Newspapers / The Charlotte Herald (Charlotte, … / Aug. 15, 1924, edition 1 / Page 7
Part of The Charlotte Herald (Charlotte, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
Letters Democratic National Committee 710 Bond Building Washington, Aug. 2f 1924. Hon. Samuel Gompers, President, ^Anwican^Fedenatk»n > of Labor, -me 3 p;riTA-WljiaftldfijsHlljohelioiqfr^itJ? Vi hash* v My Dear Mr. Gompers: 1 have accepted an invitation from the Democratic National Committee to assist in the cam paign for the election of John W. Davis as President of the United States. * My close personal friendship with you and my life long asso ciation with the labor movement, prompts me to Write you stating the reasons that have led me to this conclusion. As you know, I was for a num ber-of years * a member of the committee on President's report in the convention Of the American Federation of Labor. As the president’s report always dealt with the problems confronting r labor, it became the-duty of the committee to deal with the poli cies that should be pursued in solving the various problems present. Consequently it was my duty, as Welt as pleasure, to assist ' in the development of the poli cies expres^d by the phrases, “The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of com ' merce.” “Labor is not partisan to a party, but is partisan to a principle.” “J^abor will .support its _y friends and oppose its enemies,” and so on. These policies I thor oughly believe in, and for that reason have given my support in this campaign to John W. Davis. I first came in contact with him when I was international secre tary of the United Mine Workers of America, and he was a young practicing attorney at Clarksburg, W. Va. Innumerable injunctions were being issued against us by Jujjge Jackson at the instance of the coal operators of the state; many of our organizers were cited jto appear to show cause why they should not be held in contempt— • among them Mother Jones and Thomas H)oggerty, a member of the International Executive Board from Central, Pa. Our people were holding many meetings pro testing against the action, of the coal operators and the courts. Large numbers of them were ar rested and hailed before the local courts. John W. Davis volun teered his services to defend them. I did not see him again until be entered the Sixty*Sece»d Congress as Representative from West Virginia. a<or a generation r|ie traces union movement^ of the country had been seeking relief from the abuse of the writ of injunction. No headway had been made in se curing federal legislation until Mr, Davis came to Congress. He was assigned to the Comjmittee on Ju diciary, and took ah immediate interest in anti-injunction legisla tion. During the year 1912, in con sultation with Senator Hughes from New Jersey and Congress man Kitchin of North Carolina, and myself, he wrote sections 6 and 20 qf the Clayton Anti-Trust Law, approved October 15, 1914. They represent the most progres sive and far reaching legislation enacted by any government'in the history of the world. I am quot ing the two sections in full, that you may have them before you for reference: “Section 6. That the labor of a human being is not a commodity Or article of commerce. Nothing ^contained in the anti-trust laws shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of. labor, agricultural, or horticultural or ganizations, instituted for the pur pose.of mutual help, and noi hav ing capital stock or conducted for dividual members of such organi profit, or to forbid or restrain in zations from lawfuly carrying out the egitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the members thereof, be held or* con strued to be illegal cowknmJtim*» or consopacies.^ in restraint vot traSe/ difder 3jj|e Uli^-trust ikws;^ This is not the language of Mri Davis. It is the language of the American Labor Movement, but it Was adopted by him ^nd through IfSis inlhiCnee,'written into the law iff* the lafcdl' Arst lsehtehee of the see&o** &ys; ihe{ ;fmrB^atSoji foj* abolishing the Writ’ of^lnjdhc tion in labor disputes, fhe bal ance removes the taint of conspir acy from labor, agricultural and horticultural organizations, and has made possible the wonderful development of the farmers ; co operative selling agencies. With out it they would have been con spiracies in restraint of trade. Section 20 writes into the law what labor organisations had lpftg been contending for. It is as fol lows: “That no restraining order, or injunction shall be granted by any court of the United States, or a judge of the judges thereof,, hv any case between an employer and employe, or between employers and employes, or between C.m ployse, or between employed and persons seeking employment, in volving, or growing out of, a | dispute concerning terms or con ditions of employment, unless necessary to prevent irreparable injury to property, or to a prop erty right, of the party making the application, for which injury there is no adequate remedy at law, and such property or prop erty right must be described with particular in the application, which must be; in writing and |byvuiu tu. vy kue appiicani yk vy his agent or attorney, i “And no such restraining order or injunction shall prohibit any person or persons, whether singly or concert, from terminating any relation of employment, or from ceasing to perform any work or labor, or from recommending, ad vising, or persuading others by peaceful meaps to do so; or from attending at any place where any such person or persons may law fully be, for the purpose erf peace fully obtaining yr communicating information, or from peacefully persuading any person to work or to abstain from working; or from ceasing to patronize or to employ any party to such dispute, or from, i reeommending, advising,,. or - > p by persuading others by peaceful and lawful means so to do; or from paying or giving to, or withhold ing from, any person engaged in such dispute, any strike benefits or other moneys or things of value; or from peaceably assem bling in a lawful manner, and for lawful- purposes, of from do ing any act or tiling which might lawfully be