RESULTS OF THE ALLIANCE PROTEST.
In our last chapter was given a letter written by Mr. Carson on
December 21st, and addressed to Mr. Tait. The reply to this was as
follows:
"J. H. Carson, Esq., Secretary Quebec Provincial Branch of the
Dominion Alliance, 162 St. James Street, Montreal:
"DEAR SIR,--I have acknowledged the receipt of your two
communications of the 21st and 28th ult. As your letter of the
21st states that the Alliance does not allege that the reason for
Mr. Smith's discharge by the Company was the nature of the
principles held and advocated by him, and states that the sole
objection of the Alliance to the action of the Company in this
matter is the discharge of an employee from its service 'for his
activity in advocating those principles,' I now desire to state
briefly, and in such a way as I trust will prevent any
possibility of being any longer misinterpreted, the views of the
Company on that point.
"The Company does not object to its employees holding, practising
and promoting temperance principles in such a manner as not to
injuriously affect the Company's interests, but it does object
seriously to any employee actively engaging in the advocacy and
agitation of these or any other principles or views, no matter
how respectable and proper in themselves, about which there is a
well understood difference of opinion in the community, in such a
manner as either to injuriously affect the Company's interests or
to impair his usefulness as an employee, or to interfere with the
proper performance of his duties to his employer, as to all of
which it cannot be expected that any other than the Company
should be the judge.
"There is a large portion of the population of this country who,
rightly or wrongly, differ from and oppose the views which are
promulgated and promoted by the Alliance, and which have been so
vigorously and persistently advocated by Mr. Smith, the result
being, as it was sure to be, that his usefulness as our agent was
seriously impaired, owing to the Company having to bear to some
extent the antagonism which logically perhaps ought to have been
confined to him, though there was some ground for the public
considering that the Company was taking a part in his advocacy,
since in advertising public meetings to be addressed by himself,
Mr. Smith described himself as 'W. W. Smith, of the Canadian
Pacific Railway, Temperance Lecturer.'
"In this connection I beg to draw your attention to the fact that
Mr. Smith did not confine his work of agitation, public
lecturing, etc., to the County of Brome, or that section of the
country in which the majority of the population had voted in
favor of the prohibition of liquor, but that his operations
extended beyond these limits. After the fullest investigation,
and consideration of this whole matter, I feel constrained to say
that the Company's course was, under the circumstances, not only
justified, but, having regard to its business interests,
unavoidable.
"In yours of the 21st ult., you refer again to the correspondence
between Mr. Brady and Mr. Smith. Inasmuch as the Company has
stated that the expressions complained of do not meet with its
approval or express correctly its policy, I submit that it is now
clearly improper and unfair to endeavor to make them appear as a
reason for the continuation of the complaint against the Company.
"I note from your letter of the 28th ult., that a meeting is
suggested between the officials of the Company and a committee
representing the Alliance. I shall be glad, as I a long time ago
offered to meet this committee, and as you have kindly left the
appointment of the time and place of meeting with me, I suggest,
if it is convenient to the committee, my office on Monday next,
at eleven A. M.
"The delay in replying to your letters was due to the uncertainty
of my movements and consequent difficulty in naming a time for
the proposed meeting.
"Yours truly,
"(Signed), THOS. TAIT,
"Assistant General Manager."
According to the spirit of this letter, no man having an interest in
any reform, or a desire to aid in any work for the good of his
fellow-men, can conscientiously hold a position in the employ of this
great Company, which is so influential in our beloved country. Must
every self-supporting man be a slave?
Mr. Tait says, "After the fullest investigation, and consideration of
this whole matter, I feel constrained to say that the Company's course
was, under the circumstances, not only justifiable, but, having regard
to its business interests, unavoidable."
Mr. Tait does not say "Mr. Brady's course," but "the Company's
course," thus showing that Mr. Brady had not acted independently of
his superior officers in dismissing Mr. Smith.
Mr. Tait also expresses the Company's disapproval of Mr. Brady's
"expressions," while he, himself, makes statements which seem quite as
objectionable as those of Mr. Brady. Moreover, as Mr. Tait sanctions
the dismissal of an employee for active temperance work, and mentions
in this letter no other cause as having led to Mr. Smith's discharge,
we do not see why he should object to an Assistant Superintendent
naming the same reason to an under official, whom he is dismissing
from the Company's service.
