustrated History of the Central Trades and Labor Council (Rochester. 1927), pp. 15-16; G e o r g e G. Groat,

26

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

branch of the American Federation of Labor and assumed the name, "Workingmen's Federation of the State of New Y o r k . " 80 The need for absolute unity was perceived. 81 F o r a few years after this, efforts were made to unite the new organization with the one State labor body outside the Workingmen's Federation, the Knights of Labor. This was unsuccessful. 82 The Workingmen's Assembly had come to be recognized as a force in New Y o r k politics by the 'eighties. In the single year, 1880, twenty men were sent to the Legislature. They had promised to support the demands of organized labor. In Buffalo, Rochester, Cohoes, Troy, and Utica, labor candidates for State office were nominated, and the Workingmen's Assembly "blackballed" anti-labor members of the previous Legislature. 83 These actions opened the ears and eyes of party leaders, and labor bills began to be enacted. 84 In an effort to defeat Grover Cleveland for the Presidency, in 1884, Buffalo labor organizations entered politics extensively. Their distrust of Cleveland was best expressed by John Swinton, who looked upon the Democratic candidate as a determined enemy who " watched like a lynx for every bill in the interests of the working classes that he might put his foot upon it." 85 Trade Unions and the Law in New York. A Study of Some Legal Phases of Labor Organizations ( N e w York: Columbia University Press, 1905), pp. 16-17; Stevens, Typographical Union No. 6, pp. 586-589. 80 Frank T. Carlton, " Ephemeral Labor Movements, 1866-1889," The Popular Science Monthly, L X X X V (November, 1914), 487; Clara M. Beyer, History of Labor Legislation for Women in Three States, U. S. Department of Labor, Bulletin of the Women's Bureau, No. 66 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1929), p. 66n. 81 Groat, op. cit., p. 17; New York Journal, January 11, 1899, in Theodore Roosevelt's Scrapbooks, Roosevelt House Library, N . Y. C. 82 Groat, op. cit., p. 18. 83 John Swinton's Paper, October 21, 1883. In several cases labor candidates were successful (ibid., December 16, 1883). 84 Fred R. Fairchild, The Factory Legislation of the State of New York ( N e w York: The Macmillan Co., 1906), p. 34. 85 John Swinton's Paper, July 6, 1884. For a better founded analysis of Cleveland's reform role as Mayor of Buffalo (1882), and Governor of

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR SCENE

27

T h e criticism of the Buffalo trade unions was cited by Tammany as an argument against Cleveland's nomination. 86 Similar action against prominent men accused of harboring anti-labor sentiments was taken by the Central Labor Union of N e w Y o r k City. A resolution was passed condemning the New Y o r k Senate as " a lying and ignorant gang of corruptionists," because of its conduct with respect to labor legislation in 1884. 87 T h e Workingmen's Assembly, too, was displeased with the New Y o r k Legislature of 1885 which failed to enact any significant labor legislation. It determined to punish offending legislators. 88 T h e custom of the Workingmen's Assembly was to list those assemblymen and senators who had opposed labor measures and to urge their defeat at the polls. 89 In the gubernatorial campaign of 1885, New Y o r k labor found little to choose between Governor Hill and the Republican candidate. Hill had signed the objectionable tramp act, 90 which was to benefit prison contractors, while Davenport had a bad labor record. In general, there was less to hope from Republicans than from Democrats. John Swinton urged that both be smashed. 91 Individual unions also engaged in the effort to check hostile legislators. F o r example, the typographical union of Buffalo sent a circular letter of remonstrance to the New Y o r k Legislature objecting to the election of a candidate to the United States Senate on account of his "present and long-continued attitude N. Y . S. (1883-84), see Allan Nevins, Grover Cleveland. (New Y o r k : Dodd Mead and Co., 1933), chaps, vi-ix.

A Study

1» Courage

86 DeAlva S. Alexander, Four Famous New Yorkers, Vol. I V of The Political History of the State of New York, 1882-1905 (New Y o r k : HenryHolt and Co., 1923), pp. 34-35. 87 John Swinton's

Paper, July 13, 1884.

88 Ibid., July 12, 1885. 89 Ibid., August 17, 1884. 90 New York Laws, 1885, chap. 490, in Charles A. Collin (ed.), The Revised Statutes of the State of New York, Vol. I l l (New Y o r k : Banks and Bros., 1896), p. 2657. 91 John Swinton's

Paper,

October 18, 1885.

