MAIDEN EFFORTS ON THE ECONOMIC FIELD
The adjournment of the organizing convention in July, 1905, left the
body it had created in a very chaotic condition. The time and attention
of the delegates was so exclusively taken up with the problem of
building up "one big union" out of many little unions and the task of
working out a harmony platform of law and policy on which all could
come together, that the matter of business management was almost
entirely neglected. Indeed some of the circumstances surrounding
the I. W. W. at its inception quite precluded the ordered and
efficient procedure possible to a well manned and adequately financed
organization. The I. W. W. was not well manned and was practically
destitute of financial resources. The dearth of ability and especially
the want of honesty in its managing personnel were to become all too
evident long before the second convention had come to a close, as was
also its practically bankrupt financial status. Although there were
three rather formidable-looking departments nominally organized as
such--_viz._: mining, metal and machinery, and transportation--none
of these except the mining department represented material accessions
either numerically or financially, and the early defection of the
Western Federation of Miners quite broke down this one and, what was
even more important, cut off from the Industrial Workers of the World
the great bulk of its financial resources.
The industrial-union idea made marked headway among the trade unions
of the United States during the first year of the existence of the I.
W. W., and this was very largely due to the influence and example of
that organization. Organizers were sent to those places where serious
friction existed between trade-unionists and employers, or between
trade-unionists and the American Federation of Labor. The I. W. W.
devoted very little attention at that time to the unorganized; its
energy was chiefly centered on the reformation of the craft unions--a
policy of dual unionism. The Federation lost rather heavily in some
quarters to the I. W. W., the disaffection proving most marked among
the brewers and machinists. Max S. Hayes, in reviewing the situation at
the end of the year 1905, wrote as follows:
The elements that are dissatisfied with the A. F. of L. are
naturally looking askance at the I. W. W., which body appears
to be gaining strength in New York, Chicago, and smaller
places, especially in the West. A national officer of the
brewers told me a few week ago that the rank and file in
many parts of the country are clamoring to cut loose from
the Federation and join the Industrialists.... Still another
national officer, a Socialist, by the way, said he had visited
the little city of Schenectady, N. Y., recently and found the
machinists, metal polishers and several other trades unions in
open revolt against their national organization and going into
the camp of the Industrial Workers. Some of the garment working
crafts and textile workers are also affected. It begins to look
as though we are to have another war similar to the struggle
between the old Knights of Labor and the American Federation of
Labor.[180]
This same unrest and dissatisfaction with the condition of trade-union
organization was evident among many local unions of the United
Mine Workers of America. Only two local unions of the Mine Workers
had finally joined the Industrial Workers of the World at the first
convention,[181] but before the end of the year there were several
others desiring admission. In many cases, however, they were unable to
go into the I. W. W. because they had contracts signed up with the mine
operators, and must perforce await their expiration before any action
could be taken. The Mine Workers' locals at Barrow, Muddy Valley,
and Elkville (Ill.) were in precisely this situation. They reported
themselves at the second convention as desirous of admission, but
that immediate transfer of allegiance was impossible because they had
two-year contracts with the operators which did not expire until April,
1908.[182] Although in these instances the contracts were respected and
the locals did not join the I. W. W., that result was not due to any
moral influence emanating from the Industrial Workers of the World,
who, of course, repudiated the validity of contracts with employers.
They believed that, as Haywood expressed it, "as all is fair in love
and war, industrial unionists should abrogate all agreements which
would compel them to violate the principles of unionism."[183]
Friction between the Industrial Workers of the World and the American
Federation of Labor continued, of course, to be in evidence. The
nominal possession of a defense fund by the I. W. W., and the want of
such a feature in the Federation, doubtless appealed to craft unions in
time of need. For that reason, if for no other, many craft unionists
have felt that Haywood had some reason for saying that "the only
function which the American Federation of Labor can assume is to act as
an advisory board of the trade-union movement," and that "the ideas
of Mr. Gompers are hoary, aged, moss-covered relics of the days of the
ox-team and the pony express, when the craftsmen owned or controlled
the tools of production."[184]
There were a few trade unions which joined the Industrial Workers
of the World as a last resort or merely to spite the American
Federation. Such was the case with the Stogie Makers, who constituted
an independent organization in January, 1906, and who, having been
for some reason denied a charter in the American Federation of
Labor, finally, and with noisy repudiation of the principles of the
Federation, joined the I. W. W.[185]
Trouble most commonly arose between the Industrial Workers and the
Federation in time of strike. The Industrial Workers objected to what
they called the "unfair interference of the A. F. of L. in I. W. W.
