All the machinery of the capitalist state has been turned loose against us [says an I. W. W. paper published in Sydney]. Our hall has been raided periodically as a matter of principle, our literature, our papers, pictures, and press have all been confiscated; our members and speakers have been arrested and charged with almost every crime on the calendar; the authorities are making unscrupulous, bitter and frantic attempts to stifle the propaganda of the I. W. W.[698]
Some idea of the nature and seriousness of that propaganda may be had from the meagre reports which have reached this country. A writer in the Sunset Magazine[699] says that the striking coal miners
had Australia at their mercy.... In vain did the government plead with the strikers for coal to start troop and wheat ships.... As a last resort, the leaders ... were arrested.... The Industrial Workers of the World, the militant aggressive organization whose doctrine of a general rebellion is rapidly spreading through the "paradise of labor," demanded the release of the miners [and] threatened to burn down Sydney if their demands were not complied with. They made good. Night after night the incendiary work went on in Sydney.... Terrorized by the handful of industrial rebels, the commonwealth was forced to yield. The strike leaders were finally released [and] the demands of the strikers were granted.
A month later the New York Times published some special correspondence on the subject. It appears that in October, 1916, charges were preferred against 15 I. W. W.s in New South Wales.[700] These charges involved, in Sydney, according to this report, treason, and wholesale arson amounting to $1,250,000. The chief issue involved was the conscription policy of the government, to which the I. W. W. was opposed. They were brought to trial on October 10th. The warrant against them charged that they were preaching sabotage by means of surreptitious pamphlets and openly upon the streets. Further, the warrant alleged, says the Times correspondent, "that they plotted rebellion against the King; that they conspired to burn down buildings in Sydney ... endeavored to put force or restraint upon the Parliament of New South Wales, [and that] they endeavored to intimidate and overawe Parliament."[701]
Their anti-war campaign at last became so obnoxious to the government that the House of Representatives, in December, 1916, passed a statute, called "The Unlawful Associations Act," which practically made it a criminal offense to be a member of the I. W. W.; the apparent intention of the authorities being to arrest all prominent I. W. W. speakers and hold them for the duration of the war.[702]
The Australian Unlawful Associations Act[703] is to "continue in force for the duration of the present war and a period of six months thereafter, but no longer." Section 3 runs in part as follows: "The following are hereby declared to be unlawful associations, namely: (a) the association known as the Industrial Workers of the World; and (b) any association which, by its constitution or propaganda, advocates or encourages, or incites or instigates to, the taking or endangering of human life, or the destruction or injury of property...." The act imposes the penalty of imprisonment for six months upon any person who "continues to be a member of an unlawful association," who "advocates or encourages [or who "prints or publishes any writing advocating or encouraging"] ... the taking or endangering of human life, or the destruction or injury of property," who "advocates or encourages ... any action intended or calculated to prevent or hinder the production, manufacture or transport ... of troops, arms, munitions or war-like material," or who "knowingly gives or contributes money or goods to an unlawful association."
In Australia as in the United States there were prior to the war two I. W. W. organizations in existence: a political I. W. W. and a non-political I. W. W. In that country, however, the political group (counterpart of the Detroit wing in the United States) has been by all odds the more influential. Although both these groups were pretty well smothered by the war and the Unlawful Associations Act, the I. W. W. industrial union idea made its appearance in another form in the summer of 1918. In July of that year representatives of some of the most powerful unions of New South Wales held a conference in Sydney. This so-called "Industrial Conference Board" drew up a constitution for an organization on the I. W. W. model, adopted the I. W. W. preamble almost word for word, and launched "The Workers Industrial Union of Australia."[704] Four of the six clauses of the preamble are almost identical in phrasing with that of the American I. W. W. The other two clauses are worded as follows:
Between these two classes [proletarian and capitalist] the struggle must continue until capitalism is abolished ... by the workers uniting in one class-conscious economic organization to take and hold the means of production by revolutionary industrial and political action. "Revolutionary action" means to secure a complete change, namely the abolition of capitalistic class ownership of the means of production—whether privately or through the state—and the establishment in its place of social ownership by the whole community.... We hold that, as the working class creates and operates the socially operated machinery of production, it should direct production and determine working conditions.[705]
In the United States the Federal government has enacted no law analogous to the Australian Unlawful Associations Act. Several of the individual States, however, have passed so-called "criminal syndicalism" laws and the United States Senate on May 6, 1918, passed a so-called anti-sabotage bill[706] which the newspapers declared was aimed at the I. W. W. The State laws referred to are quite generally understood to be directed against that organization. None of these statutes, however, mentions the I. W. W. by name. The Senate bill referred to declares to be unlawful any association
