fm. 
 
 4i£- 
 
 
 
 tv^«^f
 
 3' 
 
 'i -l- 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 ic
 
 Library 
 Institute of Industrial R^i 
 University of CaliforM« 
 Los A««9l#« 54, CtaifortiU 
 
 a
 
 THE CLOSED SHOP IN AMERICAN TRADE 
 UNIONS
 
 SERIES XXIX NO. 3 
 
 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Under the Direction of the 
 
 Departments of History, Political Economy, and 
 
 Political Science 
 
 THE CLOSED SHOP IN AMERICAN 
 TRADE UNIONS 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK T. STOCKTON, Ph.D. 
 
 Instructor in Economics and History in the University of Rochester 
 
 BALTIMORE > * * 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 1911 
 
 _ library 
 
 Institute of Industrial EcUtion^ 
 University of Califo^v ,. '^"^ 
 Los Angeles 24. C^liforxiia,
 
 Copyright 191 i by 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
 Press of 
 
 The New era prihting Company 
 
 Lancaster. Pa
 
 Inst. IndBL 
 ReL 
 
 (am 
 
 /C 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Preface vii 
 
 Introduction 9 
 
 I. The Development of the Closed-Shop Rule .... 17 
 
 II. The History of the Closed-Shop Movement .... 33 
 
 III. The Simple Closed Shop 58 
 
 IV. The Extended Closed Shop 81 
 
 V. The Joint Closed Shop 98 
 
 VI. The Establishment of the Closed Shop 123 
 
 VII. The Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement . . 137 
 
 VIII. The Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device .... 153 
 
 IX. Social Aspects of the Closed Shop 165 
 
 
 G9S140 
 
 INST. INDUS. RHL
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 This monograph had its origin in an investigation carried 
 on by the author while a member of the Economic Seminary 
 of the Johns Hopkins University. The chief sources of 
 information have been the trade-union pubHcations con- 
 tained in the Johns Hopkins Library. Documentary study, 
 however, has been supplemented by personal interviews with 
 trade-union officials and employers of labor and by imme- 
 diate study of labor conditions. 
 
 The author wishes to express his appreciation of the help- 
 ful criticism received from Professor J. H. Hollander and 
 Professor G. E. Barnett.
 
 THE CLOSED SHOP IN AMERICAN 
 TRADE UNIONS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Few industrial questions in the United States have at- 
 tracted the popular interest that has been accorded the recent 
 dispute over the closed shop. For a full decade the Amer- 
 ican public has listened attentively to a widespread discus- 
 sion of what should be the proper attitude of union workers 
 toward non-unionists. As a result of this extended debate 
 there are no terms in labor-union terminology more familiar 
 to the average American citizen than " closed shop " and 
 " open shop." 
 
 Although the closed shop has been subject to much debate, 
 little has been done to make clear the extent to which the 
 trade unions have excluded non-unionists from employment 
 and what methods the unions have pursued. This gap in 
 our information is to be explained chiefly on the ground that 
 the general public has been interested only in the broad 
 social aspects of the question. Accordingly, much that has 
 been said concerning the closed shop has dealt with its 
 ethical significance, and arguments have been addressed to 
 the public conscience concerning the justice or injustice of 
 excluding certain classes of persons from employment. 
 Some attention has also been given to the question of how 
 far the closed shop is necessary as a trade-union device and 
 what effect it tends to have upon social well-being. The 
 employers have tried to show that the closed shop is an 
 institution which is out of place in modern industrial life, 
 that it cripples business, and that it creates an undesirable 
 labor monopoly. In reply, trade unionists have insisted 
 upon the necessity of the closed shop to the existence of 
 many unions. They have attempted to show that the closed 
 
 9
 
 10 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [440 
 
 shop does not lessen industrial efficiency, and they have laid 
 much stress upon the good the closed shop confers upon 
 labor as a whole. Finally, great interest has been mani- 
 fested in the legal aspects of the subject, owing largely to 
 the increasing number of cases involving the closed shop 
 which have been brought before the courts. 
 
 The primary aim of the present study is to set forth the 
 facts concerning the closed shop. It is proposed, first, to 
 trace the manner in which the closed-shop rule developed 
 among the early trade societies in America, and to disclose 
 the motives which led to its incorporation into trade-union 
 policy. Secondly, the history of the closed-shop movement 
 will be set forth. The relative importance attached to the 
 enforcement of the closed shop at various stages in our 
 industrial development and the efforts which employers have 
 made to check its operation will be shown. Next, the forms 
 of the closed shop as they exist in various unions will be 
 described. This analysis will make clear what the closed 
 shop is and how far exclusion from employment is involved 
 in its working. The manner in which the closed shop is 
 established and the methods by which it is enforced will 
 then engage our attention. When the closed shop has thus 
 been described in detail, it will be possible in succeeding 
 chapters to study its value as a trade-union device and its 
 economic import. 
 
 At the outset, however, a statement of what we mean by 
 the " closed shop " is imperative. When a union enforces 
 the closed-shop rule, its members are not permitted to work 
 with non-union men, that is, in the same " shop " with them. 
 But trade unions differ widely in their restrictions on mem- 
 bership, so that of a number of unions which enforce the 
 closed shop no two may exclude exactly the same classes 
 of workers. Consequently, there is no one example which 
 can serve as the type of a closed shop. Closed shops, in the 
 sense in which the term is used herein, are shops in which 
 is enforced the closed-shop rule as interpreted by the par- 
 ticular unions or groups of unions having jurisdiction. 
 Open shops are shops where union men work or may work
 
 440 Introduction. II 
 
 side by side with non-unionists with the full knowledge and 
 consent both of the employers and of the unions. Finally, 
 non-union shops are shops where union men as such are not 
 employed either because the employer will not hire them or 
 because the unions have ordered their members not to ob- 
 tain employment therein. 
 
 In the earlier days of American trade unionism it was 
 customary to call a shop a " union shop " provided a union 
 had control of a sufficient number of workmen to secure the 
 observance of union working rules, even though the union 
 could not force the exclusive employment of its members. 
 Such, however, is not at the present time the meaning at- 
 tached to the term " union shop." It now means identically 
 the same thing as closed shop.^ Some writers have attempted 
 to distinguish the two terms by defining a closed shop as one 
 where the exclusive employment of unionists is a matter of 
 formal agreement with the employer. A union shop is said 
 to be an establishment where a like result is accomplished 
 without any agreement." This distinction appears valueless. 
 
 A shop is not to be regarded as closed merely because all 
 the workmen at any given time are unionists. It is closed 
 only if the union men refuse to allow non-unionists perma- 
 nently to retain employment. If non-unionists are allowed 
 to continue at work undisturbed, it is an open shop. The 
 so-called " preferential " closed shop^ is really an open shop. 
 Other terms meaning the same thing as closed shop are 
 " fair shop,"* '' card shop," " contract shop," and " organized 
 shop." 
 
 *The agreement of the Printing Pressmen with the American 
 Newspaper Publishers' Association has for a number of years con- 
 tained the following clause : " The words ' union pressroom ' as 
 herein employed shall be construed to refer only to such pressrooms 
 as are operated wholly by union employees, in which union rules 
 prevail, and in which the union has been formally recognized by the 
 employer" (Printing Pressmen, Constitution and By-Laws, 1909, 
 p. 91). 
 
 'The Elevator Constructor, October, 1905, p. 13; November, 1905, 
 P- 30. 
 
 ' See below, p. 62 note. 
 
 ♦In some unions, however, shops are said to be "fair" if they 
 pay union wages and observe union working rules, although non- 
 unionists may be employed.
 
 12 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [442 
 
 But while the mere fact that all employees are union men 
 does not necessarily make a closed shop, neither does the 
 absence of union men always indicate a non-union shop. 
 A shop is open whenever the employer does not discrimi- 
 nate against unionists and when, at the same time, unions 
 do not forbid their members to work in it. A shop is not 
 an open shop when a union enforces the closed-shop rule 
 therein, even if the employer has issued an order or " decla- 
 ration " stating that he will hire whom he pleases. Nor is 
 a shop open when an employer professes to treat unionists 
 and non-unionists alike and yet in practice refuses to hire 
 the former. 
 
 Non-union shops may be divided into three classes. First, 
 there are " unorganized shops " in which, for reasons of 
 policy, union men are not allowed to work by their organiza- 
 tions. The employer may not pay the minimum rate, or 
 he may employ persons ineligible to union membership. 
 Such shops are often not subject to strong union antagonism, 
 but it is not deemed wise to allow union members to obtain 
 employment in them as long as work can be secured in other 
 shops, whether " closed " or " open," which are more sat- 
 isfactory. 
 
 The second class of non-union shops is composed of shops 
 against which the union is seriously embittered. If an at- 
 tempted organization of the shop has failed, or if, after 
 unionizing his shop, the employer has fallen out with the 
 union, his shop is then declared to be a " scab," " rat," " un- 
 fair," or " foul " shop. Whoever obtains employment in it 
 becomes a "scab," "rat," "blackleg," "snake," "bat," or 
 " anti-unionist," according to the varied terminology of 
 the unions. 
 
 Finally, there is the " anti-union shop,"^ which is non- 
 union because the employer discharges any unionist he may 
 discover at work therein. Even if union men secretly se- 
 cure work in the shop, it is not an " open shop," since they 
 
 * In December, 1905, the editor of the Bridgeman's Magazine 
 complained that no term had " come into vogue for establishments 
 which exclude unionists from employment." The term " anti-union 
 shop " seems appropriate.
 
 443] Introduction. 1 3 
 
 do not obtain employment as unionists. Sometimes the em- 
 ployer in such a shop forces his employees to sign an indi- 
 vidual contract in which each workman agrees that while 
 in such service he will have no connection with any labor 
 organization. 
 
 Since 1905 there has been much objection on the part of 
 trade unionists to the use of the term " closed shop " to 
 indicate a shop from which non-unionists are excluded. 
 They contend that this use of the term has been brought 
 about by designing employers who wish to place the unions 
 in a bad light/ and that union men have ill-advisedly copied 
 the phraseolog>' of their opponents with the result that they 
 are now burdened with a misleading name for a misunder- 
 stood policy. The proper term, they claim, is " union shop." 
 They assert that the union shop is " never a closed one ; " 
 it is open to all competent workmen who seek employment.' 
 Some unionists also contend that there is no such thing as 
 an open shop, all shops being either union or non-union, 
 organized or unorganized. The fact that a shop admits 
 union and non-union men alike to its workrooms does not 
 " set aside that anti-union policy governing the plant which 
 refuses to recognize a single principle of unionism and 
 opposes all its laws. . . . The ' open shop ' is closed to the 
 spirit and letter of unionism, and for these reasons it is a 
 non-union shop."^ 
 
 Trade unionists contend, moreover, that the term " closed 
 shop " has been twisted from its older significance — a shop 
 closed to unionists. The term, they say, is " exactly proper 
 when used to describe a shop in which for good and suffi- 
 cient reasons, the union does not permit its members to 
 
 * " Those who are hostile to labor cunningly employ the term 
 ' closed shop ' for a union shop because of the general antipathy 
 which is ordinarily felt tow-ard anything closed, and with the 
 specious plea that the so-called ' open shop ' must necessarily be the 
 opportunity for freedom " (American Federation of Labor, Report 
 of Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Convention, 1907, 
 p. 25, President's Report). 
 
 ' Tne American Federationist, November, 1905. p. 846. 
 
 ' Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, Official Journal, June, 
 1906, p. 29.
 
 14 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [444 
 
 accept employment."^ A shop becomes an open shop when 
 it is " opened " to union members. 
 
 If we examine the history of the terminology used by 
 trade unions in connection with the closed shop, it will be 
 found that for a considerable period these were the mean- 
 ings of the words " closed " and " open " among such unions 
 as the Iron Molders, the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, the 
 Cigar Makers, and the Printers. Prior to i860 shops were 
 generally known either as union or non-union shops. Some of 
 the union shops were really open shops, while some of the non- 
 union shops were known as " scab " or " rat " shops. By 1864, 
 however, notices began to appear in the Iron Moulders' Inter- 
 national Journal to the effect that certain shops had been 
 " closed " pending the settlement of strikes." In 1867 Presi- 
 dent Sylvis of the Iron Molders warned his men against too 
 quickly declaring a shop a " scab " shop, and recommended 
 that the president of the union be given authority " to open 
 every shop . . . illegally closed."^ Thus it will be seen that 
 to " close " a shop amounted practically to the same thing as 
 to '' rat " or " scab " it. Once " closed," union men were not 
 allowed to work in the shop until it was " opened " to them 
 by their organization.* 
 
 Such was the terminology in general use until about 1890, 
 but for a number of years previous to this time a change had 
 been coming about. Thus, in 1879 the local union of cigar 
 makers at St. Louis, Missouri, after winning a strike, noti- 
 fied union cigar makers through the Cigar Makers' Journal 
 that the St. Louis union was about to make a move " in the 
 direction of closing the shops," that is, preventing non- 
 unionists from working with unionists.^ In many trades it 
 became customary instead of closing certain shops to union- 
 ists to think of union shops as closed to non-unionists. This 
 
 * Blacksmiths' Journal, May, 1908, p. 8. 
 
 * See, for example, issue of June, 1864, p. 26. 
 
 ^ Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Session, 1867, p. 10. 
 
 * During this period what are now called closed shops were occa- 
 sionally called " good " shops. Open shops were frequently called 
 " free " or " independent " shops. Shops controlled by the Knights 
 of Labor were known as " K. of L. shops." 
 
 ^ Cigar Makers' Official Journal, November, 1879, p. 3.
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 The Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 
 
 Contrary to general opinion, the closed shop is not an 
 institution of American origin nor is it of recent incorpora- 
 tion into trade-union policy. How far back its history goes 
 it is impossible to say, but exclusion from employment is 
 such an obvious weapon of industrial warfare that it is hard 
 to believe that in some form or other it has not been used 
 since the inception of trade unions. 
 
 Whatever may be the case in other countries, so far as 
 England is concerned, the closed shop is " coeval with Trade 
 Unionism itself."^ Moreover, there is trustworthy evidence 
 that even before trade unions proper came into existence the 
 English gilds and trade clubs of handicraftsmen discrimi- 
 nated against non-members. Thus Sidney and Beatrice 
 Webb assert that the eighteenth century trade clubs of 
 handicraftsmen "would have scouted the idea of allowing 
 any man to work at their trade who was not a member of 
 the club."^ Brentano mentions the fact that some of the 
 gild-statutes of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries pro- 
 vided that " no journeyman was to work with a non-mem- 
 ber ; "^ in other gild-statutes appeared the rule that " as 
 long as members of the gild were out of work, no member 
 was to work with non-members."* 
 
 In the early years of English trade unionism many of the 
 unions were bitterly opposed to working with " unlawful 
 persons," that is, persons who had entered a trade in viola- 
 tion of the Act of 5 Elizabeth, c. 4, which regulated the 
 system of apprenticeship. Not only were such workmen 
 
 * Webb, Industrial Democracy, p. 214. 
 
 'Ibid. See also Webb, History of Trade Unionism, pp. 31, 46. 
 
 * Brentano, On the History and Development of Gilds and the 
 Origin of Trade Unions, pp. 96-97. 
 
 * Ibid., pp. 67-68. 
 
 2 17
 
 1 8 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [448 
 
 attacked by legal methods/ but strikes were also called 
 against them.- Jevons notes a pamphlet, "A practical and 
 eligible plan to secure the rights and privileges of me- 
 chanics," published in 1776, which outlines a scheme for 
 enabling workmen to " make use of every lawful means to 
 prevent those from exercising the calling who were not 
 authorized by law, whether as journeymen or masters."^ 
 Jevons says that " societies appear actually to have been 
 formed on the basis sketched out." 
 
 Probably coincident with this movement seems to have 
 been the adoption of regulations by many of the English 
 trade societies requiring all persons engaged in the trade to 
 observe " society rules " if they wished to work with society 
 members. Thus the "Practical and eligible plan" of 1776 
 suggested a " grand " or central committee with power to 
 use " every legal mode " to prevent persons from working 
 contrary to the articles and resolutions of the organization.* 
 In a parliamentary report of 1806 reference was made to 
 the fact that there had been in existence for some time an 
 " institution or society among the woolen manufacturers, 
 consisting chiefly of clothworkers," who so conducted their 
 organization that there was every reason to believe " that no 
 clothworker would be suffered to carry on his trade, other- 
 wise than in solitude, who should refuse to submit to the 
 obligations and rules of the society."^ 
 
 As also indicating the early origin of the "principle of 
 exclusion," as they term it, the historians of English trade 
 unionism point out that " at the present day it is especially 
 in the old-fashioned and long-established unions that we find 
 the most rigid enforcement of membership."^ While the 
 newer organizations incline to exclude non-members from 
 employment, it is among the firmly established unions, with 
 
 Webb, History of Trade Unionism, p. 53. 
 
 * Brentano, pp. 108, 112. 
 
 Jevons, The State in Relation to Labor, pp. 101-102. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 102. 
 
 Report of the Committee on the Woolen Manufactures, quoted by 
 Webb, History of Trade Unionism, p. 34. 
 
 * Webb, Industrial Democracy, p. 215.
 
 449] Development of the Closed-Shop Ride, 19 
 
 a long history, that the exclusion of such persons has become 
 almost mechanical. 
 
 It is probable that, through emigration to America and 
 constant communication between the two countries, journey- 
 men on this side of the Atlantic became familiar with the 
 policy of excluding certain persons from employment. It 
 was impossible for the early American trade societies to 
 insist in any thoroughgoing fashion upon the immediate en- 
 forcement of the closed shop. Only a small part of the 
 craftsmen in any trade were society members, and there was 
 little intercourse or cooperation between isolated local or- 
 ganizations. Once well under way, however, trade unions 
 rapidly developed, and their increase in strength was accom- 
 panied almost always with an increasing insistence upon the 
 exclusion of non-unionists. 
 
 Owing to lack of data, in many cases it is impossible to 
 state with exactness the attitude of the early trade societies 
 toward the employment of non-unionists. An exception ex- 
 ists in the case of the printers' or typographical societies 
 which thrived from 1802 onward, since a considerable part 
 of their minutes is accessible.^ 
 
 The methods used by the early typographical societies to 
 enforce their trade regulations were from the nature of the 
 case experimental. The chief concern of the societies was 
 the maintenance of a wage scale. It was believed that this 
 purpose could be accomplished if each member was for- 
 bidden to work for less than the established rate, but print- 
 ing offices were allowed to employ non-members, who might 
 or might not obey the rules. This plan was soon found to 
 be defective, since non-members frequently cut the rate. As 
 early as May 16, 1807, the Philadelphia Typographical So- 
 ciety appointed a committee to consider the matter. The 
 committee in its report proposed that a conference be held 
 with the master printers, and that such changes in prices 
 
 ^ Barnett, " The Printers : A Study in American Trade Unionism," 
 in American Economic Association Quarterly, October, 1909. 
 Acknowledgment is here made of the very substantial assistance 
 furnished by this monograph. The sources, however, have been 
 examined independently.
 
 20 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [450 
 
 be made "as the nature of the times may require and enable 
 employers in all cases to give the preference, and, if possible, 
 never to employ any others than members of this institution, 
 or at least none but men who have served a regular appren- 
 ticeship."^ The suggestion was rejected by the board of 
 directors as at variance with the established policy of the 
 society. They also rejected a proposal to bar from future 
 membership all persons who were at the time working below 
 the price. The New York Typographical Society in 1810 
 was likewise informed by a committee that the rate was 
 being cut in certain offices, but no action of importance was 
 taken on the report.^ It was also found in the enforcement 
 of the apprenticeship requirements, the only other trade 
 regulation made by these societies, that while society mem- 
 bers obeyed the rule and did not work at press with any 
 person who was not " regularly bred," non-members in the 
 same office could and did teach the trade to such persons. 
 
 In view of these facts it became necessary, if the societies 
 were to enforce their trade rules, to devise some other 
 method of dealing with the situation. The immediate devel- 
 opment was in the direction of requiring the employer, under 
 penalty of being deprived of that part of the labor supply 
 controlled by the society, " to recognize the society rules as 
 binding upon him as an employer."' First to act was the 
 New York society. On July 22, 1809, it adopted a by-law 
 providing that no member of the society should " engage or 
 continue when there is a journeyman working for less than 
 the established prices." The rule was enforced to some 
 extent, but there was considerable reluctance on the part of 
 many members to give up their positions in accordance with 
 the requirement. On November 18, 1809, the by-law was 
 suspended, and it was finally repealed on June 16, 1810.* 
 An attempt to revive it on August 17, 181 1, was defeated. 
 
 For a number of years following 1816, records of the pro- 
 ceedings of the printers' societies are not extant. Later on, 
 
 ' Barnett, p. 280. 
 *Ibid., p. 281. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 282. 
 
 * Ibid., pp. 282-283.
 
 45 1] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 21 
 
 when data are again available, it can easily be seen that the 
 plan of the New York society had been readopted. This is 
 indicated by the following typical rule in the constitution of 
 the Baltimore Typographical Society in 1832: "No member 
 under forfeit of membership shall work in any office where 
 a boy, not an original apprentice of that office, is employed 
 for less than the list of prices demands unless the boy so 
 employed is under seventeen years of age or shall have come 
 from an office the proprietor of which shall have deceased 
 or declined business ; nor shall any member, under the same 
 forfeiture, work in an office where any person or persons 
 are employed for less than the list of prices calls for."^ 
 The employer was thus required to observe the two funda- 
 mental rules of the society or he could not secure the ser- 
 vices of society members. The rule that members should 
 work only in offices where the trade rules of the society were 
 observed excluded from employment with unionists only 
 those persons who could not obtain the society rate. The 
 emergence of a wider policy of exclusion was due to a differ- 
 ent but contemporaneous line of development. 
 
 To secure the enforcement of wage scales and apprentice 
 rules, it was, of course, necessary for the societies to inflict 
 some penalty upon members who saw fit to disobey their 
 regulations. This was ordinarily accomplished by expelling 
 the offenders from membership, whereupon they became 
 known to the trade as " rats," and were shunned by all good 
 unionists. It is clear that long before the printers' societies 
 refused to work with ordinary non-union men there was an 
 intense feeling against working with " rats," with the result 
 that strikes were called in shops where they were employed.^ 
 
 Not only did the societies object to working with those 
 who had " ratted " in their own locality, but they also felt 
 that members of one society should refuse to work with 
 
 * Baltimore Typographical Society, Constitution, 1832, Art. XI. 
 
 * Such, for example, was the often mentioned strike in Albany in 
 1821, referred to by Thurlow Weed in his Autobiography, p. 86. 
 See also Barnett, p. 288; Wright, The Industrial Evolution of the 
 United States, pp. 233-234; Ely, The Labor Movement in America, 
 p. 39-
 
 22 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [452 
 
 journeymen who had " ratted " in other cities where societies 
 existed. Thus, on September 9, 1809, the New York society 
 drafted a letter to be sent to neighboring cities, urging that 
 there be an interchange of information concerning the move- 
 ment of "rats" from one place to another.^ In 1816 the 
 Albany Typographical Society reported to New York the 
 names of several printers who had worked for less than the 
 bill of prices after having been " several times warned of the 
 consequences which would result from their proceedings."^ 
 When one of these " rats " came to New York, however, the 
 typographical society of that place, after some hesitation, 
 voted that its members who were working with him " be at 
 liberty to retain their situations." The aversion to working 
 with a " rat " gradually grew stronger as the independent so- 
 cieties were gathered into a general organization. 
 
 Thus far we have seen that during the first stage in the 
 development of the closed shop the organized printers for- 
 bade their members to work in shops which did not observe 
 the two cardinal trade regulations, and also in shops where 
 " unfair " workmen were employed. But the closed shop 
 of the present day means more than this, for it excludes 
 not only those who cannot earn the minimum rate and " un- 
 fair " men, but all non-union men. That the policy of ex- 
 cluding all non-unionists was under consideration at a very 
 early time we have already indicated.^ Almost from the 
 outset there appeared in the rules of the societies the re- 
 quirement that employment should be secured for society 
 members in preference to non-members. In Philadelphia 
 the officers were pledged to this at their installation. Ac- 
 cording to a rule passed by the board of directors of the 
 society on February 21, 1807, a member who secured work 
 for a non-society man in preference to a fellow-member was 
 liable to be expelled.* Similar provisions were made by 
 
 MS. Minutes, New York Typographical Society, September 9, 
 1809. 
 2 Ibid., October 12, 1816. 
 ' See above, pp. 19-20. 
 
 Barnett, p. 284.
 
 453] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 23 
 
 other societies; but although members were occasionally 
 arraigned on the charge of having violated the rule, on the 
 whole it was "but loosely observed."^ 
 
 By about 1840 the closed-shop rule had been fully devel- 
 oped, and the printers' associations and societies in exist- 
 ence at this time explicitly provided against the employment 
 of non-members in the same offices with society members. 
 The rules of the New York Typographical Association in 
 1833 required all members " to inform strangers who come 
 into the office where they are employed, of the established 
 wages, and also of the existence of the association and of 
 the necessity of becoming members."- In the constitution 
 of the reorganized Baltimore society of 1842 the following 
 rule appeared : " Every person working at the business will 
 be required to make application to join this society, within 
 one month from the time of his commencing work at any 
 office in the city. . , . On the refusal or neglect of any to 
 comply with the regulations contained in the foregoing sec- 
 tions or in case of the rejection of the applicant . . . the 
 members of this society shall cease to work in any office 
 where such person may he employed."^ 
 
 Unfortunately, the steps in the development of the closed- 
 shop rule among other trades cannot be traced as satis- 
 factorily as among the Printers, since very few of the early 
 constitutions and minutes are extant. In five or six trades, 
 however, facts can be found here and there which seem to 
 indicate a parallelism with the experience of the printers' 
 societies. 
 
 Next in interest and importance to the Printers are the 
 Cordwainers, who were organized in Philadelphia as early 
 
 * On November i, 1817, the New York society expelled a member 
 on a charge of six counts, one of which was that he had refused " to 
 give employment to a member of this society; and employing one 
 not a member in preference, ... a distinct violation of the solemn 
 pledge he has repeatedly given us." Whether conviction on this 
 count alone would have caused his expulsion appears doubtful. 
 
 " Barnett, p. 285. 
 
 ' Baltimore Typographical Society, Constitution, 1842, Art. VI, 
 Sees. I, ::.
 
 24 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [454 
 
 as 1794.^ Societies were also established at a very early 
 time in Baltimore, New York, Pittsburgh, and other centers 
 of the boot and shoe trade. Indictments were brought 
 against members of several of the societies for " a combina- 
 tion and conspiracy to raise their wages. "^ From the re- 
 ports of these trials it is possible to ascertain the methods 
 which the societies adopted to enforce their trade regula- 
 tions and, to some extent, to trace the stages in the develop- 
 ment of these methods. 
 
 At the very first meeting of the Pittsburgh society, organ- 
 ized about 1809, the members " swore not to work for any 
 employer who would not give the wages. "^ Journeymen 
 who went to work in struck shops or worked under the scale 
 were " scabbed," and society members were not allowed to 
 work with them. Very shortly thereafter the society refused 
 to allow its members to work with non-union journeymen. 
 In the Philadelphia society, which was the first to be organ- 
 ized, it was a rule from the beginning, apparently, that no 
 journeyman, be he member or non-member, should be al- 
 lowed to work for an employer at less than the established 
 prices.* Against those who violated this regulation the 
 " scab law " was applied with great vigor. " Turn-outs " 
 against " scabs " were frequent. It was not long, however, 
 before all non-members were excluded from employment. 
 
 In the constitution of the Journeymen Cordwainers of the 
 City of New York, printed in 1805, it was provided that " no 
 member of this society shall work for an employer, that has 
 any Journeyman Cordwainer, or his apprentice in his em- 
 ployment, that do not belong to this Society, unless the jour- 
 
 ^ Documentary History of American Industrial Society, Vol. Ill, 
 edited by Commons and Gilmore, p. 27. 
 
 'The trials were held in Philadelphia, 1806; in New York and 
 Baltimore, 1809; in Pittsburgh, 1815; in Chambersburg, Pennsyl- 
 vania, 1829; in Geneva, New York, 1835; in Hudson, New York, 
 1836. 
 
 ' ' Report of the Trial of the Journeymen Cordwainers, of the 
 Borough of Pittsburgh. Taken by Charles Shaler, Esq. Reprinted 
 in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. IV, p. 26. 
 
 * The Trial of the Boot and Shoemakers of Philadelphia. Taken 
 by Thomas Lloyd. Reprinted in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. Ill, 
 p. 74-
 
 455] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 25 
 
 neyman come and join the same."^ If the non-member 
 failed to join the society within a specified time, a fine was 
 imposed upon him which had to be paid before he could be 
 admitted to membership.^ A similar rule applied to appren- 
 tices who had become " free.''^ While some witnesses at the 
 trial declared that they had never heard of a " turn-out " 
 being called merely because non-members were employed in 
 a shop, the bulk of evidence indicates that such strikes or 
 " turn-outs " actually occurred. This society was probably 
 the first labor organization in America to adopt a constitu- 
 tion openly asserting the principle of exclusion and applying 
 it to all non-members. 
 
 But while the cordwainers' societies which came latest 
 under judicial notice, such as the Journeymen Cordwainers 
 of the Borough of Pittsburgh, exhibit comparatively slight 
 development over the early Philadelphia society in their 
 closed-shop policy, at least one innovation is to be noted. 
 The Pittsburgh society in June, 1815, "brought forward a 
 resolution to write to the societies in Baltimore and Phila- 
 delphia and to agree with them not to receive any members 
 of their societies, unless they produced certificates of belong- 
 ing to their societies, and then if he came to the place with- 
 out one, they would not work with him.''* One employer 
 testified that he had been asked to discharge a journeyman 
 who had "scabbed" in Baltimore, but on his refusal to 
 comply with the request the Pittsburgh cordwainers " did 
 not scab the shop."* 
 
 The tailors were also organized at an early date. From 
 the report of the trial of the Buffalo tailors for conspiracy 
 in 1824 it is evident that permission to employ society mem- 
 bers was contingent upon the payment by an employer of a 
 minimum wage to all tailors, union and non-union alike, 
 
 * Trial of the Journeymen Cordwainers of the City of New York. 
 Reported by William Sampson. Reprinted in Commons and Gil- 
 more, Vol. Ill, p. 366. 
 
 'Ibid., p. 367 (Art. XI). 
 Mbid, (Art. XII). 
 
 * Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 31. 
 » Ibid., p. 51.
 
 26 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [456 
 
 and upon the non-employment of "unfair" journeymen. 
 This is made clear by a statement in a local paper of the 
 period that "a singular custom among the Jours, [that is, 
 journeymen] to coerce the refractory was proved to exist 
 throughout the United States, by which the person who re- 
 fused to come into the measures of the majority or who 
 subsequently to a turn out should, before an arrangement 
 was had, labor at the same place for less than the wages 
 demanded, was stigmatized by an appropriate name, and 
 rendered too infamous to be allowed to labor in any shop 
 where his conduct was known."^ In other words, a " scab " 
 was not allowed to work with society members. 
 
 From the report of the trial of the " Twenty Journeymen 
 Tailors " of New York in 1836 it appears that members of 
 the New York society of tailors had approached journeymen 
 who were working at " shops under the prohibition," tha^ is, 
 struck or " unfair " shops, and had asked them " to abstain 
 from working and join the Society." They were warned 
 that if they refused to comply with the society's wishes they 
 would be proscribed " in such a manner, that they could not 
 get employment in regular shops, here or anywhere else, 
 where there were unions." They were told that members 
 of the unions would " refuse even to work with them, or to 
 work in any shop where they should be employed ; and liter- 
 ally to hunt them from all tailors' society."^ If this testi- 
 mony is trustworthy, it seems evident that persons who had 
 " scabbed " in one locality were ostracized in every com- 
 munity where the tailors were organized. Nothing was said 
 in the course of the trial about the refusal of society mem- 
 bers to work with non-members who were not " scabs." It 
 is probable that a rule of this sort had not yet been adopted. 
 
 In a Philadelphia case, however, in 1827 it appears that 
 non-union tailors were barred from employment. All the 
 witnesses at the trial of the journeymen tailors in that year 
 
 *The Buffalo Emporium, December 25, 1824; the article is 
 reprinted in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. IV, p. 94. 
 
 ^The New York Courier and Enquirer, May 31, 1836; the article 
 is reprinted in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. IV, p. 316.
 
 457] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 27 
 
 agreed that society members would not " sit alongside " a 
 " scab." This seems to have been the fixed policy of the 
 Philadelphia society. One witness stated that the society 
 compelled journeymen to join it after they had " worked in 
 a shop ten or twelve days." If they did not join, " each 
 one in the shop would be liable to a fine."^ Other witnesses 
 declared that this was not the case. It is probable that each 
 shop had " its own rules. "^ In some shops all journeymen 
 were required to join the society, while in others non-mem- 
 bers were tolerated. 
 
 The cigar makers appear to have effected their earliest 
 organization in Baltimore m 185 1. For the first four and 
 one half years of the Baltimore union's existence no records 
 of its proceedings are available. From the earliest minutes 
 extant it appears that in February, 1856, the society required 
 its members not to work for less than the established wage 
 rate, but did not discriminate against non-unionists who 
 worked for less. As a result of an attempt to decrease 
 wages, the union on February 28, 1856, voted that no mem- 
 ber should accept work in certain shops. This did not end 
 the difficulty, as non-unionists continued to work in some of 
 the shops below the scale. This led the union to notify 
 wage-cutting non-members that they should cease work on 
 penalty of having " the hands of the association refuse to 
 work with them in the association shops. "^ 
 
 The rule that non-union men should not work at less than 
 union wages did not give the union control over the situa- 
 tion, and on March 17, 1856, the association voted that no 
 member of the organization should thereafter " work with 
 any man unless he is a member of the association or gives his 
 
 * Trial of Twenty-four Journeymen Tailors, charged with a Con- 
 spiracy : Before the Mayor's Court of the City of Philadelphia, 
 September Sessions 1827. Reported by Marcus T. Gould. Reprinted 
 in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. IV, p. 141. 
 
 ' Ibid., p. 133. 
 
 * MS. Proceedings of the Cigar Makers' Society of the State of 
 Maryland, 1856-1863. It was on March 14, 1856, that this notice was 
 given to the workmen of a Mr. Cromer. It had the effect of bring- 
 ing all but two of his men into the union, though all that was con- 
 templated at the time was to make them leave their work.
 
 28 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [458 
 
 consent to be a member at the first meeting night." On 
 August 4, 1856, unanimous consent was given to call a 
 strike in a shop against a Mr. Lohman, " he refusing to join 
 the association." On no occasion thereafter does the rule 
 seem to have been suspended.^ 
 
 In 1854 the cigar makers' unions of New York State, 
 according to McNeil,^ refused to work with " rats " or 
 " scabs," especially in what were termed " fair " shops. 
 Whether there had developed an intercity proscription of 
 scabs is not clear from McNeil's statement. In September, 
 1856, however, the Baltimore Cigar Makers sent to the Phila- 
 delphia and New York unions the names of a number of 
 journeymen who had refused to obey a strike order. While 
 the purpose in forwarding this list is not expressed, it could 
 only have been to notify these unions that those named were 
 not to be allowed to work in organized shops. In Decem- 
 ber, i860, the Maryland association, after considerable de- 
 bate, decided to notify all other societies in the trade that 
 after January i, 1861, its members would not work with any 
 stranger coming from a place where a cigar makers' organi- 
 zation existed unless he could produce a certificate of mem- 
 bership therein. 
 
 The Hollow Ware Glassblowers' Union of the United 
 States held the second annual meeting of its Grand Union 
 in 1858. At that time a resolution was adopted which at 
 least suggests that a closed-shop policy was developing. It 
 provided that union members were not to work " in any fac- 
 tory with any journeyman who is working for a less rate of 
 wages than the list of prices." Furthermore, union mem- 
 bers were not to work " in any factory with any one who 
 has a molder or finisher, or an assistant, in making bottles 
 or vials, or for any other purpose than gathering glass, ex- 
 cept such assistant be a regular journeyman or apprentice 
 to the business."^ 
 
 * On June 2, 1856, all of Mr. Cromer's non-union hands were 
 notified to "join the association forthwith." 
 
 ' McNeil, The Labor Movement : The Problem of Today, pp. 585- 
 586. 
 
 «" History of the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association," 1901.
 
 459] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 29 
 
 In the constitution of the Benevolent and Protective Asso- 
 ciation of United Operative Mule Spinners of New Eng- 
 land for 1858 it was provided that all members of the or- 
 ganization were to " intercede for employment for any of 
 its members out of employ in preference to all other Spin- 
 ners."^ It is probable that from this rule developed the 
 policy of excluding non-unionists from employment. A 
 number of unions, for example the Potters,^ the Long- 
 shoremen,' and the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers,* retain 
 " preferential " clauses in their constitutions, survivals in all 
 probability of the original attitude toward non-unionists. 
 None of these unions, at present, are willing to work with 
 non-unionists. 
 
 The early history of the Iron Molders also shows an in- 
 teresting development of the closed-shop rule. In the con- 
 stitution of the Iron Stove and Hollow Ware Moulders of 
 Philadelphia for 1855 emphasis was laid upon the provision 
 that no member should work for less than the standard rate 
 in a shop " represented in the union by an executive com- 
 mittee," except by the consent of such committee. Members 
 were not allowed to work in a " represented " foundry where 
 any journeyman, " whether a member of this association or 
 not," accepted less than the minimum rate." The associa- 
 tion, however, made no attempt to compel members or non- 
 members to observe the wage scale in foundries " not repre- 
 sented in the union." Members working in such establish- 
 ments were granted cards exempting them " from the pay- 
 ment of dues and the laws in regard to prices and all other 
 regulations of the union that may not be applicable in such 
 a case." Upon returning to work in an organized shop the 
 surrender of the cards and the privileges consequent upon 
 them was required.® 
 
 » General By-Laws, Sec. 6. 
 
 ' Constitution, 1910, Rules and regulations of local unions. Sec. 226. 
 •Constitution, 1909, Rules for Locals, Sec. 17. 
 ^Constitution, 1909, Art. XVII, Sec. 11. This section was orig- 
 inally adopted in 1876. 
 'Article VI, Sec. i. 
 •Article II, Sec. 4.
 
 30 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [460 
 
 It appears from these rules that the Holders differed from 
 the societies of cigar makers, printers, and cordwainers in 
 that they did not require their members to observe the union 
 scale in all shops. ^ Neither did the Holders during the 
 early period in the history of their national union forbid the 
 employment of members in " scab shops." A resolution to 
 that effect was " indefinitely postponed " by the convention 
 of 1866,^ but the local unions for the most part did not allow 
 members to work in such shops. In 1867 an attempt to 
 secure the adoption of an International closed-shop rule was 
 defeated,^ and instead the convention indorsed a resolution 
 declaring that it was " bad policy for union men to quit work 
 on account of non-union men working in the same shops," 
 and that " union men do all in their power to get non-union 
 men in said shops to join the union." But three years later 
 the union at its annual session voted down a resolution " that 
 it should not be considered to the interest of the Interna- 
 tional Union for men to cease work in a shop where one 
 man refuses to conform to union principles."* This change 
 in attitude was probably owing largely to the rapid increase 
 in the strength of the union from 1867 to 1870. 
 
 From the foregoing survey it appears that the same stages 
 in the development of the closed-shop rule have been re- 
 peated in union after union. There are a few American 
 trade unions even today that are no further advanced 
 
 ^ Owing to industrial depression, the union was compelled as late 
 as 1877 to sanction the employment of its members in unorganized 
 foundries at the same wages as non-union men (Iron Molders' 
 Journal, June, 1877, p. 361). 
 
 ^ Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Session, 1866, p. 28. 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Session, 1867, p. 53. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Session, 1870, p. 26. It is 
 interesting to note in this connection that at the convention of the 
 Bricklayers and Masons in 1869 a committee recommended that 
 " the question of allowing union bricklayers to work for bosses 
 employing five non-union bricklayers be left with the local unions." 
 The recommendation was defeated. In both this case and that of 
 the Molders just mentioned, if the proposals had been adopted a 
 compromise would have been effected. Non-unionists would not 
 have been entirely excluded from employment with union men, but 
 the number allowed in " organized " shops would have been 
 severely limited.
 
 461] Development of the Closed-Shop Rule. 31 
 
 toward a closed-shop rule than were the Printers of New 
 York or Philadelphia in the first years of their organization. 
 The two associations of Post Office Clerks, the Stationary 
 Engineers, and the Letter Carriers do not require non- 
 members to conform to any of the regulations adopted for 
 the control of members. The objects of these unions are 
 to secure legislation and to provide a system of benefits. 
 They do not bargain collectively with their employers. The 
 Steel Plate Transferers have no wage scale, sign no agree- 
 ments, and allow individual bargaining, but there is an un- 
 written rule that union members shall secure employment 
 for each other in preference to non-members. 
 
 A second class of unions have no objection to their mem- 
 bers' working with non-members, but insist that the latter 
 shall observe the union trade regulations. No member is 
 allowed to obtain employment in a shop where a strike is 
 in progress, but there is no organized resistance if the em- 
 ployer retains " scabs " or strike-breakers in his employment 
 after a strike has been settled. In reality, the " scab " under 
 such circumstances is ostracized, with the result that sooner 
 or later he usually leaves his job. The unions which take 
 this position with reference to the closed shop are the four 
 railroad brotherhoods, namely, the Engineers,^ the Firemen, 
 the Conductors, and the Trainmen, together with the Switch- 
 men, the Car Workers, the Maintenance-of-Way Employees, 
 the Masters, Mates and Pilots, and the Railroad Telegra- 
 phers. All of these organizations, as will be noted, are 
 connected with the work of transportation. 
 
 The great majority of American labor unions fall in the 
 third class and accept the principle of the closed-shop rule. 
 Whether they insist upon its enforcement or not depends 
 largely upon expediency. It often happens that a union 
 which would like to enforce the closed shop is compelled to 
 tolerate non-unionists. The Commercial Telegraphers and 
 the Textile Workers,^ for instance, allow their members to 
 
 * When first organized in 1863, it seems that the Engineers 
 demanded a closed shop. See below, p. ^y. 
 
 * In a few cases local unions of the Textile Workers have struck 
 against the employment of non-unionists, but their action has not 
 had the sanction of the national " emergency board."
 
 32 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [462 
 
 work in open shops because they are not strong enough to 
 do otherwise. In every closed-shop union there are times 
 when it is inexpedient to attempt the exclusion of non- 
 unionists. There are thus a few open shops in the juris- 
 diction of almost every closed-shop union. It is customary 
 for the unions to insist that members employed in these 
 shops shall receive union wages. ^ In many cases the unions 
 also require that non-union men shall be employed under 
 union conditions before union men can go into the shops. 
 