28

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

of hostility to members of trade organizations and his employment of non-union or 'rat' labor and ostracism of Union men." The protest was ineffective, according to Swinton, because all the New Y o r k candidates for the United States Senate were "enemies of organized labor," and the greater part of the New Y o r k Senate did not care " even a snap for the ' voice of labor.' " 92 The few labor sympathizers in the legislature voted as " a unit on all measures affecting the welfare of the masses." 93 State labor organizations announced that "the workingmcn are no longer to be fooled by party shibboleths, but will hold every individual legislator strictly to account." 94 That legislators respected labor's pressure was made clear in 1892, when several of them objected to the Workingmen's Assembly sponsorship of two independent labor nominees for the Assembly. The regular party people argued that there was no point in advocating labor legislation only to have labor candidates nominated against them at the next election.95 In the late 'nineties, pressure on the Legislature was continued by the Workingmen's Federation which objected to the practice of placing men from the rural districts in charge of committees to which proposed labor laws were referred. It was contended that " men coming from rural districts . . . do not sympathize with members of organized labor . . . and their opposition to labor measures is largely due to their ignorance of the just demands of workingmen." 96 The influence of corporate interests in shaping legislation was also protested. Bills of large corporations were put through promptly, according to the Workingmen's Federation, while labor bills were delayed until the close of the session and then presented with amendments as 92 Ibid., January 4, 1885. 93 Ibid., March 1, 1885. 94 Ibid. 95 Groat, Trade

Unions and the Law in New

York, pp. 27-28.

96 Workingmen's Federation of the State of N e w York, Report of Proceedings of the Second Annual Convention, January 10 to 14, 1899 (Schenectady, N e w York: Toiler Print, 1899), p. 21.

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR SCENE

2g

to be " entirely objectionable to representatives of the workingmen." 97 It was the sentiment of the Federation that " our legislative enemies should be made to feel our power to punish, and our legislative friends should with equal force be made to feel our friendship." 98 T o better effect this policy, a committee of the Federation reported as unsatisfactory the existing system of classifying legislators under such categories as " roll of honor," " favorable mention," " lukewarm," and " blacklist." T h i s system caused a great deal of confusion in making up the record, and some unintentional mistakes were made. The committee proposed a simple classification to the end that laboring men might clearly distinguish between enemies and friends. 99 T h e President of the Workingmen's Federation, in his address to the Albany convention in 1899, recommended that the record of legislators, with their votes on labor measures, be printed. This would relieve the organization's secretary of voluminous correspondence in reply to queries as to how the record was made and on what bills. He further urged that the convention meet annually, before the November elections, so that the views of candidates on labor legislation could be determined before the people went to the polls. If this were done, the Federation president said, the trade unionist would be strengthened, proper measures would have been taken to support labor's friends and defeat its enemies, and those having an unfavorable record would be remembered when they asked for labor's suffrage in order to misrepresent labor for two years more. 100 97 Ibid. 98 Ibid., p. 22. 99 Ibid. 100 Ibid., pp. 50-52; Fairchild, The Factory Legislation of the State of New York, pp. 35-36; Groat,, op. cit., p. 37. A common by-word among certain assemblymen was that in case you wished to be reported favorably to the working people, all you had to do was to pay the price. This was shown to be a groundless rumor by an investigating committee of the convention (Workingmen's Federation of the State of New York. op. cit., p. 11).