one of whose purposes or professed purposes is to bring about any governmental, social, industrial or economic change within the United States by the use, without authority of law, of physical force, violence or physical injury to person or property, or by threats of such injury, or which teaches, advocates, advises or defends the use ... of physical force, violence or physical injury to person or property, or threats of such injury, to accomplish such change or for any other purpose, and which, during any war in which the United States is engaged, shall by any such means prosecute or pursue such purpose or professed purpose, or shall so teach, advocate, advise or defend....[707]
The penalties proposed in the bill are more severe than in the Australian law. It would punish by imprisonment for not more than ten years or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment, anyone who, while the United States is at war, (a) acts as an officer, or speaks as the representative, of such an association, (b) becomes or continues to be a member of, or contributes anything to, such an organization, or (c) publishes or distributes any publication whatever which defends the use of "physical force, violence of physical injury to person or property ... as a means of accomplishing any governmental, social, industrial or economic change." The last section of the bill would impose a fine of not more than $500 and imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, upon any landlord who permits on his premises, while the United States is at war, any meeting of such an association or any assemblage of persons who teach or advocate the use of physical force or violence, etc.[708]
So-called "criminal syndicalism" or sabotage laws have been enacted by the States of California,[709] Idaho,[710] Michigan,[711] Minnesota,[712] North Dakota,[713] Montana,[714] South Dakota,[715] and Nebraska.[716] In the State of Washington a "syndicalism bill," and in Arizona a "sabotage" law, were passed by the State legislatures in 1918 but were vetoed by the governor in each case.[717] The "criminal syndicalism" laws of Minnesota, Idaho and Montana are reprinted in Appendix X. The South Dakota statute is very similar to that of Minnesota. It defines criminal syndicalism "as any doctrine which teaches or advocates crime, sabotage (sabotage as used in this act means wilful and malicious damage or injury to the property of another), violence or other methods of terrorism, or the destruction of life or property, for the accomplishment of social, economic, industrial or political ends." It declares such advocacy to be a felony and punishes "by imprisonment in the state penitentiary for not less than one nor more than twenty-five years, or by a fine of not less than $1000 nor more than $10,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment ..." anyone who (1) advocates or "suggests" such doctrines, (2) publishes, circulates or has in his (or her) possession printed matter which advocates or "suggests" any doctrine that economic or political ends should be brought about by "crime, sabotage," etc., (3) belongs to or assembles with any group or organization which advocates or suggests such a doctrine, or (4) permits in any room or building owned or controlled by him (or her) any assemblage of this character. This statute is not limited to the duration of the war, which, indeed, is not mentioned. The North Dakota and Nebraska laws are less comprehensive and less drastic than the law of Minnesota. They are anti-sabotage laws within the scope of the definition of sabotage given above in the South Dakota act. Of all the "criminal syndicalism" statutes referred to in these pages that of South Dakota inflicts the heaviest penalties. The Minnesota law has recently come into the courts[718] and the State Supreme Court, in a decision rendered April 19, 1918, held it to be constitutional.[719]
The I. W. W. does not lack constructive ideas. The trouble has been always that those ideas have not been applied very extensively. They have remained merely a part of the Wobblies' varied collection of slogans and doctrines. As the delegates at the tenth convention realized, the first decade of I. W. W.-ism in America has been marked by excessive propaganda activity—critical and non-constructive, if not destructive ... and very little constructive activity.[720] This fact is strikingly illustrated by the very transient character of its membership. The "turnover" for the decade 1905-1915 has been exceedingly heavy—not only as measured by individual members but also by local unions. The most favorable report of the present strength of the I. W. W. is given in the World Almanac for 1917, where it is stated that the I. W. W. is composed of five hundred and thirty-five recruiting and industrial unions (not including five [foreign] "national administrations") and has a membership of 85,000.[721] This latter figure probably included delinquent members, and in any case is almost certainly much exaggerated. The same statement applies to the figure given for local unions. But even on such a generous assumption, the figures in columns 7 and 11 of Table A (Appendix IV) show, first, that there have been more than five times as many local unions chartered by the I. W. W. as are now in the organization, and second, that there have been at least twice and probably ten times as many membership cards issued during the past ten years as there are members in the organization today. But the real situation is much worse. Conservative estimates of the active membership in 1915 put it at 15,000, distributed among 150 local unions.[722] Not less than 2,000 locals were chartered and approximately 200,000 membership cards issued in the ten-year period 1905-1916. This indicates that only 7.5 per cent of the locals chartered and of the individuals enrolled in the I. W. W. have remained in the organization. This means an average annual turnover (of individual members and locals) for the past ten years of 133 per cent. As the table shows, the numerical strength of the I. W. W. in comparison with the whole number in labor organizations and the whole number gainfully employed is very insignificant. Its membership in 1910 was four-tenths of one per cent of all trade-unionists and two-hundredths of one per cent of all gainfully employed. In the textile industry where the I. W. W. is numerically strongest, the Detroit I. W. W. had enrolled in 1910 one per cent and the Chicago I. W. W. fourteen per cent of all trade-unionists.