The conference arranged between Mr. Tait and the representatives of
the Alliance was held in the office of the former on January 7th,
1895. The meeting began at half-past eleven, and continued until
nearly two o'clock, when, as no definite decision was reached, it was
decided to adjourn until the following morning. The resolutions
adopted by the various temperance bodies in Montreal, and elsewhere,
were presented to Mr. Tait. The following circular, issued by the
Quebec Provincial Branch of the Dominion Alliance, shows the result of
the conference on January 8th.
"Dominion Alliance,
"Quebec Provincial Branch,
"MONTREAL, Jan. 30th, 1895.
"DEAR SIR,--On November 28th last, by circular letter, we called
the attention of the executives of the various grand bodies of
the temperance organizations of the Dominion to the action of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, in dismissing from their employ
the President of one of our county alliances, Mr. W. W. Smith.
Enclosed in this circular was a copy of the correspondence which
led up to the dismissal. In response to this circular,
resolutions were received from every Province of the Dominion, as
well as from the executives of Dominion organizations.
"These resolutions were very emphatic in their condemnation of
the position taken by Assistant Superintendent Brady, in the
published correspondence, to wit, that an employee 'must quit
temperance work or quit the Company.'
"These resolutions were carefully considered at the conference of
temperance representatives, held in this city on December 27th,
and it was decided to ask the Canadian Pacific Railway to
repudiate the position taken by Assistant Superintendent Brady,
and that it take such action in regard to Mr. Brady, whose course
has given so much offence to the temperance people, as will
convince its employees and the public that its policy is not that
represented by his act. It was also decided that before any
further action be taken, the Canadian Pacific Railway should be
notified that if it so desired, a deputation from this meeting
would be prepared to meet the representatives of the Company in
conference.
"The Company concurred in the suggestion, and as a result of two
lengthy conferences, the following agreement was arrived at:
"'The Canadian Pacific Railway distinctly repudiate, as they have
done from the commencement of the discussion, the expressions
used by Assistant Superintendent Brady, when demanding Mr.
Smith's resignation, which expressions have been taken exception
to by the temperance people.
"'The Canadian Pacific Railway admit the right of employees to
identify themselves with the temperance movement, and work for
the same, provided such work is done outside official hours,
always with due consideration to the interests of the Company.
The committee accept such declaration as satisfactory.
"'The committee claims that the hasty and ill-advised language
used in Assistant Superintendent Brady's correspondence, and
otherwise, has caused grave dissatisfaction on the part of the
temperance people of Canada. The committee disclaim any attempt
to coerce or dictate to the Canadian Pacific in the management of
the Company's affairs, but under the circumstances look to the
Canadian Pacific Railway to place on record some substantial mark
of their disapproval of the expressions of one of their staff,
same having been the means of causing offence to a large portion
of the community.
"'The Canadian Pacific Railway claims that, if for no other
reason, Mr. Smith's discharge was justifiable on the ground of
neglect of duty.'
"This was signed by Mr. Thomas Tait, Assistant General Manager,
on the part of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and by the following
delegation as representing the temperance people of Canada: Major
E. L. Bond, Mr. E. A. Dyer, M. P., Rev. A. M. Phillips, Mr. A. M.
Featherston, Mr. S. J. Carter, and Mr. J. H. Carson.
"This agreement and the delegation's report was received and
approved as satisfactory, by the executive of this provincial
Alliance, and a committee appointed to communicate the result to
the temperance bodies.
"It will thus be seen that the Company has entirely repudiated
the offensive language used by Mr. Brady, and declares that it
does not express the attitude of the Company towards the
temperance cause.
"The Company also admits the right of its employees to engage in
temperance work; and as regards Mr. Brady, it acknowledges that
cause for dissatisfaction has existed, and promises that action
will be taken to remove this cause.
"In placing these facts before you, we have to congratulate our
friends throughout the Dominion upon the satisfactory conclusion
of this matter, which has given us all so much anxious concern.
