WHO ARE AFFECTED.
Let us see who really would be affected.
As just cited there necessarily would be thousands of periodical
publishers affected--virtually ruined. But, let us go down to things
elemental in this question--_down to the stumpage_.
The great educational white way of our periodical literature is builded
upon _wood pulp_.
In an opening paragraph of this volume I adverted to that fact. The chief
pulp woods are spruce of the North--even of the distant North--and the
Northwest. Then come cottonwood, basswood and soft maple, of the South,
Southeast and New England. Of course, there are several other kinds of
pulpwoods, but they are not used extensively for the manufacture of
white paper, unless chemically treated, and such treatment makes them
expensive. Of the pulpwoods I have named, spruce is far and away the most
extensively used. From spruce is produced the best pulp. In “milling,” it
shows body, fiber, strength--it gives toughness to the milled sheet or
the Web roll.
But that is enough. I am not an expert in pulp-wood stocks. The point I
am trying to call to the reader’s attention is that _any legislation_
which cuts down the consumption of wood pulp must necessarily “affect”
some other folks besides “a few magazine publishers.”
First, a just adjudication of such a piece of legislation as that
proposed in Mr. Hitchcock’s rider amendment would put from thirty to
fifty per cent of our weaker (but excellent) periodicals on the financial
rocks--put them out of business. They consume thousands of tons yearly of
pulp-wood paper.
It will, I think, be freely admitted that such periodicals would be out
of--_forced out of_--the pulp-wood market--I mean out of the wood-pulp
paper market, which amounts to the same thing.
But that is not all. The strong weeklies and monthlies are not going
to be put out of business by legislation of that rider character. They
will continue in business. They will meet its unjust exactions by
readjustments. They are printing on sixty to eighty pound stock. Some
parts of their periodicals are printed on even heavier stock. They will
go to the paper mills and demand _lighter_ stock, of special finish--_and
their demands will be met_--and fifty to sixty pound stock will be used.
The special finish will give the reader just as presentable a magazine,
typographically, as he now receives.
But you observe that the _publisher_ will be saving from twenty to fifty
per cent in _stock weight_.
You will also observe that the paper mills will be using twenty to fifty
per cent less wood pulp than they are now using.
You will also observe that the railroads will haul twenty to fifty per
cent less of pulp timber and less wood-pulp paper than they now haul.
“Only a few magazine publishers will be affected,” eh?
Let us “recast” as far as we have gone.
The owners of pulp wood acres or stumpage would be affected, would they
not? There are probably three to five hundred of them in the country,
taken at a low estimate.
They are not of the “few magazine publishers” are they?
Pulp mill and other investors in pulp-wood stumpage seldom buy until
they have an estimate by some skilled judge as to the probable “cut”
the acreage will yield. For this purpose the prospective purchasers
usually employ one or more “timber cruisers.” A timber cruiser is a man
so skilled and experienced that he can look at a standing tree and tell
you within a hundred feet or so how much lumber it will saw or how many
cords of pulp or other wood it will cut. He “steps off” an acre, sizes
up the available trees growing on the acre, averaging up the large trees
with the small ones, and then estimates or calculates the _average_ wood
or lumber growth on that acre. He then goes off to some other acre.
The latter may be only a few hundred yards or it may be a mile or two
from the acres last measured, the estimate on which the “cruiser” has
carefully noted in his “field book.”
The second acre he “works” as he did the first, and so the “cruiser” goes
on with acre after acre through a forest of ten, fifty, a hundred, or it
may be a million or more acres of “stumpage,” always careful to note the
“light” and the “heavy” timbered sections, and marks with a sharp, shrewd
and experienced eye an estimate of the number of acres covered by the
light and the heavy growth of timber. When he has covered the acreage his
employer contemplates buying, he comes back to civilization, turns in his
field book and makes a report to the boss. On that showing the boss buys
or declines.
