« PreviousContinue »
local union of Philadelphia naturally felt that its demands were reasonable and just.
A month before the strike was ordered, printed notices were sent to all the masters in the city, comprising about two hundred and seventy-five shops, notifying them of the demands of the journeymen and giving them a month in which to comply with the same, or to meet them in conference and arbitrate their differences. All of the shops in the city, except about twentyfive, refused outright to consider the notice. Now, the journeymen's union controls about eight hundred men,
or about nine-tenths of the men engaged in their trade. When the time expired, and their demands remained unheeded, a general strike was ordered, and all the journeymen were called out except in the twenty-five shops whose masters had signed the demands. The masters' union quickly convened and brought pressure to bear on these shops, under penalty of heavy fine, to retract their position. This brought all but one or two shops into line, and the journeymen in these shops were then quickly called out.
Thus the situation remained for a week, with all the shops (except the "scabs,” which numbered about twenty-five) tied up, doing only such work as the masters and their apprentices could do, which was little enough, as some of them are unable to shoe a horse. The masters remained resolute in the belief that the journeymen would soon flock back to work, because of the fact that the highest-paid journeymen were averse to the strike. Their hopes were not realized, but they decided to hold out and import new men. An outside agent agreed to place forty new men in the shops under the condition that they should be employed permanently and not be turned off as soon as the strike was over. These men were not brought in, however, for the testimony of those who had employed men sent to them in this emergency was so unfavorable that the wisdom of a wholesale importation of new men was seriously questioned. The experience of those who had imported new men was like that in most strikes where the same expedient has been resorted to, viz., the new men were either incapable or were quickly drawn into the union and the strike. The journeymen were busy proselyting, and even drew
many of the men from the local “scab" shops into their union; and, encouraged by their success when the strike was on, they refused to compromise, but insisted that their original demands be granted in toto. And the fact that the better shops were desirous of granting the demands of the journeymen at once caused dissent among the masters themselves. The majority of the masters, however, were averse to giving in, and the reasons ascribed for their holding out show that the masters' association has failed to carry out one of the chief objects for which it was incorporated (see above, sec. I). Two years ago the masters
( adopted a scale of prices for shoeing, claiming that they were forced to raise prices because of the increase in the price of iron and the greater wages they were obliged to pay their men. The scale of prices adopted was as follows: work horses, full set of shoes (rough shoeing), $2; coach horses, full set of shoes, with or without heel and toe calks, $2.50; light driving horses, shoes, $3 per set; and special shoes, such as bar shoes, $0.75 each. These prices, however, have not been uniformly maintained. Rebates are quite general, being made in the form of cash rebates to firms or corporations having a large number of horses. Rebates of one-fifth to coachmen have also become so common that the coachman demands it as his just due. And if his employer should insist upon his horses being shod where the rebate is not given, the coachman employs every means possible to demonstrate to his employer that the workmanship in that particular shop is very inferior. He loosens shoes or actually goes to the extreme of rendering a horse lame to prove his point, until his employer, tired of being annoyed, tells him to take the horses wherever they can be shod right. This is only one of the ways in which the coachman exploits his employer. He does it everywhere-at the horse market, the carriage shop, the harness shop, the feed store, etc.
The better shops maintain the scale of prices, and were willing to concede the demands of the journeymen; and they openly accuse those who hold out of doing cheap shoeing or of giving large rebates. For, if they grant the demands of the journeymen, they will have to maintain the scheduled prices in order to
work at a profit, and they know that as soon as they refuse to give rebates much of their trade will go elsewhere. Thus it is evident that there is an outside and an inside force at work to compel the masters to live up to the rules of their own organization or disband.
After long discussion and debate the masters agreed in committee to recommend as a basis of agreement and compromise to settle the strike upon the following terms: The hours of labor should be ten every day but Saturday. The shops should close at i P. M. on Saturdays during the months of June, July, August, and September, and at 4 P. M. on Saturday the rest of the year. The men were to receive only pro rata pay for overtime for the first hour, and fifty cents for every additional hour or fraction thereof. No overtime work would be asked of the men except during “sharpening.” The holiday demanded by the journeymen would be granted, provided that hereafter the journeymen would choose for their outing the same day as the one provided for the masters in the constitution of their association, in order that the shops would not have to be closed on two different days. This report of the committee was unanimously agreed upon by the masters in meeting. And the committee was instructed to appear before the assembled journeymen and present their recommendations as agreed upon. The committee appeared before the journeymen the next day, and, after presenting arguments in its favor, the recommendation was read and the committee retired.