strikes." Numerous protests against this alleged meddlesomeness of
the Federation were made on the floor of the second convention. The
following excerpt from the report of General-Secretary Trautmann to the
convention will serve for illustration:
... strike-breakers were engaged by the American Federation of
Labor officers to take the places of members of the I. W. W.
In Youngstown, Ohio, in San Pedro [Cal.], in Yonkers and in
many other places committees were sent to employers demanding
the discharge of I. W. W. supporters; special boycotts have
been declared against the goods made in factories where
members of the Industrial Workers of the World are employed,
as, for instance, in St. Louis, Mo., and Butte, Mont.... In
Schenectady, where the I. W. W. efforts gained advantages for
others, too; in Cleveland, Ohio, where the I. W. W. bricklayers
walked out on strike in sympathy with striking hod-carriers,
members of the A. F. of L., and refused an offer of ten per
cent increase in wages and a closed shop contract, if they
would desert the building laborers, which they refused to do;
in Newark, N. J., where the I. W. W. shoemakers refused to work
with the strike-breakers engaged to defeat strikers of another
organization not in the I. W. W., and similar cases can be
recorded to show that the I. W. W. members are not organized
for the purpose of retaliation against members of their
class....[186]
The American Federation of Labor was undoubtedly often guilty of
attempts of the kind just mentioned--activities which were looked upon
by the "Wobblies" as crafty methods of undermining and antagonizing
the work of their organization. It happened more than once during
that first year of the younger organization's existence, and has
happened on the occasion of many an industrial conflict since that
time. However, the blame lies not entirely at the door of the
Federation, nor has it alone been guilty of such practices. It is, in
fact, quite likely that the first provocation to interference arose
from the persistence of the I. W. W. in the policy of organizing--or
rather of annexing to itself--unions already organized, and usually
so organized in the American Federation of Labor itself. This policy
of double affiliation was warmly discussed at the first convention,
but no definite official decision of the convention appears in the
stenographic report of proceedings. The I. W. W. has been accused of
deliberately agitating among unions already organized, and that in the
face of open declarations that the I. W. W. does not believe in dual
organization. It is true that such declarations of policy may have been
made by I. W. W. speakers, but it has not been _officially_ declared
to be the policy of the organization. A sharp distinction should be
drawn here between reorganizing, or attempting to reorganize, already
organized bodies--dual organizing activities--which are not expressly
approved or condemned, and the condition of dual organism--or dual
membership--which last is expressly forbidden. No local union of the I.
W. W. may belong to the American Federation of Labor or to any other
national organization.[187]
The I. W. W. has constantly been guilty of agitating in and building
from the old craft unions, and in the earlier days of its history most
of its work consisted in thus "boring from within" the established
unions. It is only in later years that it has even approximately
lived up to its avowed policy of organizing the unorganized--the
unskilled--the floating laborer. Consequently the provocation of the
American Federation of Labor, and craft unions generally, to retaliate
for the alleged meddlesomeness of the I. W. W. was even greater then
than it is now.
The vigor of this retaliation on the part of the craft unions
was evidenced by the action taken by such organizations as the
International Association of Machinists, the United Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners, the United Cloth Cap and Hat Makers, the United
Brotherhood of Leather Workers, and others, which "decreed that the
mere joining of the Industrial Workers of the World would deprive any
man or woman of the right to work in industries controlled by these
combinations."[188]
This strenuous opposition was largely the cause of more or less
compromising on the part of the Industrial Workers of the World
with the craft-union idea, though, of course, the very weakness
of the new movement and the hard-fixed habit of years of life and
work under the old craft form was a potent factor here. This much
is plain from the record of those early days of I. W. W. history.
Many of its constituent unions retained to a considerable degree the
characteristics of craft unions, and more than that--some of the I. W.