30

THEODORE ROOSEVELT A N D

LABOR

T h e activity of State labor organizations in the 'eighties and 'nineties was evidenced by the introduction into the Legislature of a large number of labor bills. A s the turn of the century approached, more of these were enacted. Governors, during the period, showed an awareness of labor's political strength by offering an increased number of State positions to labor men or men approved by working class leaders. 101 Closer attention was paid by officials to the wishes of labor leaders, and they were invited to serve on prominent civic committees. 102 Where labor men were in danger of losing State positions, as in the Bureau of Labor Statistics, labor leaders intervened. 103 If employers with political ambitions got out of hand, labor threatened punishment at the polls. 104 In still other cases, members of labor organizations were elected to municipal and state legislative bodies. 106 During the 'nineties social settlements took root in New Y o r k City. T h e first created in the United States was the University Settlement, which was founded in N e w Y o r k City in 1887. 106 By 1900 there were thirty social settlement houses in New Y o r k City, and t w o in Buffalo. They were composed of groups of high-minded, educated persons, who made their homes in thickly populated localities for the purpose of enlightening the people on all subjects pertaining to the general welfare. Supported by funds contributed by individuals, or by associations organized for the purpose of engaging in welfare work, they 101 Groat, op. cit., p. 38; Cigar Makers' Official Journal, March, 1885, p. 6. 102 See Gompers to Governor Levi P. Morton, May 1, 1896; to Mayor William L. Strong, March 2, 1897, Gompers Papers. 103 See Gompers to J. R. Dunn, January 27, 1896, Gompers Papers. 104 See Gompers to James O'Connell, January 29, 1896, Gompers Papers. 105 Workingmen's Federation of the State of N e w York, op. cit., p. 51. 106 See "University Settlement Society" ( A typewritten MS. in the Roosevelt Papers, Library of Congress, filed under " R " in the Governor's Private Letters, Vol. I V ; probably written by James B. Reynolds, headworker of the organization).

THE

NEW

YORK LABOR S C E N E

31 107

were cordial in their attitude toward trade unions. The settlements often assisted in the formation of unions and sought to increase mutual understanding between employer and employee.108 They took an active part in pushing social reform legislation, but refrained from activity when measures before the New York Legislature were of interest to labor alone. There were, however, no important cases in which labor and the settlements antagonized each other.109 The public's attention was attracted to the labor problem most forcibly when workers went on strike. When this occurred wellmeaning people discussed the controversy and expressed their sympathy. Organized labor maintained public interest by holding mass meetings and union gatherings. Attempts were made to win over the Legislature by passing resolutions which were sent to Albany by the State federations.110 Seldom, if ever, wrote Gompers, did Congress or the State legislature enact labor laws without the determined demand brought about by trade unionists.111 He believed that if all factions in the labor movement were united, the pressure on the major parties would be irresistible. Union wreckers in New York would be frustrated, if the State organization of the American Federation of Labor united with the Central Labor Union of New York City.112 He looked forward to a united labor movement, but discouraged affiliation with the mixed assemblies of the Knights of Labor. He maintained that " it was as much 107 The financial condition of the settlements was sometimes precarious. See, for example, Henry Hoh to Seth Low, June 13, 1895, Seth Low Papers, Columbia University; hereafter cited as Low Papers. 108 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: 1900, pp. 247-52; N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Bulletin, December, 1900, pp. 269, 296-98, 308. 109 Fairchild, The Factory 28-31.

Legislation

of the State of New

York,

pp.

110 See Gompers to H. L. Wagner, November 4, 1896, Gompers Papers. 111 Letter to L. Berliner, September 25, 1896, Gompers Papers. 112 Gompers to William Ferguson, May 13, 1896; to Henry Weisman, May 13, 1896, Gompers Papers.

32

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND

LABOR

the duty of the national trade union to belong to the family of trade unions under the banner of the American Federation of Labor as it was for a local union to attach itself to its national union, or a wageworker to belong to the local of his trade. 118 Had the degree of unity in labor's ranks been greater, there doubtless would have been a greater record of accomplishment by the end of the nineteenth century. Squabbles were aggravated by the large numbers of workers who moved in and out of labor organizations in masses. They joined when a strike began, but afterwards failed to see the necessity of paying dues to keep up their membership.114 Even while preparing for a strike, workers failed to see the necessity for high dues. They were deaf to those who counseled, " high dues means a strong Union; a strong Union means higher wages and less fears of reductions." 118 In the strong building trades unions, dues were only three dollars to eight dollars and eighty-four cents a year per member. This included payment for benevolent purposes. 116 T o achieve a greater degree of unity in the ranks of organized labor, members were repeatedly warned against the purchase of clothing and other items " made by unfair work people." 1 1 7 The first union label was adopted by the Cigar Makers' International Union at its convention in 1890. Within a decade, thirty-seven national and international unions had adopted labels. Workers were urged to " look out and remember " that barber shops, cutlery stores, knife grinders, coal yards, cigar boxes, and various other stores and products had to display a union label. 118 The union label became so effective that it was counterfeited by unfair employers.119 The New York Legislature, in 1889, passed 113Gompers to John Phillips, March 18, 1896, Gompers Papers. 114 U. S. Industrial Commission, Report on... Digest, 186.

