world, and all buyers of printed matter, in an endeavor to throw orders into union offices and educate the general public as to the justness of our cause. Many methods have been carried out successfully and have been the means of increasing the profits and output of union shops, but there is still left in many localities that class of business men who are more or less obstinate and must be handled with "kid gloves," or shown by more serious yet tender methods than those already tried. The question now confronts us as to "How can we reach and land this class?" We need their business, and get it we must, and will get it if the membership puts its shoulders to the wheel and just makes one mighty effort. Results will follow in rapid succession when this is done and ours will be a life of content.

The label sticker accomplished wonders; blotters helped to hold the attention and keep our cause before the business man; form letters served their purpose, but none of these have reached the class we are now trying to educate, so we must look in another direction to solve the problem.

The wise ones say: "You can catch more flies with sugar than you can with vinegar." There is no doubt more truth in these words than we admit, and we are forced to confess that the present generation leans toward flattery and likes to be jollied along and "sugared" to a great extent.

The writer but a few weeks ago read a communication from one of the largest advertisers in the country in reply to a request that the concern patronize union printshops. The concern admits that they received thousands of pieces of printed matter with stickers attached, but none of the senders had courage enough to attach their signature except the party now making the request.

In the first place, the stickers in the case of this concern only threw the concern farther away from us, while the letter of "sugar," which was the only one they received, brought forth a gentlemanly reply and has opened a way by which results may be obtained. The writer does not believe the sticker should be abolished, but that it should be used where it will do the most good.

We must be more progressive in our label campaigns and employ up-to-date methods. In the jurisdiction of No. 57 the label committee has abandoned that title and, instead, organized itself into what it terms the "League of Progressive Printers." This may seem strange to some of the membership, but, nevertheless, it has proven a success thus far, and the results obtained are greater in proportion than those obtained under the title of "Label Committee."

The method of the "League of Progressive Printers" is simple, yet requires considerable more labor and attention than the former label committee.

The form letter is a thing of the past as far as No. 57 and its label work is concerned, and, instead, the personal letter signed by individual members of the league has been substituted. A list of merchants has been printed and classified; this list was sent to each chapel in the city, and the chairmen instructed to mark every merchant in the list who has work done in union shops; after this has

been done the list is again classified under two heads: "Patrons of Union Shops" and "Patrons of Non-Union Shops."

It is not the purpose of the league to disturb or run chances of jeopardizing those merchants under the first head, but those merchants whose names appear in the "non-union" columns shall be the object of our labors. Letters of "sugar," each one different and to suit the particular fancy, will be written to every merchant in the city who patronizes non-union shops, and will be signed by the member who writes it, making it personal in every respect. In many cases, personal calls will be made upon the merchant or merchants and our cause put before them in a heart-to-heart talk; this will be continued from time to time until we have reached our goal and the union printshops filled to the brim with orders from the ranks of our antagonists.

As a matter of fact, it is not the intention of the league to be selfish in its efforts and only confine its work to local concerns, but it is the purpose of the league to do everything possible to assist in the general campaign that is being directed by the International officers from its headquarters.

The writer of this article is of the belief that a more general discussion of the different phases of the label campaign should be carried on through the columns of THE JOURNAL, so that all might profit by the successes achieved in different localities, and the different committees would be in closer touch with the work being done throughout the jurisdiction.

Select your object, then fight "your head off" until you get it. Every little bit helps. Dayton, Ohio.

C. O. LERCH.

AN IMPENDING CALAMITY.

That the scripture might be fulfilled (?) America is threatened (December JOURNAL, page 646) with the fate that "a superior cosmic energy-a teleological force of disintegration-working upon a heterogeneous nation, would construct from the heteroclitical disjecta membra a distinct language" -have you got it? For the sake of the unborn, all I can say is, I hope not. Today we have troubles not a few, but a language constructed out of "heteroclitical disjecta membra" (which I suppose might be freely translated "tailings" or "queer scraps") would be something that I don't think posterity could put up with.

As a matter of fact, the "art preservative" is that which holds dialects, corruptions, etc., in check, although it is powerless to prevent curious transitions in meaning. A more or less distinguished contributor to periodical literature has recently argued in favor of the ancient liberty or license of spelling, thereby going the Carnegie school one better or worse-but, I trow, we have no reason to fear that "spelling in any old way" will be added unto us "for our sins."

Of course the "art preservative" has a strong tendency to maintain the "status quo," but doubtless we shall in time have a workable universal language. W. MATCHES.

Brooklyn, N. Y.