W. locals (boasted types and rallying centers for industrial unionism)
were nothing more or less than craft locals. Even this extremity was
no doubt forced upon many locals on account of the lack of knowledge
of industrial unionism among workingmen, and this made necessary that
rather ambiguous phenomenon of a revolutionary industrial union largely
composed of craft or pseudo-craft units. The delegates to the second
convention had to face this very impossible situation. A typical one
was that of the Bartenders and Waiters Local Union No. 83 of Chicago,
concerning which Delegate Shenkan of San Francisco said:
[This] local is a craft organization whose members do not
even follow the vocation their charter would designate. Most
of their members work in other lines of industry, such as
cigar-making, shoemaking, painting, and quite a number of
diversified kinds of work during week days, while on Sundays
they work as bartenders and waiters at picnics, balls, _etc._
...[189]
The convention was very desirous that this condition be remedied as
soon as possible, and a resolution was finally passed stipulating that
the General Executive Board must always organize so far as possible
on industrial lines: "The incoming General Executive Board is hereby
directed to organize the new recruits in and by industries, and to
promote the education in industrialism among those men to whom charters
may have been issued upon a craft system before they could be enrolled
in the I. W. W."[190] In his report to the convention General Secretary
Trautmann recommended that
as a safeguard against the possible drifting of such [craft]
unions into permanent craft organizations, it should be
understood and made mandatory that as soon as a union of
employees in any given industry is formed, all those in such
craft unions must transfer to the respective industrial
body.... But all recruiting craft unions should be chartered
directly from the general administration, so that constant
control can be kept over the affairs of such organizations,
and the proper alignment be directed as soon as such [action]
appears to be opportune and necessary.[191]
However, this antagonism from outside craft unions, and these
involuntary internal compromises with the craft-union idea were not the
most serious difficulties which now beset the Industrial Workers of the
World. The organization was threatened with wholesale defection and
very soon actually suffered it in some quarters. During the spring of
1906 it became evident that a movement was afoot in the lumber camps of
the northwest to organize the lumber workers in a general union outside
of the I. W. W. Moreover, it appeared that the moving spirit in the
agitation was one Daniel MacDonald--charter member of the Industrial
Workers of the World from the old American Labor Union--a man who had
not long since been an organizer for the I. W. W., and who must at the
time have been a member of that organization, since he was sent as a
delegate to the second convention. Mr. MacDonald explained the nature
of the proposed organization in a letter to Mr. James Brookfield of
Crescent City, California, dated at Butte, Montana, March 27, 1906. He
does not mention the I. W. W. He writes that
there is a movement on foot now in this state [Montana] and
throughout the western country to organize a United Lumber
Workers' general organization, to be composed of all men
engaged in the lumber industry.... This organization is to be
constructed on lines broad enough and having sufficient scope
to meet every essential requirement of the men engaged in the
lumber industry, and to give them general support, uniform
benefits and the universal respect and protection so woefully
needed.[192]
The attempt was not successful. The lumber industry was destined to
be one of the most fertile fields for the propaganda of the I. W. W.
and to be one of its most solidly established divisions. This disloyal
agitation on the outside in 1906 was a comparatively insignificant
movement. It merely deprived the organization of a few individual
members, and delayed somewhat the I. W. W. invasion of the lumber
industries.
The most serious defections occurred in the Metals and Machinery, and
the Mining Departments. The former department at the outset comprised
two groups of metal workers: the United Metal Workers International
Union and the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. The United Metal
Workers had been a part of the American Federation of Labor until
shortly before the first I. W. W. convention, and was on its
adjournment installed as a part of the Metals and Machinery Department
of the I. W. W. The Amalgamated Society of Engineers had also been a
part of the American Federation of Labor.