 ^ Glass Bottle Blowers, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Ses- 
 sion, 1906, p. 254.
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 
 
 In the preceding chapter it has been shown that the Print- 
 ers, Cordwainers, and Tailors had developed the closed shop 
 fully by about 1835. A similar movement had begun among 
 the Hatters. In 1822 three workmen of that trade in New 
 York City refused to work with journeymen who were not 
 members of a local hatters' society.^ Whether the closed shop 
 had been adopted prior to 1835 ^Y societies in any trades 
 other than the four mentioned cannot be ascertained from 
 existing data. It seems likely that the shipwrights, house 
 carpenters, and other organized workmen followed the same 
 policy. An interesting piece of evidence in this direction 
 is found in a complaint made by the master house carpenters 
 of Philadelphia against the " Trades' Union " of that city in 
 1836. The Trades' Union was a central labor organization, 
 with which the society of journeymen carpenters was affil- 
 iated. The Trades' Union, said the masters, encouraged 
 strikes. But, they declared, "the evil does not rest here, 
 [because] in order to ensure the growth and continuance of 
 the combination, it is arrogantly required, that no master 
 workman shall employ any Journeyman who is not a mem- 
 ber of the Trades' Union. "^ The language of the protest 
 may be construed to mean that every organization affiliated 
 with the Trades' Union enforced the closed shop or even 
 that members of one union refused to work with non- 
 unionists of another trade, but it is more probable that the 
 masters referred only to the policy of the Carpenters. In 
 the same year two journeymen plasterers w'ere brought be- 
 fore the recorder's court of Philadelphia charged with con- 
 
 * The People v. Trequier, i Wheeler's Criminal Cases, p. 142. 
 
 ' The Pennsylvanian, March 17, 1836, p. 2. Article reprinted in 
 Documentary History of American Industrial Society, Vol. VI, 
 edited by Commons and Sumner, p. 51. 
 
 3 33
 
 34 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [464 
 
 spiracy because of their refusal to work for an employer 
 who would not discharge another journeyman " not a mem- 
 ber of the Trades' Union."^ 
 
 In 1846 the Carpet Weavers probably enforced the closed- 
 shop rule, since their constitution provided that when an 
 operative went from one factory to another he must secure 
 a certificate " to present to the President or Committee of 
 the Factory he goes to."' In 1854 the cigar makers' unions 
 of New York State, as has been mentioned, refused to work 
 with "scabs," while in 1856 the Baltimore society took the 
 same attitude toward all non-union men.^ In 1855 the Iron 
 Molders* and in 1858 the Hollow Ware Glass Blowers^ and 
 the Mule Spinners had begun to develop the closed-shop 
 rule.® The Glass Blowers were probably the first national 
 union to adopt a rule as to what persons its members might 
 work with. In 1857 and 1858 many local unions of the 
 Stone Cutters reported that they had refused to work with 
 journeymen who would not become members.'' 
 
 If the available evidence is summed up, it may be said 
 that practically every trade union formed prior to the Civil 
 War was in favor of excluding non-members from employ- 
 ment. Often, of course, they were not able to carry this 
 policy into practice. Moreover, the numerous prosecutions 
 for conspiracy brought against the trade societies from 1806 
 to 1842 undoubtedly acted as a deterrent on the development 
 of a rigid closed-shop policy. In practically all of these 
 trials of which the reports have been preserved it was the 
 exclusion from employment on which greatest stress was 
 laid by the prosecuting officers. Except in the cases of the 
 Hudson Shoemakers (1836) and the Philadelphia Plasterers 
 
 ^ National Laborer, July 16, 1836. Article reprinted in Commons 
 and Gilmore, Vol. IV, pp. 338-341. 
 
 ^ Weekly Tribune, September 12, 1846. Article reprinted in Docu- 
 mentary History of American Industrial Society, Vol. VIII, edited 
 by Commons, pp. 240-242. 
 
 ^ See above, pp. 27-28. 
 
 * See above, pp. 2CH30. 
 
 " See above, p. 28. 
 
 " See above, p. 29. 
 
 ^ Stone Cutters' Circular, September, 1857, p. i ; June, 1858, p. 5.
 
 465] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 35 
 
 (1836), the juries returned verdicts of guilty. Light fines 
 were ordinarily imposed upon the defendants, but in the 
 case of the New York Tailors (1836) the court, in spite of 
 a recommendation for clemency, fined the president of the 
 society a hundred and fifty dollars, one member, " who made 
 himself particularly conspicuous," a hundred dollars, and 
 the remainder fifty dollars each. The leniency of the 
 courts was owing in part to the belief that the defendants 
 had " erred from a mistake of the law," as Mayor DeWitt 
 Clinton said in passing sentence upon the New York Cord- 
 wainers. Another reason doubtless was that the combina- 
 tions had not as yet attained such power as to incite fear. 
 
 All of the conspiracy cases aroused much interest and 
 excitement at the time. After the trial of the Baltimore 
 Cordwainers, for instance, the fear was expressed in some 
 of the local newspapers " that the verdict would prove a 
 death blow to every organized society."^ While this was 
 not the case, it is evident that the cordwainers' societies 
 against whose members convictions were secured were less 
 active in discriminating against non-members for a consid- 
 erable period after their respective trials. Mayor Clinton 
 warned the New York society members in 1809 " so to alter 
 and modify their rules and their conduct, as not to incur in 
 the future the penalties of the law."- That this was done 
 may be inferred from a remark of the prosecuting attorney 
 in the Philadelphia Tailors' case (1827), who said that the 
 exclusive employment of society members had been requited 
 by the Cordwainers in New York " until the firmness and 
 independence of a Court and Jury put an end to it there. "^ 
 Indeed it is " barely possible that the difficulty of carrying 
 out strikes or other strategic industrial measures without 
 conflict with the common law principle of criminal con- 
 spiracy may have been one of the causes which . . . in- 
 duced trade societies in various parts of the country to aban- 
 
 ' Glocker, " Trade Unionism in Baltimore before the War of 
 1812," in Johns Hopkins University Circular, April, 1907, p. 28. 
 * Commons and Gilmore, Vol. Ill, p. 385. 
 =" Ibid., Vol. IV, pp. 177-178.
 
 36 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [466 
 
 don their industrial aims, or, at least, to conceal them under 
 benevolent activities."^ Those who were opposed to labor 
 combinations felt assured, at any rate, that they had put 
 " an end to those associations " which had been " so preju- 
 dicial to successful enterprise of the capitalists . , . and so 
 subversive to the best interests " of the country.^ 
 
 With the great spread of trade unionism in the thirties the 
 societies again began, as has been noted, to enforce the closed 
 shop. The decision of Chief Justice Savage of the supreme 
 court of judicature of the State of New York in the Geneva 
 Shoemakers' case^ in 1835 was a severe blow to this develop- 
 ment. The outcome of the Hudson Shoemakers' case the 
 year following was hailed by the unionists as " rescuing the 
 rights of the Mechanics from the grasp of Tyranny and 
 Oppression."* A note of elation over the victory for the 
 closed shop in the Philadelphia Plasterers' case in 1836 was 
 also sounded in the National Laborer.^ From this time on- 
 ward verdicts and decisions adverse to the right of society 
 members to discriminate against non-members caused the 
 unions much less apprehension than before. 
 
 From i860 to 1870 the union which pursued the closed- 
 shop policy with the greatest energy was the Molders. 
 During this period notices constantly appeared in their jour- 
 nal, warning workmen that they must carry union cards in 
 order to obtain employment in certain localities.® The ac- 
 tivity of the union in enforcing this rule called forth a 
 protest from employers in 1863, when the Iron Founders 
 and Machine Builders' Association of the Falls of the Ohio 
 in an address to the trade declared that discrimination 
 
 * docker, p. 28. 
 
 * Preface to the Report of the Trial of the Journeymen Cord- 
 wainers of the Borough of Pittsburgh. Commons and Gilmore, 
 Vol. IV, pp. 16-17. 
 
 'People V. Fisher, 14 Wendell (N. Y.), 9. 
 
 * From the title page of the report of the trial of the Hudson 
 Shoemakers. Commons and Gilmore, Vol. IV, p. 277. 
 
 "July 16, 1836. Article reprinted in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. 
 IV, p. 338. 
 •Iron Holders' Journal, July, 1864, p. 44; August, 1864, p. 38.
 
 467] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 37 
 
 against non-unionists meant " arbitrary interference with 
 the business management " of employers.^ 
 
 In 1864 the Ship Owners and Ship Builders' Association 
 of Buffalo in a circular to vessel owners asked them to dis- 
 criminate against members of the Ship Carpenters and 
 Caulkers' Union, which had become so "obnoxious, . . . 
 dictatorial, . . . ruinous and monstrously exhorbitant " in 
 its demands as to assert that " this man or that, shall not 
 be employed unless he first becomes a member of their 
 union. "2 Even more interesting are the resolutions adopted 
 by the board of directors of the Galena and Chicago Union 
 Railroad Company in the same year. The text of the reso- 
 lutions leads one to infer that the " Brotherhood of the 
 Footboard," now known as the Brotherhood of Locomotive 
 Engineers, demanded the right to " dictate " to the railroad 
 company "whom they shall or shall not employ."^ When 
 in July, 1864, an attempt was made to organize a general 
 association of employers to combat the " dangerous atti- 
 tude " of labor, the appeal for a convention set forth that 
 the unions assumed " to dictate to employers . . . who shall 
 be discharged and who retained ; when, and on what terms 
 our establishments and business may be operated."* 
 
 From the late sixties on, the closed shop assumed increas- 
 ing importance among union policies. Industrial develop- 
 ment was proceeding on a tremendous scale, while every 
 year the stream of immigration increased. Scattered local 
 
 1 Fincher's Trades Review, October 3, 1863. Article reprinted in 
 Documentary History of American Industrial Society, Vol. IX, 
 edited by Commons and Andrews, pp. 89-97. 
 
 ^ Ibid., April 2, 1864. Article reprinted in Commons and Andrews, 
 Vol. IX, pp. 104-105. 
 
 * Ibid., June 4, 1864. Article reprinted in Commons and Andrews, 
 Vol. IX, p. 107. The Brotherhood of the Footboard was organized 
 on August 17, 1863. Its demand for the closed shop at this period 
 in its history may, perhaps be explained by the fact that as first con- 
 stituted it included foremen and machinists as well as engineers. 
 On February 22, 1864, however, it limited its membership to loco- 
 motive engineers (Kennedy, " Beneficiary Features of American 
 Trade Unions," in Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical 
 and Political Science, Ser. XXVI, Nos. 11-12, pp. 19-20). 
 
 * Ibid., August 13, 1864. Article reprinted in Commons and 
 Andrews, Vol. IX, p. 109.
 
 38 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [468 
 
 unions were rapidly formed into national organizations. 
 All the conditions were favorable to the development of a 
 policy of exclusion. 
 
 From 1868 to 1873 the Knights of Saint Crispin, an or- 
 ganization of journeymen shoemakers, carried on eight 
 strikes against the employment of non-union men. All but 
 one of these ended in failure.^ Other organizations, such 
 as the Coopers, Granite Cutters, Sons of Vulcan, and the 
 Iron and Steel Roll Hands made vigorous demands for the 
 closed shop from 1870 to 1880, and in some cases^ inserted 
 rules in their national constitutions forbidding members to 
 work with or aid non-members. Unions like the Iron 
 Molders, Cigar Makers, Hatters, and Typographical Union 
 enforced the closed shop with increasing strictness. In 
 1873 the editor of the Iron Holders' Journal declared that 
 from what he had heard and seen it was a " risky business 
 to travel without a card."^ The unions of the building 
 trades, notably the Bricklayers and Masons and the Car- 
 penters, were also strongly in favor of the closed shop, and 
 soon reached a preeminence in its enforcement which they 
 have retained until the present day. 
 
 Two important advances in closed-shop policy were also 
 well under way by 1875. In the first place, arrangements 
 were effected between different unions of allied trades under 
 which " scabs " and other non-unionists were discriminated 
 against jointly by such unions. Secondly, the initial im- 
 pulse had been given to a movement to make an employer's 
 entire business and not a single shop the " unit " of the 
 closed " shop." Material made by non-unionists was also 
 discriminated against. The development of these forms of 
 discrimination will be treated in the respective chapters 
 
 ^ Third Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1887, pp. 
 1052-1055. 
 
 ■ Sons of Vulcan, Constitution, 1874, Subordinate Forge, Art. XI, 
 Sec. 3. Iron and Steel Roll Hands, Constitution, 1874, Constitution 
 of Subordinate Lodges, Art. XII, Sec. 3. In 1876. on the amalgama- 
 tion of these two unions into the Amalgamated Association of Iron, 
 Steel and Tin Workers, the closed shop was provided for in the 
 latter's constitution for subordinate lodges, Art. XV, Sees, i, 2. 
 
 'Iron Holders' Journal, August, 1873, p. 69.
 
 469] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 39 
 
 devoted to them, under the captions " Joint Closed Shop " 
 and " Extended Closed Shop." 
 
 An influence which made strongly for the increasing pop- 
 ularity of the closed shop from 1880 on was the trade-union 
 label. The first label was adopted by the Cigar Makers' 
 Association of the Pacific Coast in 1875/ ^^^ i^^ 1880 a 
 national organization, the Cigar Makers' International 
 Union, adopted this device.^ Within the next ten years the 
 Knights of Labor and nine national unions followed this 
 example.^ From that time forward labels came into use 
 among the unions with increasing rapidity. The label was 
 issued only to shops which employed union members exclu- 
 sively.* The number of closed shops in many unions was 
 soon materially increased by the demand for label goods. 
 Still more important, however, was the influence of the 
 label upon unions which had heretofore been indifferent 
 concerning the closed shop. By the propaganda for the 
 sale of label goods attention was called to the fact that the 
 label stood for the closed shop as opposed to open-shop and 
 non-union conditions. The effect of advertising the closed 
 shop by the " label trades " was to arouse interest in the 
 same policy in other unions. 
 
 The campaign for the closed shop was carried on among 
 a large number of unions between the years 1885 and 1893. 
 The strong closed-shop unions already mentioned were 
 joined by the Lasters, Glass Bottle Blowers,^ Window Glass 
 Workers,^ Flint Glass Workers, Machinists, and many local 
 
 ^ Spedden, " The Trade Union Label," in Johns Hopkins Studies 
 in Historical and Political Science, Ser. XXVHI, No. 2, p. 10. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 14. 
 'Ibid., p. 18. 
 
 * Until 1883 the Cigar Makers allowed the label to be used on the 
 product of a union member who worked in the same shop with 
 non-unionists (Ibid., p. 51). 
 
 ' Then known as Knights of Labor, District Assembly No. 149. 
 
 ' In 1889 the president of the Window Glass Workers, Local 
 Assembly 300, Knights of Labor, stated in his report that since the 
 formation of the Universal Federation of Window Glass Workers, 
 an international organization of European and American unions, 
 there had not been " one single non-union factory in the country " 
 (Report of the Fifth Convention, 1889, p. 21). This condition is 
 said to have continued down to 1903. By 1888 both the Local
 
 40 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [470 
 
 unions in the metal, printing, building,^ and miscellaneous 
 trades. In a few of the building trades unions, as for 
 example the Painters, the closed shop was practically ob- 
 ligatory on all local unions. Everywhere the movement 
 progressed in spite of doubt in the minds of some labor 
 leaders as to whether the exclusion of non-unionists from 
 employment was beneficial to their organizations.^ 
 
 Strike statistics from 1881 to 1893 indicate the spread of 
 the closed-shop movement.^ In 1881 the number of strikes 
 called for " the recognition of the union and union rules "* 
 amounted to 12.1 per cent, of all strikes called by labor 
 organizations ; the number of establishments involved in 
 such strikes was 1.19 per cent, of all struck establishments, 
 and the number of persons involved was 4.2 per cent, of the 
 total number. By 1892 the percentages had increased very 
 considerably, so that they were respectively 21.5 per cent., 
 29.1 per cent., and 27.3 per cent. During the intermediate 
 years, with some exceptions, the increase in percentage was 
 fairly regular. The statistics for lockouts^ in the same 
 period also show that an increasing part of the lockouts 
 
 Assembly 300 and District Assembly 149, Knights of Labor, had 
 made provision in their constitutions that their members should not 
 work except in closed shops. 
 
 * Local unions of the Painters, Carpenters, Plumbers, and Brick- 
 layers from 1885 on frequently notified workmen in their trades as 
 follows : " None but union men need apply." " All shops have rec- 
 ognized the union." " No non-unionist recognized." " No card, 
 no work." 
 
 2 Professor R. T. Ely in his Labor Movement in America (p. 160), 
 published in 1886, says, " Some of the most intelligent trades- 
 unionists think that the refusal to work with a non-union man is 
 indefensible and injurious to the cause of labor." 
 
 ' Compiled from the Twenty-first Annual Report of the Com- 
 missioner of Labor, 1906 (pp. 42, 56). The percentages given here 
 are somewhat higher than those of the report, since no account is 
 taken of strikes by unorganized workers. 
 
 * " Under the cause ' concerning recognition of union and union 
 rules ' are classed the various causes relative to dealing with union 
 officials and the adoption or enforcement of rules and regulations of 
 unions governing the work of their members, one of the most 
 frequent and important rules being against working with non-union 
 men" (Twenty-first Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 
 1906, p. 113). 
 
 ' Twenty-first Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1906, 
 pp. 70-71.
 
 47 1 ] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 41 
 
 was caused by closed-shop and " recognition " demands. In 
 1881 such lockouts amounted to 16.6 per cent, of all lock- 
 outs and in 1892 to 36.06 per cent. Even higher were the 
 percentages for 1887, 1888, 1890, and 1891. 
 
 Not only did individual employers, like the Birmingham 
 Rolling Mill Company in 1884^ and the Carnegie Steel Com- 
 pany in 1892,2 lock out union employees because they de- 
 manded the closed shop, but associations of employers also 
 pursued the same policy. In 1887 the Granite Manufac- 
 turers' Association of Boston locked out their men " on the 
 specious plea of individualism" when the union men refused 
 to work with " scabs. "^ In the same year the Master Ma- 
 sons of Providence, Rhode Island, notified the local union 
 of bricklayers that men would be hired solely as individuals 
 and not as unionists.* The following year the Master 
 Stonemasons of St. Louis voted that work should be given 
 " to every journeyman mason whether belonging to the 
 Union or not."^ In 1891 the painters' union of Milwaukee 
 was notified by the masters that they had agreed not to 
 " discharge non-union men on account of union matters."® 
 Similarly the brick contractors of Zanesville, Ohio, in 1892 
 refused to recognize the closed shop. At the national con- 
 vention of the Master Painters in 1892 a delegate urged the 
 adoption of a system of individual agreements on the ground 
 that agreements with unions were bound to result in closed- 
 shop conditions. While the speaker was heartily applauded, 
 no action was taken on his recommendations.'' 
 
 During this period, although the unions were so actively 
 
 1 Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, Pro- 
 ceedings of the Ninth Annual Convention, 1884, p. 1361. 
 
 'Ibid., Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Convention, 1893, 
 pp. 4250-4251. 
 
 ' Painters' Journal, July, 1887, p. 2. This position was maintained 
 by the Association until 1902, when it agreed to eliminate the " non- 
 discrimination clause " in its contracts with the Granite Cutters 
 (Granite Cutters' Journal, May, 1902, p. 6). 
 
 * Ibid., Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual Convention, 1887, 
 p. 24. 
 
 'Bricklayers and Masons, Proceedings of the Twenty-second 
 Annual Convention, 1888, p. 45. 
 
 « Painters' Journal, May, 1891, p. 4. 
 
 ' Ibid., April, 1892, p. 3.
 
 42 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [472 
 
 engaged in extending the closed shop, comparatively little 
 discussion of the question is found. The most important 
 pronouncement by a representative labor body in favor of 
 the closed shop in this period was that made by the Amer- 
 ican Federation of Labor in 1890. In a resolution, the first 
 expression of its views on the subject, the Federation de- 
 clared that it was " inconsistent for union men to work with 
 non-union men, especially when they are displacing their 
 fellow unionists, who may be engaged on strike or lockout."^ 
 It will be noted that this resolution is not an unqualified 
 endorsement of the closed shop. As yet public interest in 
 the question was slight. 
 
 The right to strike against non-union workmen came 
 before the higher courts in some fourteen cases from 1850 
 to 1898.^ In a majority of these cases strikes for the closed 
 shop were declared to be either criminal or tortious. Yet 
 these adverse decisions exercised no apparent influence on 
 trade-union policy. 
 
 In the depression following the panic of 1893 the unions 
 sustained severe losses. The percentage of strikes involv- 
 ing " recognition of union and union rules " greatly de- 
 creased, while the percentage of lockouts for the open shop 
 increased. An examination of the union journals also indi- 
 cates that the unions were forced in many places to concede 
 the open shop. In 1892, for example, as many as thirty 
 local unions inserted " no card, no work " notices in the Iron 
 Molders' Journal. In 1894 only ten or twelve continued 
 the practice. The Bricklayers and Masons, always a strong 
 
 * Report of Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Convention, 1890, 
 p. 40. 
 
 * State V. Donaldson (1867), 3 Vroom (N. J.), 151; People v. 
 Smith (1887), 5 N. Y. Crim. R., 509; Crump v. Commonwealth 
 C1888), 84 Va, 927; State v. Dyer (1894), 67 Vt, 690; Fischer v. 
 State (1898), 76 N. W., 594; Snow v. Wheeler (1873), 113 Mass., 
 179; Mayer v. Journeymen Stonecutters, 47 N. J. Eq. R., 519; Long- 
 shore Printing Co. v. Howell (1894), 26 Ore., 527; Clemmitt v. 
 Watson (189s), 14 Ind. R., 38; People v. Davis (1898), Chicago 
 Legal News, Vol. 30, p. 212; Chipley v. Atkinson (1887), 23 Fla., 
 206; Old Dominion Steamship Co. v. McKenna, 30 Fed., 48; Lucke 
 V. Clothing Cutters Assembly (1893), 77 Md., 396; Perkins v. Pendle- 
 ton (1897), 90 Me., 166; Davis v. United Portable Hoisting Engi- 
 neers, 51 N. Y. Supple., 180.
 
 473] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 43 
 
 union, reported an unusual number of "scabs" in 1893 and 
 1894. Other unions like the Painters^ and United Green 
 Glass Workers- were compelled openly to acknowledge that 
 it was impossible to keep union men from working with 
 " scabs " and in " non-union " shops. 
 
 With the increase in business activity which followed the 
 Spanish-American War a new period in the history of the 
 closed shop began. On account of the great demand for 
 workers, trade unions were able to secure better hours, 
 wages, and working conditions. Their membership in- 
 creased very rapidly. Contemporaneously the number of 
 strikes for the " recognition of the union and union rules " 
 grew. The number of such strikes was twice as great in 
 1899 as in 1898; in 1901 they were five times as numerous 
 as in 1898, and amounted to 36.4 per cent, of the total num- 
 ber of strikes called by labor organizations. 
 
 The unions began to insist that the employers should sign 
 written agreements in which the closed shop was conceded. 
 Hitherto, verbal understanding had ordinarily sufficed, or 
 the closed shop had rested only upon custom. It seemed to 
 many unions that while business was active, definite written 
 agreements should be drawn up limiting employment to 
 'union members.^ In all parts of the country it became in- 
 creasingly difficult for non-unionists to obtain employment. 
 In New York the building trades had almost absolute con- 
 trol under their arbitration agreement. In other cities, like 
 San Francisco and Chicago, the closed shop was enforced 
 more widely than ever before. " Unionism ran riot. . . . 
 The newsboys, the sandwich vendors, even the girls who 
 sold chewing gum on the streets were organized. Civil Ser- 
 
 ^Yet the Painters in 1893 announced that none but union men 
 would be allowed to secure a job on the buildings of the Columbian 
 Exposition at Chicago (Painters' Journal. January, 1893, p. 2). 
 
 "Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Session, 1895, p. 103; 
 Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Session, 1896, p. 102. 
 
 » Another evidence of the increasing importance attached to the 
 closed shop during this period was the fact that the ordinary mem- 
 bership card in a union was superseded by the " working card." It 
 soon became customary to speak of the " working card system," 
 meaning thereby the closed shop.
 
 44 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [474 
 
 vice in municipal affairs gave way to the closed shop."^ In 
 smaller places, like Streator, Illinois, the unions boasted 
 that it was " impossible for a man or woman to obtain work 
 on any job, skilled or unskilled, without first belonging to a 
 labor organization and carrying a union card."^ While 
 there was some exaggeration in these reports, they show 
 with what enthusiasm the unions everywhere took up the 
 idea of a universal closed shop. 
 
 On the employers' side dissatisfaction with these condi- 
 tions was widespread. Moreover, the trend of industrial 
 development had increased the power of the employers to 
 oppose the unions. In all industries business was conducted 
 on a larger scale than heretofore; in many, trusts had been 
 formed. Even in the building industry the great construc- 
 tion company had to a large extent taken the place of the 
 small contractor. Furthermore, in many leading industries 
 employers' associations had been formed, whose members 
 could be relied upon to stand together in dealing with the 
 labor problem. The employers realized that the closed 
 shop was the key to the labor situation. To rid themselves 
 of irritating shop rules, therefore, they set out to destroy 
 the system whereby unions enforced them. 
 
 The struggle which followed was one of the most severe 
 ever faced by organized labor. The first of the employers' 
 associations seriously to oppose the closed shop was the 
 National Metal Trades Federation. In 1901, after a gen- 
 eral strike of the Machinists,^ the Federation resolved that, 
 " while disavowing any intention to interfere with the 
 proper functions of labor organizations," it would not admit 
 union dictation in the management of business.* For a 
 time the Metal Trades Federation was the only national em- 
 
 1 Marcosson, " The Fight for the Open Shop," in World's Work, 
 December, 1905, p. 6961. 
 
 'The Union Boot and Shoe Worker, July, 1901, p. 18. 
 
 ' For a more detailed account, see Hilbert, " Employers' Associa- 
 tions in the United States," in Studies in American Trade Unionism, 
 edited by Hollander and Barnett, p. 202. One or two local employers' 
 associations like that of Dayton, Ohio, had already advocated the 
 open shop, but their influence was not great. 
 
 * American Industries, April i, 1903, p. 13.
 
 475] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 45 
 
 ployers' association in active opposition to the closed shop. 
 
 The next blow to the closed shop came from an unex- 
 pected quarter and, partly on that account and partly be- 
 cause of attendant circumstances, created strong public 
 sentiment in favor of the open shop. In 1902 the Anthra- 
 cite Coal Strike Commission was appointed by President 
 Roosevelt to arbitrate the great miners' strike of that year. 
 Among other things the United Mine Workers asked that 
 the mine operators enter into an agreement with them for 
 the purpose of " specifying the conditions of employment 
 which shall obtain."^ This demand was interpreted both 
 by the operators^ and by the non-union men^ as a demand 
 for the closed shop. The award of the Commission, given 
 on March 18, 1903, granted practically every demand of the 
 strikers except that for an agreement. The Commission 
 absolutely forbade the establishment of the closed shop in 
 the anthracite industry during the period which the award 
 covered. Section IX of the award reads as follows : " The 
 Commission adjudges and awards: That no person shall 
 be refused employment, or in any way discriminated against, 
 on account of membership or non-membership in any labor 
 organization ; and that there shall be no discrimination 
 against, or interference with, any employee who is not a 
 member of any labor organization by members of such 
 organization."* A number of labor leaders, notably Mr. 
 Gompers, contended that the award was not to be construed 
 as unfavorable to the closed shop. According to this view, 
 the Commission intended merely to maintain the status quo; 
 indeed, it " had particularly in mind to warn the operators 
 against future discrimination against union men."^ The 
 interpretation of the public was different. 
 
 The award of the Commission aroused great interest 
 
 ^ Bulletin of the Department of Labor, No. 46, May, 1903, p. 520. 
 
 ' Ibid., p. 527. 
 
 * In a statement to the Commission the non-unionists said, " Any 
 agreement, if made, will render it impossible for us to continue to 
 earn our living by our labor in and about the mine in which we are 
 now employed, or to which such agreement applies" (Ibid., p. 521). 
 
 *Ibid., p. 509. 
 The Union Boot and Shoe Worker, September, 1904, p. 3.
 
 46 The Closed Shop hi American Trade Unions. [476 
 
 throughout the country, discussion centering particularly 
 on the question of the open shop. Employers who had 
 hitherto been fighting a losing battle with the unions were 
 much encouraged by the award, since it proceeded from 
 what was generally considered an impartial tribunal. Indi- 
 vidual employers and associations of employers which had 
 not been moved to action by the example of the Metal 
 Trades Federation felt that they must seize the opportunity 
 to enlist in the fight for " individual liberty." 
 
 In April of the same year the National Association of 
 Manufacturers, an organization which had not hitherto con- 
 cerned itself with labor questions, proceeded " amidst great 
 enthusiasm " to adopt a declaration of principles among 
 which was incorporated, word for word, the open-shop sec- 
 tion of the coal strike award. ^ In 1902 and 1903 there came 
 into existence in numerous cities organizations known as 
 " Citizens' Alliances." Their agitation for the open shop 
 was so active as to engender much apprehension among 
 unionists. By 1906 practically every city of importance had 
 its Alliance. In many of the larger cities general employers' 
 associations also were formed, most of which were strongly 
 in favor of the open shop. 
 
 Much moral encouragement was given at this time to the 
 opponents of the closed shop by the outcome of the cele- 
 brated Miller case in the Government Printing Office at 
 Washington. The facts in the case are as follows : One 
 W. A. Miller, an assistant foreman in the bindery division 
 of the Government Printing Office, was suspended and later, 
 on May 13, 1903, expelled from Local Union No. 4 of the 
 International Brotherhood of Bookbinders. Upon notifi- 
 cation to this effect, the public printer on the following day 
 discharged Miller from his position because, as he said, 
 " the bookbinders of the Government Printing Office are all 
 members of Local Union No. 4 of the International Brother- 
 
 1 Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention, 1903, pp. 165- 
 169. In 1904 a further article was added to the declaration of prin- 
 ciples, stating that the Association declared " its unalterable antag- 
 onism to the closed shop" (Proceedings, 1904, p. I73)-
 
 477] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 47 
 
 hood of Bookbinders and under the rules of the organiza- 
 tion are prohibited from working with a member under 
 ban."^ Technically the discharge was " for the good of the 
 service." 
 
 Upon complaint of Miller to the Civil Service Commis- 
 sion, an investigation was made. It was proved that Miller 
 had been compelled to relinquish his position solely because 
 he had been expelled from the union and not because he 
 was inefficient. The Civil Service Commission accordingly 
 on July 6 requested the public printer to reinstate Mr. Miller 
 at once. " No person," it ordered, " shall be removed from 
 a competitive position except for such cause as will promote 
 the efficiency of the public service. The Commission does 
 not consider expulsion from a labor union, being a body in 
 no way connected with the public service nor having author- 
 ity over public employees, to be such a cause as will promote 
 the efficiency of the public service."- A week later Presi- 
 dent Roosevelt himself ordered the reinstatement of Miller, 
 on the ground that " on the face of the papers presented, 
 Miller would appear to have been removed in violation of 
 law." In a letter to the secretary of commerce and labor 
 on July 14 the President set forth his views on the question. 
 Calling the attention of the secretary to the award of the 
 Anthracite Coal Strike Commission, quoted above, he said: 
 " I heartily approve of this award and judgment by the 
 Commission appointed by me, which itself included a mem- 
 ber of a labor union. This Commission was dealing with 
 labor organizations working for private employers. It is, 
 of course, mere elementary decency to require that all the 
 Government Departments shall be handled in accordance 
 with the principle thus clearly and fearlessly enunciated."^ 
 
 The action of the President and of the Civil Service Com- 
 mission attracted the widest attention among both unions 
 and employers. The President's vigorous pronouncement 
 
 ^ 58th Cong., 2d sess., H. Doc. No. 644, p. 148, Twentieth Report of 
 the Civil Service Commission, 1902-1903. 
 * Ibid. 
 » Ibid., p. 149.
 
 48 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [478 
 
 served to swing public feeling to an appreciable extent to 
 the side of the opponents of the closed shop. The labor 
 unions received the President's decision with sharp criticism. 
 Committees were sent to Washington to persuade him to 
 revoke his order, but he declared his decision " final."^ 
 
 The great increase in the number of employers' associa- 
 tions and citizens' alliances and their deepening hostility 
 toward the closed shop^ led in October, 1903, to the organi- 
 zation of the " Citizens' Industrial Association of America." 
 David M. Parry of Indianapolis, president of the National 
 Association of Manufacturers and a bitter partizan of the 
 open shop, became its first president. The new organiza- 
 tion was designed to centralize the opposition to unionism 
 and to the closed shop. In December, 1903, its executive 
 committee declared that labor in demanding the closed shop 
 was " seeking to overthrow individual liberty and property 
 rights," and resolved that the "right hand of fellowship 
 should be held out to all free and independent workmen, 
 and especially, that a guarantee of full safety be offered to 
 those now in the ranks of union labor who desire to escape 
 the tyranny of the same."^ 
 
 The example set by the Metal Trades Association, the 
 National Association of Manufacturers, the Citizens' Al- 
 liances, and the Citizens' Industrial Association of America 
 
 ^ 58th Cong., 2d sess., H. Doc. No. 644, p. 148, Twentieth Report 
 of the Civil Service Commission, 1902-1903, p. 150. On July 25 
 Miller returned to work. That the President's order had a tempo- 
 rary effect, at least, is shown by the fact that when the International 
 Typographical Union attempted to levy a ten per cent, assessment in 
 1905-1907, many of its members working in the Government Print- 
 ing Office refused to make payment. See Barnett, p. 289. At the 
 present time the closed shop has practically been reestablished. As 
 early as February, 1906, the Printing Pressman^ (p. 100) reported 
 that the " frequent allusions to the open shop intended to apply to the 
 Government Printing Office has really no meaning." 
 
 ' " Many employers who previously, without much urging, recog- 
 nized the closed shop have been carried along with it [open shop 
 sentiment], and now avow their determination to resist the closed 
 shop at whatever cost" (White, "The Issue of the Open and Closed 
 Shop," in North American Review, January, 1905, p. 30). 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Preliminary Convention, October, 1903, and 
 also the First Meeting of the Executive Board of the Association, 
 p. 17.
 
 479] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 49 
 
 was immediately followed by a great number of national 
 and local employers' associations in different industries.^ 
 In all parts of the country " open-shop movements " were 
 inaugurated. Employment bureaus were established as a 
 means of preventing the dependence of workmen upon the 
 " walking delegate," while educational campaigns were in- 
 stituted for the purpose of " enlightening the American 
 people on the greatest question which has confronted them 
 since the Revolutionary War."^ The employers of Los |, 
 Angeles and of Washington, D. C, endeavored to convert 
 1 1 these cities into " model open-shop towns." " Open-shop 
 1 schools " were established for the training of printers, teleg- 
 raphers, tailors, and machinists.^ A number of the largest 
 American corporations joined the open-shop movement. 
 Among them were the United States Steel Company with its 
 subsidiary corporations, the American Tobacco Company, 
 the Macbeth-Evans Glass Company, the Baldwin Locomo- 
 
 1 The following: employers' associations declared themselves 
 opposed to the closed shop : — 
 
 National Associations. 
 
 American Anti-Boycott Association, National Association of Agri- 
 cultural Implements and Vehicle Manufacturers, National Master 
 Bakers' Association, National Building Trades Employers' Associa- 
 tion, Cap Manufacturers' Association, National Association of 
 Clothers, National Association of Erectors of Iron and Steel, 
 National Founders' Association, National Association of Employing 
 Lithographers, National Association of Marble Dealers, International 
 Association of Master House Painters and Decorators, National 
 Association of Master Sheet Metal Workers, Stove Founders' 
 National Defence Association, Merchant Tailors' National Protec- 
 tive Association, United Typothetae of America. The United States 
 Brewers' Association was suspected of open-shop sympathies, but 
 never went on record in opposition to the closed shop. 
 
 District Associations. 
 
 Lake Carriers' Association, Managers of Docks of Lake Erie 
 Ports, Inter-state Builders, Contractors and Dealers Association 
 (New England), Iron League of New York. 
 
 * Thus, in 1901 the National Metal Trades Association began the 
 publication of a magazine called the " Open Shop." It was con- 
 tinued until March, 1908, when it was merged with the " Review " 
 and published in cooperation with the National Founders' Asso- 
 ciation. 
 
 ' The unions declare that these schools are centers for training 
 strike-breakers.
 
 50 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [480 
 
 tive Works, the American Can Company, and Cramps' Ship 
 Yards. The public press for the most part warmly advo- 
 cated the open shop. 
 
 A considerable number of the opponents of the closed 
 shop took pains to declare that they were not opposed to 
 trade unions, but merely to the exclusion of non-unionists 
 from employment. It will be proper to consider at this 
 point how far the " fight for the open shop " was a fight 
 against unionism. In many cases employers, after refusing 
 to sign further closed-shop agreements, did sign genuine 
 open-shop contracts. The agreement drawn up in 1903 be- 
 tween the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers and two 
 organizations of employers, namely, the National Associa- 
 tion of Manufacturers and the Structural Steel Erectors' 
 Association, is an instance.^ This agreement contained the 
 following provisions : — 
 
 1. No restriction of material. 
 
 2. No union control over the appointment or the work of 
 the foremen. 
 
 '3. No sympathetic strikes. 
 
 4. No outside persons to interfere with workmen during 
 working hours. 
 
 5. Employer to have full power to hire or discharge as 
 he sees fit ; membership in a labor union to have no influence 
 in either hiring or discharging. 
 
 6. No interference with laborers loading or unloading 
 materials. 
 
 7. Employees to be at liberty to cease work at any time. 
 Other agreements of the same kind might be cited. 
 
 But while a large number of employers established open 
 shops and made no discrimination between union or non- 
 union men, others refused to employ union men. Mr. 
 David M. Parry, in an address before the first convention 
 of the Citizens' Industrial Association of America, declared 
 that if the unions "take the position that there must be dis- 
 crimination against independent labor as the price for the 
 employment of union labor," it becomes the "duty of the 
 
 ' The Bridgeman's Magazine, May, 1903, p. 12.
 
 481] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 51 
 
 employer to discriminate against union labor."^ Other em- 
 ployers did not refuse to hire union men provided they 
 applied as individuals, but they were unwilling to make 
 agreements with the unions. Among the employers' asso- 
 ciations which took this position were the Mason Builders' 
 Association of Montreal (1908), the Iron League of New 
 York City and Vicinity (1906), and the Builders' Exchange 
 of Jacksonville, Florida (1907). In Des Moines, Iowa, in 
 1904, the Citizens' Industrial Alliance is reported to have 
 posted open-shop rules in the establishments of its members, 
 and to have advised the discharge of union men who asked 
 non-unionists employed in those places to become members 
 of the union. ^ Undoubtedly, the anti-union shop and not 
 the open shop was desired by many of the employers who 
 engaged in the open-shop crusade. 
 
 The issue offered by the employers' associations in their 
 attack on the closed shop was met directly by the unions. 
 On September 30, 1903, the executive council of the Amer- 
 ican Federation of Labor issued a bulletin declaring that the 
 " trade union movement stands for the strictly union shop."^ 
 At the Boston convention in November of the same year the 
 Federation placed itself on record as "being in favor of 
 the union shop everywhere, as well in federal, state and 
 municipal employment as in private enterprises."* Union 
 after union by resolution indorsed the closed shop,^ and the 
 officers of the unions in their reports repeatedly warned the 
 
 'Proceedings of the Adjourned Session of the First Convention, 
 1904, p. II. 
 
 ' The Bricklayer and Mason, June, 1904, p. 69. The H. Marcus 
 Skirt Company of New York City in 1906 required each of its work- 
 men to sign an individual agreement not to join a union or to enter 
 into a strike for a year while at work " as an individual in the open 
 shop" of the company (People v. Marcus, 185 N. Y., 257). 
 
 ' American Federation of Labor, Report of Proceedings of the 
 Twenty-third Annual Convention, 1903, p. 89. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 211. President Gompers also commented on the open- 
 shop movement in his reports for 1903, 1904, 1905, and 1907. 
 
 ' Elevator Constructors, Glove Workers, Flint Glass Workers, 
 Musicians, 1904; Electrical Workers, Sheet Metal Workers, 1905; 
 Printing Pressmen, Theatrical Stage Employees, 1907 ; Bricklayers 
 and Masons, Bridgemen, Longshoremen, 1908. Various state federa- 
 tions of labor also approved closed-shop strikes carried on within 
 their jurisdictions.
 
 52 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [482 
 
 members against yielding to the demand for the open shop. 
 The Industrial Workers of the World in their manifesto for 
 1905 and the Trades and Labor Congress of Canada at its 
 twenty-first annual convention, 1905/ expressed their ap- 
 proval of the closed shop. 
 
 There were, nevertheless, some dissenting voices in a few 
 unions, such as the Slate and Tile Roofers,- and proposi- 
 tion® to endorse the closed shop were defeated on the ground 
 of expediency. In others, such as the Printing Pressmen 
 and the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, the open-shop 
 question occasioned bitter disputes. President Higgins and 
 the executive board of the Pressmen, who had signed an 
 open-shop agreement with the United Typothetae of Amer- 
 ica,^ were defeated for reelection. At the same time the 
 convention repudiated the agreement.* The action of the 
 Pressmen received the hearty endorsement of the American 
 Federation of Labor.° Considerable feeling was shown at 
 the 1908 convention of the Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers over an attempt to secure the passage of a resolu- 
 tion sanctioning the open shop. Because of the prolonged 
 strike against the American Bridge Company and other 
 concerns, certain delegates urged either that more drastic 
 measures be taken or that union members be allow^ed to " go 
 to work for all firms indiscriminately throughout the coun- 
 try." After a long and sharp debate the resolution was 
 defeated.^ 
 
 An examination of the strike statistics from 1900 to 1905 
 illustrates the importance of the open-shop issue during that 
 period. The percentage of strikes for " recognition of 
 union and union rules " increased steadily from 13.4 in 
 
 > Proceedings, 1905, pp. 47, 50. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Convention, 1907, pp. S, 6. 
 
 ' J his organization includes book and job printers only. The 
 American Newspaper Publishers' Association has never asked for 
 the establishment of the open shop. 
 
 * Constitution, 1907, Resolutions, etc., p. 85, No. 18. 
 'American Federation of Labor, Report of Proceedings of the 
 
 Twenty-seventh Annual Convention, 1907, pp. 313-314. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twelfth Convention, in the Bridgeman's 
 Magazine for October, 1908, pp. 724-760.
 
 483] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 53 
 
 1900 to 41.3 in 1905.^ The percentage of struck establish- 
 ments affected by such strikes rose from 8.5 in 1900 to 14.8 
 in 1905, while the percentage of strikers participating in 
 such strikes rose from 7.3 in 1900 to 22.3 in 1905. Every 
 State in the Union, except possibly South Dakota, and 
 many, if not all, of the Canadian provinces^ were affected 
 by strikes for the closed shop, and almost every industry 
 was involved at one time or another. 
 
 The fight against the closed shop has been reflected in the 
 increasing number of judicial decisions since 1898 concern- 
 ing the right to strike against non-union men and the legality 
 of closed-shop agreements. The weight of authority has 
 held against the closed shop. However, a number of im- 
 portant decisions, notably that of the National Protective 
 Association v. Cummings,^ have upheld the right of unions 
 to discriminate against non-members. The only apparent 
 effect of the decisions adverse to the closed shop has been 
 the encouragement they have given to the formation and 
 growth of open-shop employers' associations. The non- 
 union man has found little direct relief from these decisions. 
 
 Public discussion of the question of the closed shop was 
 very active for some years following the award of the An- 
 thracite Coal Strike Commission.'* The American Economic 
 Association^ devoted parts of two meetings to its consid- 
 eration, and the National Civic Federation organized dis- 
 cussions in which employers and unionists took part.* 
 Nothing apparently was gained in this way, for neither 
 party was willing to make concessions. In 1905 an unsuc- 
 
 1 Compiled from the Twenty-first Annual Report of the Commis- 
 sioner of Labor, 1906. No statistics are available since 1905. 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual Convention of the Cana- 
 dian Trades and Labor Congress, 1905, p. 13. 
 