TWO SIDES TO PRIORITY COMMERCIAL AND HUMANITARIAN.

"Has the last word been spoken on the priority law?" asks Frank C. Wells in the November JOURNAL as a prelude to numerous words that surely can not be allowed to stand as the last.

Admitting the law had a "natural" origin, he says it has "forced foremen, disregarding all personal considerations and all questions of efficiency, to look upon union men in good standing as mathematically equal in their claims and qualifications."

Mr. Wells is an artful writer, and his neat phraseology and ready illustrations will doubtless be mistaken for unanswerable argument by many ambitious enemies of that most natural, just and altogether desirable rule of rotation among competent artizans in the order of their priority.

Let the reader's attention be directed to Mr. Wells' first attempt to disparage priority in the sentence last quoted. Note the sacrifice of argument to a superfluity of words when "personal considerations" are included in the same line with "questions of efficiency."

"Personal considerations" as distinguished from "efficiency" are exactly what the priority law was righteously intended to regulate, and Mr. Wells here discloses all too clearly the incentive which controlled his thoughts when he committed such a colossal blunder as to write them. The statement, as he intended it, that priority forces foremen to disregard efficiency, is clearly erroneous, and it should take no counter suggestion for any mind immediately to deny and refute it.

The great body of the International Typograph. ical Union, like society at large, is composed of a vast majority of average workmen and the everpresent minority of swifts and slowpokes, freaks and no-accounts. Every foreman is given ample opportunity to learn the qualifications of the men whose names are posted on the extra list or slip board. Wisely enough, he dare not disqualify a dozen average men in order to secure the occasional freak, but Mr. Wells would, without compunction, depend on the average men, who are at his call for every emergency, and pass them all up for the extraordinary newcomer merely because he is a little better moneymaker for the office. He would then gloat on the overthrow of a rule designed to regulate this most ruinous and inhuman tendency which has reached its most heinous proportions in free (?) America.

Would Mr. Wells have us believe the opportunities in the International Typographical Union should be confined to the extraordinary? He certainly talks that way. Primary reasoning would argue that the incompetents would be disqualified. These the foreman need not endure. But must he, then, endure a lot of dubs who are not bad to have around when needed, but unworthy a situa tion? Let us admit there are a good many boozefighting and other incompetents. No foreman is immortalized by permitting them to qualify. A worthy work of purification might be done here. But is there reason for bewailing the sad plight of the swift and splendid workman, who strains every

nerve for the smiles and approval of his exploiters, in the race against the average ordinary, selfrespecting, honest man or the actual incompetent? Save your tears, friend Wells, for all your idols will be generously provided for.

In enumerating the ways in which a situation may be secured, Mr. Wells hints at lack of work when he says "the daily papers have almost all reached the limit of profitable size or passed it." Who is this singularly-posted and prophetic individual, Frank C. Wells? Read that again, and read it slowly. One can say with quite equal basis that none of them have. What is the significance of such a statement?

As to many of the older and better known dailies, this may be true, though few will admit their cities are not growing. But what of the new ones being established regularly and others that are known to be growing? Some, even many, of these, may some day appear to the restricted vision of Mr. Wells as he contemplates the future fate of almost all the daily papers.

As a matter of fact the supply of printers, both average and extraordinary, is not up to the demand in America, and there are no indications that it will be in the time of Mr. Wells.

This is not arguing there are no alleged printers who are incompetent. There are, and many. No priority law will prevent their weeding out. This is the prerogative and duty of foremen, and few are quite so foolish as to addict their favors to charity or fraternity-not as a rule. But the very fact that necessity compels foremen to retain the aver age men on the list of competents proves infallibly the precise demand for printers.

Let

Admittedly there are two sides to this issue. us be honest about it. There is the commercial side and the humanitarian side; the employer's side and the employe's side. There is mutual dependence and mutual obligation. Is the International Typographical Union designed to consider or recognize only the employers and the extraordinary workman? So argues every premise of Mr. Wells, even though he erroneously begs the question of newspaper decline to create sympathy for the interests he defends.

Are the workmen who produce newspapers from their employers' plants any more the beneficiaries of said employers than said employers are of them? Are they more favored than favoring? Is the obligation not mutual? Then why this unreasonable opposition to a most just and natural rule of promotion by priority among competent workmen?

To be sure, the extraordinary man is desirable to the office; but is the union, organized by and for the masses of workmen, both average and extraordinary, to commit itself to a policy of favoring any of its members at the expense of others? In other words, shall it cease to strive for equal opportunity among them all?

Yes, indeed, if it restricts the priority law.

