134

what they claimed were extortionate prices.' As the coal was marketed in San Francisco, they appealed to their fellow tradeunionists in that city for assistance, and the Federated Trades Council at once acknowledged the claim. As was customary, the case was referred to the executive committee for investigation and an attempt at peaceful settlement. But the committee sent to interview members of the firm in San Francisco were refused an audience, on the ground that the firm had declined to meet a committee of the miners, and intended to deal with its employees only as individuals, 135

Never before had the San Francisco trade-unionist met with the denial of the right to organize, and for the first time a committee of the Federated Trades Council was refused an audience. The contest was no longer merely an economic one, but was reenforced by stronger feelings of outraged pride, and the belief that questions of fundamental human rights were at stake. So the boycott was declared and for nearly two years, as long as the old Federated Trades continued its existence, it was pressed with the utmost vigor. Even after the discouraged miners had given up the contest, the San Francisco trade-unionists continued the fight.136

When the boycott was declared, steps were at once taken to present the case fully to the different unions of the city. These readily pledged their support, many of them appointing special committees to assist in its prosecution. The endorsement of a boycott generally meant that the individual members of the union were subject to a fine if they failed to observe it. A committee of seven members of the Federated Trades Council was appointed for the general supervision of the boycott, and they were soon permitted to employ a man who gave his entire time to watching the coal carts in order to discover the customers of Dunsmuir. At each meeting of the Council during the succeeding months different unions reported their successful efforts to persuade coal

134 Examiner, June 14, 1890, p. 2.

135 Coast Seamen's Journal, June 25, 1890.

136 In November, 1891, the strike was declared off, but in January, 1892, we find the executive committee of the Federated Trades recommending an additional per capita tax of $1 per delegate for the prosecution of this boycott. (Coast Seamen's Journal, Minutes of Federated Trades for November 13, 27, 1891; January 8, 1892.)

dealers, factories, hotels, saloons, restaurants, laundries, and private parties to withdraw custom from the offending firm. At one time three men were employed in ferreting out persons using the coal. The Stockton Federated Trades were called upon to enforce the boycott against customers in that place. Circulars were sent out warning members of the unions and possible customers of the boycott; on October 30, 1891, it was reported that five thousand of these circulars had just been sent to the retail liquor dealers.137 Those who persistently refused to comply with the requests to withdraw their patronage from the offending firm were in turn subject to boycott. We find the barbers agreeing to withdraw their custom from a certain laundry in case it continued to use the boycotted coal. While no other boycott during this period received quite so much attention as this, its history shows the methods adopted in many other cases.

THE FIRST ORGANIZED OPPOSITION OF THE EMPLOYERS

The first contest between organizations of employers and employees was that between the Brewers' Protective Association and the brewery workmen beginning in 1888. The difficulty did not originate in California, but was part of a general movement of the United States Brewers' Association to maintain the open shop.138 On refusal of one of the breweries, called the United States Brewery, to comply with the contract to employ none but union men, a boycott was declared by the Federated Trades Council. Alfred Fuhrman, the general secretary of the brewery workmen, gives the following account of the methods used to make this boycott effective: "In order to enforce the boycott we issued circulars and had parades, and did anything that was lawful to win the fight. We appointed committees to wait on saloon-keepers, and they asked saloon-keepers not to use United States beer. We reminded the saloon-keepers of the fact that their patrons consisted principally of workingmen, and that it was the desire of the workingmen that they should not have scab beer there, and it would be a favor to labor to dispense with that

137 The account of this boycott is taken from the minutes of the Federated Trades Council published in the Coast Seamen's Journal and the Examiner, June, 1890, to January, 1892.

138 Fifth Biennial Report, Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 161.

beer and take union beer. Some of the saloon-keepers refused, and we got out circulars against them, and appointed men to stand on the streets and distribute the circulars, and persuade customers not to go into the saloons. We stationed guards around all the saloons we could, and tried to keep customers away by every lawful device." After eleven months of systematically enforced boycott, the brewery surrendered and unionized.13

The new strength of the more perfectly organized tradeunionism of this period is not only evident in the effectiveness of the boycott, but also in the support furnished to strikers. The ironmoulders' strike in 1890-1891, which was one of the most remarkable contests in the history of the California labor movement, is a good example of this ability of the labor organizations to collect the innumerable small contributions of large bodies of workingmen for the support of a strike against employers who command great accumulations of capital.