"Another cause for congratulation is the intense interest
manifested in this case in every part of the Dominion. From
Vancouver to Prince Edward Island have come expressions of hearty
coöperation, which have been exceedingly gratifying, clearly
demonstrating the fact that there is a temperance force
throughout the country which, if only concentrated, and directed
unitedly against the legalized liquor traffic of our land, would
be positively irresistible. In the present instance a vital
principle of temperance reform was attacked and almost
immediately the whole Dominion resounds with the protests of the
temperance people, and forthwith the injustice is removed.
"With regard to Mr. Smith, we have this to add, that having since
accepted the position of organizer and lecturer for the
Independent Order of Good Templars of this Province, he had no
desire to return to the Company's employ, preferring to devote
himself entirely to the temperance work.
"On behalf of the executive,
"E. L. BOND, }
"S. J. CARTER, }
"A. M. FEATHERSTON, } _Committee_."
"A. M. PHILLIPS, }
"J. H. CARSON, }
It will be noticed that in this letter the committee congratulate
their friends upon "the satisfactory conclusion of this matter." Also
at a meeting of the Executive of the Alliance before the above
circular was issued the following resolution was adopted:
"That this executive having heard the agreement and the report of
the committee thereon, is satisfied with the same, and
congratulate the temperance people of Canada on the result."
It is often well for us to look at the bright side, and this was what
the Alliance Committee determined on doing, and there surely were some
encouraging features connected with this case.
Nevertheless, as there are generally two sides which may be seen in
such an affair, there were many of "the temperance people of Canada"
who did not consider this conclusion satisfactory, and exchanged no
congratulations, and it may do us no harm now to look briefly at some
of the disappointing features in this settlement.
First, it is said, "that the Company has entirely repudiated the
offensive language used by Mr. Brady, and declares that it does not
express the attitude of the Company towards the temperance cause."
Now, Mr. Tait had taken precisely this same position in his letters
to the Alliance Secretary, previous to the meeting with the committee,
and even in the minutes of the meeting, as above given, it is said,
"The Canadian Pacific Railway distinctly repudiate--_as they have done
from the commencement of the discussion_--the expressions used by
Assistant Superintendent Brady." In view of this it would seem that
not much was gained by the meeting on this point.
Secondly, we are told that "the Company also admits the right of its
employees to engage in temperance work." It certainly was encouraging
that this great Company should try to appear pleasing to the Alliance,
and seemed to show that the Canadian Pacific Railway considered the
temperance party a powerful factor in the land, but when we come to
consider the manner in which the admission mentioned above was made,
we can but see that it has a very doubtful side. The sentence in which
the Company makes this announcement is as follows:
"The Canadian Pacific Railway admit the right of employees to
identify themselves with the temperance movement, and work for
the same, provided such work is done outside official hours,
_always with due consideration to the interests of the Company_."
As we are not told that Mr. Tait, at the meeting, repudiated any of
his own former statements, we will look at the above in the light of
the following, from his letter of December 6th, to Mr. Carson:
"As far as I am able to judge, no official of our Company, of
whose duties one is to solicit and secure traffic for the
Company, could take sides on any of these questions," referring
to matters about which the public disagree, "at public meetings
and lectures without impairing its usefulness to the Company....
..... The Company is carrying on the business of a railway company,
and its objects do not extend beyond the promotion of that business.
Its success depends upon the favor and patronage of the community
at large, and if one of its officers or employees so conducts
himself as to antagonize a section of the community, or even in a
manner which is likely to bring about that result, the Company's
interests are injuriously affected."
The admission made to the Alliance seems to be robbed of most of its
virtue by the above statements, and it would seem that even yet the
employees of the Company may have but little liberty of conscience.
It is also said in the aforementioned circular that, "as regards Mr.
Brady, the Company acknowledges that cause for dissatisfaction has
existed, and promises that action will be taken to remove this cause."
This acknowledgment was certainly a good one, but we have no knowledge
of the promise having been fulfilled. Mr. Brady has been moved from
one division to another of the Canadian Pacific Railway, but as this
change did not take place until long after this meeting was held, and
then only in connection with many others among the officials and
employees of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and as Mr. Brady still
holds an honorable position in the Company's employ, we see no reason
for supposing that this had any connection with the promise made to
the committee.