Let the extraordinary workman be rewarded with higher pay. We attempt to set only a minimum scale of wages. But surely, with his splendid attainments, the exceptionally well-qualified man

can take his chances and work out his probation equally with his less competent fellow man.

It is laudable to aspire to be a good-the best possible workman, and no law or organization can possibly destroy the incentive for such achievement. Any such scheme would be thwarted by processes altogether natural and incontrovertible. But to say that the average man, good enough until a better comes along, must be summarily sacri ficed, is to say that not even the rights of past service shall longer be recognized in the titanic. struggle between humanitarianism and commercialism, justice and greed, rational development and insane lust for supremacy in a race against death. And furthermore, where the force is increased and decreased in successive order at the requirement of the office as expressed by the foreman, it takes a discrimination much finer than mine to understand the difference between the situation of a day and the situation of a year. If the situation is determined by its duration, it would be different, but if by service, a situation may last one day or one year with equal consistency; and surely where the employer will consider anything to benefit himself, and reasonably perhaps, the union can consider nothing but service as between its recognized equal units.

It is laudable, let me repeat, for any man to strive to be the best in his line, but let him keep on constantly straining to outdo his fellows for the mere glory of beating and the plaudits of his exploiters and he will doubtless live to see where he has made an ass of himself. Like all such, he will soon meet his match, and his humiliation will be the more intense when he contemplates that he himself was a faithful propagator of the system that wrought his ruin. R. A. HARRIS.

Salem, Ore.

INTERNATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE. There is much agitation as to whether the International Typographical Union shall embark in the life insurance business.

"The sage of Bristol, Tenn.," is on record in the October JOURNAL as thinking "The question of insurance is one that we can not abandon too soon; and it bodes no good to the cause." "Optional insurance would fall of its own weight, and compulsory insurance would not be tolerated by a large proportion of our membership." In the November issue Charles H. Whittemore, of Albany, in an elaborate, lengthy and strong article on the subject, and favorable to the project, as much as admits the truth of, or agrees with, the latter statement when he says: "But to be successfully carried out it must be made obligatory on the part of every member to support it" (that is, the proposed International Typographical Union life insurance). Mr. Whittemore discusses many phases of the question and succeeds in making the insurance proposition very plausible.

"The insurance or protection given by the union is only incidental," says Mr. Whittemore, which is "one point in favor of union insurance," because "there is a much greater degree of stableness to the union's membership, so far as it may relate

to the age or mortality risks, than there can be in the cases of purely insurance organizations."

When the International Typographical Union enters the insurance business. membership in the union will be the only test of eligibility. There will be no medical examiners. Regardless of his or her health and physical condition, the applicant for membership who is elected will be insured. The fact that such an one is in the worst of health will not, can not, be a consideration. It would not be right to bar from the union on account of their physical condition persons otherwise qualified for membership. This situation could only be met by having two classes of members-the insured and the uninsured. And this would result in medical examinations and other complications.

It might be well to adopt a plan of increasing the insurance benefits as the members grow older. Say, pay one-year members $100; two-year members, $150, etc.; up to ten years or over, $550; or fifteen and twenty-year members, $850 and $1,050, respectively, if it should be thought advisable to make the amount so large. But as I said in a former letter an International Typographical Union benefit of not more than $250, to be supplemented by local benefits wherever so desired, would be a more practical plan.

It is not well to expect insurance cheap. The fraternal organizations with rates very low have all done one of two or three things. Generally, they have increased their rates; but in some cases they have "gone out of the business." In one case of which I know a fraternal organization, pure and simple, decided to adopt the insurance feature and make the lowest rates possible. Upon joining, a certain member was told that his assessments would be $1.04 each on a $1,000 policy, and that there had never been more than thirteen assess

ments in any year. That sounded good. But the assessments of $1.04 never after that time were as few as thirteen per annum; and were as numerous as twenty-three (of course, thirteen and twentythree were bound to result disastrously); then the rate of $1.04 was increased to $1.86, and the number of assessments was in a measure reduced, but the aggregate cost was increased. This was not satisfactory, and the next thing done was to increase the amount of assessments to $2.08 (just double the original) and to limit the number of assessments to one per month or twelve per annum. Of course, this could be agreed to; but the result being that the twelve assessments of $2.08 did not afford funds sufficient to defray the expenses of the organization, it became necessary to do something else. It was decided to adopt the step-rate plan. (The step-rate plan is worse than a stepmother.) In the step-rate plan the rates increase each year. In this particular case the step-rate reduced the assessments for that year from $2.08 to $2; but the year to follow the amount of assessment would be increased to $2.10; then to $2.15; then to $2.22, etc.; but this was eight years ago; and as the policy was dropped when the step-rate plan was adopted the outcome is not known to the writer. However, this bit of experience goes to show that we must not expect insurance for "less

than cost;" and that even if we do start with low rates, these rates will have to be sufficient to pay off the resultant obligations or else they must be increased till the income equals the outgo.