Sometimes, of course, the careful, prudent boss may have two, three or
a dozen cruisers, covering different fields of a vast forest section
and, sometimes, virtually _trailing_ each other. In the latter case, the
buyer seeks to use one cruiser’s estimate as a check on the other. In any
event, however, the purchase or investment is usually made on the showing
the cruisers have made.
Now, this talk about timber, cruisers, etc., may be uninteresting to the
reader. I sincerely hope, though, he will read it and follow me along
the same lines a little further. My object is to show how wide of the
truth--how unjustly or ignorantly wide of the truth--Mr. Hitchcock was
when making the statement, which it has been repeatedly and reputably
asserted he did make, to the effect that the legislation he sought
would “affect only a few magazine publishers.” I have stated, and have
given what I believe to be sound, valid reasons in support of the
statement, that legislation of the nature, covered by his rider amendment
ultimately--_and necessarily_--must be either annulled by the courts or
be so broadened as to remove its special or class features. Of course,
Mr. Hitchcock wanted--_and he still wants_--legislation of the nature
indicated in that rider to become _operative law_. It is my belief he
entertained such hope and desire when he asserted that an enactment of
the character of his rider would “affect only a few magazine publishers.”
At any rate, it was with such belief I introduced this division of our
general subject.
As previously stated, legislation of the character sought by Mr.
Hitchcock cannot be enacted into operative law _without cutting down the
consumption of wood pulp from thirty to fifty per cent_.
Such a cut in consumption, I am here trying to show, cannot be made
without affecting the earnings and lives of men--many thousands of men
and families--who cannot even be imagined as of those “few magazine
publishers.”
When the stumpage owner decides to cut five, ten, fifty, a hundred or
more thousand acres for milling, another gang of men--“road blazers”--is
sent into the forest. If the transportation is to be by water, some
river or smaller stream, these latter men select suitable roll-ways and
boom yardages along the stream. From each of these they “blaze” or mark
the trees and smaller growths to be felled and the obstructions to be
removed in order to provide a haulage roadway--usually providing for both
wagons and snow sleds or sledges. If the transportation is to be by rail,
corresponding work is done, the roadways branching in from the forest to
the rail sidings where the loading is to be done. Not infrequently “spur
tracks” are blazed which sometimes run for miles into the forest away
from the main line of the railway.
Following these men who mark out the “haulways,” come a far more numerous
body of men with axes, saws, hooks, oxen, mules and other equipment,
including cooks, “grub” and other things necessary to feed and shelter
them. These, also, are factors--elemental or primal factors--in the
production of wood-pulp from which most of our white paper is made.
Numerically they, in the aggregate, number thousands.
Most certainly they cannot be counted among the “few magazine publishers”
referred to by Mr. Hitchcock.
With equal certainty it can be said that _each_ of these thousands would
be materially affected in his industrial occupation by any legislation or
other influence which caused a shrinkage in the demand for wood-pulp.
In the fall and winter of the year (sometimes in other seasons as well),
an army of men--not thousands, but tens of thousands in number--swarm
into the pulp wood forests. They are axemen, “fiddlers” (cross-cut
sawyers,) foremen, gang foremen, ox drivers, mule drivers, horse drivers.
Here also is again found the cook, the “pot cleaner,” the “grub slinger”
and other servers of subsistence to the “timber jackies” of the various
camps.
Any material reduction in the consumption of wood-pulp would affect them,
would it not?
None of them publish magazines, do they?
This brings us down to the pulp mill. Of course each mill has a hundred
or more men employed getting its wood floated down the rivers or streams
during the spring floods, or “freshets,” if their transportation is
by water. They are log “berlers”, “jam” breakers, shore “canters,”
“boomers,” etc. If their working stock comes by rail, there are
“loaders,” “unloaders,” “yarders,” etc. Then come in the thousands of
mill men, engaged on the work of reducing the wood to pulp. If the pulp
mill has not a paper mill in immediate connection, as often happens,
then the railroad is immediately interested in the reduced tonnage haul,
and likewise every man who works for the railroad becomes interested
industrially.