Some of the temperance people feeling dissatisfied with the results of
the Canadian Pacific Railway-Alliance Conference sent communications
regarding it to the papers, but the press, from some cause, seemed
very loath to publish these protests. However, the following,
addressed to the Editor of the _Witness_, did find its way to the
public, and may have expressed the opinions of many besides the
writer:
"SIR,--That the temperance people of Canada were moved, as never
before, by the dismissal of its Sutton Junction agent, Mr. W. W.
Smith, by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, because he had
rendered himself obnoxious to the lawbreakers of the County of
Brome, who had tried but failed to kill him, there is no doubt,
as may be clearly seen from your columns, to say nothing of the
thousand hearts, which, like mine, said nothing, but felt no less
all the while that by its action the Canadian Pacific Railway
had placed a premium upon lawlessness and immorality at the
expense of those whom I had been taught to regard as the 'salt of
the earth.'
"The immediate consequence of this was that that line of railway
was being shunned, and its services neglected by many of its old
patrons, and by this loss its magnates were being taught a
lesson, and put on the 'repentent stool,' and it seemed almost
certain that never more would the Bradys, Taits, and Van Hornes
of this Canadian made and pampered corporation forget that
temperance people of Canada had both the will and the power to
retaliate upon their persecutors. And that if another such
dismissal was ever again attempted, they would 'more darkly sin,'
and hide the 'cloven foot,' which was so openly shown by Brady
and Tait.
"At this juncture of its affairs, and at the moment when a
persistence in the agitation would probably have resulted in
reparation of the wrong done to Mr. Smith, and an open
repudiation of its immoral attitude, Mr. Tait managed to get a
hold of some gentlemen, who like the seven Tooley Street tailors,
who called themselves 'We, the people of England,' arrogated to
themselves the right to speak for the temperance people of
Canada, and he played them off on the 'Come into my parlor, said
the spider to a fly,' and the upshot of the matter is the most
disappointing and sickening, I think, I have ever seen.
"I do not know the names of any one of these men, so I cannot be
accused of malice in holding up their conduct to the
commiseration not to say contempt of the public. Though an
intense prohibitionist I have never been able to appreciate the
wisdom and nerve of some of our temperance people; yet, never
before have I noticed anything that looked so like treachery to
our cause.
"In your issue of the 8th inst. we have a large heading, 'Brady
Repudiated,' and in the body of the article we see this
temperance committee, if not openly repudiating Mr. Smith,
allowing the Canadian Pacific Railway to defame his character,
and to their very teeth justify his dismissal, and giving their
consent to both.
"How artfully Mr. Tait changed the whole ground of complaint; and
how simply the committee were hoodwinked and befooled will be
seen, when I say that that which roused the temperance people was
the truckling of the Canadian Pacific Railway to the liquor
traffic, and its marked contempt for temperance men, its moral
tyranny over its employees, and its wrongful dismissal of Mr.
Smith, simply because his attitude on a moral question had
exasperated the other side. But in the report which you give of
the interview between this committee and Mr. Tait, all this is
lost sight of, and the whole ground of complaint is made to rest
on poor Brady, the 'scapegoat's' phraseology. 'The committee
claimed that the ill-advised language used in Assistant
Superintendent Brady's correspondence has caused great
dissatisfaction on the part of the temperance people of Canada.'
"The committee would seem to have insisted on the punishment of
Brady, while concurring with Tait in everything. The report says:
"'The Canadian-Pacific Railway acknowledges that cause for
dissatisfaction has existed, claim the responsibility of dealing
with, and will deal with the matter in such manner as they
consider deserving in the premises.' If this is offered as a
salve to the small, cowardly feelings which would like to see a
subordinate punished for doing what he was told to do, I trust
the Canadian Pacific Railway will disappoint the committee, and
let their scapegoat go free. It would be both cruel and unfair
that the blow should fall on Brady, the mean tool, and the bigger
tyrants go free. This is so evidently seen in the fact that Tait
practically insists on the same right to muzzle Canadian Pacific
Railway employees that Brady did.
"JAMES FINDLAY.