 3170 N. Y., 315. 
 
 ^ " So much has been said and written in magazine, trade journals 
 and daily press on the question of the open and closed shop, that to 
 the average disinterested reader the question is becoming, figuratively 
 speaking, nauseating " (Weekly Bulletin of the Clothing Trades, 
 July 29, 1904, p. 4). 
 
 * Proceedings of the American Economic Association, 1903, p. 173; 
 also Proceedings, 1905, p. 140. 
 
 « Civic Federation Review, ]\Iay 15, 1905, pp. 1-4.
 
 54 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [484 
 
 cessful attempt was made to secure the incorporation of an 
 open-shop provision in the constitution of the new State of 
 Oklahoma.^ More recently pubUc interest in the subject 
 has waned. 
 
 It remains to inquire whether the events of the past decade 
 have resulted in inducing the closed-shop unions to modify 
 their position. To reach a satisfactory answer on this point 
 is difficult. If spokesmen of the unions may be believed, 
 the open-shop movement has been an absolute failure. Many 
 of them claim that the unions have thereby been strengthened 
 in their determination to enforce the closed shop. In Los 
 Angeles, for instance, the citadel of the open-shop forces, 
 the unions as early as 1904 resolved that all shops should be 
 either " strictly union or non-union."^ The Glove Workers 
 in 1903 were forced to declare for the closed shop on ac- 
 count of the demand of the manufacturers that an open- 
 shop agreement be signed. Previous to that time the union 
 had not refused to work with non-unionists, but it was 
 unwilling to sign an agreement to continue that policy.^ 
 
 In September, 1904, General Secretary Duffy of the 
 United Brotherhood of Carpenters declared that in his opin- 
 ion the open-shop movement had done nothing more than 
 create " a little ripple on the surface " of the industrial 
 world.* In 1905 he stated that " the first case has yet to be 
 reported to this office where the ' open shop ' policy has 
 been forced on our members."'^ In 1906 President Huber 
 of the Carpenters reported that two hundred and fifty mills 
 had been unionized during the two preceding years,^ while 
 the general secretary again asserted that the open shop was 
 a " dead issue as far as this organization is concerned."^ 
 
 * The proposed section read as follows : " No person shall be 
 denied or refused employment for the reason that he is not a 
 member of any labor union" (American Industries, December 15, 
 
 1905. p. 3)- 
 
 * The Labor Compendium, April 10, 1904, p. i. 
 ' The Elevator Constructor, April, 1904, p. 25. 
 
 * The Carpenter, September, 1904, p. 11. 
 
 ' Report of the General Secretary, 1905, p. 15. 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Fifteenth General Convention, 1906, p. 58. 
 
 ^ The Carpenter, October, 1906, p. 22.
 
 485] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 55 
 
 Other unions, as for example the Molders, declared that 
 their membership had been steadily increasing during the 
 very years when the struggle was most severe.^ The Mold- 
 ers attributed this result directly to the hostile open-shop 
 policy adopted by the National Founders' Association.^ 
 The officers of the Machinists, the Bricklayers and Masons, 
 the Sheet Metal Workers, the International Building Trades' 
 Council, and the iVmerican Federation of Labor were opti- 
 mistic in their reports throughout the most trying period 
 of the struggle. 
 
 A few unions, on the other hand, in 1 904-1 906 acknowl- 
 edged that they had lost ground in certain localities, or 
 admitted that they had recognized the open shop " in a way 
 harmless to the union."' Many other unions, such as the 
 Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, were led by the exist- 
 ence of strong employers' associations and " generally dis- 
 turbed conditions , . . not to make any demands."* In 
 1907 the president of this union acknowledged that the pre- 
 vious year had been a " trying ordeal."^ 
 
 The employers who fought the closed shop undoubtedly 
 made considerable gains, but they often overstated their 
 success. The period immediately after the Coal Strike 
 Award and the panic of 1907 were the high water-marks in 
 the success of the open-shop campaign. Both periods were 
 favorable to the hostile employer ; in the first, he was backed 
 by a strong public sentiment, and in the second the unions 
 were crippled by the scarcity of employment.^ In 1910 
 
 1 Iron Molders' Journal, November, 1905, p. 848; August, 1906, 
 p. 588. 
 
 * Ibid., August, 1906, p. 593. 
 
 » Weekly Bulletin of the Clothing Trades, January 13, 1904, p. 5. 
 
 * The Bridgeman's Magazine, September, 1906, p. 52. 
 
 *In 1907 the Bridgemen asked financial assistance from the Ameri- 
 can Federation of Labor to carry on their closed-shop dispute with 
 the United States Steel Company, but their request was not granted. 
 
 •The following table, taken from the Twenty-first Annual Report 
 of the Commissioner of Labor, 1906, p. 626, shows the percentage 
 of successful and unsuccessful strikes for the " recognition of union 
 and union conditions." It will be noted that in 1904 and 1905 the
 
 56 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [486 
 
 the open shop is established in the steel and meat-packing 
 industries, and generally where industrial combination is 
 strong. Throughout the South the open shop prevails more 
 widely than in other sections. In Chicago, Cleveland, De- 
 troit, Washington, and Denver the unions in many trades 
 have had to give up the closed shop. In some smaller cities, 
 as for example Los Angeles, there are practically no closed 
 shops at all. In other places and in other industries than 
 those mentioned the closed-shop unions have regained much 
 of the ground that was lost a few years ago. 
 
 The employers' associations, on the other hand, have made 
 gains which cannot be measured in statistical fashion. The 
 unions have learned that they must be more conservative 
 and tolerant in the formulation of shop rules, and the em- 
 ploying class as a whole has learned the value of organiza- 
 tion. As long as the unions dealt with isolated employers 
 it was in many cases easy for them to extort extravagant 
 concessions. In the future, organized labor will be com- 
 pelled to develop a defensive as well as an offensive policy.^ 
 On the other hand, as the bitterness of the recent conflict 
 lessens, employers will realize that the destruction of the 
 unions is not practicable. Many employers who were engaged 
 in the open-shop struggle now disclaim any intention of 
 fighting unions as such, and attack only the closed-shop 
 policy. " Whether sincere or not, their recognition of the 
 right and necessity of workmen to organize marks an impor- 
 tant step in the progress of unionism."^ 
 
 To sum up, the history of the closed-shop movement in 
 America falls roughly into three periods. In the first, from 
 
 employers were very 
 tunately there are no 
 
 successful in defeating such strikes, 
 statistics at hand later than 1905. 
 
 Unfor- 
 
 Year. 
 
 
 Succeeded. 
 
 Failed. 
 
 
 1 901 
 1902 
 1903 
 1904 
 1905 
 
 
 57.26 
 
 55-14 
 66.48 
 36.60 
 43-83 
 
 42.12 
 38-98 
 29.82 
 62.54 
 54-72 
 
 
 * For a capitalistic estimate of the results of the open-shop fight 
 see Marcosson, p. 6965. 
 "White, p. 29.
 
 487] History of the Closed-Shop Movement. 57 
 
 1794 to 1870, the closed shop was maintained almost entirely 
 by local unions which did not cooperate with each other in 
 excluding non-unionists. In the second period, from 1870 
 to 1901, the national unions, or a very large part of them, 
 made the maintenance of the closed shop a national rule, 
 and required their local organizations to enforce it as 
 effectively as possible. In the same period there gradually 
 developed a large amount of cooperation among local unions 
 of different trades and among local unions of the same na- 
 tional union in excluding non-unionists. The third period, 
 from 1901 to the present time, has been characterized by 
 the efforts of the unions to maintain the closed shop in the 
 face of the organized attacks made by employers' asso- 
 ciations. 
 
 The opposition on the part of the employers to the closed 
 shop also falls into three periods. In the first, from 1794 
 to 1836, the employers sought to prevent the exclusion of 
 non-unionists from employment almost entirely by resort to 
 legal processes. Members of different societies were tried 
 for illegal conspiracies because they refused to work with 
 non-members. In the second period, 1836 to 1901, the 
 opposition to the closed shop was carried on by local em- 
 ployers' associations. Finally, from 1901 to the present 
 time, national associations of employers have carried on the 
 struggle for the open shop.
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 The Simple Closed Shop. 
 
 Irt' its simplest form the principle of the closed shop is 
 embodied in the rule that members of a trade union shall not 
 work in an establishment where non-unionists are employed, 
 unless such non-unionists fall within classes exempted by 
 the rules of the union from the requirement of membership. 
 When the exclusion of non-members is carried no further 
 than this, we may say that a union enforces the " simple 
 closed shop." 
 
 In order to understand what persons are required to be- 
 come members of the union we must understand what is 
 meant by the jurisdiction of a union. Every union claims 
 exclusive control over a certain trade or over a group of 
 trades. With other work in the same establishment it has 
 no necessary concern.^ Any rules that it may adopt, there- 
 fore, have force only in the trades over which it claims 
 authority. Not only does a union fix limits to its trade 
 jurisdiction, but it also determines what class or classes of 
 persons at work within this jurisdiction shall be exempted 
 from becoming members. It decides, for example, whether 
 journeymen mechanics only shall be required to join, or 
 whether other persons, such as laborers, helpers, foremen, 
 and employers, shall also be included. It is within these 
 limits that the union enforces the closed shop. It does not 
 discriminate against those classes of non-unionists in the 
 establishment who are not within its jurisdiction or against 
 those exempted from membership. 
 
 It is the purpose of the present chapter to discuss the 
 relation of various classes of workmen to the closed shop. 
 
 *0n October 3, 1862, the Baltimore Cigar Makers decided that 
 " scabs " could work at the manufacture of smoking tobacco in the 
 same shop with union cigar makers, since the latter " had nothing to 
 do with tobacco manufacturing." 
 
 58
 
 489] The Simple Closed Shop. 59 
 
 The workmen with which we have to deal may be conve- 
 niently divided into the following groups : " scabs " and ex- 
 pelled union members, ordinary non-unionists, members of 
 rival unions, suspended and fined union members, retired 
 and resigned union members, travelling union members, 
 union members working at two trades, workmen in " semi- 
 closed " shops, helpers, foremen and superintendents, em- 
 ployers, apprentices, workmen inadmissible to union mem- 
 bership. 
 
 "Scabs" and expelled union members. — In tracing the 
 development of the closed-shop rule it has already been 
 pointed out that " unfair " workmen, such as " scabs," 
 " rats," and expelled union members, were the first work- 
 men to be barred from working with unionists in good 
 standing.^ It will be sufficient here merely to say that it is 
 only under exceptional circumstances that any union will 
 allow its members to work with a " scab " or with a member 
 who has been expelled for a criminal offense, such as em- 
 bezzlement of union funds. ^ More leniency is sometimes 
 shown to members expelled for non-payment of dues. Against 
 the "scab," however, relentless warfare is maintained, and 
 any unionist who ventures to work with him without the 
 consent of his organization is either heavily fined or ex- 
 pelled from membership. 
 
 Ordinary non-unionists. — By far the most important class 
 of workmen against whom American trade unionists dis- 
 criminate consists of non-union men who have not "scabbed." 
 Many of these men are non-members because they have 
 never had an opportunity to join a union or because they 
 have always worked for non-union employers. From a 
 union standpoint they are differentiated from " scabs " in 
 that they have never worked " unfairly " or in wilful oppo- 
 sition to union rules. 
 
 Whether non-union men of this type are allowed to work 
 temporarily with union members in closed shops is usually 
 
 * See above, p. 21. 
 
 * The Tin Plate Workers and a few other unions allow an expelled 
 member to work pending appeal of his case to the national union.
 
 6o The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [490 
 
 a matter for the local unions to decide. Many local unions, 
 when strong enough to enforce their demands, will not allow 
 any one to be employed in a union shop unless he has a 
 paid-up union card in his possession. Should a non-unionist 
 apply for employment in a shop where such a union has 
 control, he is informed that he cannot work unless he be- 
 comes a member of the union. A few local unions have 
 been even more extreme in their demands. In at least two 
 cases within recent years local unions of the Machinists 
 have insisted that no machinist might obtain employment in 
 union shops until he had been a member of the union for 
 at least three months.^ In an agreement in 1900 between 
 the local union of the Painters at Memphis, Tennessee, and 
 the employers it was stipulated that no painter should be 
 hired by the latter unless he held a union card paid up three 
 months in advance.^ The national unions for the most part 
 look upon such rules and agreements with disfavor. 
 
 But while it is not usual to require that the employer in 
 a closed shop shall not employ non-unionists, it is frequently 
 provided that he shall give unionists preference over non- 
 members in employment. In many agreements it is merely 
 stated that preference shall be given to competent union men 
 when workmen are to be hired, and nothing is said as to 
 how the employer is to ascertain whether union members 
 are available.^ Certain unions maintain what is known as 
 a " waiting list," on which are registered the names of un- 
 employed members in the order of their application. If an 
 employer needs a workman, the business agent sends him 
 the member whose name heads the list. If the list is "op- 
 tional," the employer may hire this applicant or not, as he 
 sees fit. Should he refuse to hire him, the union will then 
 send him the member next on the list, and so on. If the 
 
 ^Machinists' Monthly Journal, December, 1906, p. 1104; December, 
 1908, p. ro6g. 
 
 ^ Official Journal of the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and 
 Paperhangers of America, April, 1900, p. 22. 
 
 ^ Window Glass Workers, Local Assembly 300, Knights of Labor, 
 Scale of Wages and Rules for Working, September 15, iSg^-June 
 15, 1900, Sec. 40. 
 
 A
 
 49 1 ] ^^^^ Simple Closed Shop. 6i 
 
 list is " compulsory," the employer is required to hire the 
 first union member sent him. The " union " waiting list is 
 found chiefly in the unions of the building trades. Other 
 unions, such as the International Typographical Union and 
 the United Mine Workers, have developed the " shop " 
 waiting list. The two kinds of lists differ considerably in 
 the amount of preference conferred. When a union main- 
 tains a " shop list," it requires only that " the employee first 
 laid off for lack of work " shall be the first to be taken on 
 when the shop needs more workmen. When a " compul- 
 sory union list " is in force, on the other hand, an employer 
 who wants men is required to hire the union members longest 
 out of employment whether they have ever been in his em- 
 ploy or not, and he is permitted to hire non-members only 
 when all the members of a local union have obtained em- 
 ployment. Comparatively few " union " lists are maintained. 
 They are generally found in connection with " exclusive " 
 agreements, that is, agreements under which a union engages 
 not to allow its members to work for any employer who is 
 not a member of the employers' association with which the 
 agreement is made.^ 
 
 Even more restrictive than the ordinary " compulsory " 
 waiting list is the requirement maintained by the Brewery 
 Workmen. For a number of years this union has had a 
 rule that when one local union is unable to furnish as many 
 men as the employers desire, it must exhaust the supply of 
 unemployed members in adjacent local unions before allow- 
 ing non-members to be hired.^ Usually preferential em- 
 plojTnent is not provided for beyond the membership of a 
 single local union or district council, but in this case it 
 extends to a considerable part of the members of the na- 
 tional union. 
 
 Even where there are no waiting lists, national rules, or 
 agreements for the preferential employment of union men 
 it is customary for many unions to insist that the proprietors 
 
 ' Eleventh Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1904, 
 pp. 20-21. 
 * Constitution, 1901, Art. IX, Sec. 18.
 
 62 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [492 
 
 of union shops shall not hire non-union men as long as com- 
 petent unionists are unemployed. When it is impossible 
 for the union to supply workmen, there is no objection to 
 the employment of non-unionists who are eligible for mem- 
 bership. In man)' unions employers are expected to notify 
 the unions if they need workmen, and if a sufficient number 
 of unionists cannot be furnished within a reasonable time, 
 the employer is free to hire non-members.^ Some unions, 
 however, such as the Barbers, the Meat Cutters and Butcher 
 Workmen, the United Mine Workers, the Plumbers,^ and 
 the Hotel and Restaurant Employees, do not require an 
 employer to observe this rule when an emergency arises, 
 because even a short delay in securing a sufficient labor force 
 would be likely to cause irreparable loss. 
 
 When the employer cannot obtain competent union men, 
 he is allowed to hire such non-unionists as he needs as long 
 as they are not "scabs" and "perform the work in a satis- 
 factory manner." Only in a few unions does restriction 
 upon the employment of non-unionists go farther than this.^ 
 While in most closed shops the employer is required to hire 
 union men in preference to non-unionists, there are many 
 unions which do not enforce any such restriction. If the 
 employer prefers to hire non-union men instead of idle union- 
 ists, he is allowed to do so. In the older and stronger 
 unions this is the general practise. 
 
 In all closed shops non-unionists who have been em- 
 ployed must, within a certain more or less definite time, join 
 the union.* This period varies greatly in different unions, 
 
 ^ In many cases the unions are given twelve hours' notice ; in 
 others, twenty-four. Longer notices are unnecessary, since the union 
 officials ordinarily know from day to day what members are out of 
 employment. 
 
 * In the Plumbers exemption from notice to the union applies 
 principally to jobbing work. 
 
 ' The Flint Glass Workers provide that " when competent union 
 gatherers cannot be obtained their places may be filled from the boy 
 help in the respective factories where the shortage occurs." See 
 Price List of Machine Made Jars and Bottles, for the Blast of 1908 
 and 1909, Rules and Regulations governing the Machine and Press 
 Department, Sec. 21. 
 
 * During the strike of the Cloak and Suit Makers' Union in New 
 York City during the summer of 1910 Mr. Louis D. Brandeis, who
 
 493] ^^^ Simple Closed Shop. 63 
 
 in some cases being as long as three months.^ In the unions 
 of the building trades, such as the Bricklayers and Masons, 
 the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, the Amalgamated 
 Carpenters, the Painters, and the Sheet Metal Workers, as 
 well as in the Molders, the Printers, and the Printing Press- 
 men, wherever the local unions are strong, from twenty- 
 four to forty-eight hours is the usual time allowed a non- 
 member in which to apply for membership. If this appli- 
 cation is favorably acted upon, he is initiated at the next 
 regular meeting of the union.- Other unions, such as the 
 United Mine Workers, the United Garment Workers, the 
 Machinists, the Tin Plate Workers, the Cigar Makers, and 
 the Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, allow non-union- 
 ists from ten days to two weeks in which to affiliate them- 
 selves. In a few unions a period as long as one month is 
 given them.^ In practically all unions the non-union man 
 is allowed to work until he has had at least one payment of 
 
 acted as mediator in attempting to secure the settlement of the dis- 
 pute, proposed that the union sign with the employers an agreement 
 for the " preferential closed shop," that is, that the employers recog- 
 nize the union, " declare in appropriate terms their sympathy with 
 the union, their desire to aid and strengthen the union," and agree 
 " that as between union men and non-union men of equal ability to 
 do the job, they will employ union men" (The Outlook, August 20, 
 p. 855). This agreement, though first opposed as being the "open 
 shop with honey," was finally accepted by the union. The non- 
 unionists, it is to be noted, are not required to become members of 
 the union. In the classification adopted in this monograph such a 
 shop is an " open shop." See also Wyatt, " The New York Cloak- 
 Makers' Strike," in McCIure's Magazine, April, 191 1, p. 711. 
 
 * In some cases a non-union man must secure a " working permit " 
 before he can work in a closed shop. This does not give him union 
 membership, but apprizes the union officials that a non-unionist is 
 at work. 
 
 ' Bricklayers and Masons, Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual 
 Convention, 1887, p. 22. 
 
 ' The New York Cordwainers in 1809 provided that " strange 
 journeymen" who did not come forward and join the society "in 
 the space of one month " should be sent a notification by the secre- 
 tary of the society. If at the end of a second month they still 
 did not join, a fine of three dollars was assessed upon them. Ap- 
 prentices were allowed three months' time after becoming " free " 
 in which to join the society. The Philadelphia tailors in 1827 are 
 said to have had a rule that " when a man had worked in a shop 
 ten or twelve days he was forced to join, or each one in the shop 
 would be liable to a fine" (Commons and Gilmore, Vol. Ill, p. 
 367; Vol. IV, p. 141).
 
 64 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [494 
 
 wages. In the Glove Workers, the Jewelry Workers, and 
 the Longshoremen it is unusual for a non-union man to be 
 asked to join the union until he has had two "pays." The 
 unions realize that it is usually a hardship for a man to pay 
 his initiation fee and dues as soon as he obtains employment. 
 
 In certain unions the periods within which non-unionists 
 are allowed to work in closed shops are less definite. In 
 the agreements of the Seamen and some branches of the 
 Longshoremen with the vessel owners' associations of the 
 Great Lakes and with the Great Lakes' Towing Company it 
 is provided that non-unionists may be employed on vessels 
 when union men are not available, but only on condition 
 that they be discharged at the expiration of one round trip.* 
 In still other occupations, where a period of probationary 
 employment is necessary, new employees are not required 
 to join the union until they have proved satisfactory to the 
 employer. The Street and Electric Railway Employees, for 
 instance, in their agreements with electric railway com- 
 panies generally provide that new employees who are being 
 tried out as motormen and conductors shall not be required 
 to join the union for a period of from sixty to ninety days.^ 
 Similarly, in the Glove Workers, the Hod Carriers and 
 Building Laborers, the Hotel and Restaurant Employees, 
 and other unions which have no apprenticeship system a new 
 employee is not asked to join the union until he has learned 
 the trade. 
 
 Where the waiting list is rigidly enforced, the employ- 
 ment of a non-unionist may be terminated at any time by a 
 unionist's becoming available. In many of the agreements 
 of the Flint Glass Workers, the Blacksmiths, the Machinists, 
 the Plumbers, and the Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen 
 it is provided that non-unionists may be hired only "until 
 union men can be furnished." Usually a non-union man 
 employed under these conditions is allowed to " work out 
 
 * Lake Seamen, Agreement with the Lumber Carriers' Association, 
 1907, Art. Ill; Longshoremen, Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual 
 Convention, 1903, p. 65. 
 
 ' Street and Electric Railway Employees, Year Book, 1908, p. 20.
 
 495] ^^^ Simple Closed Shop. 65 
 
 the day," but in a few unions, particularly the Longshore- 
 men, he is given only a half day's employment if a unionist 
 becomes available.^ In one of the agreements between the 
 Lithographers and the Lithographers' Association (West), 
 an organization of employers, it was provided that if the 
 union could not furnish on fifteen days' notice a sufficient 
 number of men to meet the need of any member of the 
 Association, the latter might hire non-union men. These 
 non-unionists were to be discharged within three months' 
 time after the union had made known its ability to furnish 
 competent mechanics from among its members.^ Notices 
 such as this are extremely unusual. 
 
 Members of rival unions. — When the trade or territorial 
 jurisdiction claimed by two unions is identical or overlaps, 
 the members of the two unions ordinarily refuse to work 
 with each other. In 1898, for instance, the " Baltimore 
 organization " of painters in its struggle with the " Lafay- 
 ette organization " declared " all painters not affiliated with 
 the Baltimore headquarters to be non-union men."^ Seced- 
 ing local unions and the national union have always been 
 especially hostile to one another.* When the trade unions 
 from 1881 on began to demand independence from the 
 Knights of Labor, the latter refused to allow members of 
 the unions to be employed in the shops controlled by them. 
 It was recognized very early that the closed shop might be 
 a powerful weapon in many jurisdictional disputes. Among 
 those in which it has been much used in recent years are 
 the disputes between the Glass Bottle Blowers and the Flint 
 Glass Workers, between the United Brotherhood of Car- 
 penters and the Wood Workers, between the Plumbers and 
 the Steam Fitters, between the Granite Cutters, the Stone 
 Cutters, and the Marble Workers, and between the Brick- 
 layers and Masons and the Plasterers. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Convention. 1904, p. 105. 
 " Lithographers, MS. Proceedings of the Ninth Convention, 1906, 
 
 P- 72. 
 
 * Sixteenth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1901, 
 p. 899. See also Plant v. Wood, 176 Mass., 492. 
 
 *For an early case, see Stone Cutters' Circular, August, 1858, p. 3. 
 
 5
 
 66 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [496 
 
 When the jurisdictions claimed by two unions are iden- 
 tical, members of the one organization refuse to work with 
 those of the other under all circumstances. But if their 
 jurisdictions merely overlap, as in the dispute between the 
 Glass Bottle Blowers and the Flint Glass Workers, the 
 members of one of the unions do not ordinarily refuse to 
 work with members of the other except on the particular 
 class of employment in dispute. Similarly, the Wood- 
 workers would not complain if a member of the Carpenters 
 was hired to make repairs on a shop in which the Wood- 
 workers were employed, but they would strike if a member 
 of the Carpenters was hired to do woodworking. 
 
 In commenting upon the constantly recurring jurisdic- 
 tional disputes between trade unions, the editor of the 
 Plumbers, Gas Fitters and Steam Fitters' Journal in 1896 
 lamented that less courtesy had ordinarily been shown to the 
 holder of an " opposition card " and that life had been made 
 " more bitter " for him than in the case of " one who has 
 always remained outside the pale of united labor and who 
 has always been inamicable to its interests."^ The unions 
 have felt that when a non-unionist secures employment in a 
 shop controlled by them, it will not ordinarily be difficult to 
 induce him to join their ranks. But the union in control 
 is extremely reluctant to allow a member of a rival or hostile 
 union to be employed in a shop. There is always the danger 
 that he may win over the shop to his own union. 
 
 Some unions have settled their jurisdictional difficulties 
 by issuing an interchangeable working card, as is done by 
 the Bricklayers and Masons and the Plasterers. In other 
 cases they have agreed to recognize each others' cards for 
 a certain period, as has been done by the United Garment 
 Workers and the Shirt, Waist and Laundry Workers and 
 by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and the Amalga- 
 mated Carpenters. These methods seem to be growing in 
 favor. 
 
 Suspended and fined union members. — Suspension from 
 
 'April, 1896, p. 4.
 
 497] ^^^^ Simple Closed Shop. 67 
 
 union membership is ordinarily accompanied by the loss for 
 a certain period of the rights and privileges attached to mem- 
 bership. Except that suspended members need not pay an 
 initiation fee in order to regain " good standing " in a union, 
 they are in effect non-members. Most closed-shop unions 
 exclude suspended members from employment in union 
 shops. In i860 the Cigar Makers' Society of the State of 
 Maryland forbade the employment of suspended members 
 " in any shop, on any consideration, whatsoever." So 
 strictly was this rule enforced that a suspended member was 
 not allowed to go to work on the following morning.^ At 
 the present time the Cigar Makers and other unions which 
 make the label an important device are particularly careful 
 to see that suspended members are not employed in union 
 shops. The unions in the structural building trades, espe- 
 cially the Bricklayers and Masons, exclude suspended mem- 
 bers from employment almost absolutely. While there are 
 rules against working with suspended members in practically 
 all the closed-shop unions, these rules are not enforced so 
 rigidly in other unions as in the " label trades " and the 
 " building trades " unions. 
 
 Some unions, as for example the Granite Cutters, allow 
 suspended members to remain at work in a closed shop pro- 
 vided they agree to pay up back dues and assessments.- 
 Usually they are allowed to pay the union in installments. 
 This accommodation is extended chiefly to those members 
 who are in financial difficulties. The Window Glass Work- 
 ers, Local Assembly 300, Knights of Labor, also allowed 
 suspended members to be employed as " spare " workers 
 when members of the Assembly in good standing were not 
 available.^ Special consent of the executive board, how- 
 ever, had to be secured in each case. Some other organiza- 
 tions, too weak to be exacting in the enforcement of their 
 
 ' MS. Minutes, May 4, i860. 
 
 * Most suspension,s arise from union members' neglecting or re- 
 fusing to pay dues, assessments, or fines. 
 
 'Scale of Wages and Rules for Working for Blast of 1904, 
 Sec. 58.
 
 68 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [498 
 
 rules, allow suspended members ample time in which to 
 settle their debts. 
 
 In case members have been fined for " scabbing," all 
 closed-shop unions, as far as possible, exclude them from 
 employment until the fines are paid. Many fines are im- 
 posed, of course, for minor offenses. Some unions, among 
 which the Bricklayers and Masons take chief place, discrim- 
 inate against fined members in practically the same manner 
 as they do against suspended members, no matter for what 
 reason the fine has been imposed. In other organizations, 
 such as the Slate and Tile Roofers^ and the Brewery Work- 
 men, fined members are allowed to work pending an appeal 
 to the national executive board. 
 
 Workmen who have retired from the union. — Most unions 
 provide that their members may withdraw or retire from 
 active membership under certain conditions. Members who 
 take advantage of this rule are not required to pay dues, and 
 they are deprived of most of the privileges of active member- 
 ship. Retired members are usually required to deposit their 
 " retiring " or " withdrawal " cards with the proper union 
 officers and to take out working cards before " seeking work 
 under the jurisdiction of any subordinate union. "^ The 
 president of the American Federation of Musicians, for ex- 
 ample, has held that for a member of that union to perform 
 v/ith or for^ a " resigned member " is the same as perform- 
 ing with a non-member, " and in principle is a violation of 
 the interest of all locals."* 
 
 Travelling union members. — There are also restrictions in 
 some unions upon the employment of travelling members 
 who carry so-called " travelling " or " clearance " cards. In 
 the early days of American trade unionism, as has been 
 noted, the different trade societies, such as the New York 
 
 'Report of Proceedings of the First Annual Convention, 1903, 
 p. 6. 
 
 * Printing Pressmen, Constitution, 1908, Art. XI, Sec. 3. 
 
 »A11 orchestra and band leaders or contractors, except grand- 
 opera leaders, are required by the Musicians to become members of 
 the union. 
 
 *The International Musician, February, 1904, p. 6.
 
 499] -^^^^ Simple Closed Shop. 69 
 
 Typographical Society and the Journeymen Cordwainers of 
 Pittsburgh, did not refuse to work with " strangers " unless 
 they were " scabs." In i860 the Cigar Makers' Society of 
 Maryland provided that strangers should not be allowed to 
 work in union shops unless they could prove their member- 
 ship in another cigar makers' society.^ There was discrimi- 
 nation against travelling non-unionists and " scabs," but 
 none against members of other local societies in the same 
 trade. This was undoubtedly the general practice of all 
 labor organizations until about 1870. 
 
 As soon as the scattered local organizations had formed 
 national unions a further step was taken. Increased facili- 
 ties for transportation had by this time made the travelling 
 journeyman a serious problem, especially in certain unions, 
 as the Iron Molders, the Granite Cutters, the Bricklayers 
 and Masons, and the Printers, where " bumming " and 
 "tramping" had always been prevalent. Many travelling 
 members, especially in the building trades, would work for 
 a few days in one locality, and then move on without becom- 
 ing members of the local union. The latter naturally com- 
 plained, since it was thus deprived of its dues. The practice 
 was finally broken up in the building trades by requiring that 
 travelling members should not be allowed to go to work in 
 union shops until they had exchanged their travelling cards 
 for local working cards. Accordingly in unions which have 
 adopted this rule " a man holding a travelling card from 
 one local and working under the jurisdiction of another, has 
 no more unionistic rights or privileges than a non-union 
 man," and until he deposits his card all local unions are 
 instructed to "treat him accordingly."" 
 
 In a few unions also the local unions have established a 
 form of local protection by securing the insertion in agree- 
 ments with employers that none but members of tlie local 
 unions shall be given employment.^ In other agreements 
 practically the same end is reached by a provision that pref- 
 
 » MS. Minutes, October 5, i860. 
 
 * Slate and Tile Roofers, Proceedings of the Second Convention, 
 1904, p. 10, President's Report. 
 ' Machinists' Monthly Journal, July, 1902, p. 405.
 
 JO The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [500 
 
 erence in employment shall be given to members of the 
 local union. ^ Only a few national unions, such as the Musi- 
 cians and the Longshoremen, approve such provisions. The 
 Musicians allow members of one local union to refuse to 
 perform with members of another who -are brought into 
 their jurisdiction to fill a season's engagement. If the en- 
 gagement is a temporary one, discrimination is not per- 
 mitted. The Longshoremen forbid, under penalty of expul- 
 sion, the members of one local union to accept employ- 
 ment under the jurisdiction of another without first obtain- 
 ing its consent.^ 
 
 A number of important unions, including the Glass Bottle 
 Blowers, the Window Glass Workers, the Flint Glass Worlc- 
 ers, the Machinists, the Granite Cutters, the Hatters, the 
 United Mine Workers, the Pocket Knife Grinders, and the 
 Wood Carvers, allow a travelling member to work on his 
 clearance or travelling card until the next meeting of the 
 local union.^ He must then deposit the travelling card and 
 secure a working card. At one time the United Mine 
 Workers provided that a clearance card " from any legal- 
 ized or recognized labor union, anywhere, known to be 
 friendly to the United Mine Workers of America, shall be 
 accepted."* In all of these unions there is little risk that 
 travelling members will be able to change their place of em- 
 ployment so quickly as to evade control by local unions in 
 whose jurisdiction they obtain work. Members who travel 
 without cards are generally required to agree " to the initia- 
 tion fee being retained until a transfer card has been pro- 
 duced, before being permitted to work."^ Otherwise unions 
 would be subject to loss through false representation.* 
 
 1 Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, Official Journal, April, 
 1903. p. 24. 
 
 * Constitution, 1908, Rules for Locals, Sec. 3. 
 
 » The Hatters require the deposit of the travelling card within 
 twenty-four hours. 
 
 * Constitution, 1899, Art. VI, Sec. 2. 
 
 * United Mine Workers, Constitution of District No. 12, 1910, 
 Art. VIII, Sec. 4. 
 
 « Among the Musicians and the Theatrical Stage Employees a 
 large number of union men are constantly travelling with theatre
 
 50i] The Simple Closed Shop. yi 
 
 Union members working at two trades. — The American 
 Federation of Musicians in several respects has gone further 
 in its closed-shop policy than any other American trade union. 
 One rule peculiar to this union requires that members who 
 work at some other trade in addition to performing in a 
 band or orchestra must join the union of that trade, pro- 
 vided it is an organized one and affiliated with the American 
 Federation of Labor. Moreover, such members must work 
 only in closed shops even though the union of the trade per- 
 mits its members to work in open shops. ^ For violation of 
 this rule a member of the Musicians is liable to be fined or 
 otherwise penalized exactly as if he had performed in a 
 band with non-union musicians. The primary reason for 
 the adoption of this rule seems to have been a desire to gain 
 favor for the Musicians among other unions. If the mem- 
 bers of another union form a band, the Musicians regard it 
 as " non-union," and refuse to allow their members to per- 
 form with it even on Labor Day. 
 
 Workmen in "semi-closed" shops. — In marked contrast 
 to the policy of the Musicians is that of certain unions which 
 allow their members to work in what may be designated as 
 " semi-closed " shops. Such shops are found in a few unions 
 which have jurisdiction over two or more allied trades, such 
 for instance as the Bricklayers and Masons, the Painters, 
 Decorators and Paperhangers, the Flint Glass Workers, the 
 United Garment Workers, the Typographical Union, and the 
 Longshoremen. In each of these organizations local unions 
 are formed in each " branch " or trade whenever possible. 
 It often happens that when the local union in one branch is 
 stronger than that in another, it enforces the closed shop 
 for itself, but refuses to strike against the employment of 
 non-union men on work over which the other branch has 
 jurisdiction. 
 
 companies. These members are required wherever they go to per- 
 form or work only with unionists. An exception to this rule is 
 made when no local union exists in the locality. Usually such 
 members hold membership cards in certain local unions instead of 
 travelling cards. 
 
 ' The International Musician, June, 1906, p. 3. Decisions of the 
 Executive Board. No. 56.
 
 72 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [502 
 
 Curiously enough, it has been in the Bricklayers and Ma- 
 sons' International Union, where the exclusion of non-union 
 men from employment has been carried out with unusual 
 strictness, that the most important cases of this character 
 have occurred. The bricklayers have always outnumbered 
 the masons in the national union, and their branch is in most 
 localities the better organized. The bricklayers, moreover, 
 have local unions in many localities where the masons are 
 entirely unorganized. As a consequence, local unions of 
 bricklayers have frequently enforced the exclusive employ- 
 ment of their own members on the brick work of buildings, 
 but have raised no objection to the employment of non- 
 unionists or even " scabs " to do the masonry work. Either 
 the bricklayers were indifferent, or they thought it imprac- 
 ticable to compel employers to organize masons' unions. 
 The matter has frequently been complicated by the fact that 
 different employers had contracted for the masonry and the 
 brick work. 
 
 For a number of years the masons protested vigorously 
 against the failure of the bricklayers to discriminate in favor 
 of union masons. Finally, in 1890, the breach between the 
 two branches had grown so wide that the Pittsburgh masons' 
 union suggested that the masons secede from the Interna- 
 tional Union and form a separate organization.^ The situa- 
 tion has gradually been improved by the adoption of " work- 
 ing codes " in many localities. These " codes " are agree- 
 ments between the local branches of bricklayers and of 
 masons. They provide that union men exclusively, both 
 bricklayers and masons, must be employed on a building if 
 men of either branch are to work on it. Some of the " codes " 
 require that a contractor pay a fine for employing either 
 non-union masons or bricklayers.^ Other " codes " provide 
 that members of the International Union shall not be allowed 
 to work for an employer unless he contracts for both the 
 
 ^ Report of the President and Secretary for the Term ending 
 December i, 1890, Report of Secretary, p. 39. 
 
 ^ Forty-first Annual Report of President and Secretary, for the 
 Term ending December i, 1906, pp. 136-137.
 
 503] The Simple Closed Shop. 73 
 
 brick work and the masonry of a building.^ The national 
 officers have vigorously urged the adoption of such working 
 arrangements. 
 
 The Flint Glass Workers, a union composed of many dif- 
 ferent branches, have adopted rules intended to prevent the 
 existence of the "semi-closed" shop. Thus provision has 
 been made that union glass workers shall refuse to make 
 "blanks" for non-union glass cutters,^ that "no mould 
 maker shall make or repair moulds, to be worked by non- 
 union glass workers,"^ that " no union lamp worker shall 
 work tubing made by non-union tube blowers,"* and that 
 " no glass worker shall be allowed to make bottles or stop- 
 pers for non-union stopperers to work."^ Likewise the 
 Musicians provide that union prompters shall not officiate 
 at entertainments where non-union musicians are employed 
 unless unionists are unavailable.® Many other unions, such 
 as the Potters and the Brewery Workmen, have adopted 
 similar rules. No union will allow its label to be attached 
 to the product of a shop in which non-union men are em- 
 ployed on any work over which the union claims jurisdiction.'^ 
 The " semi-closed " shop is still common, however, among 
 the Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen and the Long- 
 shoremen. 
 
 Helpers. — Several closed-shop unions, as for example the 
 Plumbers, the Steam Fitters, the Printing Pressmen, and 
 the Ceramic, Mosaic and Encaustic Tile Layers, are com- 
 posed of journeymen and helpers. As far as possible the 
 latter are organized into separate local unions. The help- 
 ers are thus permitted to some extent to regulate their 
 own affairs, and their association is generally spoken of as 
 the " junior organization." It is not independent of the 
 " senior " or journeymen's branch of the union, but on the 
 
 1 Thirty-sixth Annual Report of President and Secretary, Decem- 
 ber I, 1901, p. 196. 
 « Constitution, 189s. Art. XXVII, Sec. i. 
 'Constitution, 1886, Art. XXV. Sec. i. 
 
 * Constitution, 1895, Art. XXXII, Sec. 5. 
 
 * Ibid., Constitution of Local Unions, Art. XX. 
 
 « Constitution, 1910, Standing Resolutions, No. 18. 
 ' Spedden, pp. 51-55.
 
 74 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [504 
 
 contrary is usually compelled to adjust its working rules in 
 accordance with the wishes of the journeymen. In the 
 unions mentioned, union helpers are not allowed to work 
 with non-union journeymen, and in turn journeymen mem- 
 bers of these unions must see that their helpers carry union 
 cards. The Printing Pressmen provide, for instance, that 
 " all apprentices in web pressrooms must come from the 
 assistant's unions,"^ while the Tile Layers have a rule that 
 " all tile layers must work with union helpers."^ The United 
 Association of Journeymen Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steam 
 Fitters and Steam Fitters' Helpers requires that union steam 
 fitters employed on out-of-town work " shall work with no 
 helpers except those who belong to the United Association," 
 provided there is a helpers' union in the city from which the 
 journeymen come.^ Since the adoption of this rule, how- 
 ever, agreements have been signed with employers which 
 provide that non-union helpers may be employed until a 
 local helpers' union is organized.* The International Asso- 
 ciation of Steam, Hot Water and Power Pipe Fitters has 
 followed a similar policy.^ 
 
 Foremen and superintendents. — Foremen, " bosses " and 
 superintendents in many unions are admissible to member- 
 ship. Whenever such membership is compulsory, they are 
 required to observe the same rules as journeymen regarding 
 the persons with whom they work. In fact, an additional 
 responsibility for the maintenance of the closed shop is 
 placed upon them, since they have the power to hire and dis- 
 charge workmen. In such unions if a non-union foreman 
 or superintendent refuses to join a union when asked to do 
 so, the union will endeavor to effect his discharge. Many 
 strikes " for the recognition of union rules " have originated 
 
 * Constitution, 1908, By-Laws, Art. Ill, Sec. 2. 
 " Constitution, 1905, Art. XV, Sec. 4. 
 'Constitution, 1902, Art. XXV. Sec. 18. 
 
 * Plumbers, Gas and Steam Fitters' Official Journal, May, 1905, 
 
 p. 13- 
 
 ' In their Constitution for 1886 (Art. IV, Sec. s) the Window 
 Glass Workers, Local Assembly 300, Knights of Labor, provided 
 that no glass blower should " take an apprentice to blow who is 
 not a gatherer and a member of the Assembly."
 
 505] The Simple Closed Shop. 75 
 
 in this manner. In a few unions, on the other hand, such 
 as the Iron Molders and the Paving Cutters, foremen in 
 union shops cannot continue as active members of the union, 
 but must hold retiring cards. 
 
 In some national unions, as for example the Shirt, Waist 
 and Laundry Workers, the Table Knife Grinders, and in 
 many local unions in the building trades, membership is 
 optional with foremen. In other unions, like the Glove 
 Workers, foremen are excluded from membership entirely. 
 Yet even in such unions certain requirements are often im- 
 posed on the foremen of union shops. If a foreman han- 
 dles the tools of the trade, the union requires that he must 
 be a practical mechanic. Strikes have often been called 
 against shops because the foremen had never fully learned 
 the trade. In the building trades, union men often refuse 
 to work with foremen of this kind, not only on closed-shop 
 jobs but on open-shop jobs also.^ As long as the foreman 
 is a competent mechanic or as long as he refrains from 
 working at the trade, those unions in which foremen are 
 inadmissible to membership do not object to the employer's 
 choice of a foreman. In large shops, of course, foremen 
 seldom work at the trade. 
 
 Employers. — In a number of unions, employers who work 
 at the trade are required to become members of the union. 
 They must not employ non-unionists, and if they do they 
 are fined or are expelled from union membership and 
 " scabbed." The Bricklayers and Masons fine a contractor 
 who is a union member as much as one hundred dollars 
 for hiring " scabs." Likewise in all unions in which the 
 employer is required to become a member, journeymen 
 members are penalized for working with an employer who 
 is not a member of the union. Still severer penalties are 
 
 * Most unions in the building trades require foremen to become 
 members of the union because they work usually with the journey- 
 men. Occasionally, however, they have been forced to sign agree- 
 ments in which it was provided that the foreman " shall be the 
 agent of the employer," and " shall not be subject to union rules." 
 See Bricklayers and Masons, Forty-second Annual Report of Presi- 
 dent and Secretary, for the Term ending December i, 1907, p. 178.
 
 y6 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [506 
 
 imposed when the employer has been expelled from the 
 union. 
 