Even a triple-expansion brained man could not figure these thousands of
industrial workers into the ranks of those “few magazine publishers” whom
Mr. Hitchcock, it is asserted, _repeatedly_ asserted, would alone be
affected by his urgently urged amendment.
Next, we reach the paper mill. How many thousands of men are employed by
them, I do not know. Of the many other thousands--wives and children who
are dependent upon those workers for clothing, shelter and subsistence--I
cannot make even a worthy guess. The reader can make as dependable an
estimate as I, probably a more dependable one. But readers will unitedly
agree that all these thousands of workmen, wives and children would be
affected by _any_ reduction in the consumption of wood-pulp paper.
All readers will also agree that no one of these is a magazine publisher.
Thus far we have seen, in considering the “reach” of Mr. Hitchcock’s
recommended legislation, that it would have affected the earnings and
the lives of many thousands of our people--people who cannot, in even
perfervid imagination, be classed among his “few magazine publishers.”
In this connection, however, should be noted the fact that when the
paper leaves the paper mills, with the thousands dependent upon their
operation and success, the paper proper passes into the custody of the
transportation companies--railroad and water--chiefly the former--and of
the thousands of operatives they employ. Next comes the thousands engaged
in the cartage interests in cities throughout the country, wherever
printing is done. In cities of the first and second classes there is
usually found a division of the cartage interest which confines its
service almost exclusively to the work of carting paper from car, depot,
dock or warehouse to the printing plant which consumes it.
Here, then, in the last two classes named, must be found several
thousands more workmen who would necessarily be adversely affected by
a shrinkage of thirty to fifty per cent in the pulp wood cut. Those
thousands, mark you, do not include the thousands of women and children
dependent upon the earnings of those workmen. Yet they would necessarily
be affected by any shrinkage in wood-pulp consumption.
And again it must be admitted by every man--and _will_ be admitted by
any man with as much brains as directs the activities of any lively
angleworm--that none of the thousands here mentioned are magazine
publishers. None of them could possibly be of the “few magazine
publishers” referred to by Mr. Hitchcock.
So far we have touched upon only the _elements of production_. While the
people employed in the several divisions of the pulp-wood industry may
run, numerically, into many tens of thousands, in the great division of
the printing trades, they run into _the hundreds of thousands_. I refer
to the great printing and publishing trades--the trades which turn the
pulp paper into periodicals and books--_the trades whose work directly
educates us_.
Before attempting to designate the various divisions of this class,
or to indicate the vast multitude--both men and women--to whom they
give employment, I desire to present a few quotations, showing that
these trades and these hundreds of thousands of employes are, in the
slang language of the street, “onto” not only the controlling--the
_ulterior_--motives of Mr. Hitchcock but also that they know and
understand and _feel_ something of the _far-reaching wreck and ruin to
homes and to lives which legislation of the nature he proposed must bring
to this industrial division of our general citizenship_.
Under date of May 20, 1911, Mr. M. H. Madden wrote me the following
letter. While Mr. Madden may not be as widely known as is Postmaster
General Hitchcock, he not having had the advantage of a federal cabinet
position to broadcast his fame, there are few men better known among the
personnel of the printing trades than is Mr. Madden, and equally few men
there are who are better informed on the cost of carriage, handling and
distribution of second-class mail.
In this letter Mr. Madden speaks particularly of the _alleged_ Postoffice
Department “deficit.” While this much-talked of “deficit” is made the
subject of a short subsequent chapter, Mr. Madden’s letter presents
several other points trenchantly pertinent to the subject we are now
considering, to-wit: that the printing trades--all branches and classes
of it, from the pressfeeder and bindery girl to the shop superintendent
and publisher--are alive to the dangers with which legislation of the
“rider” character is fraught:
CHICAGO, May 20, 1911.