Mr. Whittemore admits the foregoing when he says: "The International Typographical Union insurance must be compulsory on all members, or not at all, because, otherwise, in the course of time and human events, the International Typographical Union would be up against the same proposition as the rest of them-how to maintain their organization."

I do not think the greatest opposition to International Typographical Union insurance will come from those who already have insurance policies, because the men who have policies believe insurance is a good thing, and, if able to do so, are willing to take on more. But many do not want it, and it will not prove a hard task to discover those who are opposed to anything "compulsory."

The proposition to increase the amount of the benefit to $200 in 1910 and add $200 each year till the benefit should be $1,000, increasing the dues accordingly, so that "the transition from the cost of one amount to the next higher would be slight, and ultimately we would find ourselves possessed of a very desirable protection at a very reasonable cost" is not bad. But when this "desirable protection" becomes available by degrees it will cost no less than if it had been done precipitately, except during the interim, when the benefit was small. C. S. GOOKIN.

Bristol, Tenn.

"THE BIBLE AND LABOR." There are authorities and books without number, but when the question is narrowed down as to which is The Book, the answer will invariably be the bible. Mankind has no other book to compare with it. Our religion, laws and morals are all based on this ancient document. And its very age and undying potency give evidence that great truths are contained between its covers, and that its teachings aim to stimulate that which is best in

man.

From the earliest times man has regarded his conception of justice as one of his highest ideals, and nowhere has this ideal been fought for with more bitterness and determination than in the varying phases of the conflict of the classes. Man intuitively feels that it was not the plan of the Creator to make such distinctions as the powerful and unscrupulous have ever sought to impose on their weaker brethren. Nor has this conflict ceased. It is being fought as relentlessly today as ever. Its phases may differ, but the essentials are the samethe slave, the serf, the worker have always been the ones suffering from "man's inhumanity to man."

In view of this state of affairs, and considering that the bible is supposed to contain rules of life that are equitable as between man and man, it must have been surprising to many that this authority is so rarely quoted in the cause of labor, and must have caused others to ask the question, What has the bible to say about labor?

Reflections of this kind prompted Edwin L. Hitchens, a prominent member of No. 3, and a very active worker in the cause of labor, to make a study of the question, and as a result has published a neat brochure of eighty pages, giving the results of his investigations. Quoting from his preface, he says:

The preachers have skipped all over the bible to find texts to uphold their theological contentions, but they, with rare exceptions, have not seen what the bible had to say upon labor; or, seeing, did not understand. Economists, prodigal in their theories and dogmas, their science and their non-science, have seemed to scarcely know that such a book as the bible ever existed. And even the workingman, he of all others most rightfully interested in the matter, has believed in his heart that the bible had nothing for him, and had even taken up its abode in the house of his enemies.

Mr. Hitchens, after presenting the facts as he finds them, comes to the conclusion that the bible is the workingman's book, and a reading of his work will convince any one that he has proven his claim. In this connection it is gratifying to notice that he does not resort to the common trick of hair-splitting (miscalled "interpretation") in striv ing to make a point, but adheres to the plain meaning of the text. While the whole bible has been scrutinized and many valuable passages brought to light, particular attention is given to the laws of Moses and the teachings of the Christ, showing that these two great lawgivers both championed the cause of the worker. As an introduction the book gives a brief survey of the conditions of labor in ancient times. The work is written in an engaging style, and carefully avoids religious discussions or allusions. It deserves a careful reading, for it is evidently the result of much study and painstaking research, and should make friends for the cause of labor in quarters where we have hitherto received scant support. The book is very comprehensive, considering its size, and is in reality multum in parvo. It is published by Baker & Byron, also members of No. 3, and sells for 25 cents. E. STELTENPOHL.

Cincinnati, Ohio.

LEAVES FROM FOREMAN SQUEERS' DIARY. Monday-I so shake with laughter that I can hardly write. The priority law is in full blast and I throw aside my mask. The veneering of good manners and decorum, which perforce I had to wear in the old regime, is now no longer necessary. I can now howl, splutter, bullyrag, affront and insult my men with impunity, because I know they'll now stand what they would not tolerate when they were independent and their union cards were of value. Verily, priority is great, and Squeers is its prophet!