Capital and Labor

115 John Swinton's Paper, November 9, 1884. 116 Ibid., November 30, 1884. 117 James Duncan to D. C. Hogan, March 12, 1895, Gompers Papers. 118 The Central Labor Union Review, January, 1888, p. 31. 119 U . S. Industrial Commission, op. cit., VII, Digest, 105.

VII,

THE

NEW

YORK

LABOR SCENE

33

a law protecting union labels by permitting unions to sue and obtain injunctions against imitators.120 The label on each box of cigars made by union members informed buyers that members of the Cigar Makers' International Union were " opposed to inferior, rat-shop, coolie, prison, or filthy tenement house workmanship. Therefore, we recommend these cigars to all smokers throughout the world." 1 2 1 Union leaders believed that the labels played a very important part in minimizing the sweatshop system in several industries.122 In an effort to rally public support, organized workers maintained a labor press. By 1896, more than two hundred papers published in the United States were issued directly by the organizations of labor, and were owned, controlled, and edited by them.123 Of these, about fifty were trade papers, issued by the national union of a particular trade; the remainder being issued by central labor bodies of cities or states. Most of the papers were published weekly, some daily, and others monthly.124 A few daily newspapers in New York City reported labor news fairly. The Daily Press, a one-cent morning newspaper, which contested the leadership of the Tribune in the early 'nineties, and the Morning Journal were prominent in this respect.125 The World, too, was friendly to labor. Papers, other than trade union journals, which were distinctly pro-labor, were the socialist Volks Zeitung and the Irish World. The latter was 120 New York Laws, 1889, chap. 385, in Clarence P. Birdseye (ed.), The Revised Statutes, Codes, and General Laws of the State of New York, Vol. I l l ( N e w York: Baker, Voorhis and Co., 1891), p. 3113. 121 Quoted in U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, Report... on... Labor and Capital, 276. 122 Gompers to H. L. Wagner, November 4, 1806, Gompers Papers. 123 Ibid., November 5, 1896. 124 Ibid. 125 Statement in publication of District Assembly 49, Knights of Labor, 1888 (pamphlet in library of Rand School, N e w York City), n. p.; Frank L. Mott, American Journalism ( N e w York: The Macmillan Co., 1941), p. 434n-

34

THEODORE

ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

dailies. 126

the largest of the radical A weekly, which enjoyed a short but spirited existence in N e w Y o r k City, was John Swinton's Paper (1883-1887). Swinton gave up a lucrative editorial post with the New York Sun, because he could not continue to g o along with a paper which he considered venal. His weekly was hailed by the commercial press as one which would be sure to enliven the city with its stinging commentaries on current events. 127 Though a friend and admirer of K a r l M a r x , Swinton was not a socialist. 128 H e staunchly supported labor's fight for improved working conditions. His abusive attacks on unfair employers and opponents of labor legislation reflected the growing irritability of the working class. But the division within labor's ranks made it impossible for him to steer a middle course. H e failed to gain the complete backing of organized labor, and his paper collapsed with his personal fortune. 129 T h e year 1887, during which the Knights of Labor plunged toward oblivion, marked the collapse of many labor papers. 130 In the aggregate the circulation of the nation's labor press was large, and it was often quoted by the commercial newspapers. 131 Wherever possible, leading intellectuals with pro-labor orientations were encouraged to contribute articles to labor periodicals. 132 T h e labor press emphasized the growth of trade unionism and the regular system of sick and death benefits which nearly all unions offered. 1 3 3 126 U . S . Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, op.

cit.,

I, 243-44127 Quotations from the press, in John Swinton's 128 " John Swinton," Dictionary 129 Ibid.; 130 The of Labor the years of Labor

of American

Paper, October 21, 1883.

Biography,

X V I I I , 252.

John Swinton' Paper, 1887, passim.

Central Labor Union Review, January, 1888, p. 31. T h e Knights participated in many poorly planned and unsuccessful strikes in 1886-87. T h e membership fell off rapidly ( S e e Commons, History in the V. S., I I , 4:3-29, esp. 423, n. 77).