MY DEAR MR. GANTZ--For a considerable time President Taft has
directed attention to a supposed deficit in the Postoffice
Department revenues, he accepting the figures of his Postmaster
General that the amount of the shortage for 1909 was above
$17,000,000, while that for 1910 was cut down to less than
$6,000,000.
An authorized statement by Mr. Hitchcock, sent out on May 27,
1911, declares that for the six months of 1911 there is a surplus
in postal receipts ranging from $1,000,000 to $3,000,000. With
the fact kept in view that there have been increases in expenses
in many directions and the further fact that second-class mail
tonnage, on which great losses occur--according to the Hitchcock
plan of keeping books--has increased, the manifest inconsistency
involved in Mr. Hitchcock’s discovery is too transparent to
permit of discussion.
Factors which have been left out of the reckoning, among others
might be mentioned the progressive increased amount of business
of the postal department, with but slight advance in the
percentage of cost for transacting the same; a general agitation
for better service on the part of the public which awakened the
authorities to a fuller responsibility of their duty, and the
important circumstance that there has been a new alignment of the
House and Senate Committees on Postoffices and Postroads, has
caused a moving-up process, we might say shaking-up process, in
methods that sadly needed furbishing and of ideas that required
practical demonstration. The effect of improving the system of
transmitting the postal funds promptly to the national treasury
instead of leaving the same to accumulate in the common centers,
where they were earned, is seen by the immediate wiping out of
the need for a balance of $10,000,000 with which to do business.
Such an ancient method of conducting postal business would
probably do in the period when the pyramids were built, but that
system had finally to surrender, it being too archaic for even
the Postoffice Department to adopt.
In a communication to me under date of August 9th, 1911, Mr. Madden gives
expression to the following very informative statements:
In connection with the Hughes postal inquiry I would like to
inform you of the _total addition_ to the expense of conducting
the Postoffice Department which became effective July 1, 1911.
You may avail yourself of these facts in your argument, as they
are official, orders having been issued by Postmaster General
Hitchcock for these additional expenditures.
The sum of $1,200,000 is to be devoted to increases in the
salaries of postoffice clerks during the current year, while
$600,000 of an increase will go to city letter carriers. The
railway mail clerks will get an increase of only $175,000, making
an addition to the salaries of the three groups of $1,975,000.
When the rural route carriers get their increase of $4,000,000 it
will mean _an addition_ to the four groups of the stupendous sum
of $5,975,000 to the annual total. The figures are calculated to
startle the ordinary observer, especially when there has been so
much music about deficits.
On August 15th, 1911, Mr. M. H. Madden, as Secretary of the Independent
Postal League, wrote the Hon. Daniel A. Campbell, Postmaster of Chicago,
a lengthy and strong letter, in response to the latter’s request for
copies of former issues of the league’s bulletins. I have a copy of
that letter before me and shall take the liberty to quote a few of its
relevant paragraphs.
After explaining the reasons why it was impossible for him to furnish
Postmaster Campbell a file of the league’s bulletins, Mr. Madden
continues:
“For myself I have given second-class postage problems some
study, have written articles concerning the subject, and have
addressed many organizations interested, in various portions of
the country. In this connection I appeared before President Taft
as a representative of the printing trades with President George
L. Berry of the International Printing Pressmen’s Union on Feb.
23 last. We protested against the raise to 4 cents a pound on
advertising pages in the magazines. As a result of our work,
more than 10,000 telegrams of protest were sent to Senators and
members of the House from organized labor men. Two weeks later a
certain ‘rider’ was thrown in the Senate. The Hughes commission
of inquiry into the cost of handling second-class matter was
then created. In one way and another this movement has been kept
somewhat active.
“Some weeks ago the editors of union labor publications of the
country met in Chicago and formed an association to continue this
work, the Independent Postal League being thereby relieved of the
task of instructing working people concerning the subject, the
League turning over to the editors, the data it had, consisting
of documents, official reports, etc.
