Hellraisers Journal – Monday January 20, 1913
Little Falls, New York – Strikers’ Children Return from Schenectady
From Solidarity of January 18, 1913:
From Solidarity of January 4, 1913:
—————
Hellraisers Journal – Thursday November 6, 1902
Eugene V. Debs Describes the Western Labor Movement
From the International Socialist Review of November 1902:
The Western Labor Movement
[by Eugene V. Debs]
———-
There seems to be considerable misapprehension, especially among Socialists, in regard to the trade union movement of the Western states, whose delegates, recently assembled in national convention, adopted the platform of the Socialist Party and pledged the support of their organizations to the International Socialist movement. This radical departure from the effete and reactionary non-political policy of the American Federation of Labor, so long and so earnestly striven for by the Western leaders, and so entirely compatible with the Socialist conception of class-conscious and progressive trade unionism, should have been met with the prompt and hearty approbation of every unionist and every Socialist in the land. That such was not the case, the lukewarm comment and half-approving, half-condemning tone of the Socialist Party press, with but one or two exceptions, bear convincing testimony, while the uncalled for, unwise, and wholly unaccountable official pronunciamento of the St. Louis “Quorum,” purporting to speak for the National Committee, capped the climax of unfairness and injustice to the Western movement. [See REVIEW of October 1902]
Stripped of unnecessary verbiage and free from subterfuge, the Socialist Party has been placed in the attitude of turning its back upon the young, virile, class-conscious union movement of the West, and fawning at the feet of the “pure and simple” movement of the East, and this anomalous thing has been done by men who are supposed to stand sponsor to the party and whose utterance is credited with being ex cathedra upon party affairs.
They may congratulate themselves that upon this point at least they are in perfect accord with the capitalist press, and also with the “labor lieutenants,” the henchmen, and the heelers, whose duty it is to warn the union against Socialism and guard its members against working class political action.
The writer takes issue with these comrades upon this vital proposition; and first of all insists that they (including the members of the Quorum) speak for themselves alone, as they undoubtedly have the right to do, and that their declaration in reference to the American Labor Union is in no sense a party expression, nor is it in any matter binding upon the party, nor is the party to be held responsible for the same.
As a matter of fact the rank and file of the Socialist Party, at least so far as I have been able to observe, rejoice in the action of the Denver convention, hail it as a happy augury for the future, and welcome with open arms the Western comrades to fellowship in the party.
“Why didn’t they stay in the Federation of Labor and carry on their agitation there? Why split the labor movement?” This is made the burden of the opposition to the Western unionists, who refused to be assimilated by Mark Hanna’s “Civic Federation”-the pretext for the scant, half-hearted recognition of their stalwart working class organization and their ringing declaration in favor of Socialism and in support of the Socialist Party.
And this objection may be dismissed with a single sentence. Why did not those who urge it remain in the Socialist Labor Party and carry on their agitation there? Why split the Socialist movement?
It is not true that the Western unionists set up a rival organization from geographical or sectional considerations, or to antagonize the Federation; and they who aver the contrary know little or nothing about the Western movement, nor about the causes that brought it into existence. A brief review of these may throw some light on the subject.
In 1896 the annual convention of the Federation of Labor was held in Cincinnati. The Western Federation of Miners, at that time an affiliated organization, was represented by President Edward Boyce and Patrick Clifford, of Colorado. The strike of the Leadville [Colorado] miners, more than 3,000 in number, one of the bloodiest and costliest labor battles ever fought, was then in progress and had been for several months. The drain and strain on the resources of the Western Federation had been enormous. They needed help and they needed it sorely. They had always poured out their treasure liberally when help was needed by other organization, East as well as West, and now that they had reached their limit, they naturally expected prompt and substantial aid from affiliated organizations. Boyce and Clifford appealed to the delegates. To use their own language they were “turned down,” receiving but vague promises which, little as they meant, were never fulfilled. At the close of the convention they left for home, disappointed and disgusted. They stopped off at Terre Haute to urge me to go to Leadville to lend a helping hand to the striking miners, which I proceeded to do as soon as I could get ready for the journey. It was here that they told me that the convention was a sore surprise to them, that 3 or 4 men had votes enough to practically control the whole affair, and that the dilatory and reactionary proceedings had destroyed their confidence in the Federation.