 In many unions an employer who does not work at the 
 trade is allowed to retain active membership in a union but 
 is not required to do so. He can keep " in good standing " 
 only as long as he "pays the scale of wages, hires none but 
 union men and complies with the constitution and by-laws " 
 of the organization with which he is affiliated.^ In many 
 unions he is forbidden to join an employers' association. 
 Employers who hold retiring or withdrawal cards are likely 
 to have their membership taken away if they attempt to run 
 open shops. The Barbers^ and the Bakery and Confection- 
 ery Workers afford many examples of the enforcemenc of 
 this rule. 
 
 The Musicians require that all persons who take contracts 
 for performances in which union musicians are to partici- 
 pate must be union members. In addition they insist that 
 all employers who play in union bands and orchestras must 
 employ only union labor, if the trade to which their work- 
 men belong is organized in a union affiliated with the Amer- 
 ican Federation of Labor. In 1903 Secretary Miller re- 
 ported that he had frequently ordered " barber bosses, cigar 
 manufacturers (on a small scale), and painter bosses to be 
 stricken from the roll " because of their refusal to employ 
 union men.^ In unions other than the Musicians there is 
 little occasion to enforce such a rule, since it rarely happens 
 that journeymen in one trade carry on business as employers 
 in another. 
 
 In those unions in which employers are inadmissible to 
 union membership they are allowed to work in their own 
 shops. Objections have occasionally been raised against 
 allowing employers who have never learned the trade to do 
 a journeyman's work, but it is the general feeling among 
 the unions that even if an employer has not learned the trade 
 he should be allowed to work in his own shop or factory. 
 
 * Electrical Workers, Constitution, 1901, Art. VI, Sec. 4. 
 
 * The Barbers' Journal, July, 1900, p. 147; December, 1901, p. 324; 
 January, 1906, p. 283. 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention, 1903, p. 37.
 
 507] The Simple Closed Shop. jj 
 
 When the shop is conducted by a firm or a joint-stock com- 
 pany, restrictions are often placed upon work's being done 
 by members of the firm or by stockholders in the company 
 who are not members of the union. In the building trades 
 the unions usually limit the number of firm members or 
 stockholders who may be permitted to do journeymen's 
 work without becoming members of the union. ^ In other 
 agreements members of firms and stockholders are restricted 
 to certain kinds of work. If it were not for regulations of 
 this kind, journeymen in many trades, such for example as 
 plumbing, could organize firms to take contracts at prices 
 that would amount virtually to cutting the union rate of 
 wages. To deprive such firms of union labor unless they 
 agree to limit the number of working employers restricts 
 them to contracts of minor importance.^ 
 
 Apprentices. — Apprentices have a peculiar status in closed 
 shops. They are rarely admissible to full union member- 
 ship, but they are prospective union members and, in a 
 fashion, wards of the unions. Almost all closed-shop unions 
 require that apprentices must be " registered on the books 
 of the union." The Hatters require that all work in union 
 factories must be done by union members " exclusively, or 
 by registered apprentices."^ No apprentice is registered 
 until it has been ascertained whether his employer is enti- 
 tled, under union rules, to have an apprentice. If trouble 
 occurs in the enforcement of this rule, it is usually provided 
 that the shop where the difficulty occurs shall be declared 
 " unfair," and that " no union man shall accept employment 
 in such shop."* In the unions of the building trades an 
 apprentice is ordinarily not permitted to go to work '' unless 
 he is on record. "° In some cases it has been agreed with 
 the employer that the apprentice shall "not be subject to 
 
 'The Electrical Worker, July, 1898, p. 7. 
 Stockholders in union cooperative shops and factories are always 
 required to keep " in good standing." 
 
 * Constitution, 1900, Art. II, Sec. 2. 
 
 < Horseshoers, Constitution. 1908, By-Laws, Art. XXIII. Sec. 8. 
 
 'Bricklayers and Masons, Thirty-seventh Annual Report of Presi- 
 dent and Secretary, December i, 1902, Report of President, p. 2.
 
 78 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [508 
 
 union rules and shall at all times be under the control of the 
 employer."^ Apprentices who have been registered in the 
 shop of one employer are not allowed, except in unusual 
 cases, to leave his employ until the expiration of their term 
 of apprenticeship. Union members will not ordinarily work 
 with " runaway " apprentices. 
 
 In many unions an apprentice is required to carry an 
 " apprentice card," for which a small fee is sometimes 
 charged. This card must be renewed at regular intervals, 
 exactly like a journeyman's card.^ Thus, the Painters pro- 
 vide that wherever the " working card system," that is, the 
 closed shop, is enforced, apprentices must carry working 
 cards. ^ Since 1896 apprentices in " label shops " controlled 
 by the Cigar Makers have been " honorary " members of 
 the union. 
 
 Apprentices who go to work in " scab " or struck shops 
 ordinarily become " unfair," and are " liable to such pen- 
 alty or fine as the local society may inflict."* If they are 
 fined, they cannot work with union journeymen until their 
 fine has been paid. If their names are taken off the register 
 of the union, they are permanently excluded from work in 
 closed shops. Whether apprentices are required to strike 
 with the journeymen or not depends partly on how far their 
 remaining at work will " materially affect the position of 
 either party to the controversy."^ If the interruption of 
 apprenticeship will seriously handicap the apprentice in 
 learning the trade, he is not ordinarily required to strike 
 with the journeymen.® 
 
 1 Joint Arbitration Agreement between the Chicago Masons and 
 Builders' Association and Union No. 21 of the Bricklayers and 
 Masons' International Union, April i, 1903, to May i, 1905, p. 30. 
 
 * Motley, " Apprenticeship in American Trade Unions," in Johns 
 Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, Ser. 
 XXV, Nos. 11-12, pp. 79-80. 
 
 3 Constitution, 1902, Art. XXXXV, Sec. 4. 
 
 * Constitution and By-Laws of the Hat Coners' and Slippers' So- 
 ciety of Danbury, Conn., and Danbury District, Art. X, Sec. 3. 
 Reprinted in the Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of Labor Sta- 
 tistics of the State of Connecticut, 1890, p. 314. 
 
 » Motley, p. 88. 
 
 * Ibid.
 
 509] The Simple Closed Shop. 79 
 
 The Printers, the Printing Pressmen, and the Steel and 
 Copper Plate Printers allow local unions to admit appren- 
 tices to " conditional membership " in the last year of their 
 apprenticeship. Should an applicant for such membership 
 be refused admission on the ground of incompetency, how- 
 ever, the national unions have declared that it is not either 
 "necessary or proper that union men should refuse to con- 
 tinue at work " where the rejected candidate is employed.^ 
 Another year of his term remains in which it is possible 
 that the apprentice may become proficient. 
 
 Workmen inadjnissible to union membership. — From 
 almost every union certain classes of persons are excluded 
 on account of sex, race, or incompetency. These persons 
 may be willing to join the union, but they are ineligible to 
 do so, and they are not allowed to work in closed shops. 
 Opposition to them is as strong as, if not stronger than, to 
 " scabs ; " it is always stronger than to ordinary non-union 
 men. In the building trades, union members have repeat- 
 edly refused to work with unskilled laborers or " handy 
 men " even on open-shop jobs. The Bricklayers and Ma- 
 sons at one time had several local unions in the South which 
 refused to work with competent negroes, but made no ob- 
 jection to the steady employment of non-union whites eli- 
 gible for membership. If non-unionists who are admissible 
 to membership are allowed to work, there is a possibility 
 that they may join the union, but every person inadmissible 
 to union membership who is allowed to do work claimed by 
 the union for its members weakens the control of the union 
 over the trade.^ 
 
 A word may be said finally concerning the relation of ter- 
 ritorial jurisdiction to the enforcement of the closed shop. 
 In many American trade unions the jurisdiction of one local 
 
 1 Printing Pressmen, Constitution, 1908, By-Laws, Art. III. Sec. 4; 
 Steel and Copper Plate Printers, Constitution, 1900, General Laws, 
 Sec. 22. 
 
 'For humanitarian reasons, old men ineligible to union mem- 
 bership are sometimes allowed to work at their trade in union 
 shops. The Musicians permit union members to perform with ama- 
 teur musicians who are ineligible to membership, provided the latter 
 do not compete with union bands and orchestras for engagements.
 
 8o The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [510 
 
 union extends in any direction half way to the nearest sister 
 local, and thus there is no locality where some local union 
 does not have authority. In such unions, union men, wher- 
 ever they go, are required to observe the closed-shop rule. 
 In other unions local organizations are restricted in their 
 jurisdiction to the limits of a city or to a certain district, so 
 that some localities are not under the jurisdiction of any 
 local union. In such places it is not obligatory upon union 
 members to refuse to work with non-unionists.
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 The Extended Closed Shop. 
 
 The application of the closed-shop principle is not limited 
 to a single shop, but in many unions has been extended to 
 cover two or more shops. These separate shops taken 
 together are considered by the unions as one shop, and the 
 principle of exclusion is enforced in them as if they were 
 a single shop. 
 
 The simplest form of the extended closed shop is found 
 in union regulations concerning subcontracting. In the 
 building trades a general contractor often sublets part of 
 the work on a building to another contractor. Where the 
 job is a large one, several of these subcontractors may em- 
 ploy men at work which falls within the jurisdiction of a 
 single union. Thus one of them may have the subcontract 
 for laying floors, another for erecting doors, and another 
 for setting window-frames. In each of these cases the 
 subcontractor would employ carpenters. At the same time 
 the general contractor may have reserved some carpentry 
 work to be done under his immediate direction. 
 
 When a general contractor sublets work, he usually feels 
 that he is not responsible to the union for the method in 
 which the subcontractor conducts the work. Since he him- 
 self does not hire the workmen, he regards each subcon- 
 tract as a separate job or shop. In his opinion if one of his 
 subcontractors employs non-union men, it should not be 
 a cause of complaint by the union against other subcontrac- 
 tors or against himself. Each subcontractor who employs 
 union men maintains likewise that since he exercises no 
 control over the general contractor or over other subcon- 
 tractors, strikes should not be called against him if they 
 employ non-unionists. Many unions, however, insist that 
 all the subcontracts shall be regarded together as a single 
 6 8i
 
 82 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [512 
 
 job or shop, and demand that all workmen in their trade 
 employed on the contract shall be unionists. 
 
 In the building trades the Bricklayers and Masons have 
 been particularly active in this policy. Many of their local 
 "working codes" and agreements have provided that "fair" 
 employers shall not sublet work to non-union contractors.^ 
 The national executive board has also decided in several cases 
 that it is not permissible for union bricklayers and masons to 
 work with non-members for a " fair " firm which has sublet 
 to non-union employers or for a " fair " employer who has 
 subcontracted from an " unfair " firm.^ Union members 
 are thus prohibited from working for one subcontractor if 
 any other on the same building employs non-unionists of 
 the same trade. The United Brotherhood of Carpenters,^ 
 the Granite Cutters,* and the Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers^ also oppose the employment of their members on 
 a building if any part of it has been subcontracted to or 
 from an "unfair" employer. The Bridge and Structural 
 Iron Workers, however, are forced to allow their members 
 to work for " fair " employers who subcontract from the 
 American Bridge Company and other large " unfair " con- 
 cerns which are subsidiary to or in close alliance with the 
 United States Steel Corporation. These firms control so 
 much important work throughout the country that unless 
 the union made some concession its members would be 
 deprived of much employment. 
 
 The extended closed shop has also been enforced by cer- 
 tain unions in cases where a manufacturer buys from 
 another manufacturer part of the goods he sells. The two 
 establishments, in these cases, have been considered a single 
 concern. This policy is almost entirely confined to unions 
 in which the label is important. None of these unions, as 
 for example the Cigar Makers, the United Garment Work- 
 
 *The Bricklayer and Mason, July, 1903, p. 4. 
 ^ Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the President and Secretary, 
 1891, p. Ixxiv; Thirty-seventh Annual Report, 1902, p. 69. 
 'The Carpenter, March, 1908, p. 20. 
 
 * The Granite Cutters' Journal, June, 1906, p. 5. 
 
 * The Bridgeman's Magazine, April, 1903, p. 4.
 
 513] The Extended Closed Shop. 83 
 
 ers, and the Upholsterers, allow an employer the use of the 
 label if he buys the output of a non-union factory or shop. 
 
 Occasionally a strong union, even though it does not have 
 a label, will object if a union employer subcontracts to non- 
 union shops. A case of this kind occurred in the Glass 
 Bottle Blowers in 1903. At that time the Cumberland Glass 
 Manufacturing Company, a union plant, sublet part of its 
 work to non-union factories. Its action was immediately 
 considered by the executive board of the Blowers. Presi- 
 dent Hayes declared that the company could not be " too 
 severely censured," and other members of the executive 
 board favored the calling of a strike and the adoption of 
 other " radical measures." A majority of the board, how- 
 ever, thought it best not to force the issue,^ but soon after- 
 wards the conference committee of the union informed the 
 representatives of the Green Glass Bottle and Vial Manu- 
 facturers that the time was coming when union men would 
 not work in a factory which purchased the product of non- 
 unionists.^ 
 
 The unions have extended the closed shop in another way. 
 Many unions require an employer who hires union men in 
 one shop to hire unionists in other shops in the sam.e trade 
 of which he is the proprietor. Thus an employer's entire 
 business, in so far as it falls within the jurisdiction of a 
 union, is regarded as a " shop." Probably the first union 
 in which a rule of this kind was adopted was the National 
 Trade Association of Hat Finishers of the United States of 
 America. As early as 1863 it declared that it was not 
 "right for a fair journeyman to work for a boss having a 
 fair and a foul shop in the same town or district."^ The 
 Cigar Makers at the first convention of their national union 
 in 1864 required that the practice be discontinued " of any 
 
 ^ Glass Bottle Blowers, Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual 
 Session, 1903, pp. 39-40. 
 
 ^ Manufacturers' Report of the Proceedings of the Joint Wage 
 Committee, Representing the Green Glass Bottle and Vial Manufac- 
 turers and the Members of the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association, 
 1903, pp. 12-13. 
 
 ^ Constitution, 1863, Standing Resolutions, 5th.
 
 84 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [514 
 
 union allowing any of its members to work in a shop or 
 manufactory that employs no union men working for them 
 out of the shop or manufactory."^ By itself the rule is not 
 very clear, but the context reveals that the intent of the rule 
 was to forbid union employers to hire non-unionists to make 
 cigars outside of their shops. 
 
 At the present time the Hatters and the Cigar Makers, 
 as well as most of the other label unions, require that if an 
 employer runs two or more shops, all of them must be union- 
 ized before the employer is allowed the use of the label.* 
 If the employer in these trades does not desire the use of 
 the label, the unions rarely attempt to enforce the closed 
 shop in all his establishments by a threat to strike in one. 
 The Printing Pressmen, for instance, in 1905 allowed the 
 Brooklyn Eagle to run its newspaper office as an open shop, 
 while the book and job office was a closed shop.^ The same 
 policy is pursued by the Printers and the Stereotypers. 
 
 The policy of the building trades unions toward an em- 
 ployer or contractor who condu^s two or more shops or 
 jobs at the same time is illustrated by the following typical 
 provision in the constitution of the Plasterers : " No mem- 
 ber of any local shall be allowed to work for an employer 
 or builder who is employing non-union men in another city 
 where a sub-association exists."* It is so well understood 
 as not to need statement that no member is to work for an 
 employer who hires non-union men on any job in the same 
 city. Frequent strikes have been called by the Bricklayers 
 and Masons, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, the 
 Painters, the Plumbers, the Steam Fitters, the Sheet Metal 
 Workers, and the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers to 
 enforce similar rules. Whether the employer be an indi- 
 vidual, a firm, or a corporation makes little if any difference 
 in the attitude of the building trades unions. Thus in 1893, 
 when the Painters found that a contracting firm of two 
 
 ^Journeymen Cigar Makers' Union of the United States, MS. 
 Proceedings of the National Convention, 1864, p. 6. 
 ' Spedden, pp. 59-60. 
 
 * The American Pressman, March, 1905, p. 117. 
 ■* Constitution, 1906, Art. IX, Sec. 7.
 
 515] The Extended Closed Shop. 85 
 
 partners ran one of their shops as a union establishment 
 under one partner and another shop as non-union under the 
 second partner, the national executive board declared that 
 it was improper for union men to work under such condi- 
 tions, and the local union was directed to go on strike until 
 both shops were unionized.^ Several unions have also struck 
 against corporations, as for instance against the Fuller Con- 
 struction Company, because they have not put unionists at 
 work on all their jobs. 
 
 It is not always easy to secure cooperation among differ- 
 ent local unions in the enforcement of the extended closed 
 shop. The local union whose members a firm is hiring 
 is not easily persuaded to strike simply for the benefit of 
 some other local union. ^ Where the establishments of the 
 employer are within the jurisdiction of a single union, the 
 union is more likely to make an effort to extend the closed 
 shop over all the establishments. 
 
 Only two of the unions in the metal trades have ever 
 seriously considered the desirability of refusing to allow an 
 employer to operate one or more of his plants as non-union 
 while the remainder are run as union. One of these organi- 
 zations is the Holders. In 1895 it was learned by the Hold- 
 ers that a corporation which was running a union foundry 
 in the East had also a non-union foundry in the West,^ 
 but not until 1899 were the national officers instructed by 
 the convention to bring pressure to bear upon the former 
 shop in order to unionize the latter. In the Amalgamated 
 Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers the question 
 has been more serious. In 1900 the Republic Iron and Steel 
 Company and the American Steel Hoop Company refused 
 to sign agreements covering their non-union mills. The 
 president suggested at the time that strikes should be called 
 against any corporation which refused to sign the scale for 
 all of its plants.* The following year the Association de- 
 
 ' Painters' Journal, July, 1893, p. 5. 
 
 ' Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' Journal, August, 1907, p. 
 316. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twentieth Session, 1895, p. 74. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Session, 1900, p. 5764.
 
 86 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [516 
 
 manded that the companies should " sign the scale for all, 
 or none." The American Steel Hoop Company, the Amer- 
 ican Sheet Steel Company, and the American Tin Plate 
 Company refused to sign agreements for any of their mills 
 except those already acknowledged to be union. All of 
 these concerns were connected with the United States Steel 
 Corporation. Feeling that its prestige depended upon the 
 inclusion of all the mills in the agreements, the Association 
 in July, 1901, called a strike against all of the above com- 
 panies. The fight was bitterly contested for two months 
 and the Association was defeated.^ Since then the Associa- 
 tion has not been strong enough to renew its demands.^ 
 
 The Flint Glass Workers have used similar tactics. When 
 the National Glass Company was formed, the Flints asked 
 that the seven non-union factories which had been taken 
 over by the company should be unionized.^ To this de- 
 mand the directors of the company acceded. Later on, in 
 1904, when an attempt was made by the company to open 
 two non-union factories, a strike was promptly called in 
 all of its union plants.* 
 
 The Musicians have carried the principle of exclusion as 
 expressed in the extended closed shop farther than any 
 other union. Practically ever since the organization of the 
 National League of Musicians in 1886 union bands have 
 not been allowed to participate " in any procession, tourna- 
 ment or public entertainment " in which bands composed of 
 enlisted men of the United States Army or Navy take part, 
 unless the occasion is one in which the official duties of the 
 government band require its participation.^ The American 
 Federation of Musicians in 1903 provided for the imposition 
 of a fine of fifty dollars on members who violated this rule 
 
 * See the Amalgamated Journal, July 18, igoi, to September 19, 
 1901. 
 
 'The Amalgamated Association struck against the American Sheet 
 and Tin-plate Company in 1909, but in this case the strike was 
 simply to retain the closed shop in mills then unionized. 
 
 ^ Report of the Industrial Commission, Vol. VII, 1900, p. 167. 
 
 * Coopers' International Journal, March, 1904, p. 138. 
 
 " National League of Musicians, Proceedings of the Convention, 
 1892, pp. 50-51.
 
 SI/] The Extended Closed Shop. 87 
 
 and for expulsion if the fine was not paid within sixty days. 
 If a local union failed to enforce the rule, its charter was to 
 be revoked.^ Since the adoption of these regulations union 
 bands have performed with bands composed of enlisted men 
 only when the latter are escorting an officer, a foreign guest, 
 or a military command of the United States. 
 
 The Musicians also forbid union bands and orchestras to 
 perform at a " parade, festival or conclave " with bands and 
 orchestras composed of non-union professional musicians.^ 
 An exception to this rule is made in the case of a non-union 
 band which comes from a city where there is no local union 
 of musicians. The rule applies to bands and orchestras of 
 every kind, including militia bands, lodge bands and orches- 
 tras, and even bands composed of members of other labor 
 unions. The rule applies to a reunion or conclave in its 
 entirety. Thus, if an army or navy band is to play at a 
 banquet and union bands are to play at a parade, "both 
 parade and banquet being part of the same festivity," the 
 union bands " could not accept such services. "^ In some 
 cases, however, where the refusal of union bands to per- 
 form with non-union organizations would have disarranged 
 the program of an occasion of national importance, the ex- 
 ecutive board or the president of the Federation has sus- 
 pended the rule.* Frequently, too, in the case of local func- 
 tions local unions allow Federation bands to play with bands 
 composed of non-unionists when a refusal to do so would 
 be likely to provoke public criticism. 
 
 In 1908 the Federation provided that all union bands 
 which contracted to furnish music at summer or winter 
 places of amusement should incorporate in their contracts 
 a provision that none but union bands should be employed 
 there during the season. Bands were to observe this rule 
 
 * Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention, 1903, p. 107. As 
 army and navy bands are paid by the Government, they can accept 
 engagements for less than other bands. Hence opposition to them 
 is greater than in the case of an ordinary non-union band. 
 
 'The International Musician, May, 1904, p. i. 
 » Ibid. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Convention, 1908, p. 43.
 
 88 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [518 
 
 whether they took contracts in the jurisdiction of the local 
 union to which their members belonged or in the jurisdiction 
 of some other local union. President Weber of the Musi- 
 cians has expressed doubt as to the practicability of the 
 regulation, but has indicated his belief that the principle 
 involved is a proper one.^ 
 
 On at least one occasion an organization of marine 
 oflficers, although professing not to be a labor union, has 
 adopted the policy of the extended closed shop. In 1904 
 members of District No. 2 of the American Association of 
 Masters and Pilots of Steam Vessels refused to serve on 
 any vessel in the fleet of the Pittsburgh Steamship Company 
 until a non-union captain had been discharged and a unionist 
 hired in his place.^ The strike affected nearly one hun- 
 dred vessels on the Great Lakes. 
 
 The Longshoremen collect a fine from an employer before 
 they allow their members to load or unload a vessel that has 
 been unloaded or loaded by non-unionists. This rule was 
 adopted by the union in 1893,' one year after its organiza- 
 tion, and is still retained. In case an employer refuses to 
 pay the fine levied against the vessel and continues to employ 
 non-unionists to do loading and unloading, provision is made 
 for doubling the penalty.* The amount of the original fine 
 is based in general upon the difference between union and 
 non-union wages.^ This rule has not however been rigidly 
 
 ^ In a recent decision President Weber has forbidden travelling 
 bands to accept engagements at any Chicago summer resort or at 
 Riverview Park, Baltimore, except in accordance with the terms of 
 the 1908 resolution. 
 
 'Statement by the Lake Carriers' Association to the Cleveland 
 Civic Federation, May 31, 1904, p. 8. 
 
 * Commons, " Types of American Labor Unions : The Longshore- 
 men of the Great Lakes," in Quarterly Journal of Economics, 
 November, 1905, p. 70. 
 
 * Constitution, 1908, Art. XVI, Sec. I. 
 
 * " Whenever any vessel or barge loads or unloads with non- 
 union men, then it shall be the duty of the local where such loading 
 or unloading was done to notify the General Secretary-Treasurer to 
 enforce an extra charge of ten cents per hour for loading lumber 
 and ten cents per thousand for unloading lumber; two cents per 
 ton for unloading iron ore and coal ; twenty-five cents per thousand 
 bushels for elevating or trimming grain ; two cents per ton for
 
 cip] The Extended Closed Shop. 89 
 
 enforced. Many vessels have been loaded and unloaded by 
 non-union men and no penalty has been imposed upon them 
 because the local unions in the ports where such vessels call 
 are poorly organized. The Longshoremen, like all labor 
 unions, do not attempt to discipline an employer if they 
 realize that they are unable to carry the afifair to a successful 
 issue. Since the union was locked out by the Lake Carriers' 
 Association in 1909 no fines have been collected from grain 
 and ore vessels. The Lumber Carriers' Association still 
 signs contracts with lumber-loading unions in ports of the 
 Great Lakes. In these agreements it is provided that a fine, 
 usually five cents per thousand feet of cargo, shall be levied 
 upon all vessels which load with non-union men when union- 
 ists are available.^ As a matter of fact, a majority of the 
 fines imposed have always been on boats in the lumber trade. 
 Outside of one or two instances on the Pacific Coast no 
 attempt has been made by the Longshoremen to fine ocean- 
 going or coasting vessels for employing non-union men to 
 load or unload cargoes. 
 
 The union has also insisted that on the Great Lakes car- 
 goes shall be loaded in their entirety by its members. Cap- 
 tains of vessels frequently hired longshoremen to place a 
 cargo of iron ore on board their boat and then had the deck 
 hands " trim " the cargo in the hold. To prevent this prac- 
 tice, the Longshoremen in 1902 provided that when ore 
 vessels left their loading ports untrimmed by union members, 
 they should pay a fine of three and one half cents per ton of 
 cargo before being unloaded by union members.- In 1904 
 the Longshoremen proposed an agreement with the Lumber 
 Carriers' Association wherein it was provided that an 
 increased rate of ten cents per hour was to be paid union 
 
 trimming ore and coal and for boats which do not trim, two cents 
 per ton extra for unloading, provided further that boats loading 
 or unloading lumber shall be punished by enforcing grain, coal or 
 ore rates and those loading ore, coal or grain shall be punished by 
 enforcing lumber rates" (Constitution, 1909. Art. XVI, Sec. i). 
 
 * Lumber Carriers' Association of the Great Lakes, Membership 
 List and Agreements, 1910, pp. 48, 51, 53. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Convention, 1902, p. 151.
 
 90 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [520 
 
 loaders to handle lumber which had been piled by non- 
 unionists in yards within the jurisdiction of any local union.^ 
 This provision the Lumber Carriers would not accept. 
 
 The policy of the Longshoremen in fining boats which 
 have been loaded by non-union labor is evidently a modifica- 
 tion of the principle of the closed shop. The end in view is 
 the unionizing of all longshore work done for any one vessel. 
 The union does not refuse to unload vessels loaded by non- 
 unionists, since this would be impracticable. By enforcing 
 the payment of fines the Longshoremen aim to make it un- 
 profitable for a vessel to hire non-union men. 
 
 Even in many unions in which the extended closed shop 
 is not ordinarily enforced it is frequently invoked as a 
 war measure. If an employer is " scabbed " or becomes 
 " unfair " or has a strike called against him in one shop, it 
 is the policy of many unions to strike all of his shops. Thus 
 the Plasterers provide that no member of the union shall 
 be allowed " to work for any firm or corporation after the 
 Executive Board has decided said firm or corporation 
 unfair." ^ The general executive board of the Plumbers has 
 power to suspend any local union which allows its members 
 to work for an employer who has been declared " unfair " 
 in another local.' The Molders forbid their members to 
 work on patterns brought from a struck shop* or to work 
 for an employer who takes a contract from another employer 
 whose shop has been struck.^ The Pattern Makers,^ the 
 Saw Smiths,'^ and many other unions refuse to work on jobs 
 that come from shops where strikes are in progress. 
 
 The Musicians have a rule that when a theatre is placed 
 upon the " unfair " list of the union, all other theatres under 
 
 * Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Convention, 1904, p. 227. 
 
 ' Constitution, 1908, Art. IX, Sec. 7. 
 
 ^ Constitution, 1904, Sec. 222. 
 
 *Iron Molders' Journal, July, 1885, p. 14; May, 1891, p. 7. 
 
 'Constitution, 1888, Art. XIII, Sec. 7. When the proprietor of a 
 struck shop sends out work to be done by another establishment, 
 the latter is virtually working on a subcontract. 
 
 •Laws for Government, 1900, Sec. 40, Clause 4. 
 
 7 Constitution, 1902, Art. XIV, Sec. 3.
 
 52 1 J The Extended Closed Shop. 91 
 
 the same management, wherever located, shall be declared 
 " unfair " by the executive board.^ In practice the executive 
 board is slow in taking such action against the management 
 of an "unfair" theatre. In all unions, when an employer 
 is on the " unfair " list of the national organization, members 
 of all local unions are forbidden to work for him.^ An 
 employer who is declared " unfair" by a local union, how- 
 ever, does not thereby necessarily become "unfair" to all 
 locals. In the Granite Cutters, since 1897 the national 
 executive council has had power to decide whether work 
 shall cease in all the yards of an employer pending settle- 
 ment of a strike in any one yard.^ 
 
 The unions in the building trades sometimes refuse to 
 complete jobs that have been begun by non-unionists. Thus 
 the executive board of the Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers has decided that union members must not rivet 
 material raised by " scabs " or place corrugated sheeting on 
 structures erected by " unfair " firms.* Union bridgemen 
 are not allowed to rivet material that has been put in place 
 by "scabs," but they may make repairs on "unfairly" built 
 structures. In the " working rules " for 1903-1905, agreed 
 to by the Contracting Sewer Builders' Association of Cook 
 County, Illinois, and by Local Union No. 21 of the Brick- 
 layers and Masons, it was provided that union bricklayers 
 were not to build " inverts, man-holes or catch basins " on a 
 sewer which had been constructed by non-union labor.' 
 
 In at least one case a local union of the Painters forbade 
 its members to paint walls that had formerly been painted 
 
 ' Constitution, 1910, Standing Resolutions, No. 21. 
 
 * Thus, see Longshoremen, Report of Executive Council. 1903, p. 
 16. In 1904 the United Mine Workers defeated a resolution which 
 provided that wage scales should not be signed with mine operators 
 who were "unfair" in one State or district (Proceedings of the 
 Fifteenth Annual Convention, 1904, p. 136). 
 
 » Constitution, 1897, Sec. 190. 
 
 *The Bridgeman's Magazine, July, 1907, p. 429. 
 
 "Joint Arbitration Agreement between the Sewer Contractors' 
 Association and the United Order of American Bricklayers and 
 Stone Masons' Union, No. 21 of the Bricklayers and Masons' Inter- 
 national Union, April i, 1903, to May i, 1905, p. 62, Sec. 8.
 
 92 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [522 
 
 by non-unionists,^ While the national union of the Painters 
 and of other building trades unions do all in their power 
 to assist in making jobs union " from beginning to end," they 
 do not approve of this policy, since its adoption would 
 deprive union members of employment. In very few cases 
 can a property owner or a contractor be forced to tear a 
 building down and rebuild it in order to be in a position to 
 hire union painters.^ Consequently most of the unions in 
 the building trades consider that it is usually the wisest 
 policy to finish an " unfair " building. Here again, expe- 
 diency is the key-note of union policy.* 
 
 The application of the closed-shop rule has been extended 
 in still another direction by the refusal of certain unions to 
 handle non-union material. The unions which are chiefly 
 concerned with non-union material are those which have 
 jurisdiction over establishments in which material is manu- 
 factured as well as over the shops in which this material 
 is put into place or finished. The Amalgamated Carpenters, 
 the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, and the Sheet Metal 
 Workers, for example, include " inside men " or shop work- 
 ers and " outside men " or structural building workers within 
 their jurisdictions. The Sheet Metal Workers have advised 
 their local unions to adopt by-laws forbidding the erection 
 by union members of non-union metal work.* The locals 
 have frequently refused to erect non-union-made pipe elbows, 
 skylights, metal ceilings, and so on." The Amalgamated 
 
 ' Painters' Journal, November, 1892, p. 4. 
 
 ' After a strike at Cleveland in 1905 the Sheet Metal Workers 
 actually compelled property owners to tear out metal work put up by 
 " scabs " and strike-breakers (Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' 
 Journal, November, 1905, p. 423). 
 
 • At the convention of the State Building Trades Council of 
 California in 1909 General-Counsel Cleveland L. Dam recommended 
 when employers " deliberately embrace the open shop, then the 
 closed shop, then the open shop again, upon their seeking thereafter 
 to be considered ' fair,' that they be denied business intercourse 
 with our organizations. Employers who have deliberately, wilfully 
 and knowingly become ' unfair ' should be given to understand that 
 union labor will not do business with them" (Proceedings of the 
 Eighth Annual Convention, 1909, p. 69). 
 
 « Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' Journal, August, 1904, p. 
 249. 
 
 ' Ibid., March, 1903, p. 71 ; October, 1906, p. 383.
 
 523] The Extended Closed Shop. 93 
 
 Carpenters impose a maximum fine of fourteen dollars on a 
 member for " fixing, finishing or using work which has been 
 made under unfair conditions, either in the United Kingdom 
 or abroad, or contrary to the recognized rules of the district 
 in which it has been prepared." ^ In the United States this 
 rule has not been strictly enforced. 
 
 The United Brotherhood of Carpenters has been more 
 active against non-union material than either the Sheet 
 Metal Workers or the Amalgamated Carpenters. In the 
 early years of its history there was much agitation against 
 the use of " trim " and other mill-work manufactured in 
 towns and cities where the rates of wages were low.* Since 
 1887 there has been increasing agitation against the use of 
 all non-union mill-work. In the year mentioned the New 
 York City Carpenters were urged not to " touch a piece " of 
 the product of a Poughkeepsie mill owner who had persisted 
 in running a non-union shop.^ By 1897 the situation in 
 New York had become critical. Mill owners in that city 
 who ran union shops were required to pay such compara- 
 tively high wages that they could not successfully compete 
 with non-union mills outside the city. Consequently, in 
 order to save the New York mills to the union, the local 
 unions of the Carpenters decided not to put up any non- 
 union " trim " or to work on a job where it was used.* Many 
 strikes were called. The movement against outside non- 
 union trim finally assumed such importance that the execu- 
 tive board of the International union gave financial assist- 
 ance to the New York district council.^ As a result of this 
 movement the Carpenters claim that many mills in the small 
 towns about New York were unionized.' 
 
 In many other localities similar measures have been taken 
 by local unions and district councils of the Carpenters. 
 
 'Rules in Operation January i, 1905, Rule 48, Sec. I. American 
 Edition. 
 'The Carpenter, August, 1881, p. 2. 
 *Ibid., March, 1887, p. i. 
 *Ibid., May, 1897, p. I. 
 ■ Ibid., August, 1897, p. 9. 
 « Proceedings of the Tenth General Convention, 1898, p. 32.
 
 94 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [524 
 
 More and more the officers of the union have come to believe 
 " that the carpenter, in order to hold what rightfully belongs 
 to him, must control the manufacture of the material " v^^hich 
 he erects.^ In 1904 the constitution of the national union 
 was amended so as to provide that local organizations must 
 promote the use of "trim and shop-made carpenter work" 
 with the union label. ^ The chief value of the label to the 
 Carpenters at the present time is that it affords a convenient 
 and sure method for union carpenters at work on a building 
 to determine whether " fair " material is being used. 
 
 In the stone-cutting trades it often happens that granite, 
 marble, or soft stone is cut in the rough in a yard near the 
 quarry, and then sold to the owners of other yards or shops 
 where it is trimmed and finished. The Granite Cutters, as a 
 rule, refuse to cut or trim work which has been purchased 
 by an employer from the stock of an " unfair " or non- 
 union firm. In their agreements it is frequently provided 
 that no union member " shall be required to cut work taken 
 from non-union firms nor to cut any part of a job if on 
 another part of the same job (wherever it may be cut) non- 
 union cutters are employed."^ Similarly the Marble Work- 
 ers will not set marble that has been cut by non-union men 
 unless it comes from a place where there is no cutters' local. 
 Marble that has been cut or rubbed by prison labor is uncon- 
 ditionally excluded.* The Granite Cutters also object to 
 cutting granite in the rough which is to be shipped to non- 
 union yards for completion.^ At present, practical diffi- 
 culties prevent much discrimination of this kind, since 
 employers have adopted the plan of giving a number instead 
 of a name to each job. In this way the name of the con- 
 
 ^Proceedings of the Thirteenth General Convention, 1904, p. 38. 
 •i *The Carpenter, November, 1904, p. 4. 
 
 * Agreement governing Granite Cutting in Providence, R. I., 1905- 
 1906, Clause 16. The trade is so well organized now that few 
 cases of discrimination against non-union-cut granite have occurred 
 during the past five years. 
 
 * Union marble setters in San Francisco in 1908 refused to set 
 marble unless it bore the union label. 
 
 'The Granite Cutters' Journal, December, 1905, p. 7; October, 
 1906, p. 5.
 
 525] The Extended Closed Shop. 95 
 
 signee is kept secret, and the union, accordingly, never 
 knows on whose job its members are working. 
 
 In the steel industry one mill often makes billets and iron 
 bars which are purchased by another mill for rolling. When 
 their organization was strongest, the Iron, Steel and Tin 
 Workers tried to prevent the handling in union mills of non- 
 union bars and billets, but they refused to " stigmatize as 
 ' blacksheep ' any person or persons working iron made by 
 ' blacksheep.'"^ In 1888 they also rejected a resolution for- 
 bidding union mills to furnish material to non-union plants.^ 
 In one or two cases the Teamsters have refused to unload 
 railway cars that had been loaded by non-union men in other 
 cities.^ This action was taken only after the local unions 
 where the loading had been done had appealed to other local 
 unions to strike against handling the cars.* 
 
 Finally, the question has been raised in some of the unions 
 of the building trades whether union members should work 
 for a " fair " contractor on a building whose owner has let 
 another job to an " unfair " contractor. The national unions 
 in these trades so far have not sanctioned the making of all 
 jobs done for a property owner an extended closed shop. 
 To call a strike against the " fair " contractor would result 
 only in injuring him, since he has no means of compelling 
 the property owner to unionize the other jobs.^ 
 
 Several considerations have been influential in extending 
 the closed-shop rule in the directions which have been indi- 
 cated. In the first place, unions object to considering sub- 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Convention, 1888, p. 2499. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 2494. 
 
 'The Labor Compendium, June, 1905, p. 5. 
 
 *A proposition was offered in 1902 at the convention of the 
 Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen that union market cards, 
 certifying an establishment to be a union shop, should not be placed 
 in markets where " unfair meats " were sold. " After much dis- 
 cussion it was stated by the delegates that many packing houses 
 were open houses and they deemed it unwise to adopt any such 
 resolution." Accordingly it was defeated (Proceedings of the 
 Fourth General Convention, 1902, p. 78). This union has juris- 
 diction both over retail meat markets and over packing houses where 
 slaughtering is done. 
 
 ° The Labor Compendium, April 3, 1904, p. 5.
 
 96 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [526 
 
 contracts as separate " shops " because they fear that this 
 would result in the splitting up of the work of the trade. 
 If the general contractor were unrestricted in the employ- 
 ment of non-unionists as long as they were under separate 
 subcontractors, he could very easily arrange so as to give 
 them the work requiring less skill. At the same time he 
 could keep union men in his direct employ to carry out the 
 more difficult kinds of work for which skilled workmen are 
 required.^ The same consideration operates to lead the 
 unions to refuse to complete the erection of buildings on 
 which " scabs " or non-union men have, been employed. 
 
 Secondly, it is regarded as necessary for the protection of 
 the union label that all work done for an employer who 
 uses the label should be done by unionists. The label is 
 intended to indicate to consumers that the product on which 
 it is displayed has been made under union conditions. If 
 a manufacturer ran one of his shops as a union shop and 
 another as a non-union shop, there would always be the 
 chance that labels would be used on the goods made in the 
 non-union shop. To prevent this would require a more effi- 
 cient machinery for the administration of the label than the 
 unions have yet devised. Moreover, consumers would be 
 confused if part of the goods made by a firm were union 
 and part non-union. In non-label-using unions which main- 
 tain a " fair list " the same difficulties would be encountered. 
 
 Thirdly, and more important than either of the foregoing, 
 the extended closed shop serves as a lever to increase the 
 strength of the unions. If an employer wishes one of his 
 shops placed on the " fair list" or if he wishes to have the 
 use of the label, the union takes advantage of this desire 
 to force the unionizing of all. Even where the " fair list " 
 or the label is not involved the extended closed shop may 
 serve in the same way to strengthen the hold of the union 
 on the trade. An employer in one place may be practically 
 unable to run a non-union shop, while he may prefer to run 
 another of his shops in another place as non-union. The 
 
 ^ The Carpenter, March, 1908, p. 20.
 
 527] The Extended Closed Shop. 97 
 
 union may by enforcing the extended closed shop compel the 
 unionizing of all his shops. Obviously, a variety of elements 
 determine whether in any particular case a union can thus 
 strengthen itself, since the employer may prefer to run all 
 non-union shops rather than all union. It is for this reason 
 that the extended closed shop is enforced with so little uni- 
 formity. 
 
 Similarly, the union by refusing to finish work begun by 
 non-unionists, to erect or handle material made by non- 
 union men, or to handle work which has passed through or 
 which is going into the hands of non-unionists may trans- 
 form non-union shops into union. The market for non- 
 union material may be so restricted that its manufacture 
 becomes unprofitable. The building which union men refuse 
 to complete may prove a losing venture to the contractor. 
 The proprietor of a non-union granite yard, finding that he 
 cannot purchase stone from union yards, may be compelled 
 to unionize his own yard. 
 
 The extended closed shop is also in some of its phases a 
 reflection of the nationalizing tendency exhibited in every 
 department of trade-union policy. The idea that the inter- 
 ests of all local unions are the same has been much pro- 
 moted by the increasing power of the national unions. That 
 strong local unions should aid weak ones is fundamental in 
 the most highly developed American unions. In the building 
 trades unions and in the Longshoremen^ particularly the 
 extended closed shop has proved to be perhaps " the strong- 
 est weapon of mutual protection " among the local unions. 
 
 * Commons, J. R., " Types of American Labor Unions : The 
 Longshoremen of the Great Lakes," p. 70.
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 The Joint Closed Shop. 
 
 It has been noted in the chapter on the simple closed 
 shop that when a national union has jurisdiction over two 
 or more branches or trades organized into separate local 
 unions, it is usual to require local unions of one trade to 
 assist local unions in the other trade to establish the closed 
 shop. Very often, however, combinations have been formed 
 among national unions and among local unions of different 
 national unions for the purpose of securing mutual discrimi- 
 nation against non-union men. The group of shops thus 
 covered in any particular case may be fittingly called, in the 
 aggregate, a "joint closed shop." The joint closed shop 
 is distinguished from the " extended closed shop " by the 
 fact that the cooperation against the employment of non- 
 union men is among national unions or among the branches 
 of different national unions. The joint closed shop has been 
 principally employed in certain well-defined groups of allied 
 trades. These will be considered in the order of their 
 importance. 
 
 The building trades. — In strong trade-union centers it has 
 been increasingly difficult in recent years to get a union man 
 of one trade to work with a non-unionist of any other trade 
 on structural building work. In many cases discrimination 
 against non-unionists has been extended even to unskilled 
 building laborers. It has been comparatively easy to secure 
 the cooperation of the unions in the building trades in estab- 
 lishing the joint closed shop because their members ordi- 
 narily work in intimate association with each other. 
 Although jurisdictional disputes have hindered the develop- 
 ment of amicable relations, there has been, on the whole, a 
 greater sense of unity and a stronger spirit of fellowship 
 
 98
 
 529] The Joint Closed Shop. 99 
 
 among the building trades unions than among any other 
 group of unions. 
 