“President Gompers of the American Federation of Labor and
President Woll of the International Photo-Engravers’ Union
were furnished with material to present before the sessions of
the Hughes Commission. The National Typothetæ to convene in
Denver will also use data supplied by the League, as will the
International Typographical Union at San Francisco; also the
American Federation of Labor at its annual meeting at Atlanta, Ga.
“In this country there are 2,000,000 organized workingmen
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor and 500,000 who
are unaffiliated. These are opposed to a raise in postage and
have so declared. In the printing trades there are more than
400,000 of the best paid artisans in the world and these are
working in opposition to a raise, and since they produce almost
a billion dollars’ worth of printing each year their protest is
worth listening to.
“As workingmen we cannot approve of the inconsistency shown by
having a pressman produce a periodical in Canada and sending it
through the mails at ¼ cent a pound, while his brother pressman
in the United States would be forced to pay four cents a pound
for the same service. And the “Canuck” can certainly do it at a
profit. Here is where a little ‘reciprocity’ juice would taste
nectar-like for the Uncle Sam pressman. For several years our
big postoffice officials have been telling the American people
it cost more than 9 cents a pound to haul second-class mail.
In Canada there is a population of 8,000,000 served by 25,000
miles of railway, while in our country we have 90,000,000 people
and 246,000 miles of railroads. In the United States we print
500 periodicals to one printed in the Dominion. The merits
of the question are so obvious that there is no chance for a
controversy; in fact there can be no dispute on a matter so
plain.”
Now, see here, I do not want to burden you--you, the reader--with
quotations. I have not done so save when the quotations covered the
point--our point--better than I could cover it myself. I write up to
a point to the best of my ability, and then, if I have at hand some
authority--some more _conclusive_ and better told statement than I can
make myself, I hand it to you.
So please do not skip the quotations in this book. The _meat_ of it is in
the _quoted_ matter, not in what I have said or may say. That is why I
desire to quote further just here.
Under date of May 16, 1911, Mr. Hitchcock wrote over the signature of
his Second Assistant, Joseph Stewart, the following letter, addressed
“To Publishers.” Whether or not it was sent to publishers in general or
only to “certain monthly and semi-monthly periodicals,” I do not know. I
reprint it here as evidence for the reader in proof of the tendency, or
policy, of Mr. Hitchcock to exercise bureaucratic powers in administering
the official service of his office--_powers not given him by law_.
I reprint also for the purpose of showing, by two or three following
quotations, how closely Mr. Hitchcock’s official acts are being scanned
by the printing trades and how clearly and how _justly_ they estimate the
results and the trade and industrial effects of such action.
The letter signed by Mr. Stewart follows:
POSTOFFICE DEPARTMENT,
SECOND ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL,
WASHINGTON, D. C., May 16, 1911
Publisher, Practical Engineer, Chicago, Ill.:
SIR:--Arrangements are being made by the Postoffice Department
to transport, after June 30, 1911, _certain_ monthly and
semi-monthly periodical second-class mail matter for _certain_
states by fast freight to a number of central distributing
points, from which points distribution and delivery will be made
by mail as at present.
This method of transportation necessarily being somewhat slower
than the present method of carriage of mail throughout, it
becomes necessary for publishers to rearrange their mailing
schedules to allow an earlier delivery to the postoffice of mail
for the states to be so transported, in order that delivery to
subscribers may be made at approximately the same time as at
present.
It is believed that an advance in mailing dates of from _three_
to _six_ days will provide the necessary margin to offset
the slower movement, and your co-operation to that extent is
solicited.
Specific information relative to the _states affected_ and the
time of advance mailing will be furnished at an early date. Any
further information desired relative to this matter will be given
and any assistance in completing arrangements gladly supplied.
The favor of an early reply is requested.