131 Gompers to H . L . W a g n e r , November 5, 1896, Gompers Papers. 132 McBride to J o h n R . Commons, October 13, 1895, Gompers Papers; Gompers to F e l i x Adler, January 2, 1896, Gompers Papers. 133 Gompers to Carroll D. W r i g h t , March 4, 1696, Gompers Papers.

T H E N E W YORK L A B O R S C E N E

35

The economic development of the country during the last two decades of the nineteenth century was unparalleled, and nowhere were the effects of that development more quickly, deeply, and diversely felt than in New York State. The number at work in the Empire State was a larger proportion of the population than in the rest of the country.134 It became the greatest center of organized labor. With nearly one-tenth of the total population and over one-sixth of the total wealth of the United States, New York was the " chief nerve center of the most active national body in the world." 134 134 Leo Wolman, "Labor in New York State," History of the State of New York, Vol. X, ed. by Alexander C. Flick (New Y o r k : Columbia University Press, 1937), p. 67. 135 New York State Bureau of Labor Statistics, Tenth Annual 1692 (Albany, 1893), p. 6.

Report:

CHAPTER II LABOR VERSUS CAPITAL W e must assert and vindicate the right to strike against all quibbling and illogical courts and against more frank and blunt assailants. 1 SAMUEL

I.

LABOR

GOMPEKS.

LEGISLATION

LABOR'S demands were as numerous as the abuses which beset the workingman. T o remedy the abuses was the goal of all labor organizations. T h e y differed only as to the method of accomplishment, a " slight d e t a i l " which delayed progress for an indeterminate time. It was agreed by such N e w Y o r k organizations as the Central Labor Union, the Workingmen's Assembly, District A s sembly 49 of the Knights of Labor, the New Y o r k State Federation of Labor, and lesser organizations that the workers' standard of living could be raised if laws were passed to prohibit child labor under fourteen years of age, compel attendance of children at school, forbid the importation of foreign workers under contract, exclude Chinese, abolish contract convict labor, repeal conspiracy and tramp laws, and provide for equal pay for equal work for both sexes. W a g e and hour conditions could be improved by the extension and enforcement of the eighthour law for public employees, the passage of first lien laws for workingmen's wages, payment

of wages weekly in lawful

money, and the abolition of company stores. Labor organizations were also agreed that building workers required life and limb laws for their protection, that tenements and mines required frequent inspection, that government bureaus of labor 1 Statement in U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Report of a Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, March 23, 1900, Senate Report 58, 56th Congress, 2nd Session (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1902), p. 57.

36

LABOR VERSUS

CAPITAL

37

statistics and printing were needed, and that police interference with workers' meetings should be eliminated. 2 Those demands which were met by legislative action in the 'eighties were enforced with very moderate enthusiasm. Hence, many of the demands of the 'nineties had a familiar ring. T o the list might be added pressure for an employers' liability law, minimum wage legislation, the establishment of the prevailing rate of wages, prohibition of dangerous factory work for women and minors, reduction of the legal rate of interest, reduction of fares on street cars, and the discharge of bills from committees within thirty days in order to prevent the holding up of labor bills. 3 This compilation does not exhaust the number of proposals for reform but indicates their scope and variety. Among the more socialistic demands of the period were those for public ownership and operation of all means of transportation, public ownership of telegraph and telephone systems, and of gas, electric and water plants. Other demands were for the single tax and a more equitable distribution of wealth in the interests of the toilers. 4 With a wealth of labor bills from which to choose, the three rival central organizations in New York State 5 competed for 2 See John Swinton's Paper, October 14, 21, 1883, January 13, 20, August 3, 17, 1884, February 1, 1885, January 17, 1886; New York Tribune, September 13, 1882; U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Education and Labor, Report... on... Labor and Capital, I, 813, 819; Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions of the U. S . A. and Canada, Report of the First Annual Session: 1881, pp. 3-4; Cigar Makers' Official Journal, February, 1883, p. 7 ; The Central Labor Union Review, January, 1888, p. 3 1 ; Gompers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor, I, 170, 225; Richard T . Ely, The Labor Movement in America (New Y o r k : Thomas G. Crowell and Co., 1886), p. 3 4 s ; Commons, History of Labor in the United States, II, 242. 3 Workingmen's Federation of the State of New York, Report of the Proceedings of the Second Annual Convention: 1899, pp. 26, 28, 33, 34, 36, 49. 50. 4 Adelphon Kryptos (English translation), p. 2 ; John Svnnton's Paper, October 21, 1883; Groat, Trade Unions and the Latv in New York State, p. 42; Peter A. Speek, The Single Tax and the Labor Movement, p. 252. 5 The three organizations were the Workingmen's Assembly, the New York State Federation of Labor, and the State Assembly of the Knights of Labor.