 Another factor in the success of the joint closed shop in 
 the building trades has been that six or seven unions of 
 approximately uniform strength and influence include the 
 great mass of the workmen. These unions are the more 
 willing to assist each other inasmuch as each of them incurs 
 practically the same risks and secures practically equal bene- 
 fits by joint action. The smaller unions have also usually 
 been willing to assist to the extent of their power in any 
 joint movement, but the greatest factor in the success of 
 the joint closed shop among these unions has been the pecu- 
 liar effectiveness of the sympathetic strike in the building 
 trades. Since a building must be erected on a certain spot 
 and within a fixed time, a strike even of a single union is 
 a serious matter; but if a group of unions strike simulta- 
 neously to redress the grievance of one, the employer is 
 placed at an enormously increased disadvantage. 
 
 It is impossible to ascertain with exactness the date at 
 which the joint exclusion of non-union men from employ- 
 ment was first undertaken in the building trades. We do 
 know, however, that soon after 1865 there came into exist- 
 ence a number of local " building trades leagues," whose 
 object, in part, was to prevent the employment of "scabs" 
 on buildings where union men of any trade were at work.'' 
 As was the case among the early trade societies, it will be 
 noted that the first class of non-unionists discriminated 
 against were "unfair" men. 
 
 Building trades leagues, or " councils," as they soon came 
 to be called, increased in number so that by 1890 they had 
 been estabUshed in New York, St. Louis, New Orleans, 
 Augusta, Georgia, Richmond, Virginia, and other cities of 
 importance. By each of these councils " scabs " were 
 excluded from employment on work within the jurisdiction 
 of affiliated unions. Moreover, in some of them after 1882 
 it was agreed that the " societies therein represented " use 
 
 *The Carpenter, May, 1881, p. 2.
 
 lOO The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [530 
 
 their " united strength " to " compel non-unionists to con- 
 form to and obey the laws of the society that they shall 
 properly belong to."^ When a " trade society " had used 
 " every lawful means to induce all non-union men to become 
 members of their respective unions under the same rate of 
 wages " and had failed, the council by vote of its " walking 
 delegates " was authorized to " order the withdrawal of any 
 or all trades or societies which may be on buildings where 
 said non-union men may be employed." During the same 
 period, that is, from 1882 to 1890, local building trades 
 unions in cities where there were no councils occasionally 
 entered into agreements " to call off all workmen on jobs 
 where bosses hire scab labor " or non-unionists of either 
 craft.^ Most of the agreements of this character were made 
 between local unions of the Carpenters and the Bricklayers 
 and Masons^ and between local unions of the Carpenters 
 and the Painters.** 
 
 After 1890 a large number of new councils were estab- 
 lished, all of which attempted to enforce the joint closed 
 shop. In 1897, under the leadership of the St. Louis council, 
 there was formed a national organization known as the 
 " National Building Trades Council,"^ which was designed 
 to include all local building trades councils. One of the nine 
 cardinal principles of the Council was the enforcement of 
 the " working card system." The Council issued a working 
 card which could not be obtained by a workman until he had 
 procured a card in his own union. Business agents or 
 " walking delegates " were expected to see that every man on 
 a building carried the " building trades card." The Council 
 did all in its power to secure the establishment in all cities 
 of the joint closed shop. It frequently threatened to revoke 
 
 * Amalgamated Building Trades Council (New York), Constitu- 
 tion and By-Laws, 1885, Art. V, Sec. i. 
 
 * Painters' Journal, February, 1891, p. i. 
 
 * Bricklayers and Masons, Proceedings of the Twenty-first An- 
 nual Convention, 1887, p. 50. 
 
 * Painters' Journal, September, 1889, p. i. 
 
 * Since 1904 known as the " International Building Trades 
 Council."
 
 53i] The Joint Closed Shop. loi 
 
 the charter of a local council which refused to fine or expel 
 affiliated unions declining to strike against non-unionists of 
 an affiliated trade. ^ It also adopted a label to be placed on 
 buildings erected entirely by union labor. 
 
 The Council was an association only of local unions, and 
 conflicts with the national unions in the building trades were 
 frequent. In 1904 a number of national building trades 
 unions formed the " Structural Building Trades Alliance."^ 
 Subsequently, in 1908, this organization became the " Build- 
 ing Trades Department" of the American Federation of 
 Labor. The Alliance established local councils and retained 
 the " working card system " of the National Building Trades 
 Council. At the present time the Building Trades Depart- 
 ment expects the local councils, where practicable, to 
 enforce the joint closed shop, but they are not required to 
 do so. It does not encourage a joint strike against non- 
 unionists unless there is a fair chance of success.^ 
 
 In some cities the building trades councils have remained 
 independent of all national organizations. These councils 
 are, however, quite as much in favor of the joint closed 
 shop as are the local councils affiliated with the Building 
 Trades Department. Moreover, in many small cities where 
 only two or three trades have been organized and it is not 
 practicable to form a council, the unions have often con- 
 cluded agreements among themselves to act together in 
 excluding union men. It has happened that the allied unions 
 have refused to work with non-unionists of a completely 
 
 * Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Convention, 1904, p. 66. 
 
 ' For a more extended account of the history, structure, and 
 functions of the National Building Trades Council and of the 
 Structural Building Trades Alliance, see Kirk, " National Labor 
 Federations in the United States," in Johns Hopkins University 
 Studies in Historical and Political Science, Ser. XXIV, Nos. 9-10, 
 pp. 79-115- 
 
 ' The New York Building Trades Council (Rules, 1910, Sec. 37) 
 provides that " wherever, or whenever, non-union men are found 
 working, immediate action shall be taken by the business agents to 
 enforce union conditions on all work; any trade connected failing to 
 cooperate when notified of said conditions shall stand suspended, 
 and can only be reinstated upon payment of one hundred dollars." 
 New York has always been a stronghold of the building trades 
 unions.
 
 102 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [532 
 
 unorganized trade. This has frequently resulted in the for- 
 mation of a union in that trade. ^ 
 
 Although the joint closed shop has been enthusiastically- 
 supported by the building trades unions afifiliated with the 
 American Federation of Labor, the Bricklayers and Masons 
 have refused to enter into any alliance for this purpose. 
 The International union permits its subordinate unions to 
 join a building trades council, but it will not allow a council 
 or any other " foreign combination " to fine or otherwise 
 discipline bricklayers or masons.^ Furthermore, if a sub- 
 ordinate union enters into a sympathetic strike for the pur- 
 pose of assisting a union of another craft, it cannot obtain 
 strike benefits from the funds of the International union,^ 
 which believes that its local organizations should owe alle- 
 giance to it alone and that they should not be embarrassed 
 by entangling alliances.* 
 
 In Washington, D. C, in 1907 all of the building trades 
 unions with the exception of the Bricklayers and Masons 
 went out on strike to enforce the joint closed shop.® This 
 failure to join in the strike proved serious to the other 
 unions. The Bricklayers and Masons have pursued a sim- 
 ilar policy in other strikes for the joint closed shop. The 
 other unions in the building trades resent the " splendid iso- 
 lation " of the Bricklayers, and building trades councils have 
 on more than one occasion struck against union bricklayers 
 and masons because they did not carry " building trades 
 cards. "^ Pressure of this kind has induced some subordi- 
 nate unions of the Bricklayers to join the councils and to 
 make agreements for the joint closed shop with local unions 
 
 * The Carpenter, July, 1903, p. i. 
 
 * Thirty-seventh Annual Report of President and Secretary, 1902, 
 P- 157- 
 
 "•Constitution, igio, Art. XVII, Sec. 11. 
 
 * The other building trades unions assert that the Bricklayers and 
 Masons have adopted this policy because they are the first to go to 
 work on a building and can more completely "tie up" a job by 
 striking than any other organization. 
 
 'Bricklayers and Masons, Forty-second Annual Report of the 
 President and Secretary, 1907, p. 128. 
 
 * Ibid., Thirty-sixth Annual Report of the President and Secretary, 
 1901, p. 276
 
 533] ^^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 103 
 
 of the Carpenters, Plasterers, Hod Carriers, and Stone Cut- 
 ters. Both the National Building Trades Council and the 
 Structural Building Trades Alliance have, however, been 
 opposed to strikes against members of a non-affiliated union. 
 They have argued that by assisting such unions local coun- 
 cils can better induce them to affiliate. In spite of the criti- 
 cism of the other building trades, the Bricklayers and Ma- 
 sons show no signs of any change in their policy. 
 
 Certain unions which are not usually classed as building 
 trades unions have, to some extent, been included in the 
 joint closed shops of the building trades. In the large cities, 
 Machinists' local unions, which have jurisdiction over the 
 erection of engines and other machinery in buildings, are 
 usually allowed to have representatives in the building trades 
 councils. This privilege is not very valuable if the council 
 is organized as a section of the Building Trades Depart- 
 ment of the American Federation of Labor, since the policy 
 of the Department is not to allow strikes in aid of a union 
 which is not affiliated with the Department through its na- 
 tional union. By independent councils, like the Associated 
 Building Trades of Chicago, the Machinists are given as 
 much assistance in settling their grievances as are the Car- 
 penters or Painters, and joint strikes are sometimes called 
 against non-union machinists.^ The Teamsters have also 
 joined wnth the building trades unions in the maintenance of 
 a joint closed shop.^ In a number of cities agreements have 
 been made that union teamsters shall not deliver material 
 to buildings on which non-union men are at work, and also 
 that union carpenters, bricklayers, structural iron workers, 
 and so forth, shall not receive building material hauled by 
 non-union teamsters.' In many places neither the unions of 
 
 ' Machinists' Monthly Journal. February, 1908, p. 141. 
 
 ' In 1901 the Musicians and the Theatrical Stage Employees sent 
 circulars to the building trades unions of Colorado asking them not 
 to work in the theatres of a certain manager because he had refused 
 to recognize the two unions. No action on the request was 
 reported (The International Musician, July, 1901, p. s). 
 
 *The Team Drivers' Journal, October, 1902, p. 10; International 
 Brotherhood of Teamsters, Proceedings of the Fifth Convent'ou, 
 1907, p. 285.
 
 104 ^^^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [534 
 
 the building trades nor the Teamsters wish to become in- 
 volved in each others' disputes, but the adoption of some 
 plan for joint discrimination against non-members seems to 
 be growing in favor.^ Assistance in the maintenance of the 
 joint closed shop in the building trades is afforded by the 
 Brewery Workmen. When the owner of a union brewery 
 builds an addition to his plant or has repairs made, he is 
 required to have such work done by union men. As the 
 Brewery Workmen have substantial control of the brewing 
 industry, they are able to enforce this rule. 
 
 The power of the joint closed shop has been frequently 
 used to enforce the extended closed shop. The National 
 Building Trades Council, through its general secretary- 
 treasurer, on more than one occasion has expressed itself 
 as opposed to allowing " fair " employers to sublet work to 
 non-union firms. An agreement between a local council and 
 employers allowing non-union subcontracting was declared 
 to be "a peculiar guarantee," permissible only in lockouts 
 "as a policy to keep the council and unions intact."^ It 
 was also one of the aims of the National Building Trades 
 Council to compel an employer to be " fair " to the affiliated 
 unions in all parts of the country. At the time of its organi- 
 zation in 1897 many building contractors no longer confined 
 themselves to local operations but undertook work in many 
 different sections. If one council became involved in a dis- 
 pute with a contractor while he was carrying on work under 
 the jurisdiction of another council, it was the policy of the 
 national organization where practicable to force the contrac- 
 tor to grant union conditions in the former locality as the 
 price of employing union men in the latter.' 
 
 It was made, for example, a subject of complaint at the conven- 
 tion of the State Building Trades Council of California in 1909 that 
 the union carpenters of Salinas City were compelled to receive 
 lumber and other material " from non-card-carrying drivers " (Pro- 
 ceedings, 1909, p. 96). 
 
 2 Report of Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Convention, 1904, 
 p. 70. See also The Labor Compendium, May, 1905, p. 7, for the 
 New York arbitration agreement. 
 
 ' The International Building Trades Council. Its Origin, Object 
 and Benefits, p. 8.
 
 535] ^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 105 
 
 The councils have also frequently supported one of their 
 affiliated unions in its refusal to handle non-union material 
 the manufacture of which was under its trade jurisdiction. 
 As early as 1887 the building trades league at Augusta, 
 Georgia, forbade affiliated unions to handle material made 
 or even sold by a firm or company which did not " recognize 
 fifty-eight hours as a week's work."^ The leagues at this 
 time also frequently refused to use convict-made materials.^ 
 At a somewhat later date they assisted the Carpenters in 
 boycotting material from planing mills and sash factories 
 where strikes were in progress.^ When the National Build- 
 ing Trades Council was formed, the agitation against the 
 use of non-union material increased greatly. Each local 
 council was allowed to decide for itself whether it would 
 handle non-union work, but the national organization fre- 
 quently urged the local councils to discriminate against such 
 material. As a matter of fact, most of the building mate- 
 rial which was discriminated against was made by " unfair " 
 firms. It was only rarely that material was boycotted sim- 
 ply on the ground that it was made by a non-union firm.* 
 
 The Structural Building Trades Alliance and its suc- 
 cessor, the Building Trades Department of the American 
 Federation of Labor, have continued the policy of the Na- 
 tional Building Trades Council. The councils have not 
 been forced to assist affiliated unions in excluding " unfair " 
 material. Indeed, a council will not ordinarily take any 
 action unless a complaint has been made by the union con- 
 cerned. If the Carpenters, for instance, wish to have the 
 output of a certain mill boycotted by a council, they must 
 
 iThe Carpenter, October, 1887, p. 5. 
 
 * The Painter, December, 1887, p. i. 
 
 ' » Bricklayers and Masons, Twenty-sixth Annual Report of Presi- 
 dent and Secretary, i8gi, p. Ixviii. 
 
 * In reply to a question as to what benefit it had derived from its 
 connection with the National Building Trades Council, the Chicago 
 Council answered : " The refusal of trades affiliated with the Build- 
 ing Trades Councils of Kansas City, Omaha and Detroit to handle 
 marble manufactured in shops that were on strike in this city " 
 (Report of Proceedings of the Third Annual Convention, 1900, 
 p. 15).
 
 io6 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [536 
 
 petition for assistance.^ Joint discrimination against non- 
 union materials therefore is not nearly so widespread as 
 that against non-union men.^ It is very seldom that any 
 union in the building trades refuses to work on non-union 
 material the manufacture of which is within the jurisdiction 
 of unions other than those of the building trades. 
 
 In spite of certain restrictions upon the calling of joint 
 strikes, in 1903 so many were inaugurated that the National 
 Building Trades Council was unable to finance all of them.^ 
 While no statistics are available to show how far these 
 strikes were successful, it is noteworthy that there have 
 been few notorious failures. The unions have been highly 
 satisfied with the results, and employers have admitted that 
 great gains have been made for the unions by such strikes.* 
 In the near future the Building Trades Department of the 
 American Federation of Labor aims to " establish a chain 
 of building trades councils throughout the land which will 
 compel the respect of employers and enforce discipline among 
 workers."* 
 
 ^ State Building Trades Council of California, Proceedings of the 
 Eighth Annual Convention, 1909, pp. 161-162. 
 
 ^ The Bricklayers and Masons have occasionally made local agree- 
 ments with the Granite Cutters and the Stone Cutters in which it is 
 provided that the former shall not " build on or back up " any work 
 where the stone is cut by " scabs," and that the latter shall not cut 
 stone to be sent to jobs where non-union masons and bricklayers 
 are at work. 
 
 * Report of Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Convention, 1903, 
 p. 170. 
 
 * " It was agreed by both sides that the use of the sympathetic 
 strike had been a powerful influence in unionizing the building 
 trades of Chicago " (Report of the Industrial Commission, Vol. 
 VIII, p. xxi). 
 
 •Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers* Journal, December, 1908, 
 p. 470. In December, 1910, one hundred and forty-three local coun- 
 cils and two state councils, comprising twenty-four county and city 
 councils, were affiliated with the Department. The following 
 national unions were also affiliated : The Asbestos Workers, the 
 Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, the Amalgamated Carpenters 
 and Joiners, the Cement Workers, the Electrical Workers, the Ele- 
 vator Constructors, the Steam Engineers, the Granite Cutters, the 
 Hod Carriers and Building Laborers, the Lathers, the Marble 
 Workers, the Metal Workers, the Painters, the Plasterers, the 
 Plumbers, the Composition Roofers, the Slate and Tile Roofers, the 
 Stone Cutters, and the Tile Layers.
 
 537] ^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 107 
 
 The metal trades. — In the metal trades the development 
 of joint action against non-unionists has been much slower 
 than in the building trades largely because there has been 
 less opportunity for the advantageous use of joint and sym- 
 pathetic strikes. A building must be constructed on a par- 
 ticular piece of ground, but metal work can be transferred 
 from one shop to another and from one city to another. 
 The unions of the metal trades for this reason have never 
 shown enthusiasm over the possibilities of joint action. The 
 indifference toward non-unionism in other allied trades 
 might perhaps have been less if the Molders, who are far 
 and away the strongest union in these trades, had not re- 
 fused to take the lead in securing the joint closed shop. 
 They, like the Bricklayers, believe that nothing is gained 
 for themselves by interfering in behalf of the unions of 
 allied trades. The other unions in the group, deprived of 
 their natural leader, are practically powerless to effect com- 
 binations for the exclusion of non-union men. 
 
 A good illustration of the Molders' policy toward the 
 other unions of the metal trades is afforded by a review of 
 their relations with the Core Makers and the Pattern 
 Makers. With the trades represented by these two unions 
 the Molders come into intimate association in all foundries. 
 In some cases non-union pattern makers and core makers 
 were excluded from employment with union molders, but 
 for a number of years the Core Makers attempted fruitlessly 
 to obtain an agreement providing that no molder " be allowed 
 to work with a non-union core maker, or vice-versa."^ 
 Finally in 1903 the Core Makers, at their request, were 
 amalgamated with the Molders. The Pattern Makers and 
 the Molders do not even yet discriminate jointly against non- 
 unionists, except in isolated cases. 
 
 Probably the first union in the metal working trades in 
 which it was proposed to resist the employment of non- 
 unionists outside of its own trade jurisdiction was the Iron 
 and Steel Roll Hands. In 1874 a plan was laid before the 
 
 ^ Molders, Proceedings of the Twenty-second Session, 1902, pp. 
 617-618.
 
 io8 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [538 
 
 convention of that union providing for an amalgamation 
 with the United Sons of Vulcan and the National Union of 
 Rollers, Roughers, Catchers and Hookers of the United 
 States. To this resolution an amendment was offered that 
 no union roll hands work with " black-sheep, either Pud- 
 dlers or Heaters," and that if " either party be on strike our 
 organization shall sustain them."^ Partly as an evidence of 
 the good-will of the Roll Hands, it was intended that this 
 measure should go into operation before the amalgamation 
 was consummated, but after lengthy discussion the amend- 
 ment was lost. 
 
 The first joint action against non-unionists in the metal 
 trades was against " scabs," and particularly against " strike- 
 breakers." Thus in 1881 the Holders in a Pittsburgh foun- 
 dry refused to work on patterns made by " scabs," after the 
 union pattern makers in the employ of the concern had gone 
 out on strike.^ Similarly the Machinists at various times 
 have refused to handle " scab-made " castings' and boilers* 
 when a strike was in progress in the foundry or boiler-shop 
 of the concern where their members were employed. Such 
 action has usually been taken only after an appeal for help 
 has been made by the union on strike. At the present time 
 there is much indifference among the metal trades unions 
 about working with " unfair " and blacklisted men, as long 
 as the union concerned makes no protest.^ 
 
 There has been even less joint action in these trades 
 against working with ordinary non-unionists. Here and 
 there two or three local unions have come to an understand- 
 ing jointly to exclude all non-unionists, but no lasting com- 
 bination has been effected. From 1897 to 1905 the Ma- 
 chinists, the Metal Mechanics, and the Metal Polishers 
 
 ^Proceedings of the Second Annual Convention, 1874, p. 16. The 
 unions having jurisdiction over the manufacture of iron and steel 
 are seldom classed among the metal trades unions. They have never 
 been on terms of intimate relation with other unions. 
 
 ' Iron Holders' Journal, March, 1881, p. 8. 
 
 ^ Ibid., Februar>-, 1896, p. 69. 
 
 * Report of the Grand Master Machinist to the Seventh Conven- 
 tion, 1897, p. 5. 
 
 » Machinists' Monthly Journal, March, 1902, p. 143.
 
 539] ^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 109 
 
 issued a joint label the use of which could be obtained only 
 by those establishments which maintained closed shops as 
 far as the three organizations were concerned.^ 
 
 In 1908 the American Federation of Labor organized a 
 "Metal Trades Department." At the outset the Depart- 
 ment formed branches in about fifty important cities.* It 
 aims ultimately to bring about the full cooperation of the 
 affiliated unions on all matters of common concern. Al- 
 though its published program contains no mention of joint 
 discrimination against non-unionists, there is no doubt that 
 the Department favors the establishment of the joint closed 
 shop among the unions in the metal trades. In January, 
 1910, the Philadelphia branch was authorized to introduce 
 the "card system" for three months,^ but no strikes were 
 called to enforce the carrying of union cards. It was 
 thought that if unionists were all furnished with cards of 
 the branch, the non-unionists could be distinguished and 
 many of them might be induced to join the proper union. 
 As the Philadelphia experiment has not been repeated, the 
 presumption is that it did not prove a success. Since the 
 formation of the Department, however, there is no doubt 
 that the sentiment among the unions in favor of the joint 
 closed shop has greatly increased, but the employers in some 
 of the trades are strongly organized in open-shop associa- 
 tions, and the unions cannot hope for rapid progress. 
 
 Unions of the metal trades acting separately have also at 
 certain times obtained the employment of unionists in the 
 other trades. Thus the Blacksmiths in 1901 signed a closed- 
 shop agreement at Ottumwa, Iowa, which provided that all 
 employees not eligible as members of the Blacksmiths' union 
 
 * Spedden, p. 22. 
 
 * Affiliated with the Metal Trades Departmmt in January, 1911, 
 were the Sheet Metal Workers, the Blacksmiths, the Boilermakers 
 and Iron Shipbuilders, the Electrical Workers, the Steam Engineers, 
 the Steam Fitters, the Foundry Employees, the Machinists, the Metal 
 Polishers, BuflFers, Platers and Brass Workers, the Molders, the 
 Pattern Makers, and the Stove Mounters. 
 
 •Letter from Secretary-Treasurer Berres to the writer, February 
 22, 1910.
 
 no The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [540 
 
 should belong to some other bona-fide organization.^ The 
 metal trades unions have been supported at times by union 
 teamsters, engineers, and stationary firemen, who have 
 refused to work with " unfair " metal workers.^ The 
 Metal Polishers, the Steam Engineers, and the Stationary 
 Firemen in 1903 proposed an agreement to the Kellogg 
 Switchboard and Supply Company of Chicago in which it 
 was provided that the company should employ " none but 
 members of the aforesaid organizations or those who carry 
 the regular working card of such organizations, provided 
 the various crafts will furnish such competent help as may 
 be required . . . within twenty- four hours after notification."' 
 The Brewery Workmen insist that none but union machin- 
 ists, boilermakers, and so forth, shall be employed in union 
 breweries.^ Finally, there is a more or less general under- 
 standing between the Machinists and the printing trades 
 unions, particularly the Printing Pressmen, that non-union 
 machinists shall not be allowed to set up machines in union 
 offices. ° 
 
 The printing trades. — At one time all of the printing 
 trades were under the jurisdiction of the International Ty- 
 pographical Union. In the earlier years compositors, press- 
 men, and bookbinders were combined in the same local 
 unions. About 1874 separate local unions of pressmen 
 began to be chartered, and later on the same policy was 
 followed with regard to bookbinders and stereotypers. Al- 
 most immediately after the first charter was issued to press- 
 men the president of the International union recommended 
 that printers' and pressmen's locals be required to cooperate 
 with each other in matters of common interest.® In 1875 
 a resolution was adopted providing that when a non-union 
 
 ^ Blacksmiths' Journal, April, 1901, pp. 7-8. 
 
 * Machinists' Monthly Journal, March, 1903, p. 211. 
 
 * Christensen v. The People, 114 111. App., 40. 
 
 * Brewery Workmen, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Convention, 
 1908, p. 160. 
 
 * Machinists' Monthly Journal, February, 1903, p. 115. 
 
 •Report of Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Session, 
 1874, p. 13-
 
 54i] The Joint Closed Shop. iii 
 
 man, whether pressman or compositor, was employed in an 
 office, "it shall be obligatory on the part of all union men 
 to cease work in said office unless they have the consent of 
 both unions to continue."^ In the following year this rule 
 was rescinded.^ In 1879 ^^^ union men were required to 
 cease work with a non-unionist, pressman, or printer, " when 
 so ordered by their unions."^ Finally, in 1891, resolutions 
 were passed urging printers to do their utmost " to unionize 
 all the other departments of offices under their control."* 
 
 In spite of the fact that the International union thus gave 
 its sanction to the establishment of the closed shop in all 
 branches of the trade, the local unions very rarely acted 
 together. Time and again the national officers, particularly 
 the heads of the allied crafts,' called attention to the lack of 
 joint action. The weaker unions continually urged that no 
 office be considered " fair " unless it was " fair from cellar 
 to garret," but their demands were generally ignored. 
 
 The pressmen seceded from the International Typograph- 
 ical Union in 1889. They were followed by the bookbinders 
 in 1892, but it was not until 1895 that the Printers gave up 
 their claims of jurisdiction over the seceding trades. In 
 that year an agreement known as the " Tri-Partite Agree- 
 ment " was entered into between the Printers, the Printing 
 Pressmen, and the Bookbinders. The only section in the 
 agreement directly affecting the joint closed shop, other than 
 that regulating the use of the label, provided that subordi- 
 nate unions of the Printers should "use all honorable en- 
 deavors to induce non-union pressmen and bookbinders 
 within their jurisdiction to affiliate with the nearest union 
 
 * Report of Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Session, 
 
 1875, p. 62. 
 
 ^Report of Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual Session, 
 
 1876, p. 62. 
 
 ' Report of Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual Session, 
 1879, pp. 34, 42-43- 
 
 * Report of Proceedings of the Thirty-ninth Annual Session, 
 1891, p. 112. 
 
 °The subordinate crafts each had a vice-president to represent 
 them on the executive board of the International union.
 
 112 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [542 
 
 of their respective organizations."^ The agreement re- 
 mained in force until 1901, when it was finally abrogated. 
 Under it practically no progress was made in establishing 
 joint closed shops.^ 
 
 In 1904 a new agreement was made by the Printers, the 
 Printing Pressmen, the Bookbinders, the Stereotypers, and 
 the Photo-Engravers under which a " National Allied Print- 
 ing Trades Council " was established.* This agreement, with 
 certain amendments, is still in force. No reference is made 
 therein to cooperative action against the employment of non- 
 unionists in the dififerent trades, but an allied trades label 
 was adopted, to be issued to printing offices by local " allied 
 printing trades councils " when " unanimous consent of the 
 unions represented " had been obtained.* Care has been 
 taken that the joint label is not used except in accordance 
 with this provision,^ but strikes have seldom been called by 
 one trade to compel an employer to unionize another de- 
 partment of his office. 
 
 In a few cities, however, vigorous joint campaigns have 
 been carried on against " rats " and other non-unionists.* 
 Both the Printing Pressmen and the Stereotypers have re- 
 fused to handle " strike-bound " composition. During the 
 eight-hour strike of the Printers in 1 905-1 907 the Stereo- 
 typers in New York, Chicago, Cincinnati, Minneapolis, 
 Richmond, Virginia, and other cities went out on prolonged 
 strikes because they were asked to handle non-union matter.'^ 
 
 ^ Bookbinders, Official Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Con- 
 vention, 1895. p. 49. 
 
 " The International Bookbinder, April, 1901, p. 6. 
 
 » The Stereotypers and the Photo-Engravers in the meantime had 
 also seceded from the Typographical Union. Prior to 1904 the 
 Stereotypers had an agreement with the Printers requiring the 
 latter's local unions to insist upon union-made stereotype plate 
 matter, electrotype plates, and papier-mache matrices. 
 
 * Spedden, pp. 84-86. 
 
 ' Where the labels of the individual unions are still used they are 
 not ordinarily given to an office where non-union men of any trade 
 are employed. The Printing Pressmen complain that the Typo- 
 graphical Union often violates this rule. 
 
 * The American Pressman, December, 1902, p. 27; December, 
 1908, p. 14. 
 
 ' Stereotypers and Electrotypers' Journal, August, 1907, p. 4.
 
 543] The Joint Closed Shop. 113 
 
 Had it not been that the Stereotypers themselves wished to 
 secure the eight-hour day, it is not Hkely that they would 
 have interested themselves in opposing the employment of 
 non-union printers. It is noteworthy that when the long 
 Cincinnati strike was at its height, Vice-President Frey in 
 his report on the situation argued in favor of refusing to 
 handle " strike-bound " composition, but declared that for 
 the Stereotypers to object to all non-union work was some- 
 thing which neither Printers nor Stereotypers had ever 
 proposed. Many composing rooms in Cincinnati had always 
 been non-union, although the stereotyping and electrotyping 
 departments in the same offices employed only union men.^ 
 
 The chief hindrance to the wider enforcement of the joint 
 closed shop in the printing trades has been the stand taken 
 by the International Typographical Union. This organiza- 
 tion has always maintained that as a printers' union it is 
 primarily for the benefit of printers, and that it should not 
 be used as a " club " to unionize the workmen of other 
 trades. As has been shown above, this feeling prevailed 
 even when the trade jurisdiction of the union extended over 
 all the printing trades. Since the agreement of 1904 the 
 progress of the joint closed shop has been retarded by the 
 continual struggle of the four weaker unions to gain control 
 over the joint conference board. Even the Printers have 
 expressed the belief that the allied trades " should rid them- 
 selves of the merited reproach begotten of union pressmen 
 and bookbinders working with non-union compositors and 
 vice-versa."^ It is acknowledged that " too often the Allied 
 Printing Trades Council is considered a farce or joke."^ 
 
 The glass trades. — No federation of unions has ever been 
 
 * Stereotypers and Electrotypers' Journal, August 1906, p. 15. 
 
 * The Typographical Journal, July, 1897, p. 14. 
 
 « Stereotypers and Electrotypers' Journal, May, 1907, p. 15. In 
 1004 the New York State convention of the Allied Printing Trades 
 Councils declared itself " strongly opposed to the ' open shop ' in any 
 department of our allied trades, whether it be in national, state, 
 municipal government, or private corporation or firm " (The Inter- 
 national Bookbinder, September. 1904, p. 170). The secretary of the 
 joint conference board estimates that there are now about seven 
 thousand printing offices using the allied trades label. 
 
 8
 
 1 14 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [544 
 
 formed in the glass industry. Accordingly the joint closed 
 shop has been developed only as a part of the policy of indi- 
 vidual unions. In 1902, after having rejected a similar 
 proposition the year previous, the Glass Bottle Blowers 
 adopted a resolution providing that its members should 
 refuse to blow for non-union stopper grinders, a trade then 
 under the jurisdiction of the Flint Glass Workers.^ This 
 action was apparently taken at the solicitation of the latter 
 union.' Soon afterwards, in 1905, the Blowers extended 
 their jurisdiction over stopper grinders and forced them to 
 change their affiliation.^ 
 
 For many years the Glass Bottle Blowers in most shops 
 required mold makers working in union bottle factories to 
 belong to the Flint Glass Workers,* but they refused to sign 
 an agreement to make this a rule for all shops on the ground 
 that there were often not enough union mold makers to fill 
 the needs of " fair " manufacturers.^ As a result of a juris- 
 dictional dispute of long standing, the Flint Glass Workers 
 in the fall of 1909 called out on strike all mold makers in 
 union bottle factories at Alton, Illinois. The Glass Bottle 
 Blowers then permitted the employment of machinists as 
 mold makers. This policy proved successful, and the Blow- 
 ers determined to drive out entirely the mold makers who 
 were affiliated with the Flints. This was rapidly accom- 
 plished, and mold makers employed in shops under the juris- 
 diction of the Blowers are now required to be members of 
 the International Association of Machinists. For a number 
 of years prior to 1899 there was an organization among the 
 sidelever pressers in glass bottle factories called the Green 
 Glass Pressers' League. The Glass Bottle Blowers usually 
 required pressers and pressers' gathering boys in union fac- 
 
 ^ Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Annual Session, 1902, p. 120. 
 
 ^ Flint Glass Workers, Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual 
 Convention, 1902. p. 186. 
 
 ^ Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Session, 1905, p. 139. 
 
 * Fhnt Glass Workers, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Con- 
 vention, 1892, p. 179. 
 
 ' Glass Bottle Blowers, Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Annual 
 Session, 1903, p. 29.
 
 54S] The Joint Closed Shop. 115 
 
 tories to belong to the League. Since 1899 the pressers have 
 been required to join the local unions of Blowers.^ 
 
 Waterfront and marine trades. — In New York City and 
 vicinity there has been in existence for a number of years a 
 federation known as the " Marine Trades Council." It is 
 composed of unions which have jurisdiction over the con- 
 struction and repair of steam and sailing vessels. In some 
 cases it has called joint strikes against the employment of 
 non-union men in one of the affiliated trades. In San Fran- 
 cisco there is a much older organization of similar character 
 known as the " City Front Federation." It admits to mem- 
 bership all local unions " whose members are directly em- 
 ployed in the construction or repair of docks and vessels, 
 the handling and hauling of cargoes, and the handling of 
 vessels, steam or sail."- Provision is made for joint strikes, 
 and some strikes have been called against the employment 
 of non-union men in one of the affiliated unions. In New 
 Orleans the " Dock and Cotton Council " has contrived to 
 enforce the exclusive employment of union men in handling 
 all freight from the time it reaches the city until it is placed 
 on board ship.^ The Teamsters, the Freight Handlers, and 
 the Longshoremen are the unions chiefly interested in the 
 council. 
 
 The Seamen and the Longshoremen have not joined in 
 the enforcement of the closed shop as fully as might have 
 been expected from their intimate relations, but some local 
 unions of Longshoremen on the Great Lakes have forbidden 
 their members to work with non-union sailors or to unload 
 
 ^ The Flint Glass Workers have often accused the Glass Bottle 
 Blowers of bad faith. In igoi their president said : " It is only a 
 few years since pressers, gatherers, stopper grinders and mould 
 makers were permitted to work in green houses without regard to 
 their being affiliated with any union. ... If by refusal to accept 
 lower waees they were compelled to leave the employ of any 
 company, non-union men might take their places and the Glass 
 Bottle Blowers Association would not interfere. . . . All of a sudden 
 the Green Association has discovered a great interest in pressers, 
 gatherers, mould makers and stopper grinders, particularly pressers 
 and gatherers" (Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Conven- 
 tion, 1901, p. 60). 
 
 ^Constitution, 1908. Art. II, Sec. 3. 
 
 'Facts, February, 191 1, pp. 12-13.
 
 Ii6 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [546 
 
 vessels manned by them.^ In 1901 it was recommended by 
 a committee of tlie Longshoremen that marine firemen and 
 oilers, who were under the jurisdiction of the Longshore- 
 men, should see that wheelmen and watchmen were mem- 
 bers of the Seamen's union,^ but no action was taken on the 
 recommendation. In 1903 a resolution was adopted author- 
 izing local unions of the Longshoremen to refuse to work 
 with non-union crews on vessels whose owners were not 
 members of the Lumber Carriers' Association.^ When the 
 open-shop campaign of the Lake Carriers' Association was 
 inaugurated in 1909, there was bad feeling between the 
 Longshoremen and the Seamen, consequently when the Sea- 
 men were locked out, the Longshoremen did not refuse to 
 unload vessels manned by " scab " sailors.* Soon after- 
 wards they themselves were also locked out. Changes in 
 the official personnel of the Longshoremen which occurred 
 at this time and the common danger threatening the two 
 unions were responsible for the establishment of closer rela- 
 tions. It is not unlikely that in the near future the Seamen 
 and the Longshoremen " will be cemented together by mu- 
 tual protective working agreements."^ 
 
 The Marine Engineers, the International Pilots' Associa- 
 tion, and the American Association of Masters, Mates and 
 Pilots are organizations of marine officers. The Interna- 
 tional Pilots' Association has a rule that, except with the 
 consent of the executive council, no member shall employ 
 for service on any steam or sail vessel seamen who are not 
 members of a seamen's union affiliated with the American 
 Federation of Labor.® The American Association of Mas- 
 
 1 Longshoremen, Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Convention, 
 1901, p. 35- 
 
 * Ibid., p. 150. 
 
 » Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Convention, 1903, p. 196. 
 The Longshoremen have always preferred to deal with employers' 
 associations. Hence the tactics of the union in this case were 
 undoubtedly designed as much to force vessel owners into the 
 Lumber Carriers' Association as to exclude non-union men from 
 employment. 
 
 * The Buffalo Express, April 14, 1909, p. i. 
 
 * The Longshoreman, December, 1909, p. 3. 
 •Constitution, n. d., Art. XVI, Sec. i.
 
 547] ^^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 1 17 
 
 ters, Mates and Pilots, on the other hand, refuses to aid in 
 the organization of seamen. It does not even demand the 
 closed shop for its own members. The Marine Engineers 
 occupy middle ground. In 1909 the Lake Carriers' Asso- 
 ciation adopted an ofificial form of contract to be signed by- 
 individual engineers in which the following provision ap- 
 peared : " It is understood that all departments of this ship 
 will hereafter be conducted in each department upon the 
 open shop principle, and your cooperation will be required 
 in carrying out this principle." The Marine Engineers re- 
 fused to let their members sign this contract, partly on the 
 ground that it was improper for them to aid in forcing the 
 open shop on the Seamen and Longshoremen, but they were 
 willing to agree not to cooperate with these unions in secur- 
 ing the joint closed shop. 
 
 The wall paper trades. — The two unions composing the 
 " Allied Wall Paper Trades," namely, the Print Cutters and 
 the Machine Printers and Color Mixers, have maintained 
 joint closed shops since 1903. Even when the cutting and 
 the printing are done in separate establishments the Machine 
 Printers wall not handle non-union " prints," nor will the 
 Print Cutters cut patterns for non-union printing houses. In 
 Canada, w^here the Machine Printers have no local unions, 
 non-union printers are allowed to work with union cutters. 
 
 The remaining cases of enforcement of the joint closed 
 shop relate to specific unions.^ 
 
 The United Mine Workers. — Prior to 1907 there were asso- 
 ciations of mine managers and their assistants in the Illinois 
 and Indiana coal fields. Many of the members of these 
 organizations had been miners and had formerly belonged 
 to the United Mine Workers, consequently they were for 
 the most part friendly to the union. Their friendship was 
 very valuable to the union, and some of the Mine Workers' 
 
 ' In 1908 the American Federation of Labor established a " Rail- 
 way Employes' Department " with which all unions in the Federa- 
 tion having jurisdiction over railway work are affiliated. Up to the 
 present the attention of the Department has been given chiefly to the 
 settlement of jurisdictional disputes. No attempt has been made to 
 enforce the joint closed shop.
 
 1 
 
 ii8 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [548 
 
 local unions instructed their pit committees to see that 
 managers and their assistants on " card day " were in good 
 standing in the managers' association.^ In 1900 a resolution 
 was offered at the Mine Workers' convention which provided 
 that " all employees in or about the coal mines must either 
 be members of the United Mine Workers of America or 
 members of their respective trade unions," and that " the 
 pit committees in the different mines have jurisdiction over 
 all such employees belonging to other unions than the United 
 Mine Workers of America."' The resolution was rejected. 
 
 American Federation of Musicians. — In some cities the 
 Musicians have an understanding with the Hotel and 
 Restaurant Employees that members of neither union shall 
 work in hotels, cafes, and restaurants " unless all of the 
 trades are recognized." The local unions of the Musicians 
 have also frequently made arrangements with the Theatrical 
 Stage Employees for the joint exclusion of non-unionists 
 from employment in theatres and moving-picture parlors. 
 In 1905 the Theatrical Stage Employees asked for a national 
 agreement, but the Musicians considered that the matter had 
 better be left for local unions to determine.^ Because they 
 are more self-reliant than most of the other unions with 
 which they work the Musicians have frequently been accused 
 of caring little for the interests of the other trades.* 
 
 The Teamsters. — In addition to their affiliations with the 
 unions of the building and metal trades, noted above, the 
 Teamsters have also joined with the Bakery and Confec- 
 tionery Workers in maintaining closed shops. In 1902, for 
 example, the Detroit local union of bakers struck in certain 
 bakeries because the proprietors refused to agree to employ 
 
 Illinois Mine Managers and Mine Examiners' Mutual Aid Asso- 
 ciation, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Convention, 1901, p. 6. 
 
 ^ Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Convention, 1900, p. 47. 
 
 'Theatrical Stage Employees, Proceedings of the Thirteenth 
 Annual Convention, 1905, pp. 58-59. 
 
 * In 1903 the Musicians voted to " enter into reciprocal relations," 
 whenever possible, with the Actors' Protective Union of America. 
 They have not, however, discriminated against non-union actors 
 (Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention, 1903, p. no).
 
 549] ^^^^ Joint Closed Shop. 119 
 
 union drivers. The union drivers joined in the strike.^ 
 There are only a few industries, however, in which com- 
 munity of interest between the drivers and the men in the 
 shops is strongly felt.^ 
 
 Miscellaneous. — The Granite Cutters for a brief period 
 had an agreement with the Quarrymen in which it was pro- 
 vided that members of neither organization should work 
 with non-unionists in the other trade. The arrangement 
 proved unsatisfactory to the Granite Cutters and was dis- 
 continued. 
 
 The Shirt, Waist and Laundry Workers and the Meat 
 Cutters and Butcher Workmen^ have secured the insertion 
 in some agreements with employers of a provision that all 
 employees must become members of the unions in their 
 respective crafts. It is seldom that " blanket " agreements 
 of this character are formed. The Shirt, Waist and Laundry 
 Workers have required as a condition for the use of their 
 label that all firemen and engineers employed in a factory or 
 laundry must be members of the Stationary Firemen and 
 the Steam Engineers respectively. If there is no local union 
 of these organizations in the city, the firemen and engineers 
 must join the Shirt, Waist and Laundry Workers.* 
 
 In 1906 it was proposed at the convention of the Boot and 
 Shoe Workers to adopt a rule that " all employees in union 
 stamp factories shall be members of their respective unions," 
 and that union boot and shoe workers should not " be com- 
 pelled to work on any product that is declared unfair by the 
 American Federation of Labor. "^ The resolution was de- 
 feated as being inexpedient. 
 
 There have been numerous occasions in all parts of the 
 country in which local unions have combined temporarily or 
 permanently for the purpose of securing the exclusive 
 employment of their members. In Philadelphia, for instance, 
 
 * The Team Drivers' Journal, May, 1902, p. 8. 
 
 * The brewery drivers employed by union breweries are required to 
 be members of the Brewery Workmen. 
 
 'Official Journal, February, 1901, p. 5. 
 
 ♦Spedden, p. 88. 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Seventh Convention, 1906, p. 172.
 