Very respectfully,
JOSEPH STEWART,
Second Assistant Postmaster General.
The foregoing letter brought a flood of protests in reply. Why should
it not? Why does Mr. Hitchcock, as is evidenced by the letter of his
Second Assistant, seek to make such an unjust discrimination among
periodicals--a discrimination directly contravening _the basic principle
of our government_?
Among the replies Mr. Stewart received was one, a copy of which follows:
CHICAGO, May 22, 1911.
Hon. Joseph Stewart, Second Assistant Postmaster General,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR SIR.--We acknowledge receipt of your favor of the 16th,
and regret that an early reply, as requested, is but partially
possible at present.
You tell us unequivocally, if we interpret your letter correctly,
that our Postoffice Department in rendering service to
subscribers will discriminate against monthly and semi-monthly
periodicals after June 30th; that certain publications of a
class, issued weekly, will be favored with through mail service,
and that other publications of the same character and class,
issued semi-monthly or monthly, shall be rendered freight
service, and no differential rate provided.
It is unfortunate that a distinction directly affecting the
majority of the people could not have been arbitrated, and
thereby avoided a period of distress.
Yours, very truly,
CHICAGO TRADE PRESS ASS’N,
E. R. SHAW,
President.
Another reply follows. It is from the Chicago Printing Trades, an
organization which Mr. Madden, previously quoted, represented at
Washington in his conference with President Taft and senators and members
of the House.
To Postmaster General Hitchcock:--
The various branches of labor engaged in the production of
printing in Chicago number more than 50,000 highly skilled
artisans and their annual output is more than $100,000,000.
These well-paid working people declare--they knowing it to
be a statement based on truth--that the contemplated change
in the method of distributing their product will interfere
disadvantageously with their opportunity for employment, and
they respectfully appeal to the postal authorities to pause in
installing a system that is calculated to work great harm to
their industry. Their united, emphatic protest is entered against
what they feel to be an unwise and unnecessary hampering of their
industry and they ask that their appeal be heard on the justice
of their claim.
In distributing regular publications through the mails the factor
of time is most valuable, and to inaugurate a slower schedule
would greatly reduce the current value of periodicals and curtail
the influence which these publications now wield. We respectfully
direct attention to the injury which the owners of publications
would sustain through curtailment of their earning power, as this
would at once operate adversely to labor. In fact the severest
effect would reach the toiler.
As well-paid, organized workingmen we respectfully call attention
to the policy of protection which has enabled our country to
flourish almost uninterruptedly for a half-century, and in behalf
of this wise system we ask that no unnecessary interference
with our trade be inaugurated by those to whom we look with
expectation to forward our welfare as industrious citizens.
In common with other industries, business in the publishing
lines is far from flourishing, and, while our rate of wages is
conceded, we recognize that anything which interferes with the
profits and success of employers will immediately react upon our
opportunity for employment. It is upon this basis that we plead,
and we ask you, as head of the Postoffice Department, that you
forego instituting the system of distributing the semi-monthly
and monthly publications by freight, and continue the present
method of rapid-mail service.
Labor’s voice is raised in earnest plea for what it considers
itself competent to speak upon, and with the hope that you will
aid in maintaining for us our present conditions, which we esteem
necessary for our welfare and the welfare of those depending upon
us, we leave the question in your hands.
MICHAEL H. MADDEN,
Secretary Independent Postal League.