On account of the somewhat industrial structure of that
organization, as different kinds of workers in the metal
industry comprised its membership, said society had been
suspended ... from the American Federation of Labor, but by
a referendum vote of the members living in the United States
and Canada it was decided to become an integral part of the
American Labor Union....[193]
On the merging of the American Labor Union in the Industrial Workers of
the World, the Metal Workers of that union organized in the Amalgamated
Society of Engineers were naturally installed with the United Metal
Workers in the Metals and Machinery Department. Mutual hostility and
friction between these two groups thus arbitrarily forced into one
department, added to a deplorable lack of coöperation and assistance
from the General Headquarters, finally resulted in the breaking away of
the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, and the consequent loss to the
I. W. W. of about four thousand wage-earners in this one department
during the first year of its existence. This left the Metals and
Machinery Department, about three thousand strong, practically limited
in membership to the United Metal Workers International Union.[194]
The most paralyzing blow of all came with the loss of the whole of the
Mining Department in the defection of the Western Federation of Miners
in 1907. Indeed, the Federation really ceased to be an active member of
the I. W. W. after the second convention of the latter organization in
September, 1906. The W. F. of M. defection was so intimately connected
with other dark troubles which came to light at the second convention
that the subject will best be treated in that connection.[195]
The strikes conducted by the Industrial Workers of the World during
the first fifteen months of its existence were almost uniformly
unsuccessful. Its strike activities were, however, quite widespread
and pushed in most cases with energy and enthusiasm. The following
groups of workers were involved: the Stogie Workers of Cleveland, Ohio;
Hotel and Restaurant Workers of Goldfield, Nevada; the Window Washers
of Chicago; the Marble Workers of Cincinnati; the Miners of Tonopah
and Goldfield, Nev.; the Silk Workers of Trenton (N. J.) and Staten
Island (N. Y.); and the Saw Mill and Lumber Workers of Lake Charles,
Louisiana. The Stogie Workers were on strike from January 1 to October
1, 1906. They demanded a ten per cent wage increase, abolition of the
black list, and one apprentice to every ten employees.[196] Although
the strikers were unable to get the aid they needed from the General
Organization, the strike seems to have been quite successful.[197]
In Goldfield, Nevada, strikes were conducted by two different locals.
The demand of the Hotel and Restaurant Workers for the eight-hour day
was finally acceded to. The Miners were on Strike both in Goldfield
and Tonopah. They were bitterly opposed by the Allied Printing Trades
Council of the American Federation of Labor, and seem not to have
reached a settlement until late in 1907.
The Window Washers' strike in Chicago began August 1, 1906, and was on
at the time of the second convention. Members of the Window Washers'
Union quit work in thirty-five buildings in the down-town district of
Chicago. The General Executive Board advised that the striking men be
kept at work in other occupations so far as possible in order to keep
down expenses. The Marble Workers of Cincinnati demanded a nine-hour
day and a Saturday half-holiday. There appears to be no record of the
result of their efforts.
The strikes of the Silk Workers at Trenton, N. J., and
Staten Island, N. Y., were both lost, the cause assigned by the
strikers for their defeat being the fact that they could get no support
from the General Organization.[198]
There was a disproportionate amount of energy given to strikes at this
time. Moreover, most of this energy was misdirected. President Sherman,
in his report to the convention, said: "There has been no time since
August, 1905, but what we have had one or more strikes to contend with,
which has been more or less responsible for our organization not being
in a position to place more organizers in the field than what it has
maintained."[199]
In discussing the I. W. W. strike record, Secretary Trautmann declared
that "there was not a single solitary strike that the I. W. W. won."
They were not rightly conducted, nor called at the right time.
Those organizations [he explained] formed in the last year on
a strict observance of the laws and principles of the I. W. W.
did not have a strike while those organizations organized on
the craft union principle of immediate gains without voluntary
coöperation of the membership, those organizations were the
only ones that were plunged into a fight immediately after we
were organized.[200]
There was certainly little or no coöperative planning of strikes,
especially no careful timing of them, between the local unions and
the general administration. Often during the first year "strikes were
called in times when the general organization was least prepared, and
when it required strenuous efforts to meet the requirements of such a
conflict with the employers."[201]
President Sherman believed that the strike activities had been too
exclusively confined to the eastern states, and even suggested that it
might be better for the time being to conduct strikes only in the West.