 I20 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [SSO 
 
 the members of the two local unions of lace menders and 
 lace finishers will not work for factories which employ non- 
 union lace operatives. In 1904 the stationary engineers, fire- 
 men, rock drillers, tool sharpeners, caisson workers, and 
 dock builders engaged on the Pennsylvania Railroad tunnel 
 at New York struck jointly against the employment of non- 
 unionists.^ 
 
 It will be seen from the foregoing that the joint closed 
 shop has been most successfully established in those trade 
 groups where the joint or the sympathetic strike is most 
 effective. It has attracted little attention from those unions 
 which work in contact with only one or two others. In the 
 case of unions like the Barbers and the Horseshoers, which 
 do not come in contact with unions of other trades, and in 
 the case of the open-shop organizations, like the Locomotive 
 Engineers, there has been no discussion whatever concerning 
 the joint closed shop. A large number of groups of unions, 
 on the other hand, seem to afford the necessary con- 
 ditions for the success of the joint closed shop. Jurisdic- 
 tional disputes, like that between the Glass Bottle Blowers 
 and the Flint Glass Workers, have greatly hindered the 
 development of joint movements against non-union men. 
 
 The enforcement of the joint closed shop is usually based 
 on the principle of reciprocity.- The advantage of such an 
 arrangement, especially if the unions are of approximately 
 the same strength, is obvious.^ If one union makes a sacri- 
 fice in striking for another union, at another time or place it 
 receives aid. Moreover, the united power of the unions is 
 enormously greater than the power of any one of them. One 
 reason why a more vigorous joint campaign has not been 
 carried on against non-union material is that there is in 
 
 * The Labor Compendium, July 31, 1904, p. 8. 
 
 » The Carpenter, May, 1881, p. 2. 
 
 ' " Councils of related trades . . . have a plain economic basis, in 
 that they represent men who work for the same employers, or for 
 employers who cooperate in the same industry. Their technical and 
 industrial relations give them strength in united action. The sym- 
 pathetic strike, as it develops under their influence, is a formidable 
 weapon" (Final Report of the Industrial Commission, 1902, p. 799).
 
 SS^I The Joint Closed Shop. 121 
 
 most cases little opportunity for the unions having jurisdic- 
 tion over the manufacture of material to assist the unions 
 which handle it. The Bricklayers and Masons may dis- 
 criminate against non-union bricks, but it is impossible for 
 the Brick, Tile, and Terra Cotta Workers to prevent the 
 owner of a brick-yard from selling to non-union contractors. 
 
 Certain unions have discriminated against non-unionists 
 of other trades not so much to get help of the same kind 
 as to secure other forms of assistance. The Brewery Work- 
 men, for example, require the employment of union carpen- 
 ters, bricklayers, and so forth, in erecting buildings at union 
 breweries, although the other unions are unable to insist 
 directly on the employment of union brewery workers. The 
 brewery workers make no complaint if unionists in the build- 
 ing trades work for one of the few non-union breweries. 
 The Brewery Workers aim merely at increasing the general 
 obligations of other trade unions to them. Much of the 
 enthusiasm manifested by trades councils and city federa- 
 tions against local option and prohibition seems to be inspired 
 by the fact that the Brewery Workmen have always been 
 extremely loyal to other unions. No union has made more 
 effective use of the boycott than the Brewery Workmen. 
 
 The enforcement of the joint closed shop does not rest 
 simply on advantages to be gained, but also on the principle 
 widely accepted among unionists that it is "lowering and 
 degrading" to work with non-union men. Many unionists 
 analyze such action by characterizing it as not only " in- 
 congruous " but " weakening." It is incongruous because 
 each union insists on the closed shop within its own juris- 
 diction, and it is weakening because the opportunity to 
 assist another union and thereby gain its good will is lost..^ 
 
 American trade unions fully realize the advantage of the 
 joint closed shop, and it is evident that they are likely to 
 make fuller use of it in the future. For years the American 
 
 *"When you work on the same job where non-union men are 
 employed, you are aiding and encouraging the cause of the open 
 shop, rendering weaker the whole structure of union labor, and in 
 effect cutting your own throat" (Amalgamated Sheet Metal 
 Workers' Journal, November, 1908, p. 434).
 
 122 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [552 
 
 Federation of Labor has been striving to bring about alli- 
 ances among the national unions. At present the Federation 
 seems to have in view the formation of " departments " in 
 every group of allied trades affiliated with it. By doing this 
 the machinery is provided for more vigorous and more 
 extensive discrimination against the non-union man. 
 
 i
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 The Establishment of the Closed Shop. 
 
 Trade unions follow two methods in organizing the work- 
 men under their jurisdiction. Journeymen may be ap- 
 proached as individuals without regard to the shop in which 
 they are employed, or attention may be concentrated on the 
 workmen employed in a particular shop. The first method 
 is employed in organizing the workmen in cities where a 
 union is weak. The second method is the one chiefly em- 
 ployed by unions in which the closed shop is well established. 
 The extension of the union's influence is not accomplished 
 by organizing individuals but by unionizing shops. 
 
 There are, of course, no hard and fast rules determining 
 the way in which a local union, a district council, or a 
 national union shall proceed in order to secure the exclusive 
 employment of its members in a shop. Expediency is here 
 the only practicable test of union policy, although precedent 
 exercises some influence. The initiative in unionizing a 
 shop, obviously, must come from one of two sources. Either 
 a trade union takes it upon itself to see that the shop is 
 unionized, or the employer on his own initiative requires 
 his workmen to join the union. In the great majority of 
 cases it is the union that acts, since it is the party chiefly 
 interested in the extension of its control. 
 
 The simplest plan by which American trade unions secure 
 the closed shop in an establishment is to induce the men in 
 a shop or factory 'one by one to join the union until all, 
 or practically all, have become members. During the period 
 of unionizing no demands are made upon the employer that 
 he discharge non-union men, nor are such demands made 
 after the shop is organized. At first a few non-union men 
 may be allowed to remain at work. As time goes on, estab- 
 lished custom is likely to make the shop a completely closed 
 
 123
 
 124 '^^^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [554 
 
 one. As the union men come to have an overwhelming 
 majority, "moral pressure" can usually be effectively ap- 
 plied to secure the membership of the remaining non-union 
 men.^ " Moral pressure " varies from persuasion to intimi- 
 dation. 
 
 The shop having thus been unionized, if the employer has 
 never shown unfriendliness to labor organizations, the union 
 soon comes to feel that it is securely intrenched. When 
 new workmen are employed, there is no hesitation about 
 asking them if they have union cards. If they prove to be 
 non-unionists, they are told they must join the union. It is 
 well known to them, of course, that for a considerable time 
 the union has had practical control over the shop, although 
 the employer has not entered into a closed-shop agreement 
 with it. Ordinarily they apply for membership. Should 
 they refuse to become union members, their work would 
 probably be made very unpleasant. Not only would the 
 unionists do all in their power to annoy such " independents," 
 but if the foreman happened to be a union member, some 
 pretext would usually be found for their discharge. 
 
 While all the closed-shop unions at some time or other 
 have unionized shops in this manner, the Molders furnish 
 the best illustration of the working of this plan. In 1891 
 the Molders signed the first of a series of agreements with 
 the Stove Founders' National Defence Association. Nothing 
 was said in these agreements concerning the employment 
 of union men. At the time the first agreement was signed 
 sixty per cent, of the members of the Defence Association 
 were operating open shops, but the union soon unionized the 
 shops so effectively that in 1906 all but two of the foundries 
 covered by the agreements were union shops. This result 
 was accomplished " rather by inducing the Molders to enter 
 the union, than by bringing pressure to bear upon the em- 
 ployer to discharge non-union men, or to force them to join 
 the union. "^ 
 
 * Iron Molders' Journal, August, 1880, p. 19. 
 
 * Hilbert, F. W., " Trade-Union Agreements in the Iron Molders' 
 Union," in Studies in American Trade Unionism, edited by Hol- 
 lander and Barnett, p. 243.
 
 555] Establishment of the Closed Shop. 125 
 
 In the early nineties the United Green Glass Workers* 
 were unable to secure an agreement for the closed shop 
 with a number of manufacturers. As business was then 
 very dull, it was decided to allow union members to work 
 for these firms as long as union wages and hours were 
 observed. It was hoped that the non-union workmen could 
 be induced to become members " in a short time," and that 
 the union's control would be made " absolute." The plan 
 was adopted, however, only after the bitterest opposition. 
 Even its defenders admitted that it was " of necessity a slow 
 method of gaining control."^ 
 
 A number of small unions like the Compressed Air Work- 
 ers and the Cotton Mule Spinners, which deem it wise not to 
 adopt more radical policies, make it the duty of their mem- 
 bers " to try by all means to get employment for union mem- 
 bers "' and to induce non-members with whom they are 
 working to take out union cards.* Similar rules were 
 adopted by the Longshoremen, the Potters, and the Iron, 
 Steel and Tin Workers soon after their organization, and 
 they are still in force,^ although these unions now also use 
 other and more radical means of unionizing the shops in 
 which their members work. Open-shop labor organizations 
 also in this manner sometimes completely unionize a shop 
 or a railroad. They may secure the membership of all the 
 men at work for an employer, and yet not establish the 
 closed shop. But most of the strong closed-shop unions 
 have abandoned the plan of trying to secure the closed 
 shop by gradually bringing into membership the workmen 
 in a shop, and then relying on established custom to give 
 them control. This method is considered too slow and un- 
 certain. Moreover, to many unions it seems to give official 
 sanction to the open shop if they allow their members to 
 
 » Known since 1895 as the Glass Bottle Blowers' Association of 
 the United States and Canada. 
 ' Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Session, 1894, p. 21. 
 
 • Card and Picker Room Protective Association of Fall River and 
 Vicinity, Rules, 1908, p. 26. 
 
 * Compressed Air Workers, Constitution, 1902, Art. VI. 
 » See p. 29.
 
 126 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [556 
 
 work for any length of time with non-unionists.^ The 
 method ordinarily employed of unionizing a shop is to 
 bring into membership as many of the men as possible, and 
 then to demand of the employer that he recognize the union 
 and agree thereafter to employ only union members. Should 
 the employer refuse, a strike is ordinarily called in his shop. 
 This method of unionizing a shop has been favored by 
 leading unionists for many years.^ After the union has 
 " coaxed the non-unionists long enough,"^ it is better in 
 their opinion to bring the matter to a conclusion than to allow 
 unionists and non-unionists to work together indefinitely. 
 Conservative unions do not like to call such strikes until 
 every effort has been made to bring the men into member- 
 ship,* but frequently trade conditions make it advisable to 
 strike for the closed shop rather than to wait until every 
 non-union man in the shop has been induced to join. Greater 
 care is taken in calling strikes for the closed shop against 
 
 ^ Bricklayers and Masons, Thirty-second Annual Report of Presi- 
 dent and Secretary, 1897, p. 85. 
 
 ' " The first thing the union must do is to open the shop to union 
 men. Then, at the first opportunity to get in the shop, grasp it and 
 try to get as many union men in that shop as possible, until they 
 have the majority. Then ask and request the non-union men, 
 politely, to join their ranks. If they refuse to join (which rarely 
 happens), you will strike on them. The boss very seldom lets the 
 majority quit, and would discharge the non-union men. The non- 
 union men, seeing themselves out of work and being run out by 
 union men, will naturally but timidly come one by one and ask for 
 admission to the union " (The Cigar Makers' Journal, April, 1892, 
 p. 7). In 1S80 a writer in the Iron Molders' Journal urged that 
 strikes should be called at once against non-union men when they 
 were in a minority in a shop, but conceded that " where they com- 
 pose about one-half the shop's crew, a great deal of moral suasion 
 should first be resorted to" (Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1880, p. 4). 
 
 ' The Carpenter, August, 1883, p. i. 
 
 * " Many employers who are willing to have their shops unionized 
 are not willing to appear to be forced into such a position, and many 
 workmen can be persuaded who cannot be compelled to become 
 unionists. No demand should be made for the unionization of a shop 
 until all reasonable eflforts have been made to secure the allegiance 
 of every employee. It is unwise, moreover, to demand the unionizing 
 of a shop or an industry where there is not sufficient strength to 
 compel it. For every such demand and prior to every such demand 
 there should be months of patient propaganda, and in this, as in 
 every other line of trade policy, compulsion should not be used until 
 persuasion has completely and signally failed" (Mitchell, Organized 
 Labor, p. 284).
 
 557j Establishment of the Closed Shop. 127 
 
 large employers than against smaller ones. Thus in 1893 
 Subordinate Union No. 4 of the Bricklayers and Masons at 
 St. Catherines, Ontario, asked permission to work with non- 
 union men on a job until it could secure a majority, when it 
 was willing to strike for the closed shop. The executive 
 board of the national union, in passing upon the petition, 
 ruled that it was "illegal " for members of any subordinate 
 union to " work with non-union men inside of their legal 
 jurisdiction,"^ although in 1891 the board had acted favor- 
 ably upon a similar petition from the subordinate union at 
 South Oil City, Pennsylvania. Here the employer whose 
 shop it was hoped to unionize after organizing a majority of 
 its employees was the Standard* Oil Company. The sub- 
 ordinate union was strictly enjoined to "use good judg- 
 ment " and " not to estrange " the " good will " of the 
 company.^ 
 
 No closed-shop union allows members on their own initia- 
 tive to go to work in "unfair" or "scab" shops. The 
 unions will not admit the plea that the member entered such 
 employment in order to unionize the shop. A member who 
 violates this rule is " scabbed." Moreover, most unions do 
 not allow their members on their own initiative to go to 
 work in an ordinary non-union shop. As early as 1874 the 
 Molders provided that local unions should not permit their 
 members to work in " scab or non-union shops " unless there 
 were " positive hopes of reclaiming such shops. "^ This reg- 
 ulation was highly commended by the editor of the Iron 
 Molders' Journal. " Years of experience," he declared, 
 " must have convinced all that no shop can be regained 
 simply by allowing union men to work therein. . . . The 
 idea of opening shops to get union men in and eventually 
 making it a union shop is ' played out ' ; it has never been 
 done, but simply because the class of men who could regain 
 
 ^ Twenty-eighth Annual Report of the President and Secretary, 
 1893, p. 13- 
 
 * Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the President and Secretary, 
 1891, p. Ixxxii. 
 ' Iron Molders' Journal, October, 1874, P- 69.
 
 128 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [558 
 
 the shop, will not go into it."^ In practically all of the 
 closed-shop unions which have their trades well organized, 
 union members must secure the consent of their union 
 before going to work in any shop other than a closed one. 
 In poorly organized trades where the open shop largely 
 prevails such consent is rarely required. 
 
 In some cases the national unions have themselves speci- 
 fied in what open or non-union shops union men shall be al- 
 lowed to work and when strikes shall be called for the closed 
 shop. Thus, the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel 
 and Tin Workers for many years " opened " non-union mills. 
 Union men were from time to time encouraged to obtain 
 work in such mills in order gradually to work out the 
 " blacksheep " or non-union men. The mills were not 
 allowed to remain " open " indefinitely if the attempt to 
 unionize them failed. After a certain period the union men 
 were called out, and the mills reverted to the " blacksheep."^ 
 In 1904 the Association provided that not more than three 
 mills should be " opened " at one time,^ and that union mem- 
 bers sent into them should be allowed only ninety days in 
 which to unionize them.* A union member sent into a mill 
 which had been " opened " was regarded as a union mission- 
 ary. If he was lax in seizing opportunities to induce non- 
 unionists to become members, he was condemned as one 
 who had betrayed a trust.® In former years many mills were 
 unionized by this method, but since the decline in the power 
 of the Amalgamated Association practically all aggressive 
 tactics have been dropped.® 
 
 ' Iron Molders' Journal, October, 1874, p. 69. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Convention, 1900, p. 5727. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Convention, 1904, 
 p. 7099. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Convention, 1904, p. 
 6879. 
 
 ' Proceedinefs of the Eleventh Annual Convention, 1886, pp, 183^ 
 i8do. 
 
 * Some unions lay more stress on a written agreement for the 
 closed shop than others. In practice it makes little difference 
 whether an agreement is signed. As soon as the employer, either 
 expressly or tacitly, recognizes the right of union members to 
 exclusive employment, the closed shop has been secured. A union
 
 559] Establishment of the Closed Shop. 129 
 
 In many shops the unions are greatly embarrassed in 
 organizing the men by the hostility of the employer toward 
 organized labor. Thus the employer will not hire union 
 men to do any work. If by chance union men do get into 
 his employ and the fact is discovered, they are discharged. 
 Very often it is essential to a union to gain control over 
 anti-union shops when they are of sufficient importance to 
 prevent effective control over the trade if left unorganized. 
 Unions are also eager to unionize such establishments be- 
 cause prestige is thereby given the union to a far greater 
 extent than would be the case if a friendly shop of the same 
 importance were unionized. Occasionally when an employer 
 announces that he intends to run an anti-union shop, the 
 unions address an appeal to his employees asking them to 
 leave his service. This rarely succeeds in its object. Even 
 if it does, unless non-union men are scarce, only temporary 
 concern is caused the employer. A boycott may also be 
 instituted to destroy the "unfair" employer's business. If 
 these methods fail or if they do not appeal to a union as 
 likely to be effective, the plan usually adopted, if the shop 
 is to be unionized, is to allow union members to work there 
 " under cover," that is, without the employer's knowing that 
 they are unionists. 
 
 When a union man works " under cover," he does so with 
 the express permission of his organization. Very often 
 when he applies for employment at an anti-union shop he 
 gives an assumed name, or if he gives his real name, it is 
 frequently after his name has been erased from the regular 
 union roster and placed upon a " secret list.'"^ Once em- 
 ployed, he quietly begins to gather recruits among those 
 workmen who appear most amenable to persuasion. Secrecy 
 is enjoined upon all the new members he obtains. Other 
 unionists are instructed to apply for such vacancies as occur 
 in the shop. Thus by the secret introduction of union men 
 into the shop from the outside and by patient propaganda 
 
 in any event governs its members through its own rules (Amalga- 
 mated Sheet Metal Workers' Journal, June, 1908, p. 215). 
 * Buchanan, The Story of a Labor Agitator, pp. 39-41. 
 
 9
 
 130 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [560 
 
 among the non-union employees the work of unionizing 
 goes on. 
 
 From time to time reports of progress are made to the 
 local union or district council. In some cases it may be 
 months or even years before the shop is sufficiently organ- 
 ized to justify any open action. Finally, when enough 
 members have been obtained to promise a successful issue, 
 the union suddenly reveals to the employer the fact that 
 many of his men are unionists and demands that he make 
 the shop a closed one. If he complies, the non-unionists are 
 given the alternative of joining the union or seeking other 
 jobs. Very often the fact that he has been secretly ensnared 
 incenses the employer, and the union has to strike. Although 
 the employer may defeat the strike, he can never feel sure 
 that union men are not again at work in his shop trying to 
 organize it. He may require all his employees to sign an 
 " iron-clad " agreement not to affiliate themselves with any 
 labor union while in his service, but he knows that in spite 
 of every precaution union men may be working in his shop. 
 There is a wide-spread feeling among the unionists that it is 
 legitimate in industrial warfare to conceal the fact that they 
 are unionists. In this spirit many union men are willing 
 to sign an " iron-clad " agreement, although they never 
 intend to keep it. 
 
 In the early days of American trade unionism working 
 " under cover " was a much more common practice than at 
 present. Formerly the unions frequently planned by this 
 means to open shops to unionists rather than to close them 
 to non-unionists, but during the past twenty years prac- 
 tically all such movements have been instituted with the aim 
 of establishing the closed shop. Consequently when it is 
 found impossible to gain sufficient recruits in an anti-union 
 shop to warrant a strike, the union members employed 
 therein are required to seek employment elsewhere.^ Some 
 unions would be gratified if their employers could be led to 
 agree to maintain open shops. A very large part of the 
 
 ^Lithographers, Constitution, 1901, Constitution of Subordinate 
 Associations, Art. IX, Sec. 3.
 
 561] Establishment of the Closed Shop. 131 
 
 membership of the Commercial Telegraphers, for example, 
 is enrolled on a " secret list." 
 
 Local unions are ordinarily allowed to send men into 
 anti-union shops when they see fit, but in a few unions, 
 as for example the Lithographers and the Plumbers, the 
 matter is regulated by national rules. In a few unions the 
 plan of concealing the membership of unionists has even 
 been used on a national scale. Thus, in 1899 the Flint Glass 
 Workers undertook to unionize the trade by sending mem- 
 bers " under cover " into all non-union plants. Some of the 
 factories were more quickly organized than others, and ar- 
 rangements were made that the unions should withhold their 
 demands until all the factories were in position to act. On 
 a date fixed by the national officers the proprietors of all 
 the factories were apprised of the fact that the union had 
 control and that strikes would be called unless it was recog- 
 nized.^ In 1902 the president of the union reported that 
 recourse had again been had to working " under cover " in 
 order to establish the closed shop in the factories of the 
 United States Glass Company.^ 
 
 A second method of introducing the closed shop into the 
 establishments of anti-union employers is to make conces- 
 sions to the men in the shop in order to induce them to join 
 the union in a body. Such concessions may take the form 
 of an " amnesty " for past offenses against the union or a 
 reduction in the initiation fee. Under an " amnesty " work- 
 men are admitted to a union " without regard to their past 
 record," and without their being subject to "fines, pains or 
 penalties " which have been imposed upon them. On cer- 
 tain occasions national and local unions have proclaimed 
 "general amnesties" to all "unfair" men. Thus in 1868 
 the Printers provided for a " general amnesty " for three 
 months.^ At present, however, the use of " amnesties " 
 is more restricted. The executive council of the Typo- 
 
 * Reports of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Organizer, 1899, 
 
 Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Convention, 1902, p. 60. 
 ' Barnett, p. 308.
 
 132 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [562 
 
 graphical Union, for instance, has power to declare an 
 "amnesty" only within the jurisdiction of a particular local 
 union. Such amnesties are rarely declared except when a 
 local union is about to make an attempt to unionize an 
 establishment. 
 
 An "amnesty" is an inducement to join only to "scabs" 
 and other persons who have incurred the displeasure of the 
 union, but a reduction in the initiation fee is an inducement 
 to the ordinary non-unionist, particularly in those unions 
 where the initiation fee is high. Among the Table Knife 
 Grinders, the Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, and 
 some other unions it is not uncommon for reductions to be 
 made in the initiation fee if all the non-unionists in a shop 
 join simultaneously. In 1900 the Table Knife Grinders 
 voted that cards be granted to workmen in shops " in a body " 
 for one dollar per man and fifty cents per boy.^ The regu- 
 lar initiation fee at the time was twenty-five dollars. 
 
 Ordinarily an " amnesty " is granted to all the men in a 
 shop, but occasionally some " scab" may be so objectionable 
 to the union that he will be excepted. No union makes con- 
 cessions to a body of " unfair " men with the intention 
 merely of opening the shop to unionists. If a minority hold 
 out and refuse to join the union, or if some are excepted 
 from the amnesty, such workmen will be required to seek 
 employment elsewhere. The policy of the unions is similar 
 where a reduction in initiation fees is offered to the men in 
 a shop. If the latter do not accept the union's proposition 
 " in a body " or by a substantial majority, the terms are with- 
 drawn. The reduction in the fee is the price which the 
 union pays for a closed shop. Usually financial concessions 
 are not made to the employees unless the shop is an impor- 
 tant one. Small non-union shops are not considered dan- 
 gerous to the welfare of the union except in trades where 
 the small shop is the prevailing type of business unit. Weak 
 unions are more likely than strong ones to make concessions 
 to non-members, since they cannot so easily bring pressure 
 to bear on workmen to join. 
 
 ^ Report of the Fifteenth Convention, ipco, p. 14.
 
 563] Establishment of the Closed Shop. 133 
 
 So far we have considered the establishment of the closed 
 shop as brought about by organizing the workmen in a 
 shop. There is also another way of securing the closed 
 shop ; that is, by inducing the employer to unionize his shop. 
 In many cases employers have signed closed-shop agree- 
 ments when there was not a single union man at work in 
 their shop. All unions of any importance maintain a corps 
 of business agents and organizers one of whose chief duties 
 is to persuade employers that it is advantageous to run 
 union shops. Local business agents of the unions, in par- 
 ticular, are supposed to be constantly on the alert to secure 
 the " signatures of employers to contracts and agreements 
 where such exist and have not been signed by all said em- 
 ployers and ... to endeavor to unionize all shops not thor- 
 oughly unionized."^ Special committees are also frequently 
 appointed to treat with an employer concerning the estab- 
 lishment of the closed shop. 
 
 The unions of the building trades, perhaps, have made the 
 most frequent use of this method. In many industries work- 
 men remain with one employer for months or even years. 
 While there are some who work in the shop only for a brief 
 period, the personnel of the shop changes very little during 
 the period in which a union can expect to unionize it. In 
 the building trades, on the contrary, the changes in the per- 
 sonnel of the shop are very rapid. While most contractors 
 employ certain workmen steadily as far as possible, it is 
 rarely the case that the " gang " working for a contractor 
 on one building will be the same as that on another building 
 constructed immediately thereafter. A job in the building 
 trades must be union when it begins, or it is not likely to be 
 union at all. Consequently the building trades unions often 
 go to a contractor to whom work has been let and ask that 
 he conduct the job on the closed-shop plan. 
 
 To aid them in securing the immediate recognition of 
 their demands from contractors the unions urge prospective 
 builders to insert in their specifications a clause requiring 
 
 ^ Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen, Constitution, 1900, Consti- 
 tution and By-Laws for the Government of Local Unions, Sec 10.
 
 134 ^^^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [564 
 
 bidders to agree to hire only union labor in case contracts 
 are awarded them.^ If a building is to be erected for busi- 
 ness purposes, threats are often made that a boycott will be 
 declared against the owner unless he gives the work to a 
 union contractor. By political influence the building trades 
 unions have also frequently succeeded in getting city coun- 
 cils and school boards to provide that union men only shall 
 be given employment in the construction or repair Of mu- 
 nicipal buildings.^ All unions make strong efforts to secure 
 the exclusive employment of union men in a new mill or 
 factory. The Amalgamated Window Glass Workers, for 
 example, for some time have made provision that no mem- 
 ber shall go to work in a factory until the proprietor has 
 signed an agreement.^ 
 
 While the majority of closed shops are established on the 
 initiative of the union, it sometimes happens that employers 
 of their own accord decide to hire union men exclusively 
 and notify the union and their employees to that effect. 
 The employer may be a union sympathizer, or he may con- 
 sider it advisable from a business standpoint to run a union 
 shop. Many employers who have formerly been union men 
 are heartily in sympathy with the unions. On the other 
 hand, other employers are led to establish closed shops by 
 business considerations, as for example the desirability of 
 using the label. Certain employers have petitioned again 
 and again that their factories be taken over by a union so 
 that they may be awarded the use of its label.* Such occur- 
 rences lead the unions to believe that the label is the " most 
 potent weapon . . . to-day for securing the closed shop."' 
 
 ^ The Carpenter, May, 1898, p. 6. 
 
 * Official Journal of the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and 
 Paperhangers of America, December, 1900, p. 6; The Carpenter, 
 February, 1900, p. 10; Painters' Journal, August, 1899, p. 4. 
 Similarly, city councils have provided for the exclusive employment 
 of union men as teamsters, steam engineers, and street cleaners. 
 
 » By-Laws, 1904, Art. I, Sec. 9. 
 
 * United Garment Workers, The Weekly Bulletin, September 9, 
 1903. P- 4- The use of the label is sometimes withheld from shops 
 because of improper sanitary conditions, and so on, and not merely 
 because they do not employ all union men. 
 
 ' Furriers' Journal, April, 1908, pp. 13-14.
 
 565] Establishment of the Closed Shop. 135 
 
 Open-shop employers also recognize that in some industries 
 the label is " the key locking the door of the closed shop."^ 
 
 Members of certain employers' associations which have 
 closed-shop agreements with the unions are required to 
 maintain closed shops under penalty of expulsion. If a 
 non-union or open-shop employer joins such an association, 
 he is compelled to see that all of his work people join the 
 proper union. ^ Local employers' associations which have 
 entered into " exclusive " agreements with trade unions 
 require all their members to run closed shops. ^ Some 
 agreements for the closed shop have also been made by dis- 
 trict and national associations of employers, in which the 
 unions did not in return agree to work only for the mem- 
 bers of the association. Notable examples of such agree- 
 ments have been those between the Longshoremen and the 
 vessel owners' associations of the Great Lakes prior to 1909 
 and the agreement between the Coopers and the Machine 
 Cooperage Employers' Association in 1905.* The greater 
 part of the agreements made between trade unions and na- 
 tional, district, or local employers' associations have not 
 specified that the closed shop shall prevail in all establish- 
 ments represented in the associations. Thus, in the agree- 
 ments made by the Iron Molders with the Stove Founders' 
 National Defence Association it was provided for many 
 years that employers who were running union shops at the 
 time the agreements were signed should continue to do so, 
 but that proprietors of open and non-union foundries were 
 not to be required to run closed shops.^ 
 
 " Closed-shop movements " are usually undertaken by the 
 unions during prosperous seasons, or in years when the de- 
 mand for men is active. At such times the union can read- 
 ily place in employment any men who are thrown out of 
 work by strikes to unionize non-union plants. The unions 
 
 * The Open Shop, September, 1905, p. 416. 
 
 * Carpenters and Builders' Association of Chicago, Constitution 
 and By-Laws and Membership List, 1897, By-Laws, Sec. 23. 
 
 » See p. 61. 
 
 * The Elevator Constructor, February, 1905, p. 16. 
 » Iron Molders' Journal, May, 1900, p. i.
 
 136 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [566 
 
 at such times are quick to demand the closed shop as soon 
 as they have a few men in a plant. In less prosperous sea- 
 sons the unions are far less active and much slower in calling 
 strikes to establish the union shop, since the men thus thrown 
 out of work are a burden to the union. If the situation 
 becomes very bad, not only will union members be allowed 
 to work under open-shop conditions but they may even be 
 sent into anti-union shops " under cover " to work for non- 
 union wages. 
 
 i
 
 CHAPTER VIL 
 The Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 
 
 Two different methods of enforcing the closed shop after 
 it has been established have been developed by the American 
 trade unions. They are known respectively as the " card 
 system " and the " check-off system." The former is much 
 the older and more widely used of the two, and it will be 
 considered first. In the final part of this chapter the 
 methods used by trade unions to control the employment of 
 their members in non-union shops will be briefly discussed. 
 
 The card system. — In 1807 a proposal was made in the 
 Philadelphia Typographical Society that membership cards 
 be issued to affiliated journeymen.^ This was probably the 
 first occasion on which the use of union cards was suggested 
 in America. The resolution was defeated, but not long 
 afterwards many of the local typographical societies began 
 to issue cards to members who wished to travel. This was 
 done because all of the societies strongly objected to work- 
 ing with " strange " journeymen. In local unions in other 
 trades, membership cards were first adopted chiefly for local 
 use, and were first used in the larger cities where it was 
 impracticable for each journeyman to be acquainted with all 
 his fellow-members. By about 1840 the membership card 
 had come into general use. 
 
 Since 1890 the membership card has been largely super- 
 seded for local use by the " working card," which differs 
 from the membership card in that it is periodically renewed 
 on the payment of dues.^ Various names are given to the 
 " working card " in different unions, such for example as 
 " due book," " due card," " pass card," and " register check." 
 In addition to the working cards of single unions two other 
 
 ^ Barnett, p. 284, n. 
 
 *The working card was first used by the Typographical Union as 
 early as i860 (Ibid., p. 295, n.). 
 
 137
 
 138 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [568 
 
 kinds are in use. The " interchangeable working card " is 
 issued by two unions which claim jurisdiction over the same 
 work. The " allied trades card " is issued by combinations 
 of unions which together enforce a joint closed shop. At 
 least as early as 1892 the allied trades card was in use 
 among local building trades councils.^ 
 
 There is general similarity in form among all working 
 cards. Upon them are inscribed the name of the issuing 
 union, the name of the member to whom the card is granted, 
 and the length of time for which the card is to run. The 
 signature of a union official and, in many cases, the seal of 
 the union are also attached. Cards are usually issued quar- 
 terly, though some unions have monthly cards, while others 
 have semi-annual or annual cards. In many unions, as for 
 example the Plumbers,^ the color of the card is changed 
 each month or quarter. The due book or due card is a 
 form of the working card designed to save the expense of 
 issuing new cards periodically, and also to afford an account- 
 ing check on the financial officers of local unions. When 
 dues are paid, a stamp resembling in appearance an ordinary 
 postage stamp is affixed in a designated space in the book 
 or on the card.^ 
 
 The financial secretaries of local unions usually issue 
 working cards to members on the last meeting night in the 
 month or quarter. Occasionally cards will be given to a 
 person who is in arrears for dues,* but as a rule they are 
 not issued to any one until all his dues, fines, and assess- 
 ments have been paid. When members are admitted to the 
 union, they are given working cards immediately. Some- 
 times they are allowed to pay their initiation fees and ad- 
 vance dues in installments. Interchangeable working cards 
 are obtainable only upon payment of dues in the proper 
 union. The allied trades card, as already noted, cannot be 
 
 ^ The Painter, February, 1892, p. 4. 
 
 ^ Constitution, 1897, Art. VIII, Sec. 2. 
 
 ' Brewery Workmen, Constitution, 1903, Art. XIII, Sees, i, 2. 
 
 * This is done frequently during dull seasons. See Flint Glass 
 Workers, Proceedings of the First Biennial and the Twenty-third 
 Convention, 1901, p. 58.
 
 569] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 139 
 
 secured until a workman obtains a membership or working 
 card in the union of his trade. ^ All unions forbid members 
 to lend or alter working cards with intent to defraud. Cer- 
 tain restrictions are also imposed upon the granting of cer- 
 tificates to replace cards reported as lost or stolen. 
 
 Instead of a working card, the Marine Engineers, the 
 Hotel and Restaurant Employes and Bartenders, the Street 
 and Electric Railway Employes, and the Shingle Weavers 
 use a button, which is displayed on the coat or cap. Local 
 unions of the Teamsters also have frequently used buttons. 
 The United Mine Workers in 1902 adopted a " working but- 
 ton " in certain districts where the operators had forbidden 
 the union to examine working cards upon their premises. 
 At one time the Denver- and Philadelphia^ building trades 
 councils issued both a card and a button. A proposal to 
 substitute a button for the working card was defeated at the 
 convention of the Iron, Steel and Tin Workers in 1905.* 
 Working buttons, like working cards, are issued monthly, 
 as in the case of the Shingle Weavers ; quarterly, as in the 
 case of the United Mine Workers ; or yearly, as is done by 
 the Marine Engineers." The Mine Workers distinguish the 
 different quarters of the year by different numbers and dif- 
 ferent colors on the buttons. The color or size of the but- 
 ton may also be varied to indicate to what branch of a union 
 a member belongs. This is done by the Hotel and Restau- 
 rant Employes and Bartenders.® 
 
 The button is defective as a device of identification since 
 it does not contain the owner's name. If it falls into the 
 hands of a non-union man, he can therefore pass himself 
 off as a unionist more easily than with a union card. The 
 chief advantage of the button, from the union point of view, 
 is that it is a more patent mark of identification. A non- 
 
 * See p. 100. 
 
 * The Labor Compendium, August, 1905, p. 10. 
 » Ibid., December, 1905, p. 3. 
 
 * Journal of the Thirtieth Annual Session, 1905, p. 7439. 
 
 'The Marine Engineers require dues to be paid in advance for 
 the entire year before the button is issued. 
 •Constitution, 1901, Art. XIII, Sec. 2.
 
 140 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [570 
 
 unionist, without a button, is very conspicuous in a shop 
 under union control, and there is no chance of his being 
 overlooked. Besides, in some unions like the Hotel and 
 Restaurant Employes and Bartenders the button serves 
 partly as a label to indicate to customers that union labor is 
 employed. In the same way, also, it enables persons friendly 
 to a union to discriminate against non-members. Union 
 teamsters will at once give the right of way to a street-car 
 motorman with a union button on his cap, but they will delay 
 as much as possible if the motorman wears no button. In 
 cities like Chicago where traffic is congested effective block- 
 ades can be established very quickly without appearing 
 intentional. 
 
 Besides requiring that their members shall carry a card 
 or a button to distinguish them from non-unionists, the 
 unions provide for the inspection of cards and buttons. In 
 practically all of the older closed-shop unions it was origi- 
 nally the duty of each member to ascertain for himself 
 whether his fellow-workmen were unionists.^ As long as 
 shops employed a small number of men this was not an 
 insuperable task, but with the increase in the number of 
 employees in the shop this method of inspection in most 
 unions has become impracticable. 
 
 In two national unions, the Seamen^ and the Musicians, 
 members are still required to ascertain whether their fellow- 
 workmen are unionists in good standing. The local secre- 
 taries of the Seamen ordinarily know whether there will be 
 non-union men in the crew of a vessel on which it is pro- 
 posed to ship union members. The burden on members is 
 thus somewhat lightened. The Musicians make one excep- 
 tion to their rule. Local leaders of theatre orchestras are 
 required to ask for the cards of travelling members per- 
 forming at theatres.^ The Hatters have a rule of long 
 
 ^ Massilon Miners' Association, Constitution, 1864, p. 9, Sec. 28. 
 See also rules of the Boston Journeymen Bootmakers of 1840 in 
 Commonwealth v. Hunt, Thatcher's Criminal Cases, 609. 
 
 ' Lake Seamen, Constitution, 1907, By-Laws, Sec. 15. 
 
 s Constitution, 1908, By-Laws, Art. VI, Sec. 19, B. In his report 
 for 1908-1909 the secretary of the Musicians complained that the
 
 57i] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 141 
 
 standing that a union journeyman, before introducing to an 
 employer a hatter who appHes for work, must examine his 
 register check or travelHng card.^ A few other unions, such 
 as the Barbers, place the responsibility for the inspection of 
 cards or buttons in the smaller shops upon all union mem- 
 bers at work there. 
 
 Most unions, however, have delegated the duty of card 
 inspection to a shop officer, known usually as the " shop 
 steward," or to a "shop committee."^ In the larger cities 
 many unions employ a business agent, " walking delegate," 
 or "patrolman," one of whose duties is to discover any non- 
 union men at work in his district. In some cases the busi- 
 ness agent takes over all the work of card inspection from 
 the shop stewards or committees, but more often he acts in 
 conjunction with them. In those districts of the United 
 Mine Workers in which cards are used they are inspected 
 by the " checkweighman."^ Allied trades councils often 
 employ a business agent, one of whose duties it is to inspect 
 or to supervise the inspection of the allied trades working 
 cards. 
 
 examination given to cards of travelling musicians was often of the 
 " flimsiest character." 
 
 'National Trade Association of Hat Finishers of the United 
 States of America, Constitution, 1863, Art. IX. When a hatter 
 applies for work in a union factory, he is not allowed to go to the 
 foreman or employer. He must hand his travelling card or register 
 check to one of the journeymen in the shop. The latter then pre- 
 sents the card to the employer with the remark, " Journeyman on 
 turn." This means that the owner of the card is seeking employ- 
 ment. The employer may then " shop," that is, hire, the applicant or 
 not as he sees fit. 
 
 • The steward has different names in different unions. Some of 
 these are " local delegate," " shop delegate," " ship's delegate," " shop 
 collector," " shop secretary," " shop monitor," " card man," " chapel 
 chairman," "job steward," and "preceptor." The committee is 
 variously known as the "lodge," "shop," "mill," or "pit committee." 
 
 Shop stewards and committees are elected in some cases by the 
 members at work in the shop and in others by the local union. In the 
 building trades the first man to go on a job is usually required to 
 act temporarily as the steward. Some unions, as for example the 
 Bricklayers and Masons, provide that when members go to work on 
 a job and find that it has no steward, they shall prefer charges 
 against the members hitherto employed there. 
 
 » The checkweighman is a miner in the pay of the union who 
 stands at the pit entrance and sees that coal is properly weighed 
 and credited.
 
 142 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. \_S72 
 
 When new employees come to work in a closed shop, the 
 steward or a member of the shop committee, as the case may 
 be, asks to see their cards. This request is made either 
 immediately after their employment begins or within a very 
 short time. An examination of the cards or buttons of all 
 the men in the shop is also made at stated intervals, the 
 first working-day of each month or quarter being the day 
 generally selected.^ In those unions where the steward is 
 also a collector of dues he makes his rounds on pay days. 
 Closed-shop agreements often specify that the authorized 
 officers of a union while inspecting cards shall not be inter- 
 fered with by the employer. ^ Union members who refuse 
 to exhibit their cards or fail to show proper respect to the 
 steward or committee while performing this duty are gen- 
 erally subject to a fine.^ A steward, business agent, or com- 
 mittee that fails to obey the rules regulating card inspection 
 is subject to a similar penalty.* When a card or button has 
 been passed as valid, it is in nearly all unions restored to 
 the owner, who is expected to carry it at all times. In the 
 Hatters, however, as soon as a union journeyman is 
 " shopped " he must deposit his register check with the shop 
 steward.^ The United Mine Workers also have a rule in 
 some of the bituminous coal fields that members shall leave 
 their cards in the possession of the checkweighman.® The 
 cards are returned when their owners wish to obtain em- 
 ployment elsewhere. 
 
 There is at least one instance in the early days of Amer- 
 ican trade unionism of the performance of the combined 
 
 ^ In the anthracite coal mines controlled by the Mine Workers 
 this day is known as " button day." In some unions, like the 
 Stereotypers and Electrotypers, stewards or business agents may 
 examine the cards in a shop whenever they see fit. 
 
 'Bricklayers and Masons, Thirty-fifth Annual Report of President 
 and Secretary. 1900, p. 4. 
 
 ^ Elevator Constructors, Local Union No. 2, Constitution, 1905, 
 Art. XXIII, Sec. S- 
 
 * Bricklayers and Masons, Forty-first Annual Report of President 
 and Secretary. 1906, p. 2)7', United Garment Workers, Proceedings 
 of the Ninth Annual Convention, 1900, p. 7. 
 
 'Journal of the United Hatters, February, 1903, p. 12. 
 
 • District No. 8, Constitution, 1903, Art. X, Sec. 2.
 
 573] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 143 
 
 duties to shop steward and business agent by a committee. 
 The Philadelphia Cordwainers in 1806 appointed a " tramp- 
 ing committee " whose business it was to " watch the Jers 
 [that is, journeymen] that they did not scab it. They were 
 to go their rounds every day to see that the Jers were honest 
 to the cause." Service on the committee was obhgatory, 
 and no compensation was given for it. It soon came about, 
 however, that " the body thought it requisite to take one 
 man instead of three for the tramping committee and they 
 paid him ; they took one Nelson for the business."^ In all 
 likelihood Nelson was the first American " walking dele- 
 gate." The Pittsburgh Cordwainers in 181 5 also had " tramp- 
 ing Committees ... go round and inspect the shops . . . 
 to see that none were working unlawfully."^ At Hudson, 
 New York, the same policy was pursued by the Cordwainers 
 in 1836.^ Again on March 3, 1856, the Cigar Makers' As- 
 sociation of Maryland appointed a committee of five " to 
 go round to the shops to see if any of the cigar makers are 
 working against the rules of the association."* 
 
 The earliest use in any trade union of the term " steward " 
 which we have found was in 1837 in the Journeymen Black 
 and White-Smiths' Beneficial Society of the City and County 
 of Philadelphia. This organization had a steward in each 
 shop whose duty it was to investigate and report on the 
 cases of workmen who applied for relief out of the general 
 funds. ° There is no evidence that they were instrumental 
 in enforcing the closed shop, but in 1857 we find that local 
 unions of the Stone Cutters had " shop stewards " who were 
 employed in this manner.® 
 
 There are also some unions which impose the duty of 
 inspecting working cards upon the employer or his repre- 
 sentatives. The most important organizations in this group 
 
 ' Commons and Gilmore, Vol. Ill, pp. 75-76. 
 » Ibid., Vol. IV, pp. 29, 34. 
 *Ibid., p. 280. 
 * MS. Minutes. 
 