Afterward I was told by the officers in charge of the strike that no aid of the least value, or even encouragement, had been rendered by the Federation of Labor and that the financial contributions were scarcely sufficient to cover the expense of the canvass for same.
It was not long after this that the Western miners withdrew from the Federation and a couple of years later, conceiving the necessity of organizing all classes of labor in the Western states, which as yet had received but scant attention, the American Labor Union was organized, the Western Federation of Miners being the first organization in affiliation with the new central body.
—————
Hellraisers Journal – Friday May 3, 1912
“The Shame of San Diego” by Hartwell S. Shippey, Part I
From the International Socialist Review of May 1912:
The Shame of San Diego
by HARTWELL S. SHIPPEY
[Part I of II]
SPAT upon, cursed, reviled; the victims of lying calumny and vile vituperation; the recipients of farcical indignities on the part of the legal lackeys of an organized oligarchy; beaten, kicked, clubbed, starved by brass-bound blue-coated Cossacks and vigilantes, the scorned and despised members of the I. W. W. hold San Diego-on-the-bay in their grasp.
Laughing, only passively resistant, singing their songs of solidarity, these homeless, propertyless, countryless “hoboes,” incarcerated in the iron-bound bastiles of smiling San Diego, are clamoring not for physical comforts or luxuries, but for mental food, the works of Marx, Spencer, Renan, Rousseau and Dietzgen.
Even without definite knowledge of the rhythmic tread of the thousands marching to their rescue, these modern Crusaders, buoyed up by their indomitable idealism, secure in the virtue of their cause, have that great faith in the loyalty of their kind to feel, if they cannot know, that theirs will be the victory.
Rivaling the Coeur d’Alene and Colorado, the San Diego fight for free speech and free press will enter the pages of revolutionary history as a stupendous example of red-blooded men heroically enduring every conceivable form of “Man’s [perfect?] self-control in the face of fiendishly inhumanity to man” and preserving brutal persecution.
San Diego may congratulate herself on being the instrument by which two socially valuable bits of education have been given to the world. First the world has come to know the extremes to which an overbearing despotism will go in its efforts to crush labor; and second, it is being demonstrated that, under certain conditions, revolutionary and conservative branches of the labor movement will line up together solidly and unitedly.
For, know ye, the battle is not primarily one fought for a short hundred yards of city street, nor yet for free speech and press alone. It is, at bottom, a struggle on the part of labor for the privilege of organizing and educating its kind to the end that the products of labor shall be rendered unto labor, and that better living conditions for the toilers shall make of this modern miasma of human misery a more fit state for human beings to occupy.
What precipitated this struggle in the non-commercial city nestling on the hills above a beautiful bay with the blue mountains rising in the distance?
California will, barring intervening preventatives, hold two great fairs in 1915, one at San Francisco and one at San Diego. A great amount of labor will be employed in instituting and conducting these fairs. Organized labor, as represented by the A. F. of L., insists on having a voice in determining the rate of wages it will receive and the conditions under which it will work. Organized capital, dominated by the M. and M., declares that IT shall be the sole arbiter in reference to these questions. Organized capital insists that the open shop shall prevail in California; while organized labor realizes that the closed shop is its life-principle. Knowing that it cannot prevail against the unions when there are no idle men to take their places, the M. and M., controlling the press of the country as it does, has systematically published misinformation throughout the country to the effect that jobs are plentiful in California-to the end that jobless men may flood the labor market of the coast and imperil the power of the unions.
The chief function of the Industrial Workers of the World on the coast has been, and is, an education of the unemployed to an understanding of the interests of labor that prevents the out-of-works from acting in the selfish and cowardly role of strike-breaker or scab. The M. and M. recognizes this menace to their plans and strikes at the vitals of this education by an attempted suppression of free speech and press, these forms of freedom being imperative to the educators of the floating population.
—————
Hellraisers Journal – Wednesday March 6, 1912
“The Battle for Bread at Lawrence” by Mary E. Marcy, Part III
From the International Socialist Review of March 1912
[Wonderful Solidarity]
The wonderful solidarity displayed by the strikers has surprised everybody. There are more languages spoken in the confines of Lawrence than in any other district of its size in the world. But in spite of these barriers, the strike was an almost spontaneous one and seventeen races, differing widely in speech and custom, rose in a concerted protest. Lacking anything like a substantial organization at the outset, they have clung together in furthering a common cause without dissension. Too much credit cannot be given Comrades Joseph Ettor and Wm. D. Haywood in the splendid work of organization and education they have carried on in Lawrence.