He explained his position as follows:
Nearly all the strikes which have taken place during the life
of the organization have been in the eastern States. The
workers at those points, being so poorly paid, it has been
necessary for them to immediately appeal for benefits, which
demonstrates the fact that we must prepare for war before
war is declared. Many of our strikes ... have taken place
immediately after the local union was organized, before the
members involved in such strikes were hardened and drilled in
the principles of industrial unionism.... One local union in
the East ... becomes a greater responsibility to the general
organization than three local unions in the West.[202]
At the same time that the industrial unionists were pushing their
strike propaganda some of them who were also members of the radical
political parties were trying to bring those parties (_viz._, the
Socialist party and the Socialist Labor party) together. To do this
they realized that the two parties must agree upon a policy in regard
to the attitude which the party should assume toward the trade unions.
With this object in view representatives of the two socialist parties
called a conference which was afterwards known as the New Jersey
Socialist Unity Conference. The sessions of this conference were held
in various New Jersey towns--Orange, Paterson, West Hoboken, Newark--at
irregular times between September 10, 1905, and March 4, 1906. The
purpose of the conference, as expressed in the Manifesto issued at the
close of its sessions, was "to consider the causes of the division
between the two [socialist] camps and ascertain, if possible, whether
solid grounds could be found for a union of the militant socialist
forces ... of the State...."[203]
The conference believed that any union between the revolutionary groups
in America depended upon a proper solution of two problems: "First, the
proper attitude for a political party of socialism to assume toward the
burning question of trades unionism; and second, the proper attitude
for a political party of socialism to assume toward the ownership of
its press, the voice of the movement."[204]
The first of these two problems took up the greater part of the
attention of the conference, and it is the only one which was of
special import in the development of industrial unionism. The very
fact of such a conference indicates that there was at least that
harmony between the two camps which was necessary to enable them to
get together to discuss differences. Members of both parties, too,
believed that a harmony platform was actually in process of successful
application, so far as the economic or labor-union policy of both
parties was concerned. For--behold the I. W. W.! "Such a conference,"
said the secretary of the State Executive Committee of the Socialist
Labor party, "taking place at a time when the hitherto divided
socialists are approaching one another and joining hands on the basis
of the Industrial Workers of the World--such a conference we feel
confident, at least feel hopeful, will promote the desired end of
socialist unity."[205]
Shall the political party, the radical political party, be neutral in
its attitude towards the economic organization of the working class?
This was the real question at issue. The prevailing sentiment at this
conference was in the negative.
A socialist political movement [declared one delegate] cannot
be neutral with regard to economic movements. The Socialist
party itself, on the speakers' banners, says to the workers,
"Join the union of your craft. Join the party of your class."
Evolution forced the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance, the
class conscious, economic organization of labor. It was not a
mistake. It organized with 25,000 men and today we have the
Industrial Workers of the World with 100,000 men, organized on
class conscious lines. If it was a mistake, it was the kind of
a mistake that helps. Neutrality is nonsense.[206]
Some of the delegates were more hesitant about such a proposition as
the unqualified endorsement of the I. W. W. One of the Socialist party
representatives expressed his opposition to such support in these words:
The I. W. W. may be good enough now [he said] but it may drift,
may become bad. Should the Socialist movement base itself on
the I. W. W. and that organization fall, the party would fall
with it. I am opposed to recognizing that organization until
it has proved itself to be of use. In Colorado the Western
Federation of Miners adopted declarations similar to those of
the I. W. W., endorsed the Socialist party, then went to the
polls, not to cast their ballot for the Socialist candidate,
but for a reactionary Democrat. We have nothing definite to
show that the I. W. W. would not do the same thing.[207]
The I. W. W. _has_ changed--shifted very decidedly--and in that the
delegate proved himself something of a prophet, but its new position
is anything but that of a reactionary labor organization voting for a
Democratic--or Republican--candidate!
The majority were emphatically for a recognition of the principle of
industrial unionism, but there was some difference of opinion as to
whether any particular organization should be endorsed. A number of
the conferees felt that the I. W. W. should simply be commended as
useful for working out the industrial-union idea, rather than given an
unreserved endorsement. The final conclusions of the conference were
embodied in a series of resolutions, and also expressed in detail in
the Manifesto already referred to. The resolutions pertaining to the
question of political-economic relations were as follows:
I. Resolved, that the Socialist political movement of the
working class cannot remain neutral to the organized effort
of the working class to better their economic conditions on
class-conscious, revolutionary lines.