 » The Black and White-Smiths' Society v. Van Dyke-, 2 Wharton's 
 Pa. Repts., 309. 
 « Monthly Circular, August, 1857, p. 3.
 
 144 -^^^^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [574 
 
 are the Plumbers, the Horseshoers, the Musicians, the Ma- 
 rine Engineers, the Printing Pressmen, and the Theatrical 
 Stage Employees. The first three unions sometimes make 
 the employer responsible for employing non-unionists when 
 unionists are available.^ If he hires non-unionists he is 
 fined.^ His responsibility ceases when union men have been 
 hired. He is not expected to see that they keep in good 
 standing. In " one-man shops " in all trades the employer 
 is required to ascertain whether his " extra help " is union, 
 and he must also see that his apprentices or helpers hold 
 cards if they are required to do so.^ 
 
 The Printing Pressmen require the foreman of a shop to 
 hire none but union men when they are available.* He must 
 ask applicants for work whether they are union men, and 
 demand to see their cards. For violation of this rule the 
 foreman is fined. The other unions of the printing trades 
 imitate the Pressmen to some degree, but they are by no 
 means so severe with foremen who fail in their duty. The 
 Marine Engineers provide that members sailing as chief 
 engineers must employ " brother engineers " as assistants if 
 possible.^ Foremen in some unions are required to inspect 
 cards, even after the men have been hired. As noted above, 
 the Musicians authorize local leaders of theatre orchestras 
 to call for the cards of all travelling musicians before begin- 
 ning an engagement with them.^ The Theatrical Stage Em- 
 ployees provide that the master machinist shall demand to 
 see the cards of all persons coming to work in a theatre as 
 
 ^This is done by the Plumbers and Horseshoers only when the 
 employer is a member of an association with which an " exclusive " 
 agreement has been signed. 
 
 ' International Horseshoers' Monthly Magazine, January, 1908, 
 p. 27; Plumbers, Gas and Steam Fitters' Official Journal, May, 1899, 
 p. 13; Musicians, Local Union No. 161, Washington, D. C, Consti- 
 tution, n. d., Art. XX, Sec. 2. 
 
 » Frequently an employer, to secure himself against any difficulty 
 with the union, voluntarily examines the cards of all applicants for 
 work. See Journal of the United Hatters, December i, 1898, p. 2. 
 
 * Constitution, 1909, By-Laws, Art. IV, Sec. I. _ , 
 
 ' Constitution, 1904, Constitution for Subordinate Associations, 
 Art. IX, Sec. 3. 
 
 *See p. 140.
 
 575] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 145 
 
 stage employees.^ Local unions have sometimes required 
 foremen to make a regular examination of cards. Thus the 
 Bricklayers' Protective Association of Philadelphia in 1885 
 made it " the duty of the foreman or oldest hand on each 
 job to examine the cards every Tuesday morning of the 
 different members working with him and allow no member 
 to work unless he is in good standing."^ Most unions, how- 
 ever, do not desire to trust the employer or a foreman with 
 the enforcement of union regulations.^ 
 
 Despite the elaborate machinery which the unions have 
 developed for this purpose, the enforcement of the closed 
 shop depends largely on the vigilance of individual unionists. 
 Foremen and employers often neglect to ask for an appli- 
 cant's card, and in many shops stewards, business agents, 
 and shop committees become careless in the performance of 
 their duties. In many strong unions members are urged to 
 request to see the cards of their fellow-employees and to 
 display their own cards in turn.* As soon as a non-unionist 
 is discovered at work in a closed shop the fact is reported 
 to the local union. He is asked to make application for 
 union membership and, perhaps, to deposit with the union 
 a part of the initiation fee.° If he does as requested, the 
 non-unionist is then ordinarily given a " working-permit "^ 
 which entitles him to work in that shop or in any other union 
 shop until his application for membership has been acted 
 upon. In some unions the permit must be secured from the 
 
 > Constitution, 1898, By-Laws, Art. I, Sec. 8. 
 
 * Constitution, By-Laws and Rules of Order, 1885, By-Laws, Art. 
 VI, Sec. 3. 
 
 » In 1898 the Potters indefinitely postponed the consideration of a 
 resolution which provided that " all bench bosses, foremen and others 
 in authority " should see that all men under their supervision held 
 union cards (Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Convention, 1898, 
 p. 32). 
 
 * The Carpenter, August, 1901, p. 3; Electrical Workers, Constitu- 
 tion, 1905, Art. XXVI, Sec. 15. 
 
 ' Painters' Journal, June, 1893, p. 2. In case a workman does not 
 have the money to make an advance payment, practically all unions 
 will accept an order on the employer for the necessary amount. If 
 his application for admission to membership is refused, whatever he 
 has paid is refunded. 
 
 •A "writing" is the term used by the Cloth Hat and Cap Makers. 
 
 10
 
 146 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [576 
 
 business agent before employment begins.^ Similarly, when 
 union members are in arrears for dues- or when travelling 
 members do not have their cards,^ they must either secure a 
 permit or make a deposit with the union. 
 
 When non-unionists refuse to apply for membership in 
 the union or when members in arrears refuse to make pay- 
 ment, a request for their discharge is made to the foreman 
 or to the employer. Some unions, as for example the Spin- 
 ners and the Tin Plate Workers,* go no further than this, 
 and do not strike if the employer refuses. If the employer 
 has signed a closed-shop agreement with a union, less diffi- 
 culty is ordinarily experienced in securing the discharge. 
 When an employer has given a bond to employ union men 
 only, he is still less inclined to deny the union's request." 
 The strike, however, is the weapon on which the enforce- 
 ment of the card system depends. Some unions, as for 
 example the Pattern Makers, " pull " their members out of a 
 shop one by one when it is found impossible to secure the 
 discharge of a non-unionist. In the building trades unions, 
 on the other hand, business agents and even shop stewards 
 are authorized to call a strike immediately if a non-union 
 man is found at work on a union job.® This policy is partly 
 due to the transitory nature of building operations. The 
 great mass of unions, on the other hand, will not allow 
 strikes to be called against non-union men unless, as is 
 required in other strikes, they have the sanction of the local 
 or national union. 
 
 iThe International Horseshoers' Monthly Magazine, July, 1902, 
 p. 18. 
 
 The Granite Cutters' Journal, September, 1902, p. 7. 
 
 3 Iron Molders' Journal, December, 1894, p. 3. 
 
 * Proceedings of the Fifth Convention, 1903, p. 299; Proceedings 
 of the Eighth Convention, 1906, pp. 536. 579. 
 
 ' In some unions such bonds are frequently given. See, for 
 instance, The Painter, August, 1889, p. i. 
 
 « Bricklayers and Masons, Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual 
 Convention, 1891, p. 89; New York Building Trades Council, Con- 
 stitution and By-Laws, 1910, Sec. S7- In the Stone Cutters the shop 
 steward has authority to " rap on his chisel " and call an immediate 
 strike against a non-union man.
 
 577] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 147 
 
 The check-off system..'^ — The check-off system has been 
 used almost exckisively in the two industries of bituminous 
 coal-mining and window glass manufacture. From the union 
 standpoint the check-off system works with much less fric- 
 tion than the card system. The latter, as has been indicated, 
 involves the issue of cards or buttons, their inspection by 
 union representatives, appeals to employers to discharge 
 workmen, and finally, the calling of strikes. Under the 
 check-off system almost the entire burden of enforcing the 
 closed shop is thrown upon the employer. He is required 
 to deduct dues, fines, and assessments from the wages of 
 his men. 
 
 In the bituminous coal fields of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, 
 Iowa, Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Indian Terri- 
 tory, Wyoming, and Montana the United Mine Work- 
 ers have signed numerous agreements with mine operators 
 in which it is specified that the latter shall, upon receipt of 
 " proper individual or collective continuous order," deduct 
 dues and other assessments which the union authorizes.^ In 
 some agreements, as for example that made by District No. 
 II with the Indiana Bituminous Coal Operators for 1906- 
 1908, it was provided that deductions shall be made from 
 the wages only of such miners or mine laborers as " give 
 their consent in writing" or furnish ''properly signed au- 
 thority."^ As such an arrangement does not preclude the 
 open shop, the Mine Workers endeavor, wherever possible, 
 to obtain agreements in which the " check-off " is applied to 
 all persons in a mine over whom the union claims jurisdic- 
 
 ' The section here published, relating to the check-off system was 
 published substantially in its present form, in the Johns Hopkins 
 Circular, April, 1910. In the Quarterly Journal of Economics for 
 August, 191 1, Mr. F. A. King has an interesting account of the 
 " Check-Off System and the Closed Shop among the United Mine 
 Workers," which, unfortunately, appeared too late to be of service 
 in the present connection. 
 
 2 State Agreement between the Illinois Coal Operators' Association 
 and the United Mine Workers of America, District No. 12, 190S-1910, 
 
 P- 24- . . . ^ , 
 
 ' Terre Haute Agreement between Indiana Bitnmmous Coal 
 Operators and United Mine Workers of America, District No. 11, 
 15K36-1908, p. 20.
 
 148 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [578 
 
 tion. In order to protect the operators from suits by indi- 
 vidual miners to recover the amounts deducted from their 
 wages the union agrees to furnish, on demand, a collective 
 order authorizing deductions to be made.^ 
 
 In some agreements certain restrictions are placed upon 
 the collection of fines imposed by a local union. Thus the 
 Illinois State Agreement for 1908-1910 specifies that " in 
 case a fine is imposed, the propriety of which is questioned, 
 the amount of the fine shall be withheld by the operator until 
 the question has been taken up for adjustment and a deci- 
 sion has been reached." Other agreements provide that no 
 fine shall be deducted from wages unless it has been ordered 
 by a two-thirds vote of the local union.^ Exceptions of this 
 kind are intended to prevent the operators from being forced 
 to endorse palpably unfair treatment of a miner by the local 
 union. The agreement of District 5 for 1906-1908 exempts 
 the operators from making deductions for initiation fees 
 " unless locally agreed between the Operators and Miners."^ 
 
 In some districts a maximum amount of " check-off " is 
 provided for, the exact amount being subject to local adjust- 
 ment.* The agreements usually provide also that before the 
 operator pays anything to the union, he shall have the right 
 to abstract from the wages of all employees sums due him 
 for rent, tools, smithing, powder, and so forth. He is also 
 authorized to deduct assessments for accident and death 
 benefit funds and the money due from each man toward the 
 salary of the checkweighman.^ After the operator has made 
 
 ^Agreement and Scale of Wages between Operators and Miners, 
 United Mine Workers of America, District 21, in the Bituminous 
 Mines of Texas, 1906-1908, Sec. 6. 
 
 ' Official Mining Scale of Association of Pittsburgh Vein Operators 
 of Ohio for their Mines in Belmont, Harrison and Jefferson 
 Counties, Ohio, and the United Mine Workers of America, 1904- 
 1906, Rule 9, pp. 11-12. 
 
 * Pittsburgh District No. 5, Pennsylvania, Scales and Constitution, 
 1906-1908, p. II. 
 
 * Agreement between the Members of the Iowa Coal Operators' 
 Association and the Members of District No. 13, United Mine 
 Workers of America, 1904-1906, Resolution No. 15, p. 32. 
 
 "Pittsburgh District No. 5, Pennsylvania, Scales and Constitution, 
 1906-1908, pp. 11-12.
 
 579] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 149 
 
 the deductions from wages, he is required to send to the 
 union a statement " showing separately the amount of dues, 
 assessments, fines and initiations collected " and the names 
 of those employees whose dues, and so on, for any reason 
 remain uncollected.* If the union wishes, he must also 
 afford it the means of ascertaining the correctness of his 
 representations.^ 
 
 The early " rules for working " of the Window Glass 
 Workers, Local Assembly 300, Knights of Labor, provided 
 merely that manufacturers whose factories were organized 
 should " deduct money from members' wages, when re- 
 quested to do so by the chief preceptor."^ Certainly as early 
 as 1899 provision was made that manufacturers were to 
 deduct from the earnings " of all members " a specified per- 
 centage to be paid to the organization as dues.* A statement 
 was also to be furnished by them showing from whom such 
 collections had been made. While this arrangement, literally 
 interpreted, applied only to members of Local Assembly 300, 
 in reality it covered all the workers in an organized estab- 
 lishment, since no one was allowed to obtain employment 
 therein without a " clearance card " issued by the preceptor 
 of the factory where he had last worked. To obtain such a 
 card a glass worker had to be a Knight in good standing. 
 The " rules for working " also provided that if any employer 
 overpaid a glass worker or failed " to deduct and forward " 
 the amount due the Assembly, he was to be " held liable for 
 payment of the same." His action was also to be considered 
 an infraction of the " working scale," and members of the 
 Assembly, if they chose, could then cease work without giv- 
 ing him the usual seven days' notice.^ 
 
 * Joint Interstate Agreement between the Southwestern Interstate 
 Coal Operators' Association and the United Mine Workers of 
 America, 1904-1906, p. 9. 
 
 * The check-off system prevails widelj' in the coal-mining unions of 
 southern Wales. It is also found among the unions in the English 
 manufactured iron trade (Webb, Industrial Democracy, p. 210). 
 
 ' Scale of Wages and Rules for Working, for Blast ending June 
 30, 1894. 
 
 * Ibid., for Blast ending June 15, 1900, Sec. 33. 
 » Ibid.,
 
 150 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [580 
 
 In 1901 each member of the Assembly was required before 
 going to work " to sign and place on file with each manu- 
 facturer " an agreement authorizing the latter to deduct 
 dues and so on, from his wages. ^ Finally, in 1905, it was 
 provided that all window glass workers accepting employ- 
 ment under the union scale must " agree to and authorize 
 the manufacturer, company, firm or their agents to deduct 
 one per cent, of all their earnings," and in addition " waive 
 all legal rights to recover money obtained from wages." At 
 each factory the manager or his representative was compelled 
 to acquaint all workmen with the above requirement before 
 giving them employment. If workmen were hired who re- 
 fused to assent to deduction from their wages, the firm or 
 company employing them was required to pay their dues, if 
 need be, out of its own pocket.^ Similar rules are in force 
 at the present time, but have been largely ineffective since 
 1905 owing to the weakened condition of the Assembly. 
 
 For a number of years the Amalgamated Window Glass 
 Workers of America^ and the Window Glass Cutters and 
 Flatteners' Association'* have also required employers to 
 deduct the dues of members from wages. Their rules have 
 been very similar to those of Local Assembly 300. No one 
 of these three organizations, it may be noted, has ever used 
 the term " check-off " to describe its method of collecting 
 dues. The expression originated with the Mine Workers, 
 and they appear to be the only union using it. 
 
 In a few other trades the check-off has been adopted by 
 local unions. In Baltimore, for example, certain clothing 
 manufacturers have been accustomed to deduct union dues 
 from the wages of employees eligible to membership in the 
 
 * Scale of Wages and Rules for Working for Blast ending June 
 30, 1901, Sec. 35. 
 
 * Ibid., for the Blasf of 1905 and 1906, Sec. 28. 
 
 * Window Glass Workers' Association of America, Scale of Wages 
 and Rules for Working, for Blast 1902-1903, Sec. 25. In 1904 this 
 union became the " Amalgamated Window Glass Workers of 
 America." 
 
 * Scale of Wages and Rules for Working for Blast of 1900-1901, 
 Sec. 26. See also Scales for 1905-1906, 1906-1907, and February, 
 1909-September, 1909.
 
 581] Mechanism of Closed-Shop Enforcement. 151 
 
 United Garment Workers. These employers are anxious to 
 keep their shops union in order to have the use of the label, 
 and it has been found difficult to do this by the card system, 
 since a large percentage of the employees are women who 
 take little interest in union matters. In 1902 the union iron 
 workers at Birmingham, Alabama, went on strike to compel 
 the employers " to deduct from the pay of the men their 
 dues and hand them over to the union officials."^ 
 
 The limited use of the check-off system can be explained 
 on two grounds. First, the unions desire to remain as self- 
 reliant as possible, and it seems a confession of weakness 
 for them to ask employers to assist in collecting dues. It is 
 also thought that if a union comes to depend on employers 
 for keeping up its organization and expects them, as it were, 
 to be its " walking delegates," the interest of its members in 
 union affairs will gradually diminish. Consequently, if the 
 employers ever determine to run open or non-union shops, 
 the union will be less able to defeat the movement. Secondly, 
 employers are ordinarily disinclined to assist actively in any 
 plan to compel their employees to join a labor organization.^ 
 The check-off system among United Mine Workers has, 
 however, not been opposed in most of the districts by the 
 operators. Under the card system it frequently happened 
 on " card day " that workmen who held important posts 
 about a mine had neglected to secure a card. This some- 
 times necessitated the tying up of a whole shaft. Because 
 of such difficulties the operators felt that it would be more 
 economical for them to collect dues for the union. 
 
 The Mine Workers themselves regard the check-off sys- 
 tem as a useful arrangement. In a union composed of work- 
 men of so many nationalities there are many difficulties in 
 
 ^ Bulletin of the National Metal Trades Association, November, 
 1902, p. iSi. 
 
 * " Trade unionism demands that our cashiers . . . collect from its 
 members in our employ the amount due the unions and the sum thus 
 collected is paid into their treasury to further encroach upon our 
 business. That does not sound a bit good, does it?" (Address of 
 Mr. James W. Van Cleave before Citizens' Industrial Association of 
 America, in Proceedings of the Second Annual Convention, 1904, 
 P- 23).
 
 152 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [582 
 
 the working of the card system. The unions in the window 
 glass industry also seem to have been well satisfied with the 
 plan of having employers deduct dues. But at present there 
 appears to be little desire among unions to substitute the 
 check-off for the card system. 
 
 Union supervision over non-union shops. — Trade unions 
 not only endeavor to keep non-union men from working in 
 shops under union control but they also take measures to 
 keep union men out of non-union shops. Business agents, 
 in particular, are expected to discover whether union mem- 
 bers are working for " unfair " or non-union employers. 
 When it has been shown that a member is guilty of such 
 misconduct, he is subject to fine, suspension, or even expul- 
 sion, but ordinarily he is fined for the first offense. If he 
 violates the rule again, the fine is increased, and on the third 
 offense he is expelled. Some unions, however, will "scab" 
 a member the first time he works in a non-union shop.^ 
 Often a union is forced to relax its rules and allow mem- 
 bers, under certain conditions, to work for a non-union 
 employer. In some cases a mere vote of the union declares 
 certain non-union shops " open." In other unions, members 
 must personally obtain permission from a local union, dis- 
 trict council,^ or the national union.^ When they have ob- 
 tained consent to work in non-union shops, they are often 
 given a written permit.* This serves them as evidence to 
 rebut any charge of " scabbing " that may be brought 
 against them.^ 
 
 * In order to prevent union men from obtaining employment 
 inadvertently in non-union or " scab " shops, many unions publish a 
 list of such establishments in their journals. 
 
 ' United Mine Workers, District No. 13, Constitution, 1006, Art. 
 XII, Sec. 7. 
 » Flint Glass Workers, Constitution, 1909, Art. XXIII, Sec. 3. 
 Printing Pressmen, Constitution, 1903, By-Laws, Art. I, Sec. 5. 
 
 • Flint Glass Workers, Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Annual 
 Convention, 1902, pp. 53, 382, 386. In 1898 the Holders provided that 
 members working in non-union or open shops could not claim or 
 receive financial support if discharged for any reason unless 
 "specifically authorized" by the union "to act in its behalf" (Con- 
 stitution, 1898, New Decisions, No. 31). The Typographical Union 
 will not recognize a strike in an open or non-union office. 
 
 I
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 The Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device. 
 
 To many persons the closed shop seems an arbitrary insti- 
 tution which could well be abandoned without injury to the 
 cause of organized labor. In their view the exclusion of 
 non-unionists from employment is for no ostensible reason 
 except to exercise accidental power or wantonly to deprive 
 certain workmen of a livelihood. The friends of union 
 labor who take this view wish to see the open shop uni- 
 versally established. Under the open shop it is claimed that 
 both union and non-union men would receive fair treatment, 
 as discrimination in employment would not exist. Employ- 
 ers, it is said, would not try to abolish collective bargaining, 
 since they are not only ready but anxious to make contracts 
 with the " proper kind " of unions. Finally, the friends of 
 the open shop declare that a properly conducted union can 
 attract non-unionists to itself by means of beneficial, social, 
 and educational features. To illustrate how well labor 
 organizations can succeed without discriminating against 
 non-members, attention has usually been called to the four 
 great railway brotherhoods, the Locomotive Engineers, the 
 Railway Conductors, the Locomotive Firemen and Engine- 
 men, and the Railroad Trainmen. These organizations are 
 admittedly strong and vigorous beyond the majority of 
 American trade unions, although they do not refuse to work 
 with non-unionists. 
 
 In answer to such criticism the closed-shop unions have 
 explained at some length their motives in requiring the ex- 
 clusive employment of union members. In the first place, 
 they claim that the closed shop is necessary to enforce dis- 
 cipline over union members. If the union scale and the 
 rules are to be enforced, there must be some sufficient pen- 
 
 153
 
 154 ^^^^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [584 
 
 alty attached to their violation. The fear of exclusion from 
 employment is considered the " best possible means " of 
 holding members " to fidelity to the union. "^ There is no 
 penalty which a workman fears so much as that of being 
 deprived of his employment and possibly of his livelihood. 
 This is the punishment administered to him in case he vio- 
 lates union rules or wage scales in an establishment where 
 the closed shop is enforced. Neither social ostracism nor 
 loss of the right to share in accumulated union funds can 
 compare in rigor with exclusion from a trade. 
 
 Moreover, it is argued that unless a union has complete 
 control over the workmen in a shop it cannot prevent non- 
 unionists from rendering its rules ineffective. Particularly 
 is this the case if the open shop involves the use of indi- 
 vidual agreements.^ Non-union men are then not restrained 
 from working under whatever conditions they see fit. Al- 
 though union men may agree among themselves to work 
 only for certain wages, non-unionists often prove " sub- 
 servient " enough to work for less. The employer naturally 
 favors the cheaper men and will endeavor to fill his shop 
 with them. Accordingly one by one union men will be dis- 
 charged when non-unionists can be secured. The open shop, 
 therefore, " means only an open door through which to turn 
 the union man out and bring the non-union man in to take 
 his place."^ " Weak-kneed " union men who do not wish to 
 lose their jobs will follow the example of the non-unionists 
 and accept reductions in their wages. In a short while the 
 wage scale has been hopelessly undermined. " The result 
 of a number of non-unionists cutting wages or the price of 
 work is like the existence in a community of healthy people 
 
 ^At the trial of the Boot and Shoemakers of Philadelphia in 1806 
 a witness stated that the object of the society was "to support the 
 price of wages," and that " the scab law was the stimulus to the 
 members to support what they undertook ; there must be a stimulus 
 in every society to keep the members to their common engagements " 
 (The Trial of the Boot and Shoemakers of Philadelphia. Taken 
 by Thomas Lloyd. Reprinted in Commons and Gilmore, Vol. Ill, 
 p. 86). 
 
 ' The International Woodcarver, July, 1905, p. 4, 
 
 ' Darrow, The Open Shop, p. 26.
 
 585] Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device. 155 
 
 of a man afflicted by a contagious disease."^ The open shop 
 thus compels organized workmen to give way to the un- 
 organized.^ 
 
 The closed-shop unions also claim that the open shop 
 makes collective bargaining to a large extent ineffective. 
 Employers in trade agreements are " constantly seeking to 
 extend the responsibility of trade unions." "To meet this 
 responsibility it is incumbent upon the labor organizations 
 to exercise jurisdiction over all the men employed in the 
 same shop, over all those working at a given trade or calling, 
 otherwise the unions will be powerless to enforce any con- 
 tract."' A bulletin of the American Federation of Labor 
 sets forth that " the agreement ... of organized labor with 
 employers depends for its success not only upon the good 
 will of the union and the employer toward each other, but 
 that neither shall be subject to the irresponsibility or lack 
 of intelligence of the non-unionist or his failure to act in 
 concert with, and bear the equal responsibility of, the union- 
 ists."* Only when the closed shop is enforced are all work- 
 men in an establishment equally responsible for the ob- 
 servance of a collective contract with the employer, since 
 all are then parties to it and can be severely disciplined if 
 they violate its provisions. Only under such conditions do 
 the unions consider that collective bargaining becomes " com- 
 plete, effective, successful." 
 
 One point which the unions have not emphasized is the 
 part that the closed shop plays in excluding from the trade 
 persons who are ineligible to union membership. The ques- 
 tion is often asked, however, why it is not possible for 
 
 » Mitchell, p. 281. 
 
 * Statements like the following are easy to find in the journals of 
 closed-shop unions: "The open shop means to unionism just what 
 slow poison means to the human system." " On the open shop ques- 
 tion there is nothing to arbitrate. Our unions cannot consent to 
 arbitrate a question that involves their very lives." " The strongest 
 argfument against the open shop is, that if the employer were per- 
 mitted to hire non-union workmen, the union workmen would soon 
 be displaced and union standards broken down." "' An establishment 
 cannot long remain . . . part union and part non-union." 
 
 ' The Elevator Constructor, December, 1904, p. 26. 
 
 * The Granite Cutters' Journal, November, 1903, p. 5.
 
 156 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [586 
 
 unions to discriminate against " scabs " and inadmissible 
 persons and still make no objection to non-unionists eligible 
 for membership and with clear records. The unions some- 
 times answer that union men in a shop have no means of 
 ascertaining whether a non-unionist is working below the 
 established rate. This, however, is not a valid reason, as 
 uniform scales are often paid in open shops. The one reason 
 why the unions have preferred to discriminate against all 
 non-union men rather than against certain classes of non- 
 unionists has been the constant friction with the employer 
 involved in the latter method. With every new case of ex- 
 clusion the unions were compelled to explain why they took 
 such action. By requiring the employer to recognize the 
 rule that none but union members should be hired the ex- 
 clusion of undesirable persons became " automatic," and 
 each case of discrimination did not become " the occasion of 
 a new difficulty."^ 
 
 The unions also claim that the continued presence of non- 
 union men in a shop is likely to make for a completely non- 
 union shop. A prominent spokesman for the unions recently 
 said : " The promotions, the easy places, the favors, all fall 
 to the non-union workman, whose presence and whose atti- 
 tude is ever helpful to the employer and a menace to his fel- 
 low workman. If some one is to be relieved for a day, if a 
 laborer is given extra work, if a workman is specially com- 
 missioned for an important duty, and if some one is to be 
 promoted it is always the non-union man. This is his 
 reward for minding his own business. . . . Union men are 
 much like other men. They cannot long be persuaded to 
 pay dues, to make sacrifices for their organization, when 
 they find that others are favored or promoted over them, 
 or receive special privileges because they are non-union 
 men."^ 
 
 That many open-shop employers have discriminated 
 against union men cannot be denied. Although they have 
 usually avoided "victimizing" them openh , yet they have 
 
 ' Barnett, p. 289. 
 
 ' Darrow, p. 27. 1
 
 587] Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device. 157 
 
 easily found pretexts on which to discharge union men, espe- 
 cially officers and " agitators." The laws passed in several 
 States and by Congress against the discharge of workmen 
 because of union membership have been for the most part 
 held to be unconstitutional.^ The only effective defense that 
 a union can make against an employer who discriminates 
 against its members is to discriminate against non-unionists.* 
 In certain closed shops the danger that the employer will 
 gradually eliminate the unionists is not present. In these 
 shops all workmen of a certain class receive uniform pay, 
 and work the same number of hours under identical condi- 
 tions. The advocates of the closed shop contend, however, 
 that even if all employees are paid at the same rate and no 
 preference is shown to non-unionists, there would still be, 
 in most trades, a disastrous falling off in union membership 
 in such shops. Non-union men would receive all the advan- 
 tages of the improvement of working conditions obtained by 
 the union, and yet contribute nothing to the support of the 
 organization. When union members see that they are bear- 
 ing burdens from which the non-unionists escape, they will 
 be likely to drop their membership.^ 
 
 That this does not always occur was proved by the suc- 
 
 ^ See, for example, Adair v. United States, 208 U. S. 161. 
 
 ' " From the economic point of view the fewest difficulties are 
 encountered in the case of a union that is compelled to fight for the 
 mere right to exist. When employers undertake ... to discriminate 
 constantly against union men . . . the organization is likely to dis- 
 integrate unless it resists the employment of non-union men. ... It 
 is hard to criticize a union for meeting discrimination with dis- 
 crimination " (Bullock, "The Closed Shop," in Atlantic Monthly, 
 October, 1904, p. 435). 
 
 » Bricklayers and Masons, Thirty-eighth Annual Report of Presi- 
 dent and Secretary, 1903, p. 432. In discussing the open-shop agree- 
 ment which the Printing Pressmen signed with the Typothetae in 
 1904, the International Bookbinder (September, 1904, p. 168) offered 
 the following comment : " We cannot see the benefit that would be 
 derived by allowing employers to give to non-union men the same 
 wages that union men have struggled and fought so hard to obtain. 
 There may be cases where non-union men may join the organization 
 if their wages have been increased thereby, but how can we expect 
 union men to pay their dues and assessments if the organization 
 they are members of secures increase of pay for men who are not 
 members, and in most cases enemies of unionism, and will not under 
 any condition join the union."
 
 158 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [588 
 
 cess of the open-shop agreements formerly in force in the 
 coal-mining and stove-founding industries. Under them the 
 unions made great increase in membership. This result was 
 due to three characteristics of these agreements. In the 
 first place, they were made by associations of employers and 
 not by individual employers. The associations promptly 
 fined any member who violated the agreements, as they 
 wished to keep all employers on the " same competitive 
 level." Secondly, the agreement covered " not only mem- 
 bers of the union, but all positions of the same grade, 
 whether filled by union or non-union men."^ Finally, pro- 
 vision was made for the reference of "all unsettled com- 
 plaints either against unionists or non-unionists to a joint 
 conference of the officers of the union and the association." 
 Arbitration was used in settling " all matters of discrimina- 
 tion as well as matters of wages, hours and rules of work, 
 . . . all questions of hiring, discharging and disciplining 
 both union and non-union men."- Thus in every direction 
 the unions were guarded against discrimination. 
 
 To the railway unions and brotherhoods also there is little 
 danger in the open shop. Railroad corporations do not 
 bargain individually with their employees, but fix a uniform 
 rate for all workmen of a certain class. All the conditions 
 of employment apply to union men and non-unionists alike. 
 The only exception to this rule is found in the case of certain 
 railroads in the South which pay a lower scale of wages to 
 negro than to white firemen. This is considered a serious 
 menace by the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, but 
 they have as yet been unable to secure any change. The 
 four great railway brotherhoods are also protected by the 
 fact that the handling of trains is a highly responsible task 
 which cannot be undertaken on short notice by untrained 
 men. The union garment worker in an open shop must con- 
 stantly meet the competition of the unorganized newly- 
 arrived immigrant, but there is little danger that union 
 
 ^ Commons, " Causes of the Union Shop Policy," in Proceedings 
 of the American Economic Association, 1905, p. 146. 
 *Ibid., p. 147.
 
 589] Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device. 159 
 
 train crews, no matter how opposed a railroad corporation 
 may become to labor unions, will be gradually discharged 
 to make way for " independent " workmen.^ In all highly 
 skilled trades there is less necessity for the closed shop than 
 there is in those demanding less skill. 
 
 The railroad brotherhoods find it possible under the open 
 shop to secure a large membership and to enforce their rules 
 because of the exceptional value of their beneficiary fea- 
 tures. These organizations issue insurance against death 
 and disability in policies of $1,000 or more. The Loco- 
 motive Engineers, in fact, will issue a policy for as much as 
 $4,500.^ In the closed shop unions such as the Carpenters, 
 Cigar jMakers, Granite Cutters and Tailors death benefits 
 are paid only in amounts varying from $25 to $550.^ No 
 disability benefits are paid whatever. ^Members of these 
 unions can secure insurance from old line insurance com- 
 panies at rates but slightly in advance over those charged 
 for union benefits, but railroad work is so highly dangerous 
 that old line insurance companies exact a relatively high 
 premium for policies issued to railway employees. So well 
 have the railroad brotherhoods managed their beneficiary 
 systems that the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, for 
 instance, are able to grant insurance to members for " con- 
 siderably less than one half of company rates."* The ad- 
 vantage to be derived from affiliation with such an organiza- 
 tion is so obvious that a railroad employee, facing daily the 
 possibility of accident, is anxious to obtain membership. 
 Again, since the violation of brotherhood rules may lead to 
 expulsion from membership and loss of the right to partici- 
 pate in beneficiary features, members of the organization 
 are seldom in need of other discipline. On the other hand, 
 in those unions where the benefits paid possess no special 
 
 'As a matter of fact, on most of the important railway systems 
 the brotherhoods have in their membership approximately seventy- 
 five to ninety-five pe." cent, of all the employees eligible to member- 
 ship, vj- 
 
 * Kennedy, p '■i'5 
 ' Ibid., pp. 
 
 * Ibid., p. 
 
 \
 
 i6o The Closed Shop m American Trade Unions. [590 
 
 attractiveness, it needs something more than the mere loss 
 of their receipt to prevent "scabbing" and other infractions 
 of union rules. 
 
 The Switchmen, the Maintenance-of-Way Employees, the 
 Railroad Telegraphers, and the unions whose members are 
 employed in railway shops also work in accordance with 
 general orders covering both union and non-union men. 
 The first three organizations pay substantial benefits and 
 thus attract a large part of the men. The Boilermakers, the 
 Machinists, the Metal Polishers, the Iron Molders, the Pat- 
 tern Makers, and other metal trades unions, however, find 
 that the open shop in the railroad shops works to their de- 
 cided disadvantage, and have done all in their power to 
 unionize the shops. 
 
 The attitude of the few other open-shop unions can be 
 easily explained. The Masters, Mates and Pilots is an 
 organization of officers which has as its chief purposes the 
 payment of insurance and the securing of legislation. It is 
 not a trade union and hence has no need of the closed shop. 
 The National Association of Steam Engineers is an educa- 
 tional organization which has " nothing to do with the ques- 
 tion of wages." The Steel Plate Transferers, as noted 
 above, ^ can scarcely be called a trade union, as it does not 
 attempt to regulate wages. The Letter Carriers and the 
 two associations of Post Office Clerks, who also make no 
 demand for the closed shop, are all under the classified ser- 
 vice of the Federal Government, and their wages, hours, and 
 other conditions of employment are regulated by Congress. 
 There is no possibility, therefore, that wages will be cut by 
 non-union men, or that preference will be shown them. The 
 associations were formed chiefly to get civil-service em- 
 ployees in the post-office department to act together in pre- 
 senting petitions to Congress through the postmaster general. 
 
 In sharp contrast to the policy of the Letter Carriers and 
 the Post Office Clerks, the printing trades unions have en- 
 forced the closed shop in the United Si7~tes Government 
 
 * See p. 31.
 
 59i] Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Device. i6l 
 
 Printing Office and in the Canadian Printing Bureau. These 
 unions claim that through the closed shop petty tyranny on 
 the part of foremen is prevented. It is to be noted that only 
 a small part of the members are in government employ. The 
 closed shop does not here serve the interest of the govern- 
 ment employees so much as that of the union as a whole. 
 The exclusion of " scabs " and undesirable persons is na- 
 tional, and is presumably in the interest of all unionists. 
 If the Government Printing Office were non-union, to that 
 extent the system of national exclusion would be weakened.^ 
 A " sentimental "^ argument has also been advanced in 
 favor of the closed shop as a trade-union device. Non- 
 union men, it is said, are " industrial parasites " who do 
 nothing to help organized labor fight its battles. " To 
 say that the fruits of victory should come without effort, 
 nay, as a reward for cowardice and disloyalty, is neither 
 right in the realm of ethics or in the practical work-a-day 
 world. "^ Consequently the non-unionist " should not con- 
 sider it a grievance if at the conclusion of a successful strike 
 he should be invited to join the union or work only with 
 other non-unionists. . . . All that is demanded is that the 
 cost and burdens of union management and action be fairly 
 shared by these men in the future."* This argument fails 
 to take account of the real motives for excluding non-union- 
 ists. Although resentment has often been aroused against 
 non-unionists because they escape paying dues, as for ex- 
 ample among the Paper Makers, there would be no discrimi- 
 nation against them if their presence did not endanger the 
 enforcement of union wages and shop rules. Among the 
 Railroad Trainmen, for instance, there have been no pro- 
 tests against the employment of non-members for "senti- 
 
 * " To recognize the principle of the union shop in all other parts 
 of the nation, and then except the government employees, only means 
 to use the government service as a club to destroy all that the honest 
 and unceasing efforts of organized labor have accomplished " 
 (American F'^ l^rationist, January, 1905, p. 14). 
 
 'So term'- ^^Prof. J. R. Commons in a paper before the Ameri- 
 can Econc 2cO. ho'ociation in 1905. 
 
 ' Darr mev 
 
 * Mi» --.s \ 
 
 V
 
 i62 The Closed Shop hi American Trade Unions. [592 
 
 mental " reasons. This is because the open shop is not a 
 Tnenace in railroad vvork.^ 
 
 An argument for the closed shop of which much has been 
 made is that it increases trade-union membership. Expe- 
 rience has shown that there are always a large number of 
 workmen " in and out of the union." They are " in the 
 union " when they obtain a job in a closed shop ; they are 
 " out of the union " when they work in a shop where a union 
 card is not necessary. It has been said that " the mere 
 closing of one door to the non-unionist is the best argument 
 to him for application."^ Instances of marvelous growth in 
 membership following the introduction of the card system 
 have also been frequently reported. 
 
 A recent writer in dealing with a typical American trade 
 union indicates the two ways in which the closed shop in- 
 creases union membership. " In the first place, when the 
 union has once unionized an office, it is able by requiring 
 the exclusive employment of unionists to affiliate with itself 
 every workman who thereafter obtains work in the office. 
 The rule thereby tends to continue a control once obtained. 
 The closed shop rule can be viewed in another aspect as a 
 device for securing the unionizing of offices, and of thereby 
 bringing in new members. If a local union controls a large 
 part of the labor supply, the influence of the closed shop 
 rule as a means of increasing the membership may be very 
 considerable. If, for example, in a community where 500 
 printers are employed, 400 are members of the union, both 
 the non-unionist workmen and their employers will be at a 
 
 ^ In New Zealand, where compulsory arbitration is in vogue, pref- 
 erence is given union men by the arbitration courts. " Among the 
 arguments in favor of preference, the chief is that the unionists go 
 to much trouble and expense to obtain concessions, not only for 
 themselves but for other laborers and that non-unionists can obtain 
 preference by joining the union. Also preference is sometimes 
 regarded as a compensation to unionists for having given up the 
 right to strike. Preference, too, protects active unionists from being 
 victimized by their employers. ... In brief, the question is practically 
 the same as that of the closed shop in the United States " (Le 
 Rossignol and Stewart, " Compulsory Arbitration j ' New Zealand," 
 in Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 19' '. '>8o). 
 
 2 Bookbinders, Official Proceedings of the Si al Conven- 
 
 tion, 1S98, p. 21.
 
 593] Closed Shop as a Trade-Union Deince. 163 
 
 distinct disadvantage. A non-unionist workman, if he can 
 earn the minimum rate, will be eager to secure access to the 
 wider opportunities for employment which the unionist pos- 
 sesses. The non-union employer under such circumstances 
 cannot discharge his workmen and thus reduce expenses so 
 readily in times when business is slack as he otherwise 
 would, for he cannot easily replace his employees from his 
 restricted labor market. At times, for the same reason, he 
 must go outside his home labor market, at expense and in- 
 convenience, to supply himself with printers. But just as 
 the closed shop rule is a powerful instrument for unionizing 
 offices when the union is strong and controls a great part of 
 the labor supply, so it is a hindrance when the union is weak. 
 The unionist and the employer of unionists suffer in this case 
 under the same disadvantage of a restricted labor market 
 as non-unionists and the non-union employer do when the 
 union is strong."^ 
 
 Finally, it has been asserted in defense of the closed shop 
 that the exclusive employment of union men is necessary in 
 many trades because of the legal principle known as the 
 " fellow-servant doctrine." In dangerous employments, it 
 is said, skilled union men run constant risk from having to 
 work with unknown non-unionists. If the latter, by care- 
 less acts, injure unionists, no redress is ordinarily to be had. 
 If the shop is an open one, their discharge cannot be forced. 
 As the common law requires " each to be responsible for the 
 rest," it is maintained by unionists as in accord with the 
 " most elementary principles of self preservation " that they 
 should seek through the union to have some voice in choosing 
 
 ^ Bamett, pp. 290-291. One effect of the closed shop of which 
 Httle mention has been made is that it tends in some unions to make 
 employment more regular for members of the union. Since em- 
 ployers ordinarily hire workmen who are members of the union, no 
 more workmen are brought into the union than are needed. When 
 trade is brisk, forays are made by the union into open shops and the 
 needed men are recruited. Such an argument applies most to those 
 unions which not only force the preferential employment of their 
 m rubers, but also refuse admission to non-unionists when work is 
 slack. Y-""n, however, in ordinary closed-shop unions it is probable 
 that uner .^ •'vment is slightly less among the unionists than among 
 the non 'is in the trade.
 
 164 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [594 
 
 their fellow-employees.^ The fellow-servant argument, like 
 the " sentimental " argument, is an afterthought on the part 
 of zealous unionists and their sympathizers. No union was 
 ever led by such an argument to introduce the closed shop. 
 There are probably few employers who would continue to 
 hire a habitually reckless workman. In a few cases, how- 
 ever, the argument has been seriously considered by the 
 courts.^ 
 
 It will thus be seen that the closed shop is used by trade 
 unions as a device to gain certain ends. It is not an end in 
 itself. It cannot be explained on the grounds of unreason- 
 ing prejudice against non-union men. It is an utterly mis- 
 taken view to regard it as a mere " passing phase " of union- 
 ism. It is also probably safe to say with Mr. John Mitchell 
 that '' with the growth of trade unionism in the United 
 States the exclusion of non-unionists will become more 
 complete."* 
 
 ' Elevator Constructor, October, 1905, p. 15. See also Darrow, 
 pp. 21-22. 
 
 * In rendering the majority opinion in the case of National Protec- 
 tive Association v. Gumming (170 N. Y., 315), Chief Justice Parker 
 of the court of appeals said : " It cannot be open to question but 
 that a legitimate and necessary object of societies like the defendent 
 association would be to assure the lives and limbs of their members 
 against the negligent acts of a co-employee. ... It is well known 
 that some men, even in the presence of danger, are perfectly reck- 
 less of themselves and careless of the rights of others. . . . These 
 careless, reckless men are known to their associates, who not only 
 have the right to protect themselves from such men, but, in the 
 present state of the law, it is their duty through their organizations, 
 to attempt to do so, as to the trades affording special opportunities 
 for mischief arising from recklessness. . . . The master's duty is 
 discharged if the workman be competent, and for his recklessness, 
 which renders his employment a menace to others, the master is not 
 responsible." 
 
 » Organized Labor, p. 285. 
 
 ^r
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 
 
 In the preceding chapter attention was confined to an 
 exposition of the motives which have led the unions to en- 
 force the closed shop. There still remains to be considered 
 how far the closed shop is economically and socially desir- 
 able. This inquiry may be conveniently divided into three 
 parts: (a) the effect of the closed shop upon the economic 
 conduct of industry, (b) its effect upon the welfare of the 
 non-union man, (c) its ultimate effect upon the unions 
 themselves. 
 