38

THEODORE ROOSEVELT A N D

LABOR

the ears of lawmakers. They sometimes poured in upon the legislature fifty labor bills at a single session. E v e n the best intentioned legislators found it impossible to please all labor lobbyists. A s a result, relatively little effective legislation was passed. T h e welter of confusion was added to by people not connected with working class organizations who introduced bills dealing with labor interests in the hope of gaining a lien on labor's affections. More than one-half of the labor bills introduced were for the purpose of giving the introducer political prestige in his district. T h e confusion in presenting these bills was clarified somewhat by the amalgamation of t w o of the rival pressure groups in 1897.® T h e newly created Workingmen's Federation announced its intention of placing the " official seal of condemnation on fake labor bills." 1 Featured in trade union programs during the period was the demand for shorter hours, which often took the form of the eight-hour day. Trade unionists saw the eight-hour day as a means of reducing unemployment, increasing consumption of goods, and obtaining much needed leisure time for reading and thinking. 8 These were seen to be the benefits of any movement toward shorter hours in industry." Opponents of shorter hours claimed that it would encourage drunkenness. 10 Proponents replied that the eight-hour day was the " greatest temperance advocate." T h e y attributed the large increase in attendance at evening schools to the shortening of the working day. 1 1 A s to the bearing of the eight-hour day on unemployment, critics pointed to wide unemployment in Australia, during the 'nineties, 6 Workingmen's Federation, op. cit., p. 22; Groat, op. cit., 32-36. 7 Workingmen's Federation, op. cit., p. 23. 8 John Swinton's Paper, December 20, 1885; Statement by Samuel Gompers, quoted in Public Opinion, X X I V ( J a n u a r y 6, 1856), 15; N . Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: 1900, p. 75; H e n r y D. Lloyd, Men, The Workers ( N e w Y o r k : Doubleday, P a g e and Co., 1909), p. 23. 9 Cigar Makers' Official Journal, September, 1883, p. 10. 10 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, op. cit., p. 70. 11 Ibid., pp. 70-71.

LABOR VERSUS

CAPITAL

39

despite the existence of the eight-hour day. 1 2 Defenders did not propose shorter hours as a panacea for all economic woes. They did deny the charge that it would mean a decline in production. The experience of Massachusetts textile workers was cited. Workers in Massachusetts, on a ten-hour basis, produced " as much per man or per loom or per spindle . . . as other states with eleven and more hours." 1 3 The shorter hours campaign got under way in New Y o r k in 1885. The following year, " there was scarcely a union in New York City that did not hold a special eight-hour meeting and follow it by constant educational discussion. . . Even the street car drivers who had worked interminable hours demanded twelve as the limit." 1 4 Agreements were submitted to employers in which they were asked to promise to restrict working hours to eight per day. The workers, for their part, agreed " not to ask any increase on the present rate of wages until such time as the same is warranted by the condition of the trade." 1 8 May i , 1886 was generally recognized as the date on which the eight-hour day was to be established by industry. The May Day meeting in New York City on that day strengthened all who attended in their determination to establish the eight-hour day. 1 8 T o help the eight-hour movement, about eighty thousand workers participated in strikes in Chicago, and forty-five thousand workers struck in New Y o r k City. 1 7 Among those who profited by the movement in New York City were the strongly unionized building trade workers, cigarmakers, piano makers, and machinists. 18 F o r the greater part of the country, the strikes in 1886 were unsuccessful. No one was anxious to be identified 12 Ibid., p. 77. 13 Ibid., pp. 52-53. 14 Gompers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor, I, 292. 15 Ibid., p. 291. 16 Ibid., p. 293. 17 Commons, History of Labor in the United States, II, 385. 18 Ibid., pp. 384-85-

