This study was undertaken after five years spent in educational work among the wage-earners of San Francisco. I have tried to combine in it the scholarly interests of my University experiences, and the practical aims of a settlement worker. I feel that the California labor movement has attained the degree of development possible by the cruder methods, and that it has now reached a stage where greater knowledge and a more statesmanlike insight into the complex economic life of our age, are necessary for further growth. I hope that this exposition of legal principles determining the validity of past legislation will enable the trade-unionists of California to understand more clearly the legal status of their movement, and will prevent the waste of energy in securing the passage of unconstitutional measures, which has so frequently occurred during the earlier periods of trade-union activity. A knowledge of the long record of successes and failures of the past should help the cultivation of that patience, that willingness to work steadily through many discouragements for the attainment of completer justice for the masses, that have been necessary in all great democratic movements.

I am indebted to Professor A. C. Miller, of the University of California, for suggestions and encouragement at every stage of the work. Professor II. W. Farnam, of Yale University, has also read the book in manuscript. Professor C. C. Plehn, of the University of California, generously permitted me to use a large amount of material collected by his pupils. I am also indebted to Miss Eudora Garoutte, of the California History Department of the California State Library, for many useful references. The officers of the San Francisco labor organizations, particularly of the Labor Council, the Sailors' Union of the Pacific, and the Typographical Union, have been most courteous in allowing me access to records, and in answering questions. Mr. W. J. French, editor of the Labor Clarion, has assisted me in clearing up a number of obscure points. I wish to make particular acknowledgment of the valuable assistance I have received from Mr. Walter Macarthur, editor of the Coast Seamen's Journal. He has not only allowed me to make use of the many important

records of his office, which escaped the San Francisco fire of 1906, but has also assisted me by a generous expenditure of time and thought in the discussion of important phases of the work.

I have been permitted by the Academy of Pacific Coast History to use the Bancroft Library of the University of California. Its valuable newspaper files were of great assistance.

The undertaking of this piece of research was made possible by the Flood Fellowship in Economics which I held while engaged upon it, and by financial assistance received from the Carnegie Institution. This study was completed in December, 1908, and does not contain the decisions and legislation subsequent to that date.

LUCILE EAVES.

CHAPTER I.

THE SAN FRANCISCO LABOR MOVEMENT.1

REASONS FOR THE LEADERSHIP OF SAN FRANCISCO.

The leadership of the labor movement, not only of California but also of the Pacific Coast, has centered in San Francisco. This has not been due merely to the financial and numerical strength possible to the organizations of a great center of population. The unions of San Francisco have furnished able leaders and the initiative in forming organizations for the entire region west of the Rockies. At times her central bodies have been representative of the wage-workers of other portions of California, and of Oregon, Washington, and Nevada. A history of the varying aims and strength of the San Francisco labor movement furnishes the key to an understanding of the California labor legislation, as there are but few important measures for the protection of the wage-workers of the state which cannot be credited to the efforts of the organized workers of this great industrial center.

Many factors have combined to give San Francisco this tradeunion leadership in the West. Indeed, it might be safely asserted that these same causes tend, at the present time, to make this the chief stronghold of American trade-unionism. These factors may be described as:

1. Geographical factors, or the situation of San Francisco in its relations to the economic development of California.

2. The effects of the concentration of the population in the cities about San Francisco Bay.

3. The influence of the race elements composing the population.

1 This introductory sketch of the San Francisco labor movement was submitted as the author's doctor's dissertation in the Department of Sociology at Columbia University.

4. Historical factors that have promoted the development of trade-unionism.

Geographical Factors.

One has only to glance at a map of the Pacific Coast to realize the importance of this centrally located harbor, on a coast where the mountains crowd close to the oceanside, and where but few indentations permit a safe entrance for commerce. In the first great rush to the gold mines, a large part of the population of the state coming from other portions of the Union, and all of the foreigners, entered California by way of San Francisco. Supplies for the mining region were also first landed here and then reshipped to the interior points for distribution. The Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers emptying into San Francisco Bay were the two great natural highways making possible communication with the interior of the state. With the development of the agricultural resources of these rich interior valleys, San Francisco furnished the market for their products. The rapidly accumulating capital of the state found this the best place for investment in commercial and manufacturing enterprises. The rich came here to spend their money; the unemployed returned in search of new opportunities; this was the port of departure for the discouraged, or for those who hastened back to their families with what they considered a fair share of the wealth of the gold mines. Prior to the building of the overland railroads, during all of the important formative period, the economic life of the state centered in San Francisco.

Concentration of Population about San Francisco Bay.

These natural advantages have resulted in a concentration of the population of California in the cities grouped about San Francisco Bay. From 1870 to the present time, about one-third of the inhabitants of the state have been found in San Francisco and Alameda counties. A strong labor movement is possible only in a great center of population. Such a center has the large

2 The percentages of the population of the state living in San Francisco and Alameda counties at the different decades when the United States Census has been taken were as follows: 1860, 12%; 1870, 31%; 1880, 34.3%; 1890, 32.5%; 1900, 31.8%.

number of skilled artisans who form the more permanent organizations and furnish intelligent leadership. Numbers not only give courage and enthusiasm, but also supply the economic support that is necessary to enable any group of wage-workers to enter upon a successful contest with their employers.

This concentration of population has given San Francisco great influence in politics. The San Francisco vote has determined the state elections and was an important influence in national politics during the years when presidential elections were closely contested. As will be shown in the later discussion of the political activities of the trade-unions, the older political parties have never had a strong hold here. Whenever conditions are such that the large body of voters found in the labor organizations unite to obtain some object, they may hold the balance of power in any election. From early days politicians have found it necessary to court the favor of the San Francisco tradeunionist.

3

Race Elements.

Although San Francisco is one of the large cities of the United States in which three-fourths of the citizens are of alien parentage, its population is composed of race elements quite different from those of the large cities of the East. The accompanying table shows the numbers of foreign males of specified nationalities in California, estimated on the basis of the per cent. of males among the foreign born at each decade:*

British

660

1850 21,802 20,439 93. 2,280 4,528 2,721 1,438 3,854 212 1860 146,528 116,934 79. 26,187 18,638 17,100 6,145 9,085 2,216 22,385 1870 209,831 150,058 76. 41,396 26,524 22,579 6,132 8,677 3,542 45,429 1880 292,874 208,526 71. 44,703 38,326 30,198 6,780 11,809 5,351 71,328 1890 366,309 252,525 68. 42,934 49,843 41,811 8,061 6,010 10,537 69,382 1900 367,240 240,237 65. 28,909 51,572 47,092 7,967 6,318 14,805 42,297

3 The cities in the United States in which the census of 1900 shows a high percentage of residents of foreign parentage are: Milwaukee, 82.7%; Chicago, 77.4%; New York, 76.9%; Cleveland, 75.6%; San Francisco, 75.2%; Boston, 72.2%.

This table was compiled by Mrs. M. R. Coolidge, for use in her study of the Chinese. (New York, 1909.) She has kindly permitted me to use it.