done in the absence of any such dispute by any. party thereto; nor shall any of the acts .specified in this paragraph be con sidered or held to be violations of any law of the United States.” This work undertaken person ally by M'r. Davis, without solici tation, clearly indicates his atti tude of mind toward problem#, af fecting the wage worker and farmer. When the eighthour law for railroad men was passed in 1916, the officials of the rail-way organ izations feared that it would; not stand the test of the Supreme Court, that was made jeviden-t by the fact they had declared a strike on the members of the brother hood to take effect in the early part of 1917. The manner in which John W. Davis prepared and presented the case fo the Supreme Court in behalf of the govern ment* resulted in a favorable de cision that came jufst in time to prevent the threatened strike. This attitude of mind has been backed up by the action- of the Democratic party in federal leg islation during the last 30 years. It has not enacted everything that the wage workers and farmers have demanded, but it hjas placed upon the statute books more well thought out constructive legisla tion that opened the doors of op? portunity to wage workers and farmers, than all other parties', blocs, or groups 'combined. I shall this.time ^attempt to^efiM^ erat'e -tliem, which would onl^ be refreshing your memory on what your official records show. I have no antagonism toward Senator La Follette. He has done goo&'serviee f gr ^b^cpiuntry,^ the waythat*he is best guajifled ;fe> do it* ,: He has ably called atten tion to existing wrongs; he’ has been “The voice crying in the wilderness. ” Hie has acted wide attention, hut he does not seem to have the faculty of con solidating his contentions into concrete legislation for the relief of the people. In addition to that, he has -allowed himself to be placed in the position in this cam paign, where he is being used as the auger to bore the labor or ganizations of the country .from Within. The records of all the candi dates will not be complete until their letters of acceptance have been given to the public, and I take the liberty of suggesting that the Executive Council, or some person or persons representing the council, attend the ceremonies for the notification of Mr. Davis, at Clarksburg, West Virginia, Au gust 11, '1924, and listen to his letter of acceptance before taking definite political action> Cordially yours, W. B. WILSON. Ambassador Hotel, Atlantic City, August 6, 1924. Mr. W. B. Wilson, 323 Investment Building, Washington, D. C. ^ Mr. Dear Mr. Wilson: Your letter of August 2rfd, re questing that the Executive Coun cil of the American Federation of Labor should not consider and take definite action regarding the pending political situation ufrtil the Executive Council or some per son or t persons representing the Executive Council should attend the ceremonies for the notification of Mr. John W. Davis at Clarks burg, West Virginia, August 11, 1924, was referred to the Execu tive Council of the American Fed eration of Labor following the re ceipt of your telegram of August 1st. By and with the approval of the Executive Council I am submitting to ybii’ the following statements Three fnonths ago:the Exeeu. tive: .'Council of the American Fed eration. _ of Labor directed that the E. C. next meet in Atlantic City, New Jersey, August 1st, to trans act such business as required the attention of the Executive Coun cil, including the defining of the attitude of the A. F. of L. in the furtherance of its Non-partisan Pelitie&l Campaign. On Friday, August 1st, and before the receipt of your telegram, the question of determining our political course was made a special order of busi ness for Saturday. The suggest tion of a letter coming from you ‘ was mentioned during the discus sion on Saturday, but the Execu tive Council deemed itself fully competent to deal with the prob lems entrusted into its keeping for consideration and action. “\ You know oi course, that the officers of the American ^Federa tion of Labor are fully informed of all that transpired in connec tion with the. enactment of the Clayton Law, especially Sections 6 and 20. We ar© likewise fully informed as to all who rendered valuable services in that legisla tion. We must dissent from the conclusions related by you*. This dissent is borne out by records and facts readily available. At an opportune - time these records and facts will be fuHy set forth, in none pf which does Mr. John W. Davis appear. | Regarding your statement that | H was the Supreme Court decision upholding the Adamson law which prevented a strike on the railroads of the country, and giving Miv Davis credit for having won that decision and thus preventing the strike, let me recount facts with which you are familiar and which are in direct conflict with the statement m your letter. President Wilson appointed 5 a B^niel 3Wit&riit of ihk B&fcijnore arid Ohio; Secretary of the Inte rior Franklin K. Lane, you and myself, for the purpose of mediat ing and preventing a strike. ^ : $hls commission brought about an f agreement ^between -the. road hroth^hoo^.. arid the r4pte^ sefftativw of the. railroads "and* that agreement was signed in the presence of the commission, of which you and I were members, before the St^preirie Court decis ion - was handed down , and conse quently before anyone had knowl edge of what that decision would be. It was this agreement, and not the Supreme Court decision, which prevented the strike. You may recall, as I do, the statement made by the late W. S. Carter, then president of the Brotherhood of Locomotive -Firemen and En ginemen. Mr. Carter said, as tlie agreement was signed by us all: “Gentlemen, this is the dawn of a newi day,” and those present generally felt that he voiced the conviction of all. It was the machinery of the labor movement, and not the Su preme Court and, Mr. Davis, which prevented the threatened strike. The executive Council ^appreci ates your advice regarding the early struggle and career of Mr. Davis. It likewise has weighed in the balance his later utterances and courses, associations and train ing. We are confident that ottr judgment and action are well founded, But qu,ite apart from all this, your request that our Executive Council should adjourn to go to Clarksburg and there reconvene after considering his acceptance address, is utterly impossible and inconceivable. The suggestion could be madfc with equal pro priety that we attend the accept ance ceremonies of. President Coolidge so as to prevent being charged with party partisanship.. You know, of course, the prac tice of our organization in sU.ch matters as this, but" a brief word may clarify the situation to you. The American Federation of.