II. Resolved, that the A. F. of L. form of organization and its
principles are an obstacle to working class emancipation.
III. Resolved, that the Conference places itself on record as
recognizing the usefulness of the Industrial Workers of the
World to the proletarian movement....
X. Resolved, ... that ... steps be taken to bring about a
national conference between the two organizations in order to
bring about unity on a national basis.[208]
The Conference holds [reads this Manifesto] that without the
political movement backed by a class-conscious ... economic
organization, ready to take and hold and conduct the productive
power of the land, and thereby ready ... to enforce if ...
and when need be, the fiat of the socialist ballot of the
working class; that without such a body in existence, the
socialist political movement will be but a flash in the pan
...; that a political party of Socialism which marches to
the polls unarmed by such [an] organization, but invites a
catastrophe over the land in the measure that it strains for
[and achieves] political success.... It must be an obvious
fact to all serious observers of the times, that the day of
the political success of such a party in America would be the
day of its defeat, immediately followed by an industrial and
financial crisis, from which none would suffer more than the
working class itself.... By its own declarations and acts the
American Federation of Labor shows that it accepts wage-slavery
as a finality ... holding that there is identity of interest
between employer and employee.... Consequently [the Conference]
... rejects as impracticable, vicious, and productive only of
corruption the theory of neutrality on the economic field ...,
condemns the American Federation of Labor as an obstacle to
the emancipation of the working class ... [and] commends as
useful to the emancipation of the working class the Industrial
Workers of the World, which instead of running away from the
class struggle bases itself squarely upon it, and boldly and
correctly sets out the socialist principle "that the working
class and the employing class have nothing in common...."[209]
The second I. W. W. convention met on September 17, 1906, with
ninety-three delegates. The sessions continued for sixteen days. It
had been predicted at the first convention that the Industrial Workers
of the World would within a year be one hundred thousand strong. This
forecast was, according to Secretary Trautmann's report to the second
convention, very much too sanguine. This report indicated that there
were some sixty thousand members (including 27,000 in the Western
Federation of Miners) at the opening of the second convention. The
following tabulation of the growth of the membership during the first
year is arranged from the data given in Mr. Trautmann's report:
I. W. W. MEMBERSHIP--FIRST YEAR[210]
_Unions_ _Transportation_ _Metal_ _Total_
_directly_ _Dept._ _Dept._ _Membership_
_Date_ _attached_
1905
Aug. 1 1,900
Sept. 1 4,247[211]
Oct. 1 1,000 840 5,078
Nov. 1 840 5,482
Dec. 1 840 7,971
1906
Jan. 1 840 8,200
Feb. 1 7,817
Mar. 1 9,275 1,500 10,775
Apr. 1 10,288 3,000 13,228
May 1 13,520 195 3,000 16,715
June 1 21,000
July 1 22,500
Aug. 1 45,000
Sept. 1 60,000
The data, it will be noticed, is very fragmentary in regard to the
growth of the various departments, and even the figures representing
total membership can be considered by no means conservative. Mr. St.
John, until recently Secretary-Treasurer of the organization, wrote
"that the Second Annual Convention reports claim 60,000 members, but
the books of the organization did not justify any such claims; in fact,
the average _paid-up_ membership _with the W. F. of M._ for the first
year of the organization was 14,000 members in round numbers."[212]
As has already been intimated, the Mining Department was from the first
not very securely held in the bonds of the general organization, and
it is very doubtful whether the 27,000 miners should be included in I.
W. W. membership estimates even during the period while the Western
Federation was nominally a department of the Industrial Workers of the
World. According to Secretary Trautmann, it was evident "on August
1, 1905, that those brave men of the American Labor Union, numbered
then 1,100, and approximately 700 in the Metal Department, [and] could
not be swayed by the denunciation of the opposition in the West,
those under cover as friends, often more dangerous than those openly
fighting the I. W. W." "These 1900 [1800]," continued Mr. Trautmann,
"constituted the only force with which the constructive work was
begun."[213]
President Sherman reported that on September 10, 1906, the locals
holding charters in the Industrial Workers of the World numbered
394, of which number 120 were not at that time in good standing,
so that there were at the time of the second convention 274 active
locals enrolled.[214] The greater part of this number consisted of
local unions directly attached to the general organization without
any intervening subordinate division or subdivision. A considerable
minority of the total, however, comprised local unions which were only
indirectly attached to the general organization, such locals being
enrolled in District Councils or National Industrial Unions, or even
Industrial Departments and being directly responsible to that council,
national union, or department.
