HOW HE HAS DEALT WITH LABOR TROUBLES
No subject furnishes so good an index to the entire record of an
executive as the manner in which he has handled the affairs
growing out of industrial disputes. Touching, as they often do,
a zone of disputed claims, and involving, as they often do, the
social rights of workers no less than the rights of property,
and entailing, as they frequently have, the duty of maintaining
public order, the conflicts between capital and labor test to
the utmost the abilities of the Executive Officer of a great
industrial state like Ohio. Within its borders are toilers from
every land and every clime. In her cities dwell as laborers men
and women from every known country and representative of every
race--a modern Babel of tongues with a greater variety, were it
possible, than those upon whom fell confusion of speech in the
ages gone.
And the period during which Governor Cox has held away has been
one of profound upheavals. There have been strikes brought forth
by "hard times," strikes occasioned by efforts at organization
of workers, and strikes whose distant origin lay in the economic
overturn incident to war inflation with its topsy-turvy of
values and its jumble of the normal status. These conditions,
then, supply a complete and ample test of the effectiveness of
the policy which has been followed. The results of this policy
are told in a brief statement by Mr. Oscar W. Newman, Associate
Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court. He said: "Not a soldier was
brought to the scene of a single strike (although they were in
readiness for emergency); person and property were preserved;
and above all, the dignity of the law was maintained."
Nor has capital been offended by the methods pursued. This fact
is attested by statements of those who speak for invested
industrial wealth. Thus, W. S. Thomas, of Springfield, says that
the policies pursued have made "Ohio an oasis in the widespread
area of industrial turmoil during and since the great war."
There are cited, too, the conclusions reached by Thomas J.
Donnelly, Secretary of the Ohio Federation of labor, who has
written:
"Labor has confidence in James M. Cox because the laboring
people feel that he understands their needs and is in hearty
sympathy with the progressive aspirations of those who earn
their bread by the sweat of their brows. As governor, he
accomplished more in the interest of the laboring people of Ohio
and is held in higher esteem by them than any other governor in
the state's history.
"He has done much to avoid and to settle labor troubles. He
believes that more can be accomplished through reason and common
sense than through force and intimidation; and whenever called
upon to send the militia to deal with striking workmen, he
always found a way to prevent violence and preserve order
without using soldiers for that purpose. During the big steel
strike when violence and disorder were rampant in some states
where the right peaceably to assemble had been denied to the
striking workers, in Ohio, where there were equally as many
strikers involved, there was no sign of violence, and the right
of workers peaceably to assembled was not interfered with. If
his policy had been followed by other public officials
throughout the nation, there would be less unrest and the people
would have more confidence in the fairness of government
authorities."
It is only necessary to get a comprehensive view of Governor
Cox's record with respect to labor troubles to tell the plain
story of what he has done. He had scarce taken hold as Governor
in 1913 when a strike broke out in the great rubber plants of
Akron. It seemed to have been fomented by members of the
Industrial Workers of the World, but it drew in its train
thousands upon thousands of other workers until the great plants
were practically idle. In Akron, where a heterogenous collection
of industrial workers dwell, idleness was a potent factor in
fomenting disorder. The normal course of affairs would have been
an attempt to operate the plants with strike breakers under
guard, provocative acts upon both sides, and finally, recourse
to an armed militia to quell the disorder after the inevitable
bloodshed had ensued. Although new in executive experience,
Governor Cox took another course. He sent trained and trusted
investigators to Akron who learned the facts and reported to him
accurately upon the situation, including also the grievances of
the toilers. At the same time he gave warning to the local
authorities that they preserve a strict neutrality in their
dealing with the contending forces, and he uttered a solemn
warning that the laws must be respected, assuring those of both
contending factions that public opinion within the city would
speedily ascertain the right and wrong of the controversy. And
so it proved to be. But learning there were abuses in the plants
that needed correction the Governor gave his assent to an
investigation by a legislative committee through the helpful
publicity of which all interests were induced to redress certain
grievances. It gave an object lesson not only to Akron but to
all the state. It taught even the turbulent element that only
harm could come through infraction of the law and through
disrespect for rights of person and property. The remainder of
the story is that I. W. W. disturbers have more sterile soil in
Ohio to cultivate than in any of the states about it.