It is not easy to say to what extent the I. W. W. is likely to develop its constructive features. In so far as more and more stress is placed on job organization, the I. W. W. is and will continue to become a more constructive organization. But it is not easy to credit the statement made at the tenth convention that the I. W. W. has "passed out of the propaganda stage." It will become more actively constructive, probably, but only its complete annihilation can put a period to its propaganda work.
[641] T. P. Esmond, letter dated July 17, 1914, Proceedings, 21st Convention, W. F. M. (1914), p. 26.
[642] Editorial, Solidarity, July 9, 1910, p. 2, col. 4.
[643] Proceedings, 20th W. F. M. Convention, p. 426.
[644] Constitution and By-Laws of the W. F. M. (1912), art. viii, sec. 4. President Moyer discusses this change of policy on trade agreements in his report to the 22nd (1914) convention (Proceedings, pp. 37, 40). For constitutional provisions of the I. W. W. on contracts, cf. infra, p. 332.
[645] July 2, 1914, p. 5.
[646] Report of Proceedings, 22nd W. F. M. Convention, Miners' Magazine, Aug. 17, 1916, p. 2.
[647] Delegate Murray, Proceedings, 21st Convention W. F. M. (1914), p. 146.
[648] Miners' Magazine, July 16, 1914, p. 7. Mayor Duncan's statements were denied by the editor, ibid., pp. 8-10.
[649] The New York Times, June 22, 1914, p. 18, col. 3. Butte dispatch, dated June 21.
[650] Report to the 20th Convention, W. F. M., Proceedings (1912) p. 14.
[651] Proceedings, 20th Convention, W. F. M., p. 283.
[652] Ibid., p. 24.
[653] Editorial, Aug. 1, 1912, p. 6, col. 1.
[654] Ibid., p. 7, col. 2.
[655] Miners' Magazine, June 20, 1912, p. 9.
[656] Hearings, Washington, D. C., Apr. 6, 1914. Final report and testimony, vol. i. p. 453.
[657] Editorial, United Mine Workers' Journal, reprinted in Miners' Magazine, July 2, 1914, p. 9.
[658] Report to 17th Annual Convention (1906), Minutes, pp. 53-4.
[659] Katherine Mayo, Justice to All: The Story of the Pennsylvania State Police (Putnams, 1917), p. 225.
[660] "Industrial Organization," Miners' Magazine, May 7, 1914, p. 6, col. 2.
[661] "A plea for solidarity," International Socialist Review, March, 1914, p. 538.
[662] "Debs, revolutionary unionist," New Review, vol. ii, p. 426, July, 1914.
[663] Solidarity (Oct. 3, 1914, p. 1).
[664] Ibid., Oct. 3, 1914, pp. 1, 4.
[665] Cf. Louis Levine, Revolutionary Syndicalism in France, ch. viii, for a more adequate description of the "one union, one vote" plan of representation.
[666] Editorial, Oct. 24, 1914, p. 2, col. 2.
[667] Solidarity, Oct. 3, 1914, p. 1, col. 4.
[668] Chicago Daily News, September 22, 1914. This same dispatch stated that there were fifty delegates present—twice as many as the "Wobblies" themselves claimed.
[669] See the report in Solidarity, Oct. 3, 1914, p. 4, col. 4.
[670] Letter dated July 16, 1913, to W. Beech, Proceedings, 8th Convention, I. W. W., p. 24, col. 1.
[671] Solidarity, Oct. 3, 1914, p. 4, col. 4.
[672] Preamble and Constitution of the I. W. W., 1916, art. vii, sec. 5.
[673] Ibid., art. iii, pp. 11-12.
[674] Cf. Appendix iv.
[675] Proceedings, Eighth I. W. W. Convention, p. 30.