"_Beachburg, P. Q._"
Commenting on the above letter the _Witness_ says:
"The question might be raised whether the committee appointed by
the temperance conference had instructions to come to any
agreement with the Canadian Pacific Railway. They certainly were
instructed to give the Company an opportunity to right the wrong
it had done before proceeding to publish the finding of the
conference. It was, therefore, natural for the Company's
representative to ask the committee what would satisfy them, and
it would seem to the committee unreasonable not to answer such a
question. Mr. Findlay labors under a misconception if he thinks
the committee were not independent, and determined to maintain
the rights of temperance men. They were selected so as best to
represent the interests of Mr. Smith as well as those of the
principles at stake. The assurances they received were certainly
about as complete as could well be looked for from a Company that
was not prepared to acknowledge itself dictated to as to the
management of its internal affairs. The Company was not asked to
reinstate Mr. Smith, which would have been unpleasant for him.
What it promised was that temperance men should be under no
disability in its service, and though it reserved to itself the
right to manage its own affairs, it acknowledged that cause for
dissatisfaction existed, and undertook to deal with the matter.
This, we submit, if followed up in accordance with the Company's
policy, as stated in Mr. Tait's letters, is a very satisfactory
position."
The reason of this latter statement is seen when we remember that "the
Company's policy as stated in Mr. Tait's letters" was that when any
officer or employee antagonized a part of the community on a question
on which the public were divided, the Company would "protect its
interests by his removal;" and Mr. Brady had certainly opposed and
displeased a very large portion of the community. How this Assistant
Superintendent was really dealt with, is shown by the following from
a report of an executive meeting of the Provincial Alliance, on April
18th:
"The first business considered was the communication, from the
Canadian Pacific Railway, forwarded to the executive from the
general committee for action. This letter was in reply to the
Secretary's request to know in what manner the Company had dealt
with Mr. Brady, the Assistant Superintendent, whose action in
connection with Mr. Smith's dismissal had been so offensive to
the temperance people. The letter is addressed to Mr. Carson, the
Secretary, and is as follows:
"'DEAR SIR,--I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of
the 1st inst.
"'The Company has reproved and dealt with Mr. Brady as, under the
circumstances, was considered deserving, and in such a manner as,
it is trusted, will prevent any reasonable cause for further
complaint.
"'Mr. Brady, while stating that he never intended the slightest
disrespect towards the Dominion Alliance or disapproval of
temperance principles, has acknowledged that he gave cause for
dissatisfaction, and expressed regret for the same, and a
determination to avoid a recurrence. Yours truly,
"'THOS. TAIT,
"'Assistant General Manager.'"
A few days previous to this Executive meeting the above letter was
presented at a meeting of the general committee of the Provincial
Alliance, and "was not considered at all satisfactory."
However, the Executive Committee, without approving the letter,
decided to publish it "for the information of the temperance public,"
probably accepting it as the best which could be hoped for under the
circumstances.
But, although all was not satisfactory, there were, as we have said,
some causes for gratitude in connection with this affair. The Canadian
Pacific Railway and Canadian liquor men had a chance to learn that
among their opponents there was some zeal and spirit, and a desire to
help one another, and this knowledge may make them more careful in the
future as to how they oppose and arouse temperance sentiment. Such an
agitation and interest as resulted from this dismissal, doubtless
might decide some unsettled minds in favor of the temperance party.
Also the action of the Canadian Pacific Railway in thus reproving Mr.
Brady, and eliciting from him a promise to exercise greater caution in
the future was probably as much as could be expected from a powerful
corporation which is not willing to acknowledge itself in the wrong,
and whose "objects do not extend beyond the promotion of its
business," so long as the laws of our land permit liquor sellers to be
licensed, and Prohibition is a thing talked of, but not experienced.
Not until national prohibition finds a place among Canadian laws, and
is upheld by the Canadian government, will such bodies allow
themselves to be dictated to by the temperance people.
The Scott Act is very good so far as it goes, but if the County of
Brome, instead of having this Act, and standing, in this respect,
almost alone in the Province, had possessed its share in a prohibition
law which held sway from the Atlantic to the Pacific, the outlawed
liquor venders of the county would probably not have had such power
with a great corporation as they displayed in this case. If the
temperance people of Canada wish to have a powerful voice in such
matters as this, or if they would have great institutions like the
Canadian Pacific Railway conducted on principles of temperance and
true freedom, let them work for prohibition, and send representatives
to Parliament who will do the same. And just now, when they hold in
their hands a key which may be the means of unlocking to us the gate
of Prohibition for our country, let them use it to the best advantage,
by giving a powerful majority for good when the Plebiscite vote is
taken.