In a few minutes the journeymen reported to them through a committee of five that the recommendations of the masters had been considered in detail and rejected in toto. The nine-hour day was the chief thing that the journeymen were determined to win. The committee of the masters, having power to act, proposed further concessions, which amounted to conceding all of the demands of the journeymen, but deferring the time when they should go into operation. They argued that their patrons would suffer much inconvenience unless sufficient time was given to acquaint them of the new schedule. Accordingly they agreed to settle the strike on the following basis: That the hours of labor should be ten for the first five days of the week, with a half holiday on Saturday, until August 1, 1902, after which the hours of labor were to be nine daily, with a half holiday on Saturday during June, July, and August, and the shops to close at 4 P. M. on the remaining Saturdays of the year. All overtime was to be paid according to the demands of the journeymen. The annual holiday was conceded without specifying when it should be taken. These propositions were presented to the journeymen and rejected within fifteen minutes. The chairman of their committee suggested to the chairman of the masters' committee that if the propositions just rejected were made to go into operation July 15, instead of August 1, he was quite sure they would be accepted by the journeymen, as they deemed a month's time enough for the masters to notify their patrons of the new schedule. Upon this, however, the masters could come to no agreement. But the larger shops, anxious to concede the demands of the journeymen and begin work on Monday, June 16, decided to act individually. Nor were threats of penalty for so doing effective. Finally, to prevent a breakup of the masters' union itself, it was necessary to pass a resolution that no fines or penalties should be imposed upon those masters who wished to sign the agreement with the journeymen and begin work. But they were urged to do with as few men as possible, so as to compel as many journeymen as possible to remain out of employment. It was decided that the demands of the journeymen should not be signed by the president and secretary, but each master left to act for himself. The result was that the agreement was soon signed by all of the shops that had been in favor of doing so from the first; and a majority of the others soon found themselves obliged to do the same in order to hold their trade, as no shoeing had been done in the city for a week. Thus the short-sighted policy of those masters who favored holding out resulted only in keeping their shops closed without profit, whereas they might have gained a month at the old schedule, had they been willing to allow their own recommendations to go into effect July 15.
AN INQUIRY INTO THE CAUSES OF THE DECREASE
OF THE HAWAIIAN PEOPLE. "BE fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” These words, according to the philosophical writer of the first chapter of Genesis, the Creator addressed to the first parents of the human race. One of the most notable exceptions to the law of life here implied may be observed in the later history of the Hawaiian Islands. The Hawaiian people, after multiplying, and replenishing their islands in the Pacific, have been decreasing steadily for more than one hundred years.
When Captain Cook discovered Hawaii, 1778–79, he and Mr. King estimated the population at 400,000. When Vancouver, who had accompanied Cook, revisited the islands in 1792, "the depopulation throughout the group ....
struck him painfully.” The missionaries arrived in 1820. Three years later they estimated the number of inhabitants at 142,000. In 1832 the first official census was taken, and from that time the census returns are as follows:
1853 1860 Hawaiian and part Hawaiian 130,313 108,579 82,203 71,019 67,084
1866 1872 1878 1884 1890 1896 Hawaiian
57,125 49,994 44,088 40,014 34,436 31,019 Part Hawaiian - 1,640 1,487(?) 34,420
4,218 6,186 8,485 Total
58,765 51,481 47,508 44,232 40,622 39,504 The number of the native population is not given in the census returns of 1900 thus far available; it has been estimated at 38,000.
The decrease of the Hawaiian people has been dealt with in almost every book that has been written about the islands. Of these numerous treatments that of Professor Blackman in The Making of Hawaii, although in some respects defective-owing apparently to the author's overconfidence in his authoritiesis undoubtedly the best. A number of interesting articles have also appeared on the subject, notably one by Rev. A. Bishop in