[676] Adapted from data in Proceedings, Eighth I. W. W. Convention, p. 30.
[677] Cf. appendix iv, table A. For the status of the I. W. W. in California in 1914, see the writer's report to the U. S. Commission on Industrial Relations on "The I. W. W. in California."
[678] "The Truth about the I. W. W.," Journal of Political Economy, Nov., 1913, vol. xxi, p. 786.
[679] "The Development of Hoxie's Economics," Journal of Political Economy, vol. xxiv, p. 875, note (Nov., 1916).
[680] "The Development of Syndicalism in America," Political Science Quarterly, Sept., 1913, vol. xxviii, p. 478.
[681] Proceedings of the 26th meeting, American Economic Review, vol. iv, no. 1, supplement, pp. 140-141 (March, 1914).
[682] Letter to the author, Feb. 1, 1915.
[683] Proceedings, Eighth I. W. W. Convention, p. 5, col. 2, p. 6, col. 1. In this branch of the I. W. W. in New York City there were in 1917 about 5000 members (mostly Spaniards) of whom not less than half were in good standing.
[684] Industrial Relations (Hearings), vol. ii, p. 1462.
[685] Speech at the I. W. W. Hall in 81st Street, New York City, January 31, 1915.
[686] Solidarity, Dec. 2, 1916, p. 1. General Secretary Haywood reported to the convention that the A. W. O. had enrolled at that time 18,000 members. Proceedings, p. 36.
[687] The New York World, Aug. 13, 1916, p. 11, col. 1 (dated Sioux City, Ia., Aug. 12).
[688] R. W. Babson, Reports on Labor, "The I. W. W.'s latest move," Confidential Bulletin of the Co-operation Service, no. L-59, Aug., 1916.
[689] Dec. 9, 1916, p. 1, col. 3. Dispatch signed "R. E. P."
[690] Ibid.
[691] Issues of December 2, 9, and 16, 1916. The Proceedings were published in full in 1917.
[692] Solidarity, Dec. 2, 1916, p. 1, col. 1.
[693] Solidarity, Dec. 2, 1916, p. 1.
[694] St. John, The I. W. W., History, Structure and Methods (1917 edition), p. 23.
[695] Ibid., p. 24. Charters were issued to 116 locals (in 27 States and 2 Canadian provinces) during the two years ending Sept. 1, 1916. These included 8 recruiting unions and 9 Propaganda Leagues. (Vide Report of General Secretary, Proceedings, Tenth Convention [1916], pp. 33-36, where there is a list of these new locals.)
[696] St. John, op. cit., p. 23.
[697] In the summer of 1918 it was reported in a press dispatch from Johannesburg that a branch of the I. W. W. had been established among the natives at Durban (New York Times, July 19, 1918, p. 15, col. 5).
[698] Direct Action (Sydney), reprinted in Solidarity, Mar. 17, 1917, p. 4.
[699] March, 1917, p. 11, col. 1, "The Raised Fist of Labor."
[700] One of them was the editor of Direct Action, an I. W. W. paper published in Sydney.
[701] New York Times, April 14, 1917, p. 6.
[702] Cf. letter from the General Secretary of the Australian Administration, in Report of General-Secretary-Treasurer to the Tenth I. W. W. Convention (1916), Proceedings, pp. 42-43. Vide, also, New York Times, Dec. 20, 1916, p. 5, col. 2.
[703] The Unlawful Associations Act (No. 41 of 1916), assented to Dec. 21, 1916, and amended by the Unlawful Associations Act (No. 14 of 1917), assented to July 27, 1917.
[704] Christian Science Monitor, October 4, 1918.
[705] The preamble is printed in full in The World (Oakland, Cal.), October 18, 1918, p. 3. (Reprinted from the British Columbia Federationist, Sept. 27, 1918, article by W. Francis Ahern, Australian correspondent.) Mr. Ahern gives a detailed description of the structure of the new union and shows that in this respect, also, it follows the American I. W. W. very closely. Other meetings in furtherance of this project are reported to have been held in the fall of 1918 in Brisbane and Melbourne. (Ibid.) This recrudescence of militant industrialism in Australia appears to be an indirect outcome of the defeat of the Labor party in the federal election of 1917.
[706] 65th Cong., 2nd sess., S. 4471.
[707] Ibid. The bill was amended by the Judiciary committee and favorably reported to the House.