Under the new order of things my printery is a battlemented castle, from the grated windows of which I behold other battlemented castles along the Row, their drawbridges up and portcullises down, presenting a formidable appearance indeed. About me are my vassals, serfs, minions, all busy -some poring over the multifarious office rules without which no work, however simple, can be turned out successfully; others doggedly pounding away at the keyboards in fear of my displeas

ure, while others at the forms are chanting pæans of praise of section 109. I feel that no other feudal baron was ever more strongly entrenched than I; and this is the more enjoyable since this condition was brought about by the votes of the men whom the priority law now oppresses.

Tuesday-A happy thought, that, which discourages visitation on the part of the cardholder in search of a fair amount of work in an environment to his liking. In one sense this priority law is Protection to Home Industries writ large; in another sense it is the severest blow independence ever received.

I never liked "the independent spirit" in a workingman; it caused me embarrassment and

*

even humiliation in the old days when there was no priority law, because on occasion it would dare question my acts or take exception to a new rule. I have, indeed, known men to reach for hat and coat, their faces aflame at my pleasantry, and to depart from my presence in haste. Not now, however. My men know that the dignity of their cards has now vanished in thin air, that there are those "at home" (queer, that even workingmen have a silly regard for "home!") who are dependent upon a stipulated weekly wage, and they receive my pleasantries with every evidence of great joy. Indeed, in this matter they are particeps criminis-no, that isn't the phrase; I shall have my proofreader set me right.

Wednesday-I caught Smike again looking from a window toward the Castle Whirrl. It was a momentary glance, but the time this occupied might have been utilized in setting a typeline. Being "an eminently practical man," as Old Fireworks, the publisher, said I was when he appointed me to the post of foreman, I at once mentally calculated that if Smike's pair of eyes were followed by the eyes of my other three-score operators there would be a net loss to the office of sixty-one (61) typelines. Moreover, if the tendency of looking from a window were not immediately discouraged, the following night a similar infraction of the rules might happen; the third, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth night might record a similar transgression, with the possible loss, in the aggregate, of 366 lines-more than a column of matter!

I pounced upon Smike.

"Smike," said I, quoting office rule No. 477, "not only have you committed this offense, but on the night of the Fourth of July, 1907, you committed the gravest of all offenses-that of lese majeste-by damning my rules, my business methods, my gumshoe expeditions, my secret service, and finally my hair, my eyes and every bone in my body. Now, in view of all this, Smike, let me say that the gentlemen who pitch manure in a stable lost a valuable companion when you broke from their ranks and became an operator. Further, I shall discharge you instanter upon the infraction of any other rule in the future." Smike's face paled with anger.

He made as if

I wish, for the benefit of those interested in my "Priority Statistics," published in the December JOURNAL, and in the interest of absolute accuracy, to make a few small corrections in the figures. The number of resignations from the machines in the World office should be increased from one to four, three members of that chapel having resigned to accept situations on a new suburban daily. This paper soon failed, and the three members referred to have now been added to the list of priority victims-all having returned to the World as subs, where, I am told, two still remain, the third having left the city. There were also overlooked one death in the Telegram chapel and one discharge on the Evening Globe. These are the only inaccuracies so far as I have been able to learn. They raise the total number of vacancies in one year on the ten principal daily newspapers of New York from 31 to 36, or more properly 35, since one vacancy caused by resignation on the Press was never filled.

My opponents are very welcome to whatever satisfaction this change in my figures may afford them. FRANK C. WELLS.

New York, N. Y.

PROFESSOR MOORE'S MEMORIAL ADDRESS.

The address delivered by Prof. Willis L. Moore, director of the weather bureau and a member of Columbia Typographical Union, at the memorial services of that body, held in the Typographical Temple, Washington, D. C., on Sunday afternoon, December 6, was so favorably commented on by all who heard it that THE JOURNAL herewith reproduces it in full:

"On this occasion, when you are met to pay loving tribute to the memory of dear ones who have passed on to the silent shore, it is surely an honor to stand in the presence of so many representatives of union labor. As the head of one of the great scientific bureaus of the government I have received certain recognition from social and scientific organizations, but I have received no recognition that I prize more highly, or that means more in the mind of every man whose good opinion is worth the having than my election as an honorary member of Columbia Typographical Union No. 101. This came from an organization of which over thirty years ago I was an active member, and I prize it because it testifies to my devotion to the cause of humanity. I love my