40

THEODORE

ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

as having set the date on which the " millennium " w a s to arrive. 1 8 In the 'nineties there w a s a significant reduction of hours from ten to nine per day in N e w Y o r k State. 20 In N e w Y o r k City, in 1899, almost one-half of the employees worked nine hours a day or less. Conditions in the metropolis were far better than in the remainder of the State, where only fourteen per cent of the workers were on a nine-hour basis. E v e n in those N e w Y o r k City industries which were unorganized, the very fact that eight or nine hours was enjoyed by many union men had the effect of improving conditions. 21 T h e State, too, joined in the shorter hours movement. Its eight-hour law for laborers 011 public workers, strengthened in 1899, was regarded as the most advanced of any on the statute books of a state. T h e law prohibited all agreements to work overtime, even at an increased compensation. 22 Special groups of workers were singled out for protection by the State. 2 3 In 1893, ^

w a s

made unlawful for brickyard owners

19 On May 4, 1686, a bomb was thrown into a squad of policemen sent to break up a labor meeting at Haymarket Square. The incident was seized upon to discredit the shorter hours movement. It is doubtful, however, that the bomb was responsible for the failure of four-fifths of the strikes for the eight hour day. See David, The History of the Haytnarket Affair, PP. 535. 539-40. 20 The decrease in the number of working hours in major industries was due, in the opinion of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, to the united action of workingmen in their respective industries. The Commissioner asserted that " before hours can be shortened... the competing employers must come to an agreement among themselves; and this is something for which no inducement exists except the pressure of their employees." N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: 1900, pp. .4-5, 10. 21 Ibid., pp. 12-13, 15-16. 22 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, March, 1900, pp. 35, 37. For Roosevelt's role in the passage of the law, infra, pp. 227-30. 23 For Roosevelt's part in the attempt to regulate tenement house manufacturing, and his attitude toward the abolition of convict contract labor, infra, pp. 80-2, 86-8, 93-5, 191-203.

LABOR

VERSUS

CAPITAL

41

to require employees to work more than ten hours in any day. 24 In 1900, the labor of drug clerks was reduced to seventy hours per week. 25 The State also sought to regulate the working hours of street car drivers and conductors. Between 1887 and 1895, the Legislature was persuaded to enact laws which aimed to remedy bad working conditions of surface car railroad workers. The new legislation provided that ten hours of labor within twelve consecutive hours should constitute a day's work on street railways operated by corporations in all cities of more than one hundred thousand population. This was extended to steam railroads. Railroads were also made responsible for working conditions maintained by their contractors. 28 The turn of the century found conditions but slightly improved, despite the passage of the ten-hour law in 1887. The circumstances of bakers were especially grievous. Totally lacking in successful organization until the late 'nineties, they were employed by petty tradesmen for sixteen hours daily at four and five dollars a week. 27 The majority of the bakeshops were located in damp, miasmic, disease-breeding cellars, unfit as workshops for human beings and an absolute danger to the consuming public.28 According to the New Y o r k Factory Inspector, the shops were a " mass of filth," with bugs of every 24 N . Y . S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth Annual Report: pp. 95-96.

1900,

25 N . Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, June, 1900, pp. 84-85. For Roosevelt's role in the passage of drug clerks' legislation, infra, pp. 230-33. 26 T h i s w a s an effort to curb the padrone system. F o r its with the Croton D a m strike, injra, p. 249. 27 John Swinton's

Paper,

connection

J a n u a r y 13, 1884.

28 H e n r y W e i s m a n ( e d . ) , The Conditions of the Bakeshops and the Operative Bakers of New York, Brooklyn, and Vicinity ( N e w Y o r k : N . Y. S. Council of the Bakers' and Confectioners' International U n i o n of America, 1895), p. 3 ; N . Y. S. Bureau of Labor Stati€tics, Twelfth Annual Report: 1894, p. 8. T h e condition of bakeshops and bakery workers in European cities was much the same. Cellars were used for bakeries because of cheap rent and their adaptability to the building of ovens ( N e w Y o r k State Senate, Preliminary Report of the Factory Investigating Commission Jerning Board for the Year 1895 ( N e w York: Clarence S. Nathan Press, 1896), pp. 2, 5, 6. 55 The powerful Typographical Union No. 6 of N e w York City insisted upon and secured equal pay for women printers. The president of the union, testifying before the United States Industrial Commission, in 1899, said: " N e w York employing printers consider that one thousand ems on a galley brought to them by a woman is worth just as much to them as the same amount by a m a n . . . . " (Stevens, New York Typographical Union No. 6, p. 440). 56 Wolman, " Labor in N e w York State," op. cit., p. 78. 57 N. Y. S. Assembly, Report...