[708] 65th Cong., 2nd sess., S. 4471. The one hundred odd members of the I. W. W., who were indicted in 1917, were indicted, tried and convicted, not under any specific anti-sabotage, "criminal syndicalism" or unlawful associations statute, but under section 4 of the "Espionage Act" of June 15, 1917, and sections 6, 19 and 37 of the Criminal Code of the United States. (The United States of America vs. William D. Haywood et al., no. 6125 in the District Court of the U. S., Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.)
[709] Acts of 1919, ch. 188. Approved May 5, 1919.
[710] Acts of 1917, ch. 145. Approved Mar. 14, 1917.
[711] Act no. 139.
[712] Acts of 1917, ch. 215. Approved Apr. 13, 1917.
[713] Approved Jan. 30, 1918.
[714] Acts of 1918, ch. 7. Approved Feb. 21, 1918.
[715] Special Session, 15th legislative assembly (1918), Senate bill no. 12. Approved Mar. 23, 1918.
[716] Laws and resolutions passed at the 36th (extraordinary) session of the legislature (1918), ch. 9. Approved Apr. 9, 1918.
[717] On January 14, 1919, the Washington Syndicalism bill was passed over the Governor's veto. Session laws of 1919, ch. 3. [S. B. 264, Session of 1917].
[718] In the case of State vs. Moilen, 167 N. W. 345.
[719] A digest of the court's opinion is given in the Monthly Labor Review (U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), vol. vii, pp. 177-179 (July, 1918).
[720] Cf. Caroline Nelson on "The Constructive Side of the New Unionism," in her pamphlet, Aggressive Unionism, pp. 20-24.
[721] P. 125. The five "national administrations" reported are: Australia, Great Britain, Hawaii, New Zealand, and South Africa. The World Almanac for 1916 reported 300 local unions.
[722] In the case of the United States of America vs. William D. Haywood et al., now (June, 1918) being tried in Chicago, the Government indictment credits the I. W. W. with a membership of 200,000. The author believes this is much too high, although the organization has unquestionably grown. It is probably based on gross accumulated memberships and would give a fair indication of the number of persons who have, at one time or another, been members of the I. W. W. (Indictment in U. S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, no. 6125, p. 7).
[723] Reproduced from The Miners Magazine, vol. vi, p. 15 (April 20, 1905). Cf. supra, p. 79.
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among millions of working people and the few, who make up the employing class, have all the good things of life.
[Between these two classes a struggle must go on until all the toilers come together on the political, as well as on the industrial field, and take hold of that which they produce by their labor through an economic organization of the working class, without affiliation with any political party.]
Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and the machinery of production and abolish the wage system.
We find that the centering of management of industries into fewer and fewer hands makes the trade unions unable to cope with the ever-growing power of the employing class. The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the workers have interest in common with their employers.
These conditions can be changed and the interest of the working class upheld only by an organization formed in such a way that all its members in any one industry, or in all industries if necessary, cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus making an injury to one an injury to all.
Instead of the conservative motto, "A fair day's wage for a fair day's work," we must inscribe on our banner the revolutionary watchword, "Abolition of the wage system." It is the historic mission of the working class to do away with capitalism. The army of production must be organized, not only for the every-day struggle with capitalists, but to carry on production when capitalism shall have been overthrown. By organizing industrially we are forming the structure of the new society within the shell of the old. [Therefore we, the working class, unite under the following constitution.]
[Therefore without endorsing or desiring the endorsement of any political party, we unite under the following constitution.]
Knowing, therefore, that such an organization is absolutely necessary for our emancipation, we unite under the following constitution:
The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace as long as hunger and want are found among millions of working people and the few, who make up the employing class, have all the good things of life.
[Between these two classes a struggle must go on until all the toilers come together on the political, as well as the industrial field, and take and hold that which they produce by their labor through an economic organization of the working class, without affiliation with any political party.]
Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the toilers come together on the political field under the banner of a distinct revolutionary political party governed by the workers' class interest, and on the industrial field under the banner of One Great Industrial Union to take and hold all means of production and distribution, and to run them for the benefit of all wealth producers.
The rapid gathering of wealth and the centering of the management of industries into fewer and fewer hands make the trade unions unable to cope with the ever-growing power of the employing class, because the trade unions foster a state of things which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. The trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers.
These said conditions must be changed, the interests of the working class upheld and while the capitalist rule still prevails all possible relief for the workers must be secured. That can only be done by an organization aiming steadily at the complete overthrow of the capitalist wage system and formed in such a way that all its members in any one industry or in all industries, if necessary, cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus making an injury to one an injury to all.
[Therefore, without endorsing any political party, we unite under the following constitution.]
Therefore we unite under the following constitution.