—————
Hellraisers Journal – Sunday February 4, 1912
“The Capitalist Press” by Agnes Thecla Fair, “Boy Scouts” by Ryan Walker
From The Coming Nation of February 3, 1912:
———-
—————
Hellraisers Journal – Saturday January 13, 1912
New York City – Haywood and Hillquit Debate Labor Question at Cooper Union
From The New York Call of January 12, 1912:
The first of a series of meetings for the discussion of the various problems confronting the Socialist party of America was held in Cooper Union last night with Julius Gerber, organizer of Local New York, which has arranged these meetings, presiding.
The big hall was jammed to the doors and the audience followed every word of the protagonists with breathless interest.
The meeting was a sort of family affair, only holders of red cards being allowed in the hall. A few Socialist Labor party men smuggled themselves into the crowd on borrowed S. P. cards. They were promptly recognized and Chairman Gerber asked that they leave the hall, which they did.
The subject of the discussion last night was “What shall the attitude of the Socialist party be toward the economic organization of the workers?”
William D. Haywood and Morris Hillquit were the debaters. Each of them was given an hour, the time being divided as follows: half an hour for the outline of the debate by each speaker, then each one got twenty minutes for rebuttal and finally ten minutes for closing the discussion.
Haywood opened the discussion. The burden of his arguments in the main was that the Socialist party should go among the workers and begin a propaganda for industrial unionism, for one big union. He assailed the American Federation of Labor and said that the Socialist party is acquiescing in the policy of the American Federation, which was a distinctly anti-Socialist and capitalist policy.
Industrial Form Superior, But-
Hillquit in his reply to Haywood said that there can be no question in the mind of any Socialist that the industrial form of organization is superior to the craft organization. But he did not believe that the Socialist should begin preaching industrialism outside of organized labor. The Socialist party, he said, should keep up its policy of trying to reach the workers in their present unions. The policy has been successful, Hillquit said, as is shown by the fact that every union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor has Socialists in important positions, as well as in the rank and file. These men have been elected to these positions by the rank and file, he said, because they were Socialists.
[…..]
Haywood’s Final Reply.
Haywood took the floor to reply in his final ten minutes.
He declared there is nothing in common between the policies of the American Federation of Labor and the Socialist party. The former, he said, is craft conscious as opposed to the class consciousness of the latter. He went on to show that by high initiation fees, curtailment of apprentices and even closing of books, membership is kept down and would-be members excluded…..
He went on to say that he had never advocated anything else but the organization of the workers as one man, and that he had believed and still believes the craft form of organization to be “ethically unjustifiable and tactically suicidal.”
At the same time he urged the necessity for political action, the political power to be used, not after the social revolution, but under present conditions, citing as an instance of its use the turning of the police against strikebreakers instead of against strikers.
Haywood explained that in criticizing the American Federation of Labor he criticized its leaders, who were members of the Knights of Columbus and of the Civic Federation executive.
Hillquit Finds Mystery Deep.
In taking the floor to close the debating. Hillquit declared that the mystery had deepened, seeing that Haywood did not oppose the rank and file of the A. F. of L. but the members of the Executive Committee of the Civic Federation…..
The difference between the speaker’s policy and Haywood’s, Hillquit declared, was that the former, while condemning the policies of Samuel Gompers, made efforts to educate the rank and file, while Haywood was ready to kick over and destroy the whole A. F. of L.
[…..]
[Emphasis added.]
———-
Hellraisers Journal – Saturday June 3, 1911
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn: Organize Women in Strong Industrial Unions
From the Spokane Industrial Worker of June 1, 1911:
WOMEN IN INDUSTRY SHOULD ORGANIZE
———-BY ELIZABETH GURLEY FLYNN
From the viewpoint of a revolutionary socialist there is certainly much to criticize in the present labor organizations. They have their shortcomings, of so pronounced a character that many thoughtful but pessimistic workers despair of practical benefit from assisting or considering them further. Yet unionism remains a vital and a burning question to the toilers, both men and women.
[…..]