There were but three departments actually organized as such during
the first twelve months. These were the Transportation Department,
the Metals and Machinery Department, and the Mining Department. The
Mining Department was the only one of the three having the members
necessary to justify existence as a separate autonomous department,
and it was finally the only department recognized as such at the
second convention. The Western Federation of Miners was thus the I. W,
W.'s only genuine department--and a department, moreover, which was
agitating _sub rosa_ all the while against the general organization of
which it was even a nominal department for but a few months.
Concerning the Transportation Department, Secretary Trautmann reported
to the convention that, "the United Brotherhood of Railway
Employees ... installed itself as the Transportation Department of
the I. W. W., it being accepted as a fact that said Brotherhood was
an integral part of the American Labor Union and had at the time of
installment 2,087 members...."
... this so-called department [he said] proved to be a constant
drain on the general treasury.... While the Transportation
Department has paid in taxes to the Industrial Workers of the
World the sum of $130.75, the main organization was constantly
paying more into that department in the vain hope that
eventually the workers in that industry would rally around the
banner of industrial unionism....[215]
Although the convention decided not to recognize the Transportation
Department, it did endorse a resolution providing "that the
credentials of all local unions of transportation workers who are
sending delegates, be recognized and the delegates seated."[216] The
break-up of the Metal and Machinery Department and the bolting of that
(chief) subdivision of it which was formerly and now again became the
Amalgamated Society of Engineers has been referred to above.[217] The
convention took the same action in regard to this as in the case of
the Transportation Department, denying recognition to the Department
but granting it to those local unions (the United Metal Workers Union
in this case) which had sent delegates to the convention.
It was claimed that seven international unions voluntarily joined
the Industrial Workers of the World, "even though they were forced
by the power of the capitalist combinations to remain ... attached
to the American Federation of Labor."[218] The seven "international"
industrial unions are nowhere specifically mentioned but must
presumably have included unions belonging to the three departments
mentioned above and which were organized during the first year. The
International Musical Union was one of these so-called international
unions. This organization was not even satisfied to be an international
industrial union--it insisted on being a Department as well--and
claimed the title of
the International Musical and Theatrical Union, Subdivision
of the Public Service Department of the Industrial Workers of
the World ... [all this] on the grounds ... that organizations
comprising 1000 and even less members were allowed autonomous
department administration and department executive boards; and
so that organization has since been using the prestige of the
I. W. W. to justify its existence as a part of a department not
at all organized.[219]
There is not now and never has been a genuine, that is to say a
constitutional, Public Service Department in the I. W. W., and of
course the convention could not recognize a mere fragment of what might
some day become a Public Service Department.
Since 1906 there have been no Industrial Departments (_i. e._, no
divisions larger in scope than the National Industrial Union) in the
I. W. W. Nevertheless, the Constitution continued, up to the tenth
convention in 1916, to speak of the organization as being composed
of National Industrial Departments, National Industrial Unions,
_etc._[220] The Agricultural Workers' Organization (the "A. W. O."),
organized in 1914, which now constitutes a large and increasingly
important division of the I. W. W., is akin to what the founders wanted
to have in the I. W. W. in 1905. There is more _body_ to it today than
there was to any of the so-called International Industrial Departments
of the earlier period. It is to be noted that in all the editions of
the Constitution since 1906 the word "International" has been replaced
wherever it occurred by the word "National."
Throughout the whole of its history the Industrial Workers of the World
has been composed almost entirely of local unions scattered throughout
the United States and Canada, all directly connected with the central
office or what is called the General Organization. The development
of subdivisions (such as Industrial District Councils, International
Industrial Unions, and Industrial Departments), between the general
organization and the local union has not been appreciable until within
the last two or three years.[221]
FOOTNOTES:
[180] "The World of Labor," _International Socialist Review_, vol. vi,
pp. 434-5 (Jan., 1906).
[181] The Red Lodge, Mont., and Pittsburg, Kans., locals.