I am presenting just here, only local protests--Chicago protests. Similar
objections were heard from all parts of the country. The Chicago protest,
however, would not be complete unless we presented the resolutions
adopted by Typographical Union No. 16, at a regular meeting held July 30,
1911. It applies both to the proposed increase in second-class postage
rates and to Mr. Hitchcock’s unjust discrimination in distributing
periodicals:
WHEREAS, It is a fundamental economic truth that anything which
tends to unduly and unjustly raise the cost of distributing the
product of labor reduces the opportunity for employment of those
concerned in the industry thus affected, and indirectly becomes
a menace to all industry, Chicago Typographical Union No. 16,
embracing a membership of more than 4,000 skilled craftsmen,
takes this method of entering its emphatic protest against any
increase in the rate for second-class mail matter; and,
WHEREAS, The proposed routing of semi-monthly and monthly
publications by fast freight instead of by the regular fast mail
service is manifestly unjust and is a flagrant discrimination
against our product, this organization further condemns those
who contemplate this pernicious innovation, and we submit that
the installation of this system by the Postoffice Department is
not only inimical to our welfare as workingmen but will work
incalculable injury to the publishing interests of the entire
country; and,
WHEREAS, These propositions of the Postoffice Department deserve
only the strongest condemnation, and as a means of making this
protest effective, we hereby invite the working people of the
United States to unite with us in a movement having for its
purpose the overhauling and readjustment of the postal affairs
of this country, to the end that the service may become one
of greater convenience to our people and be an instrument
of promotion to the industries of our country instead of a
leaden handicap on our industrial progress and the educational
improvement of all the people; therefore, be it,
_Resolved_, That for the protection of the printing industry we
hereby instruct our delegates to the next annual convention of
the International Typographical Union to propose the following
for the consideration of that body, and they are hereby
instructed to support the indorsement of the same by the said
International Typographical Union convention:
_Resolved_, That the International Typographical Union
emphatically opposes any advance in the rate of postage on
second-class mail matter, and that it condemns the proposed
method of distributing semi-monthly and monthly periodicals
by fast freight instead of by the regular fast mail, to the
facilities of which they are entitled under the law, because they
pay for the same.
The foregoing quotations are sufficient to show that the printing trades
of the nation are awake to the industrial significance of legislation of
the Hitchcock “rider” nature, likewise that they are equally wideawake
to the purpose of Mr. Hitchcock--ulterior or other--in his attempt to
_stealth_ such legislation into operative law.
How many people are employed in the printing trades in this country? I do
not know.
In Chicago alone there are, at a safe estimate, not less than 40,000. A
representative of the organized pressmen of New York before the Postal
Commission testified that there were 12,000 pressmen in New York City and
that _six thousand of these_ were employed on presses which print monthly
and weekly magazines.
I have no later statistics by me than a 1905 report touching the number
of men and women employed in the printing trades in this country. From
the figures given for 1905, however, it may be conservatively stated that
the number of persons in this nation who today are earning their shelter,
apparel and subsistence (not counting the office or clerical forces)
in our great printing and publishing industries is somewheres around
400,000. If the counting-room and general office forces are included the
total number--not counting owners or publishers--will reach at least
450,000.
Now, if we total the people who would be affected by legislation which
must force a shrinkage of from 30 to 50 per cent in the consumption of
wood pulp paper, counting from the timber cruisers to the publication
counting-rooms, we shall find that total to be not less than
700,000--probably 800,000. And, mark you, you fair-minded, conscientious
reader, that total does not include the wives and children dependent upon
the vast army of men employed in our printing industries--dependent for
shelter, clothing and food. If they are counted, the figures I have just
given must be doubled--probably tripled.
So, there must be not less than two, probably _two and a half_, millions
of people,--men, women, wives and children--who would be affected by
legislation of the Hitchcock “rider” character.
It is needless, but I must still point out that not _one_ of these
millions of industrial _earners_ nor their dependents who would be
injuriously, if indeed not disastrously affected, by legislation of
the nature Mr. Hitchcock is so persistently, if not _unscrupulously_,
pressing to force into operative law, _is a magazine publisher_.
Most certain is it that none of this vast multitude of our industrial
citizens and their dependents can be thought of, nor even imagined, as
being counted among those “few magazine publishers” who, Mr. Hitchcock
is reported to have repeatedly asserted, would alone be affected by his
proposed harsh, discriminating and, therefore, unjust legislation.