Female Labor in the City of New

York,

II, I93I58 Wolman, " Labor in New York State," op. cit., p. 79. 59 Don D. Lescohier and Elizabeth Brandeis, History of Labor in the United States, 1896-193?, Vol. I l l ( N e w York: The Macmillan Co., 1935),

48

THEODORE

ROOSEVELT

AND

LABOR

time there was an expansion of legislative activity inspired by labor pressure and increased industrial activity. B y the close of the century twenty-eight states provided some kind of protection for child workers. T h e typical child labor law was limited in scope to children employed in manufacturing, set a minimum age of twelve years, fixed maximum hours at ten per day, contained some sketchy requirements as to school attendance and literacy, and accepted the affidavit of the parent as proof that the child had reached the legal minimum age. 60 Sixteen states passed laws restricting the hours of women's work, but most of them were unenforceable. T h e typical law made ten hours the daily maximum and was limited to women employed in manufacturing. 61 More than twenty states enacted laws limiting the hours of labor on public works. The majority of these made eight hours the legal working day; but almost all of them permitted contracts for longer hours. 6 2 Georgia " mercifully " limited the day " to the hours between sunrise and sunset." 6 3 Much of the state labor law belonged to the " pre-enforcement stage " of labor legislation. There were those laws which set up standards which were to prevail only if employers and workers did not make an agreement to the contrary. Other laws made it possible for the worker to maintain his rights only if he brought civil suit against his employer. Even more widespread was the statute which made violation of the law by an employer punishable by fine, but left it to the worker, or some other interested party, to initiate proceedings by informing the prosecuting attorney. 64 P- 3991 See U. S. Bureau of Labor, The First Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, March, 1886 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1886), Appendix C, p. 457 ff.; N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin, March, 1900, pp. 35-4360 Lescohier and Brandeis, op. cit., Ill, 404-05. 61 Ibid., pp. 457-59, 466, n43; N. Y . S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, teenth Annual Report: 7900, pp. 6-7.

Eigh-

62 Lescohier and Brandeis, op. cit., Ill, 541-43. 63 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Eighteenth p. 85. 64 Lescohier and Brandeis, op. cit.. Ill, 626-27.

Annual Report:

/poo,

LABOR VERSUS

49

CAPITAL

B y the close of the century, " N e w Y o r k was well to the front " in the enactment of labor laws. Every legislative measure calculated to improve the conditions of the worker had been stubbornly resisted. 66 W h e n labor pressure was relaxed, the few labor bills before the Legislature were " flagrantly neglected." 86 Such gains as there were appeared only after years of persistent agitation and effort. Only by the slow process of continuous amendment were any of the laws made effective; so that labor legislation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, appeared in history " as the gift of the right hand which the left constantly withholds, taking from it as much as it can clutch or substituting for it worthless counterfeits." 67 2. T h e

Courts

Where labor did successfully hurdle the legislative barrier, the courts remained to weaken working class gains. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century labor decisions became really numerous, 68 with judges tending to construe the most effectively worded statutes as " class legislation " and unwarranted interference with freedom of contract. 69 In New Y o r k , surface and elevated railways violated the tenhour law with impunity. The Court of Appeals ruled that such violation could not dissolve the corporation's charter, since the statute provided that punishment was to fall upon the officers and agents as individuals and not upon the company acting in its corporate capacity. 70 65 N. Y . S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Tenth PP. 11, 1366 John Swinton's Paper, March 20, 1887.

Annual

Report:

1892,

67 N. Y. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Tenth Annual Report: 1892, p. 13. 68 George G. Groat, Attitude of American Courts in Labor Cases, Vol.X L I I I of Columbia Studies in History, Economics and Public Law (New Y o r k : Columbia University Press, 1911), p. 7. 69 Lescohier and Brandeis, op. cit., I l l , 399. 70People v. Atlantic Avenue Railway Company, 125 N. Y . 513 (1891), in U. S. Bureau of Labor, Second Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor. Labor Laws of the U. S., p. 1313.

5