A startling comparison two years later at East Youngstown,
during the administration of Governor Cox's successor, disclosed
by contrast the value of the peaceful plan. Through a policy of
uncertainty and wavering, a riot was allowed to start and
military were needed to put down the disorder, life being lost
in the process.
The details of the incidents of similar nature to that of Akron
need not be recounted here, but the invariable policy pursued
was the collection of all the facts, so far as possible, by a
representative of capital and one of labor. Of this course, the
simple statement can be made that it was eminently successful.
This recital has been made as a preliminary to the narrative of
the great steel strike of 1919 on which the Governor's fame as
an administrator in troubled times largely rests. The same
policy of investigation and research was pursued. Solemn warning
was given that freedom of speech and assembly must be respected
rigidly but that neither must become the instrument of license
nor of subversive speech or conduct. At the time when the
situation reached a critical stage the Governor issued this
statement:
"To the Mayors of municipalities and County Sheriffs of Ohio:
"I am impressed with the importance of a statement to the mayors
and sheriffs as to a policy which should serve as a guide to
government, both state and local, in the matter of turbulent
conditions which have developed in many communities, from
pending industrial disputes.
"We have inquiry at the executive office from local officials
clearly indicating that no rule of action has been developed in
the face of present emergencies and further that none is in
prospect. The constitution imposes upon the Governor the very
definite responsibility of law enforcement. While it is the duty
of the mayor of a municipality and the sheriff of the county to
execute the laws, the founders of our charter of government gave
to the state executive, not only the right to keep vigilant eye
on conditions in every community, but his oath imposes the
obligation so to do. Therefore, in no part of the state must a
public officer permit the violation of the law. The mayors and
sheriffs seem to have proper concept of their duty in the
abstract. The purpose of this statement is to deal with
specifications.
"The sections of the state which give the greatest concern have
large masses of alien residents. Thousands of them do not speak
the language. They are not familiar with our laws but it is safe
to assume that the individual conscience tells every man that
violence is both a moral and a legal wrong.
"Officers of companies whose manufacturing plants are closed by
strike or other cause have expressed to me the intention to
resume operations. At the same time they have asked for
'protection.' Inquiry develops this fact--that some employers
believe it the duty of government to transport their employees
into and out of the plants in question. This is not a function
of government. Throughout the years, the policy has been not to
make use of soldiers nor policemen to man street cars, for
instance, nor in any way to make of them the instruments to
bring a strike to an end. If either state or local officers
provided safe conveyance of workmen into or out of a
manufacturing institution, then government would be making of
itself the agent of one of the parties to the dispute. If,
however, the plant resumes, and disorder of any sort ensues as
the result of employees going into or out of the factory, then
that becomes an affair of governmental concern and the mayor of
the municipality or the sheriff of the county, as location
within or without the municipality largely determines, must
suppress violence and arrest those who violate the law. I shall
exact this from all local officers.
"Picketing as we understand it is neither prohibited by law nor
condemned by public sentiment, but it must go no further than
moral persuasion. Organized society cannot continue without
government, and government will not live unless the laws are
respected. They not only express what experience has taught us,
but they are the official mandate of the will of the majority,
and after all, that is a fundamental principle in a republic.
"All officers must act with care. It will be found that trouble
can often be avoided by an open, frank and firm contact of
public officers with both the representatives of the employers
and employees. No call that I have ever made upon either side of
these controversies has ever gone unheeded.
"We are in the midst of unprecedented conditions, but if we
devote ourselves to the single thought of making government the
agency of justice and the instrument of bringing swift
punishment to those who violate the laws of this commonwealth,
we will pass through the storm safely.
"No man must be permitted to define the rules of his individual
conduct. The law is supreme. I shall expect its enforcement by
local officers. When they have rendered their utmost effort and
failed to meet conditions, then the state will act promptly."
In every city in Ohio, save one, this warning was sufficient,
but in Canton it became necessary for the Governor to remove the
mayor. His successor speedily re-established the peace.