- L& bor National Non-Partisan Politi cal Camaignp Committee, appoint ed by authorty of the A. F. cf L.f convention and with the approval of the Executive Council, is charged with the duty of present ing labor’s demands to the political conventions. It is then charged with'the duty of considering the records of candidates and'plat forms adopted by the conventions. All of this proceeding has been carried out* this year precisely as in every other campaign since 1906. Our • committee held many meetings and considered all facts, records and platforms seriously and at length. The document adopted here was the report "of that committee—the A* D. National Non-Partisan Political Campaign Committee. Not only the matters to which you draw at tention but all available informa tion were considered and weighed and our judgment then was ex pressed n the report submitted tor and adopted by. the Executive Council. You may not know that Jo^n W. Davis, for whom you now speak, Wrote me under date of July 17th, asking a conference at a time convenient to me at Brigh ton Beach where I- was for a time recuperating from my illness. Mr; Davis asked me to fix a. time when it would be convenient to see him, specifying only that 1 should not fix' a time' when he was on his vacation-in Maine. I replied by letter on July 22, saying that I would be glad to see Mr. Davis at ,* Brighton Beach, where I was then, in New York City prior to my coming here, or in this City after my arrival here for the Executive Council meet-, ing. To thi^ letter Mr. Davis tele graphed a reply on July 24, say ing that it was impossible to finish the work he then-had on hand and return to* New York Jby July 29, the date which I suggested to conform to his wishes, that he was planning to leave Dark Har bor on; August; 1st and then sug gested that I file With him “a state ment of questions in Which labor is chiefly interested at the mo ment.. On July 25, I replied to that -telegram expressing- my willing ridfes that mH <>filt€kvie3v place ”&tthe time <#efeigndfcefl byTyou.” f furdreT miggested"that the sev eral dates and places first pro posed by me were still agreeable to me but that “I cannot submit questions to you 'which would npt be equally submitted to other can didates for the presidency.” I have heard nothing further from Mr. Davis. We have not overlooked your reference to Senator La Follette and we are glad, you may be Sure,’ that you have “no antagonism to ward” him. You will not fall to remember that among the many^ constructive legislative achieve ments of Senator La Follette the Seaman’s Act stands out as a bea con light. It was this great piece of legislation which, in the -lan guage of our mutual friend, An drew Furuseth, “made the last of the bondmen free.” We recall no instance in which Senator La Fol lette has hesitated to give faithful - service in furtherance of legisla tion supported by our movement. We are snre that you did not fujJly comprehend the nature of your request or the impossibility of our compliance. You are aware,: of eourse, that authorized representatives of the American Federation of Labor, -"including myself as chairman of the Ameri can Federation of Labor National Non-Partisan Political Campaign . Committee, were in New York City during the entire period of the Democratic Convention while the platform was being drafted and while candidates were being nominated and that there were laid before that convention, as , well as before the Republican convention, the planks which the Executive Council formulated and which we believe should be in- - corporated in both platforms. It would have been better if those proposals had been considered when the time ^ras opportune. : : Inasmuch as you addressed us ■as an assistant to the Democratic National Committee and not as a trade unionist, will you kindly in form that committee of these con clusions? For your full information there is enclosed herewith copy of the full and complete report as made by the American Federation of 1 Labor Nationals Non-Partisan Po- * litical Campaign Committee and adopted and approved by the Executive Council on Saturday, August 2nd, 1924. 1 v Very truly yours, 1 SAMUEL GOMPERS, President, American Federation of Labor. U. S. NOW HAS 1,390 HYDRO- J ELECTRIC UTILITY PLANTS ' Washington, Aug. 14.—Hydro- "'J electric public utOity plants pro ducing light and power through out the United States now has 1,390, according to a census by the United States Geological Sur vey. The capacity of those plants totals 7,348,197 horsepower, the sttrvey reported. This represents 81 per cent of the total capacity of all water power plants in the United States. The development of water power hy utilities t companies has progressed further in California and New York than in any other states, the government census dis closes. California plants number 118 with a total capacity of 1, 432,748 horsepower. .New York, has 117 plailts which develop 1, 234,460 horsepower, slightly less * than California^ Washington state ranks thim; with 63 utility plants and a capa city of 469,139 horsepower, while Georgia is fourth with 24 plants, developing 350,320 horsepower. Among other states whore devel opment has been pushed are Mich igan, Wisconsin, Idaho, Oregon, Alabama, Norfh Carolina, South Carolina,* Virginia, Pennsylvania andMaint. * v = 4
The Charlotte Herald (Charlotte, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Aug. 15, 1924, edition 1
7
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75