[182] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, p. 324.
[183] _Voice of Labor_, June, 1905.
[184] _Voice of Labor_, June, 1905.
[185] _International Socialist Review_, vol. vi, pp. 434-5 (Jan., 1906).
[186] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, pp. 71-2.
[187] _Cf. Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, p. 338.
[188] Report of General Secretary-Treasurer Trautmann, _ibid._, p. 63.
[189] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, p. 356.
[190] _Ibid._, p. 294.
[191] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, pp. 61-2.
[192] For the letter in full _vide Proceedings, Second I. W. W.
Convention_ (1906), p. 146.
[193] From the report of General Secretary-Treasurer Trautmann,
_Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_ (1906), pp. 51-52.
[194] _Ibid._, p. 53.
[195] _Cf. infra_, ch. v.
[196] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_ (1906), p. 106.
[197] _Ibid._, p. 169.
[198] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_ (1906), p. 169.
[199] _Ibid._, p. 43.
[200] _Ibid._, p. 377.
[201] Report of General Secretary-Treasurer Trautmann, _ibid._, p. 59.
[202] Report of President Sherman, _Proceedings, Second I. W. W.
Convention_ (1906), p. 46. For partial list of I. W. W. strikes _vide_
Appendix viii.
[203] _Proceedings of New Jersey Socialist Unity Conference_, p. iv.
The Manifesto is reprinted on pp. iv-ix of these _Proceedings_.
[204] _Ibid._
[205] In a letter to W. B. Killingbeck of the Socialist party, _ibid._,
pp. xv-xvi.
[206] Delegate Gallo, S. L. P., _Proceedings of New Jersey Socialist
Unity Conference_, pp. 7-8.
[207] Delegate Killingbeck, _ibid._, p. 17.
[208] _Proceedings of New Jersey Socialist Unity Conference_, pp. x and
xii.
[209] _Proceedings of New Jersey Socialist Unity Conference_, pp. v-vi.
[210] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_, p. 60. These figures
are based on per capita taxes paid and do not include the mining
department which at the time referred to was paying taxes on 22,000
members. _Ibid._
[211] Including S. T. & L. A. accession, 1200 members.
[212] _Private Correspondence_, Oct. 5, 1911. (The italics are mine.)
[213] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_ (1906), p. 60.
[214] _Vide_ President's report, _Proceedings, Second I. W. W.
Convention_ (1906), p. 43.
[215] _Proceedings, Second I. W. W. Convention_ (1906), pp. 55-56.
[216] _Ibid._, p. 9.
[217] _Cf. supra_, p. 122.
[218] Report of General-Secretary Trautmann, _Proceedings, Second I. W.
W. Convention_ (1906), p. 63.
[219] Trautmann, _loc. cit._, p. 57.
[220] I. W. W. Constitution (1914), p. 4.
[221] The writer is unable to find any complete list of the
"individual" locals belonging to the I. W. W. in 1906 or 1907. It is
not probable that any such record has been preserved. The following
very incomplete list has been put together from scattered references in
the _Proceedings of the Second Convention_:
Local Union No.
144 Power Workers Denver, Colo.
Industrial Workers Union Jersey City (Mixed local).
Retail Clerks Union Flat River, Mo.
Industrial Workers Union Paterson, N. J.
Textile Workers Pawtucket, R. I.
Bakery Workers Butte, Mont.
177 Capmakers New York City.
183 Cement Workers Spokane, Wash.
313 Paper Makers New Haven, Conn.
176 Silk Workers New Haven, Conn.
190 Silk Workers New Haven, Conn.
Marble Workers Cincinnati, Ohio.
90 Shoemakers St. Louis, Mo.
299 Window Washers Chicago, Ill.
Miners Pittsburg, Kans.
Miners Chicopee, Kans.
139 Hod-carriers
Tobacco Workers Cleveland, Ohio.
365 Mixed Industries Jamestown, N. Y.
185 Mixed Industries San Antonio, Tex.
307 Mixed Industries St. Paul, Minn.
83 Bartenders and Waiters Chicago, Ill.
263 Hotel and Restaurant Employees Chicago, Ill.
Arizona State Union No. 3 of the Department of Mining.