Little need be said of he seven million wage-earning women. That unionism is their one great weapon, hardly admits of argument. Even more than their brother toilers do these underpaid and overworked women need co-operative effort on their own behalf. Yet many of their experiences with the old unions have been neither pleasant nor encouraging. Strike after strike of cloak makers, shirt waist makers, dressmakers, etc on the East Side of New York has been exploited by rich faddists for woman’s suffrage, etc., until the points at issue were lost sight of in the blare of automobile horns attendant on their coming and going. A band of earnest, struggling workers made the tail of a suffrage kite in the hands of women of the very class driving the girls to lives of misery or shame, women who could have financed the strike to a truly successful conclusion were they seriously disposed, is indeed a deplorable sight. But the final settlement of the many widely advertised strikers left much to be desired.
———-
Hellraisers Journal – Sunday October 10, 1909
Louis Duchez on Victory of McKees Rocks Strikers, Part II
From the International Socialist Review of October 1909:
[Part II of II.]
—–
On August 15th, the I. W. W. advertised a mass meeting to be held on Indian Mound. Large posters printed in five different languages were displayed. Eight thousand men attended the meeting—nearly all strikers, and many railroad men and trade unionists and laborers from Pittsburg.
William E. Trautman first addressed the meeting in English and German, after which the men were parcelled off in lots. Nine different nationalities were spoken to—besides these two—and to each man his own tongue.
To Ignatz Klavier, a Polander and member of the Socialist Party who speaks five languages fluently, much credit is due for enlightening the McKees Rocks strikers on the principles of industrial unionism. It was Klavier who, during the second week of the strike, brought out clearly the distinction between the A. F. of L. and the I. W. W. He was ably assisted by Henyey, a Hungarian, and Max Forker, a German.
A wonderful spirit of solidarity was shown by the trainmen of the Pittsburg, Ft. Wayne and Chicago and on the Pittsburg and Lake Erie roads—the only railroads running into McKees Rocks, when the trainmen refused to haul scabs to the plant. This is the first time in the history of labor troubles in the United States that this has been done. This was another example of the tactics of industrial unionism directly due to I. W. W. propaganda and education. Not only did the railroad men lend their aid to the strikers but the crews on the two company steamers, “The Queen” and “The Pheil,” refused to haul the scabs. This also is due to the work of the Unknown Committee and the great wonderful spirit of solidarity that is spontaneously stirring the wage slaves of the world. Even the school children of “Hunkeytown” refused to attend school until the strike was settled.
———-
Hellraisers Journal – Saturday May 15, 1909
Western Tour of Elizabeth Gurley Flynn from May to July
From the Spokane Industrial Worker of May 6, 1909:
LECTURE TOUR OF MISS E. G. FLYNN
—–INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD
—–
General Administration,
310 Bush Temple, Chicago.
—–
Labor Produces All Wealth-
Labor Is Entitled to All It Produces-
An Injury to One Is an Injury to All
—–
Fellow Worker: The crying need of the hour with the working class is a form of organization that will create and maintain solidarity. To gain this means constructive work of great proportion. It needs correct education as well as correct form of organization. It means laying the foundation for the rule of the working class. It means the building of an organization that will enable its membership to successfully cope with the employing class in its everyday struggle. It means building an organization that will supplant the capitalist system and secure for the workers the full product of their labor.
Can this work be accomplished?
Can this organization be built?
It can and will!
It must be built!Industrial Unionism on revolutionary lines will furnish the organization needed.
Agitation, education and organization on industrial lines is first required.
The Industrial Workers of the World is arranging a tour of the West for
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn.
Miss Flynn is one of the cleverest and best posted industrial unionists before the country today. Her exposition of the aims and objects of Industrial Unionism can be understood by all.
———-
Hellraisers Journal – Tuesday April 15, 1919
The Journey of Eugene Debs from Terre Haute to Moundsville Prison
From The Indianapolis Sunday Star of April 13, 1919:
Debs Leaves Alone on Way to Serve Sentence
—–(Special to The Indianapolis Star.)
TERRE HAUTE, Ind., April 12,-When Eugene V. Debs was advised by long distance telephone today that no Federal officer would be sent for him, but that he would be expected to report as early as possible to the authorities in Cleveland, O., he made arrangements to depart at 10 o’clock tonight. He engaged his berth on the Big Four train, then quietly proceeded to put his house in order for his period of absence.
Mr. Debs observed his farewell dinner at home with only Mrs. Debs and her mother at the table. He was surprised when advised that he would be permitted to report voluntarily to the Federal Building in Cleveland. It had been thought that an officer would come to accompany him to the prison at Moundsville, W. Va., where he is to serve ten years.
———-
[Photograph added.]