We have already noticed the organization of the Iron Trades Council in 1885. This federation was soon matched by an organization of the employers known as Engineers' and Foundrymen's Association. After making inquiries in eastern foundries and finding the wages less and conditions of work more severe than in California, this association gave notice that it would no longer observe the minimum wage, apprentice regulations, and prohibition of piece-work required by the California unions. This notice was soon followed by the discharge of eleven union men from the foundry of one of the members of the association. Thereupon, the moulders in the employ of all the firms of the Foundrymen's Association struck. Between a thousand and twelve hundred men were involved in the difficulty, though there were only two hundred and seventy-five of the moulders and their apprentices, 140

The moulders' union is said to have spent two hundred thousand dollars in this controversy.141 A portion of this was the regular strike benefit furnished by their International, but a

139 A full account of the difficulties with the breweries is given in the Fifth Biennial Report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, pp. 101-166. 140 Examiner, March 3, 1890. Full reports of the strike are given in the Examiner.

141 Labor Clarion, September 4, 1908, p. 34.

very large share was from the special donation of the different California trade-unions. Not only did the unions vote money from their treasuries, but there were also numerous benefit entertainments, and assessments of portions of the weekly earnings of members. For example, we find the Typographical Union donating one hundred dollars, and then agreeing to raise by assessment a weekly sum of eighty dollars. The iron workers all over the United States interested themselves in obtaining financial support, and also did all they could to prevent the enlistment of strike-breakers.

The employers found the bringing in of new men a most difficult and expensive undertaking. Every opportunity was seized to board the overland trains and persuade the strikebreakers to desert or turn back. They were hurried through Sacramento on special trains, or in well-guarded coaches, and instead of entering the city by the usual route, the men were transferred at some point outside the city, to steam launches and then landed secretly. Union men smuggled themselves into the parties made up in eastern cities, and persuaded the men to desert along the way. The union pickets surrounded the shops and watched for opportunities to entice the new men to desert. During the first nine months of the strike, about two hundred of the strike-breakers were returned to their eastern homes by the union. The newcomers were penned up in the foundries, and, as the months passed they naturally became homesick and ready to accept the standing offer of the ever-present picket to supply them with return tickets. But the employers persisted in their firm refusal to yield to the demands of the union, though the strike is estimated to have cost them millions of dollars. The moulders were obliged to yield most of the points for which they had contended, and in the hard times that followed the union was practically disbanded.14

142

FIRST EMPLOYERS' ASSOCIATION.

The employers now began to realize the necessity of completer organization, and in August, 1891, their first central body

142 Seventh Biennial Report, Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 146, reports a membership of 38-40 in this union from 1891-1896.

was formed. The Declaration of Principles indicates, that as originally planned, the Board of Manufacturers and Employers of California was formed for defense rather than aggression. It was declared that the policy of the board was not dictated by a spirit of aggression, but that its members would strive to prevent friction. The right of labor to organize was fully recognized, but the need of federations of employers to check those of labor was also maintained. While asserting that they would not refuse employment to members of labor organizations, the right to select their employees freely was insisted on. They declared that the arbitrary spirit shown by the unions in the absence of effective restraining power, and the frequent strikes and boycotts were dangerous to the industries of the community,143

The employers did not succeed in maintaining this mildly defensive attitude. A "Manifesto on the Boycott'" which they issued shows that they were deeply irritated and disposed to attribute the decline in business which began to be felt at this time to the influence of the unions. It is quite evident that they regarded the labor leaders as dangerous agitators who should be suppressed. A few extracts will show clearly their point of view: "The Board of Manufacturers and Employers of California believe that the time has come when a universal and systematic effort should be made to put an end to boycotts and the pernicious interference of trade-unions with the internal affairs of trade. Unless this be done, the already suffering industries of the city will soon become so badly handicapped as to be practically out of the race in the competition of the world. [A number of instances are cited where it is alleged that work has been sent East.] ... The firms in the Manufacturers' Association employ 40,000 people and pay $100,000 per day in wages. What if these plants go east?

"The manufacturers do not complain of wages. There is no desire to reduce them below the normal which must always remain the highest. If permitted to do business in peace the manufacturers could pay these wages and prosper. It is the element of uncertainty that kills. The labor leader seeks to control the men, and the manufacturer cannot manage his business to the best advantage. It is because the life of a business has heretofore been at the mercy of the boycott that the manufacturers have been afraid to launch into new undertakings, improve their plants, or push for new a venues of trade.

"The levying and agitation of a boycott is always harmful, not,

143 Fifth Biennial Report, Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 51.