 (a) The closed shop and the economic conduct of indus- 
 try. — In recent popular discussion of the closed shop much 
 emphasis has been put upon its uneconomical character. 
 The charge is made that the demand for the exclusive em- 
 ployment of union men, by interfering with the right of an 
 employer to " run his own business," makes high efficiency 
 impossible.^ This argument is based on the fact that the 
 employer, under the competitive system, is alone responsible 
 for the successful conduct of business undertakings. If he 
 fails to produce as well and as cheaply as others do, the loss 
 is his. It is necessary, therefore, for the most economic 
 conduct of business that the employer " should have power 
 to order his own affairs." He " should not be influenced 
 by any other consideration in the hiring of men than the 
 ability, fitness or loyalty of the applicant."- At the same 
 time he should be free to reward exceptional workmen and 
 to discharge those who are inefficient or insubordinate. He 
 
 ^ As early as 1836 the Master Carpenters of Philadelphia asserted 
 their " right as Free Citizens " to run their business as they saw fit 
 (The Pennsylvanian, March 17, 1836, p. 2. Reprinted in Commons 
 and Sumner, Vol. VI, p. 53). 
 
 * Citizens' Industrial Association of America, Proceedings of the 
 Adjourned Session of the First Convention, 1904, p. 11. 
 
 165
 
 i66 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [596 
 
 should be the sole judge as to the kind of machinery, tools, 
 and material to be used. Only in this way, it is argued, can 
 the employer secure that "effective discipline" which is es- 
 sential in bringing about the " highest measure of success 
 ... in industry."^ 
 
 The " essence " of the open shop is that the employer is 
 entirely free " to hire and discharge."^ It gives him, there- 
 fore, the opportunity for initiative, and subjects him to the 
 control of no influence save that of the market. The closed 
 shop, on the other hand, is attacked because it does not leave 
 the employer free.^ It denies him the " right to hire and 
 discharge." If the employer wishes to hire competent non- 
 union men, he is prevented from procuring their services if 
 they cannot or will not obtain union membership. Often 
 he is compelled because of a " waiting list " to hire the union 
 men who have been longest out of employment regardless 
 of their ability or fitness. The "walking delegate"* in 
 some cases, it is said, usurps the employer's prerogative. 
 
 The employer complains that under the closed shop, in- 
 stead of being able to secure workmen regardless of whether 
 they are union or non-union, white or black. Catholic or 
 Protestant, Jew or Gentile, he is compelled to draw from a 
 definitely fixed labor market. Very often, too, this market 
 is severely limited by the refusal of the unions on one ground 
 or another to admit competent workmen to membership.® 
 He cannot hire members of other unions who are competent 
 to do the work because this will at once involve him in a 
 jurisdictional dispute. One trial is enough to demonstrate 
 
 * Citizens' Industrial Association of America, Proceedings of the 
 Adjourned Session of the First Convention, 1904, p. 11. 
 
 » The Open Shop, October, 1906, p. 479. 
 
 » Employers have complained that since they must discharge work- 
 men who refuse to join a union, they virtually act as union organ- 
 izers or business agents. They consider it highly improper that their 
 aid should be requisitioned for trade-union ends. 
 
 * The name " walking delegate " is preferred by most employers to 
 " business agent," the name now more ordinarily used by unions. 
 
 * " Further, by imposing large initiation fees or other penalties, the 
 union may limit its membership, thus shortening the supply of labor, 
 to the injury of the employer and of trade in general" (Statement 
 of Marcus M. Marks, quoted in The Labor Compendium, August 
 28, 1904, p. i).
 
 597] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 167 
 
 the fact that members of rival unions tolerate each others' 
 presence less than they do that of non-unionists. There is 
 then no practicable way in which he can secure additional 
 help when his work increases except by bidding for work- 
 men against other union employers. It is also said that 
 the closed shop serves to prevent the discharge of inefficient 
 employees. If such persons are dismissed from employ- 
 ment, they try to make it appear that they have been " vic- 
 timized " on account of union membership. Often they 
 secure a sympathetic hearing from their union, and the latter 
 forces their reinstatement. 
 
 Another evil attributed to the closed shop is that it estab- 
 lishes a minimum wage which becomes virtually also a maxi- 
 mum wage. This is said to produce a disastrous " dead 
 level " of efficiency throughout an establishment and to dis- 
 courage effort.^ Accordingly union control is declared to 
 be " absolute death to individual effort and ambition," and 
 to cause the degeneration of " mental and moral fiber."- 
 Restriction of output is the direct result of such conditions. 
 Especially harmful does the closed shop become, in the opin- 
 ion of its opponents, when a union requires foremen to obey 
 its rules and to serve the union rather than the employers.^ 
 All closed-shop unions, it is represented, " define the work- 
 man's rights but say nothing of his duties. . . . They destroy 
 shop discipline and put nothing in its place."* 
 
 To these indictments the advocates of the closed shop 
 have made vigorous rejoinder. They assert that while the 
 unions do not allow employers to " victimize " their mem- 
 bers, they do not interfere otherwise with the " right to hire 
 and discharge " as long as all persons who are hired become 
 union members. It is also flatly denied that the minimum 
 wage is usually the maximum, and that production is re- 
 stricted in closed shops. 
 
 ^ The Open Shop, November, 1905, p. 522. 
 
 • Hibbard, " The Necessity of an Open Shop," in Proceedings of 
 the American Economic Association, 1905, p. 181. 
 
 * Bulletin of the National Metal Trades Association, February, 
 1903, p. 80. 
 
 < Walling, "Can Labor Unions be Destroyed?" in World's Work, 
 May, 1904, p. 4757.
 
 1 68 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [598 
 
 The reconciliation of these conflicting statements of facts 
 is possible. The opponents of the closed shop in discussing 
 its economic effects always assume that the closed shop is 
 everywhere the same, and take as typical those unions in 
 which the restrictions on employment are most severe. The 
 advocates of the closed shop assume as typical those unions 
 in which the restrictions are mildest. If reference is made 
 to a preceding chapter/ it will be noted that the unions vary 
 widely in this respect. In some unions, employers are al- 
 lowed to hire only such persons as have already become 
 union members. In fewer cases employers are restricted 
 to hiring persons who have been union members for a fixed 
 period. That such rules are injurious cannot be denied. 
 Compulsory " waiting lists," too, are found in a few unions ; 
 where such lists are in force the employer's right to hire and 
 discharge is almost entirely destroyed.^ ■ In the majority of 
 closed-shop unions, however, we have seen that the employer 
 is allowed to hire non-unionists when competent unionists 
 are not available, or even in many unions when they are 
 available. It is also customary to allow such non-unionists 
 to work a certain period in a shop before being required to 
 join the union. There is little basis for the claim, therefore, 
 that employers are restricted to hiring union men only. It 
 is true that " scabs " and members of rival unions are rarely 
 allowed to work. " Scabs," however, form but a small part 
 of the men in any trade, and agreements between rival unions 
 have now to some extent solved the problem of jurisdic- 
 tional disputes. 
 
 If the union itself is closed, that is, will admit new mem- 
 bers only with great difficulty, union employers have no 
 means of obtaining additional help when their business in- 
 creases. The closed union, however, although it is usually 
 found with the closed shop, is not identical with it. To say 
 that no more members shall be admitted to a union is an 
 entirely different thing from saying that union men shall not 
 
 ' See p. 59 et seq. 
 
 ^According to the Eleventh Special Report of the Commissioner 
 of Labor in 1904 (pp. 20-21), waiting lists were found in only a few 
 unions.
 
 599] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 169 
 
 work with non-unionists. It cannot be denied that the effect 
 of " closing " a union is made economically important by tlie 
 requirement that only members of the union shall be em- 
 ployed. If the union is closed but the shop is open, the 
 excluded workmen alone are affected. But if a closed union 
 enforces the closed shop, workmen, employers, and the con- 
 sumer suffer loss. A highly objectionable feature to be 
 found in certain closed-shop agreements is the provision that 
 employers shall hire only members of a certain local union. 
 The only economic method is to allow the employer to 
 " take on " any one he will as long as such persons join the 
 local union having jurisdiction. 
 
 There is much truth in the charge that some closed-shop 
 unions have prevented the discharge of inefficient workmen 
 on the score of "victimization."^ The older unions have 
 come to understand that nothing is gained by such a policy. 
 They realize that employers cannot destroy the union by 
 " victimizing " members if the persons they hire are required 
 to become members. The closed-shop rule does not neces- 
 sarily require any infringement on the employer's right to 
 discharge. In instances where this right has been limited, 
 use has been made of the power derived from the closed 
 shop to enforce a union rule. It is quite possible for open- 
 shop unions to seek to prevent their members from being 
 dismissed from employment, even though they are incom- 
 petent or insubordinate.^ 
 
 All unions that have advanced beyond the most rudi- 
 mentary stage enforce a minimum wage. The tendency to 
 uniformity and a " dead level " growing out of the existence 
 of the minimum wage can only be connected with the closed 
 shop through some restriction on the right to hire and dis- 
 charge. If the union has a compulsory waiting list, it is 
 easy to see how the minimum wage may become the maxi- 
 mum wage. As has been pointed out, however, compul- 
 
 * Eleventh Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor, 1904, 
 p. 20. 
 
 * Charges to this effect have been freely made against the railway 
 brotherhoods. See, for instance, Fagan, Confessions of a Railroad 
 Signalman.
 
 170 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [600 
 
 sory waiting lists are established in very few unions. Simi- 
 larly, restriction of output is connected with the closed shop 
 only through the waiting list. A great part of closed-shop 
 unions do not have waiting lists. 
 
 It is also charged that the joint and extended closed shops 
 lead to demands upon employers. When satisfactory con- 
 ditions have been obtained in one trade, the men may be 
 called out on strike because " unfair " material is used, or 
 because the open shop exists in an allied trade. Moreover, 
 the closed shop puts work " at the risk of and even invites 
 jurisdictional disputes." Grievances " manufactured out- 
 side the shop " are thus said to be constantly arising. Com- 
 plaint is also made that the closed shop is responsible for 
 many unnecessary shop rules which virtually deprive the 
 employer of control over his business.^ One writer has 
 gone so far as to say that " the amount of restriction which 
 it may be expected to find in ' closed shops ' will certainly 
 amount to one-third of what the output should amount to."^ 
 Statements have frequently been made that the open shop 
 has brought business prosperity to different communities.^ 
 It has been declared that " in no case . . . has the demand 
 for a union shop been accompanied by a proposition for 
 benefit to the employer."* 
 
 Taking up the last of these contentions first, the unions 
 allege that closed-shop agreements are of distinct advan- 
 tage to employers. It is pointed out that in some of the 
 most aggressive closed-shop unions, such as the Bricklayers 
 and Masons, the Longshoremen, and the Printers, local 
 agreements have been " underwritten " by the national union 
 
 ^ " Of course, the gravest phase, to employers, of the 'closed shop' 
 is that the unions, not satisfied with having obtained fulfillment of 
 their demand that their members only be employed, forthwith pro- 
 ceed to assert under their rules the authority to control the shop and 
 the methods used" (The Open Shop, January, 1905, p. 10). 
 
 ^ The Open Shop, January, 1905, p. 9. 
 
 'Thus at a dinner in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, in 1906 one of 
 the speakers asserted that the open shop had proved to be the 
 " greatest factor " in bringing prosperity to the city (The Open 
 Shop, September, 1906, pp. 419-420). 
 
 * Pfahler, " Free Shops for Free Men," in Proceedings of the 
 American Economic Association, 1902, p. 186.
 
 6oi] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 171 
 
 when they provide for the exclusive employment of union 
 members.^ In open shops of most trades the employer is 
 said to be constantly harassed with complaints from indi- 
 viduals. In closed shops all grievances must first be re- 
 ferred to the union, which acts upon many of them unfa- 
 vorably.^ Great stability is given to an agreement when a 
 national union " underwrites " it. It is equally undeniable 
 that most unions which have opportunity to enforce the ex- 
 tended or the joint closed shop have not hesitated at times 
 to strike even when all their demands in the particular shop 
 have been satisfied. Moreover, the closed shop has involved 
 employers in wasteful jurisdictional disputes with which 
 they have no real concern. Were there no closed shop such 
 disputes would be robbed of all their bitterness. 
 
 The unions have also denied in a general way that their 
 shop rules have been unduly restrictive. As a matter of 
 fact, the great open-shop movement which began in 1901 
 was caused primarily by the rapid increase in rules regu- 
 lating the number of apprentices, the kind of machinery that 
 should be used, the methods of shop management, and the 
 like. The connection between the closed shop and arbitrary 
 shop rules is close, but the two are not identical. Arbitrary 
 rules can rarely be enforced except in closed shops. If the 
 union is strong enough to secure the one, it can, if it sees 
 fit, enforce the other. Obviously, however, a closed-shop 
 union need not, and many of them do not, have hurtful 
 shop rules. 
 
 The defenders of the closed shop, however, have not con- 
 tented themselves with endeavoring to answer their oppo- 
 nents. They have tried to show that the closed shop is an 
 advantage to an employer. In the first place, they claim 
 that the closed shop protects fair-minded employers from 
 "cut-throat competition." If an industry is thoroughly 
 unionized, every manufacturer or contractor can tell pre- 
 cisely what his competitors are paying in wages. As wages 
 form the largest item in the average employer's expense 
 
 ^ The Bricklayer and Mason, November, 1903, p. 5. 
 "The Cigar Makers' Official Journal, April, 1899, p. 8.
 
 172 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [602 
 
 account, it therefore becomes possible for him to " figure 
 intelligently on his work," something which he '' could never 
 feel certain of were the open shop to prevail."^ The same 
 shop rules also apply in all union establishments. Under 
 the open shop not nearly the same uniformity in competitive 
 conditions can be secured. The closed shop is a device 
 absolutely essential to the rigid and wide enforcement of 
 union rules. Without it, the "check which the union rules 
 have placed on the unscrupulous employer will be swept 
 aside," and the " fair competitive basis " established under 
 the closed shop will be destroyed.^ 
 
 This argument can be valid only when applied to a sharply 
 competitive industry which is thoroughly unionized. It 
 would be absurd to claim that the closed shop tends to pro- 
 tect employers in the steel industry from " cutthroat com- 
 petition." Likewise it would be extravagant to represent 
 that one employer was put on a " fair competitive basis " 
 with others if his shop alone were unionized. The argu- 
 ment is therefore chiefly applicable to trades, like the build- 
 ing trades, which are highly competitive and fairly well 
 organized.^ Even in the building trades only the larger 
 contractors have ever been placed on a " fair competitive 
 basis" with each other. The small contractor who runs a 
 "one-man shop" is still free to cut prices. 
 
 Secondly, those who uphold the closed shop affirm that it 
 tends to create a greater esprit de corps among the men than 
 the open shop does. Union and non-union men represent 
 two diametrically opposed ideas. The first stand for col- 
 lective, the second for individual action. Consequently, 
 there is constant conflict between the two in the endeavor 
 
 ^ Official Journal of the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and 
 Paperhangers, July, 1904, p. 358. 
 
 ' Kidd, " The Open Shop vs. Trade Unionism," in Proceedings of 
 the American Economic Association, 1905, p. 198. 
 
 * Employers have frequently informed the Cigar Makers, the 
 Garment Workers, the Granite Cutters, the Iron Molders, and 
 building trades unions that they could not afford to unionize their 
 shops unless the establishments of their chief competitors were also 
 unionized. See, for example, The Granite Cutters' Journal, Febru- 
 ary, 1906, p. 4.
 
 603] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 173 
 
 to obtain control over a shop. Because his men do not co- 
 operate, the employer is likely to lose money.^ Therefore 
 as a business necessity open shops must become either union 
 or non-union.' That there should be ill feeling between 
 union and non-union men is easily understood when we con- 
 sider why unions desire the closed shop. Non-union men 
 are the economic enemies of unionists as long as employers 
 resort to individual bargaining or express a dislike for full 
 union control. In most open shops, therefore, there is an 
 element of unrest and dissatisfaction. Even in the organi- 
 zations which do not enforce the exclusive employment of 
 members there is usually not the same cooperation between 
 union and non-union men that there is between the unionists 
 themselves. In particular, efforts are put forth to make the 
 employment of " scabs " unprofitable. For this reason, 
 after a strike of the Trainmen or Firemen has been settled, 
 railroads have almost always discharged their strike-breakers 
 quietly, but as quickly as possible. 
 
 Finally, unionists say that the closed shop is advantageous 
 to employers because in many unions it carries with it the 
 privilege of using a label that has a distinct market value. 
 In the building trades it is represented that a contractor 
 profits by employing unionists exclusively, since business 
 agents always endeavor to secure jobs for " fair" employers. 
 No union solicits work for an open shop.^ A label, how- 
 ever, is an advantage to an employer only under certain 
 conditions. It can be used to best advantage on articles 
 largely purchased by the laboring classes. That a label 
 increases sales on such goods is evidenced by the fact that 
 manufacturers, solely for the purpose of obtaining the use 
 
 * The Bridgeman's Magazine, December, 1904, p. 15. 
 
 * " As the immortal Lincoln said, ' This country cannot long remain 
 half free and half slave.' So say we, that any establishment cannot 
 long remain, or be successfully operated, part union and part non- 
 union " (American Federation of Labor, Proceedings of the Twenty- 
 third Annual Convention, 1903, p. 20, President's Report). 
 
 * " The Bricklayers of New York and of a number of other cities 
 are at times practically a collection agency for their employers. The 
 annual agreement provides that no bricklayer shall work on a build- 
 ing for any one where money is owing to an employer until payment 
 has been made" (The Bricklayer and Mason, November, 1903, p. 5).
 
 174 ^^^<^ Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [604 
 
 of the label, have often asked that their establishments be 
 unionized.^ The labor journals not infrequently contain 
 statements from employers that the closed shop is a " good 
 business proposition."- But the label rarely effects an in- 
 crease in the demand for expensive goods or for articles 
 sold to women.^ It is evident, therefore, that the number 
 of employers who can find an advantage in the use of the 
 labels is small relative to the total number of employers. 
 Business agents are often able to secure jobs for *'fair" 
 building contractors, but if the building industry were thor- 
 oughly unionized, one employer would be able to secure no 
 advantage over others in this way, since all would be equally 
 " fair." 
 
 Neither employers nor unions have had much to say con- 
 cerning the advantages of " exclusive agreements."* This 
 is explained by the fact that such agreements are generally 
 condemned as being in restraint of trade and therefore 
 against public policy. Employers who are parties to them 
 obtain a great advantage over competitors in localities where 
 the unions are strong, since they secure a virtual monopoly 
 of the labor supply. Consequently the employer outside the 
 association is nearly always desirous to enter. He com- 
 plains of the losses that come from having to employ non- 
 union men, and is eager to agree to hire union men exclu- 
 sively. But while the closed shop under such conditions 
 may be an advantage to those employers with whom a union 
 agrees to deal exclusively, the public interest suffers inas- 
 much as competition is effectively stifled. 
 
 To sum up the arguments against the closed shop on the 
 ground that it affects unfavorably the economic conduct of 
 industry, it may be said that the crux of the question is 
 whether or not the " right to hire and discharge " is unduly 
 
 ' See above, pp. 134-135. 
 
 * The International Bookbinder, April, 1905, p. 120. For union 
 comments on open shops that have failed in business see The Granite 
 Cutters' Journal, June, 1905, p. 2; Printing Pressmen, President's 
 Report, 1908, p. 31. 
 
 3 For an interesting discussion of the demand for label goods, see 
 Spedden, p. 74. 
 
 * See above, p. 61.
 
 605] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 175 
 
 restricted under the closed shop. Tlie employer may enjoy 
 the use of a valuable label and may be placed on a " fair 
 competitive basis " with other employers. Individually the 
 employer may reap a gain. But in the long run industry 
 will be carried on less efficiently if by waiting lists or other 
 restrictive devices the union interferes with the employer's 
 hiring and discharging his working force in accordance with 
 his best judgment. Similarly, a " closed union " restricts 
 the employer in his choice of workmen. In those unions in 
 which such practices exist the closed shop is to be con- 
 demned in that it is only through the device of the closed 
 shop that waiting lists and arbitrary restrictions on member- 
 ship can be made workable. 
 
 (b) The closed shop and the non-union man. — The oppo- 
 nents of the closed shop also declare that the closed shop 
 is an injustice to unorganized labor. They assert that the 
 demand for the closed shop " is in fact the demand for the 
 installation of a labor monopoly."^ For a union to exclude 
 non-members from employment is denounced as an act of 
 " criminal selfishness " because it deprives the latter of a 
 property right in which they have as great an interest as 
 unionists." Ten or fifteen per cent, of the working class, 
 it is said, are trying to prevent the remaining eighty-five or 
 ninety per cent, from obtaining employment, although the 
 latter consists more largely of persons, like women and im- 
 migrants, who have special need of protection and assist- 
 ance.^ Trade unions are therefore as " tyrannical " as capi- 
 talistic trusts, for they violate the principle of equal oppor- 
 tunity by aiming to " gain an advantage for the insiders 
 over the outsiders."* The closed shop itself, therefore, is 
 said to be " far from ... a democratic invention," as it is 
 " a means of promoting the interests of a certain group or 
 class against the interests of the mass."^ 
 
 ^ The Open Shop, September, 1906, p. 418. 
 
 'Ibid., November, 1905, p. 516. 
 
 ' Bulletin of the National Metal Trades Association, October I, 
 1902, p. 146. 
 
 * Report of the Industrial Commission, Vol. XIV, 1901, Review of 
 Evidence, p. Ixvii. 
 
 ^ Eliot, The Future of Trade-Unionism and Capitalism, p. 63.
 
 1/6 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [606 
 
 In reply the unions have answered that it is not their pur- 
 pose to estabHsh a labor monopoly through the closed shop, 
 that on the contrary it is the purpose of every union " to 
 get every man following or engaged at a business to affiliate 
 himself."^ To this end vigorous campaigns for members 
 are conducted among non-unionists, and " hundreds of mis- 
 sionaries are at work, in and out of season, urging and 
 pleading with them to enter the wide-open doors of the 
 union. "'^ Furthermore, it is said that even if it is true that 
 ninety per cent, of the wage earners in America are non- 
 union, the great majority of non-unionists are "in occupa- 
 tions in which there are no unions at all, or in which the 
 unions are too weak to think of challenging a contest over 
 the employment of workers outside their organizations."^ 
 
 Here again it seems to the writer that many of the critics 
 of the closed shop have identified it with the closed union. 
 If non-union men have no difficulty in obtaining union mem- 
 bership, it is hard to see how the closed shop can be con- 
 demned as a " criminally selfish " device. Only when a 
 union declares that it will not work with non-members and 
 then refuses to admit the latter to membership can monopo- 
 listic motives properly be charged.* Closed unions, however, 
 are rarely found at present except in decaying trades. The 
 closed shop is ordinarily intended not to restrict membership 
 but to increase it, as has already been shown.^ Even a union 
 which is " closed " and refuses to work with non-members 
 lacks many of the attributes of a capitalistic trust, as it does 
 not aim to undersell non-members or to " exterminate men 
 
 1 Operative Plasterers, Proceedings of the Eighteenth Convention, 
 1904, p. 45- 
 
 * American Federation of Labor, Report of Proceedings of the 
 Twenty-third Convention, 1903, p. 20, President's Report. 
 
 ' Iron Holders' Journal, June, 1904, p. 423. 
 
 *" If a union is working not for the interest of all the men at the 
 trade, but of members who at the time are actually in the union, if 
 it is unduly restrictive . . . then its refusal to work with non-union 
 men is monopolistic and such a union should not be put up on a 
 par with unions that refuse to work with non-unionists in the gen- 
 eral interest of the trade" (Mitchell, p. 283). 
 
 ° See above, p. 162 et seq.
 
 6o7] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. 177 
 
 to raise wages as Trusts have destroyed an excessive stock 
 of goods. "^ 
 
 When all shops are unionized, however, not only will em- 
 ployers be completely at the mercy of organized labor, but 
 non-unionists will also be compelled to obtain union mem- 
 bership whether they wish to do so or not.^ Thus " liberty," 
 "freedom of contract," and the "inalienable right" of a 
 workman to secure employment " where and when he 
 pleases " will be denied. The closed shop, therefore, is said 
 to be " un-American," " un-democratic," and contrary to 
 the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence 
 and in the Constitution of the United States. It injures indi- 
 viduals by impairing their privileges as citizens, and there- 
 fore it is pronounced to be against public policy. In reply 
 the unions which enforce the closed shop maintain that they 
 do not deprive non-unionists of their " right to work " in any 
 real sense, since no man is privileged to take up any employ- 
 ment that appeals to him regardless of the desire of em- 
 ployers.^ The only " right " which an individual mechanic 
 has, if he does not see fit to accept such terms as are offered 
 him, is the right to look for another job.* The unions argue, 
 moreover, that even if they do exercise some compulsion 
 upon non-unionists in order to bring them into membership, 
 
 1 Macgregor, Industrial Combinations, p. 179. It is interesting to 
 note that the Wall Street Journal (October 17, 1903, p. 2) compares 
 the closed-shop union to " a trust which seeks by measures of per- 
 secution to drive an independent merchant out of business." 
 
 * But while some opponents of the closed shop condemn it on the 
 ground that it excludes non-unionists from a livelihood, others, 
 curiously enough, protest that the union aims to bring about a 
 monopoly by " the forcing of all labor " into unions so that the 
 latter " may better be able to dictate terms to employers " (Statement 
 of T. F. Woodlock, Editor of the Wall Street Journal, quoted in 
 The Bricklayer and Mason, November, 1903, p. 2). The Master 
 Carpenters of Philadelphia in 1836 condemned the closed shop 
 because it prevented union members " from working at the same 
 building or in the same shop with any journevTiian who is not a 
 member, thus compelling him to join the Association and contribute 
 weekly his earnings for the support of the idle and discontented" 
 (The Pennsylvanian, March 17, 1836, p. 2. Article reprinted in 
 Commons and Sumner, Vol. VI, p. 52). 
 
 » Stone Cutters' Journal, June, 1904, p. 2. 
 
 «The Bricklayer and Mason, November, 1903, p. 5. 
 
 12
 
 1/8 The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [608 
 
 it is with a view to conferring benefit upon them. The work- 
 man who refuses to join a union, therefore, is said to be 
 injuring himself, since he gains his Hvehhood "at the ex- 
 pense of the permanent interest of all workingmen."^ 
 
 Only on rare occasions have non-union men protested in a 
 body against the establishment of the closed shop. In most 
 of these instances, such as the appeal of non-union miners 
 to the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission,^ there is strong 
 suspicion that the non-unionists took action at the instance 
 of their employers and not upon their own initiative. There 
 is no doubt, however, that many non-unionists in various 
 trades have felt that to be required to become union mem- 
 bers has been an imposition. Those who have been most 
 firmly opposed to joining the union have probably been the 
 exceptional mechanic and the workman of less than usual 
 efficiency. The former feels able to shift for himself, and 
 fears that the rules of the union may keep him from sell- 
 ing his skill as dearly as he might in a free market. The 
 latter is hostile to the closed shop because he is excluded 
 from employment in case he has not sufficient competency 
 at his trade to obtain admission to membership or, if ad- 
 mitted, to receive the minimum rate. 
 
 In the long run the question will probably resolve itself 
 into a consideration of the value of labor organization. Indi- 
 viduals may properly be made to suffer some loss by being 
 compelled to act with others, or by being excluded from 
 acting with others of their class, if it appears that the class 
 as a whole is advanced by such action. What the non- 
 unionist loses in " individual liberty," therefore, may be 
 made up to him if his membership is necessary to enable the 
 union to protect the conditions of work in its trade.' 
 
 Mitchell, p. 278. 
 
 ^ Bulletin of the Department of Labor, May, 1903, .pp. 520-522. 
 
 ' Professor E. R. A. Seligman in an address before the National 
 Civic Federation in 1905 said : " Liberty must be looked at from the 
 social as well as the individual point of view. The individual has 
 become what he is largely through associated effort. This, however, 
 implies a certain subjection of the individual to the group. The 
 liberty that is compatible with social progress involves the readiness 
 of the individual to work for a common end. If this readiness is not
 
 609] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. i 79 
 
 (c) The closed shop and trade unionism. — The final argu- 
 ment directed against the closed shop is that it will ultimately 
 prove the destruction of trade unions themselves. It is 
 claimed that if workmen are induced to join a union through 
 coercion, " the same process which deprives them of their 
 freedom deprives the labor organization of that spirit of 
 brotherhood which is at once the justification of its existence 
 and the inspiration of its power."^ Collective bargaining, it 
 is urged, is highly desirable, but it will be " more speedily 
 and permanently secured by the maintenance of free labor 
 unions than by swelling the ranks of labor unions through 
 processes of compulsion."^ A combination of w^orkmen to 
 be " permanently efficient " must be composed " of members 
 who believe in unionism and are loyal to it ; it must be an 
 army of volunteers and not of drafted men."^ 
 
 In answer to the charges that their members are largely 
 obtained through compulsion, some union leaders have re- 
 torted that " the scruples that the non-unionist is supposed 
 to have against joining the union evidently exist only in the 
 mind of the employer."* In the opinion of these writers, 
 only " scabs," professional strike-breakers, and semi- 
 criminals dislike to join a labor organization. Other union- 
 ists admit that " it is a fact much to be regretted that a large 
 percent of all trade unions in this country consists of so- 
 called forced membership."^ They recognize that by means 
 of the closed shop, social ostracism, and even physical force, 
 union membership has been substantially increased. 
 
 We have already noted that one of the trade-union motives 
 for enforcing the closed shop is that new members may be 
 recruited. It would undoubtedly be disastrous if members 
 were gained in no other way. But it is probably safe to say 
 that most non-union men are not hostile to organization, 
 
 voluntary, it must be developed by persuasion or force." Quoted in 
 the Broom Maker, June, 1905, p. 172. 
 ^ Editorial in The Outlook, July 16, 1904, p. 633. 
 
 * Ibid. 
 
 • Ibid., p. 632. 
 
 < White, p. 179. 
 
 'The Bricklayer and Mason, November, 1901, p. 6.
 
 i8o TJie Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. [6io 
 
 but are merely indifferent toward it. Consequently it is 
 wrong to assume that every man who is compelled by the 
 closed shop to become a union member remains anti-union 
 at heart. Forced members have become in many instances 
 ardent trade unionists. In fact, some of the men who are 
 now national union officers originally joined their respective 
 unions because they were compelled to do so or leave their 
 jobs. On the other hand, many workmen resent having been 
 forced to join an organization. Their resentment may even 
 be carried so far as to induce them to act as informers for 
 employers.^ Certainly no union can afford to neglect the 
 development of social, beneficiary, and other features that 
 will induce men to join of their own accord. Voluntary 
 membership is by all means the best, and a trade union can- 
 not exist long if built on compulsory membership. 
 
 If it be true, as has been said, that " the excesses of union- 
 ism which have done and are still doing the greatest injury 
 to the prospects of the movement are all traceable to the 
 use of the arbitrary and coercive power of the closed shop," 
 it is equally true that the closed shop is responsible for the 
 greatest advances made by unionism. On the one hand, the 
 closed shop, if universally enforced, would afford unions the 
 opportunity to commit gross excesses by virtue of the power 
 lodged with them. On the other hand, the closed shop opens 
 the way to the highest and most efficient form of collective 
 bargaining.^ 
 
 Since regulation of employment is a matter of public con- 
 cern, and since there is danger that trade unions may become 
 arbitrary in exercising control over a trade, it has been sug- 
 gested that the state should control their " constitution, pol- 
 icy and management."^ In this way requirements for ad- 
 
 The union button does not make a unionist at heart. An enemy 
 is sometimes more formidable within the lines than on the outside " 
 (Mitchell, p. 284). 
 
 ^ " In the most perfected form of Collective Bargaining, compul- 
 sory membership becomes as much a matter of course as compulsory 
 citizenship" (Webb, Industrial Democracy, p. 217). 
 Bullock, p. 438.
 
 6i i] Social Aspects of the Closed Shop. i8i 
 
 mission to union membership and working rules could be 
 regulated. State regulation, however, is likely to be intro- 
 duced only after the closed shop has been wadely enforced. 
 At present, in the majority of trades, it is but partially 
 enforced, and only with great difficulty.
 
 NDEX 
 
 Agreements between labor and 
 
 capital, 50, 60, 64, 65, 77-78 
 
 (and note), 124, 135, 147-148, 
 
 158. 
 Alban}', Typographical Society 
 
 of, 22. 
 American Bridge Company, 52, 
 
 82. 
 American Can Company, 50. 
 American Sheet Steel Company, 
 
 86. 
 American Steel Hoop Company, 
 
 85-86. 
 American Tin Plate Company, 
 
 86. 
 Anti-union shop, 12 (and note), 
 
 Anthracite Coal Strike Com- 
 mission, 45-46, 47, 53, 178. 
 
 Asbestos, Workers, 106 (note). 
 
 Augusta, Ga., Building Trades 
 League of, 105. 
 
 Bakery and Confectionery 
 Workers' International Union, 
 76, 118. 
 
 Baldwin Locomotive Works, 49- 
 
 Baltimore, Typographical Soci- 
 ety, 21, 23; Journeymen Cord- 
 wainers, 24-25 ; Cigar Makers 
 of, 27, 58 (note) ; Painters of, 
 65. 
 
 Barbers' International Union, 62, 
 76, 120, 141. 
 
 Birmingham Rolling Steel Com- 
 pany, 41. 
 
 Blacksmiths and Helpers, Inter- 
 national Brotherhood of, 64, 
 109-110. 
 
 Boiler Makers and Iron Ship- 
 builders, Brotherhood of, 160. 
 
 Bookbinders, International 
 Brotherhood of, 46-47, iio- 
 
 113. 
 Boot and Shoe Makers' Union, 
 
 119. 
 Button, union, 139-140. 
 Brandeis, L. E., 62-63 (note). 
 
 Brentano, L., 17. 
 
 Brewery Workmen, United, 61, 
 68, 7s, 104, 121. 
 
 Bricklayers' and Masons' Na- 
 tional Union, 30 (note), 38, 
 40 (note), 42-43, 51 (and 
 note), 55, 63, 65-66, 67, 68, 71, 
 72-73, 75, 79, 83, 84, 91, 100, 
 102 (and note), 106 (note), 
 121, 127, 141 (note). 
 
 Brick, Tile and Terra Cotta 
 Workers' Alliance, 121. 
 
 Bridge and Structural Iron 
 Workers, 50, 52, 55 (note), 
 82, 84, 91. 
 
 Brooklyn Eagle, 84. 
 
 " Brotherhood of the Foot- 
 board," 37 (and note). 
 
 Buffalo, Journeymen Tailors of, 
 25-26. 
 
 Building Trades Council, Inter- 
 national, 55. 
 
 California, State Building 
 Trades of, 92 (note), 104 
 (note). 
 
 Canadian Printing Bureau, 161. 
 
 Card system, 43 (note), 78, 109- 
 iio, 137-147- 
 
 Card, union, 38, 42, 44, 125, 162; 
 exemption cards, 29; working 
 card, 43 (note), 66, 68, 132; 
 travelling card, 68, 69-70 (and 
 note), 141; apprentice card, 
 78; market card, 95; allied 
 trades card, 136; membership 
 card, 137; interchangeable 
 working card, 138. 
 
 Carpenters and Joiners, Amal- 
 gamated Society of, 63, 66, 92- 
 
 93- ^^ . , 
 
 Carpenters and Jomers, United 
 Brotherhood of, 38, 40 (note), 
 54, 63, 65-66, 81-82, 84, 92-93, 
 100, 103, 105, 159- 
 
 Carpet Weavers, 34. 
 
 Car Workers, International As- 
 sociation of, 31. 
 
 Carnegie Steel Company, 41. 
 
 182
 
 6i3] 
 
 Index. 
 
 183 
 
 Cases, closed shop, "Journey- 
 men Cordwainers," 24-25 ; 
 " Twenty Journeymen Tai- 
 lors " of New York, 26, 35 ; 
 " Twenty-four Journeymen 
 Tailors" of Philadelphia, 26- 
 27 (and note), 35; " People v. 
 Trequier " ("New York Hat- 
 ters"), ss; "Hudson Shoe- 
 makers," 34-35 ; " Philadelphia 
 Plasterers," 34-36; "People v. 
 Fisher" ("Geneva Shoe- 
 makers' Case"), 36; "New 
 York Cordwainers," 35 ; " Na- 
 tional Protective Association 
 V. Cumming," 53, 164. 
 
 Cement Workers, American 
 Brotherhood of, 106 (note). 
 
 Ceramic, Mosaic and Encaustic 
 Tile Layers' International 
 Union, 73-74. 
 
 Check-off system, 147-152. 
 
 Chicago, Associated Building 
 Trades of, 103. 
 
 Cigar Makers' Association of 
 the Pacific Coast, 39. 
 
 Cigar Makers' International 
 Union of America, 14, 38, 39, 
 63, 67, 78, 82, 83-84, 159. 
 
 Citizens' Alliances, 46, 48. 
 
 Citizens' Industrial Association 
 of America, 48, 50. 
 
 Civil Service Commission, 47. 
 
 Clinton, Dewitt, 35. 
 
 Closed shop, meaning of term, 
 10-16; development among 
 early English trades, 17-19; 
 development among early 
 American trades, 19-23 ; adop- 
 tion of principle, 23-32 ; trade 
 classifications of, 30-32; legal 
 aspects of, 33-36; impetus to 
 movement after Spanish- 
 American War, 43-44 ; effect 
 of organized capital upon, 44- 
 50; Anthracite Coal Strike 
 Commission's decision con- 
 cerning, 45-46 (and note), 47; 
 three periods of, 56-57; forms 
 of, 58-122; relation of classes 
 of workmen to, 59-79; meth- 
 ods of establishing, 123-136; 
 mechanism of, 137-152; union 
 motives of inforcement of, 
 153-164; effect upon economic 
 
 conduct of industry, 165-175; 
 effect upon non-union man, 
 175-178; ultimate effect upon 
 unions, 179-181. See Cases, 
 closed shop. 
 
 Commercial Telegraphers* 
 Union of America, 31. 
 
 Compressed Air Workers' 
 Union, 125. 
 
 Coopers' International Union, 
 135. 
 
 Coopers of North America, 38. 
 
 Core Makers, International, 107. 
 
 Cotton Mule Spinners' Associa- 
 tion, 125. 
 
 Cramps' Ship Yards, 50. 
 
 Detroit, Bakers' Union of, 118. 
 
 Electrical Workers, Interna- 
 tional, 51 (and note), 106 (and 
 note). 
 
 Elevator Constructors, Interna- 
 tional, 51 (and note), 106 
 (note). 
 
 England, origin of closed shop 
 in, 17-19. 
 
 Federation of Labor, American, 
 42, 51-52, 55, 71, 76, 102, 116, 
 119, 122, 155; Building Trades 
 Department, lor, 103, 105- 
 106; Metal Trades Depart- 
 ment, 109 (and note) ; Rail- 
 way Employes' Department, 
 117 (note). 
 
 Flint Glass Workers' Union, 51 
 (and note), 62 (note), 64, 65- 
 66, 70, 71, 73, 86, 114, 115 
 (note), 120, 131. 
 
 Frey, J. P., Vice-President, 113. 
 
 Fuller Construction Company, 
 
 85- 
 
 Garment Workers, United, 63, 
 66, 71, 82-83, 151. 
 
 Glass Bottle Blowers, 39 (and 
 note), 65-66, 70, 83, 114-115 
 (and notes), 120. 
 
 Glove Workers' Union, Inter- 
 national, 51 (and note), 54, 64, 
 
 75- 
 
 Gompers, Samuel, 45. 
 
 Granite Cutters' International 
 Association, 38, 65, 67, 69, 70, 
 82, 91, 94 (and note), 106 
 (note), 119, 159- 
 
 Granite Manufacturers' Associ- 
 ation, 41 (and note).
 
 1 84 
 
 Index. 
 
 [614 
 
 Green Glass Pressers' League, 
 114. 
 
 Green Glass Workers, United, 
 43, 114, 125. 
 
 Hat Finishers, International, 83- 
 84. 
 
 Hatters, United, 38, 70 (and 
 note), 77, 140-141 (and note), 
 142. 
 
 Hollow Ware Glassblowers' 
 Union, 28, 34. 
 
 Horseshoers' International 
 Union, Journeymen, 120, 144 
 (and note). 
 
 Hotel and Restaurant Employes' 
 and Bartenders' International 
 Alliance, 62, 64, 118, 139-140. 
 
 Huber, W. D., President, 54. 
 
 Indiana Bituminous Coal Opera- 
 tors, 147. 
 
 Industrial Workers of the 
 World, 52. 
 
 Iron Founders' and Machine 
 Builders' Association of the 
 Falls of the Ohio, 36. 
 
 Iron League of New York City 
 and Vicinity, 51. 
 
 Iron Holders' Union, 14, 38, 55, 
 63, 69, 75, 85-86, 90, 107-108, 
 124, 127, 135, 160. 
 
 Iron and Steel Roll Hands, 38. 
 
 Iron, Steel and Tin Workers, 
 National Amalgamated Asso- 
 ciation of, 14, 29, 41 (note), 
 85-86 (and note), 95, 125, 128. 
 
 Jewelry Workers' Union, Inter- 
 national, 64. 
 
 Knights of Labor, General As- 
 sembly of, 14 (note), 39 (and 
 note), 65, 67. 
 
 Knights of St. Crispin, 38. 
 
 Label, union, 39, 67, 78, 83, 84, 
 94, 96, 112 (note), 119, 13s, 
 I7VI74- 
 
 Lake Carriers' Association, 89; 
 open shop campaign of, 116- 
 117. 
 
 Lasters' Protective Union, 39. 
 
 Laundry Workers, United, 66. 
 
 Letter Carriers, 31, 160. 
 
 Lithographers' Association 
 (West), 65. 
 
 Lithographers' International 
 Protective and Beneficial As- 
 sociation, 131. 
 
 Locomotive Engineers, Grand 
 
 International Brotherhood of, 
 
 31, 37 (and note), 120, 153, 
 
 159. 
 Locomotive Firemen and En- 
 
 ginemen. Brotherhood of, 31, 
 
 153, 158. 
 Lockouts, 40-42, 89. 
 Longshoremen, Marine and 
 
 Transportworkers' Associa- 
 tion, 29, 51 (and note), 64-65. 
 
 70, 71, 73, 88-89, 97, 11S-116 
 
 (and note), 125, 135. 
 Lumber Carriers' Association, 
 
 89-90, 116 (and note). 
 Machine Cooperage Employers' 
 
 Association, 135. 
 Machine Printers and Color 
 
 Mixers, 117. 
 Machinists, International Asso- 
 ciation of, 44, 55, 63, 64, 70, 
 
 108, 114, 160. 
 Maintenance-of-way Employes, 
 
 International Brotherhood of, 
 
 31, 160. 
 Marble Workers, International 
 
 Association of, 65, 94. 
 Marine Engineers' Beneficial 
 
 Association, 116-117, I39. I44- 
 Maryland, Cigar Makers' Soci- 
 ety of, 27-28, 67, 69, 143. 
 Masters and Pilots of Steam 
 
 Vessels, 88-89 (and note). 
 Masters, Mates and Pilots, 31, 
 
 116-117, 160. 
 Meat Cutters and Butcher 
 
 Workmen, Amalgamated, 13 
 
 (note), 62, 63, 64, 73, 95 
 
 (note), 119, 132. 
 Memphis, Tenn., Painters of, 60. 
 Metal Mechanics, International, 
 
 108. 
 Metal Polishers International 
 
 Union of, 108, no, 160. 
 Miller case, 46-48. 
 Milwaukee, Painters' Union of, 
 
 41- 
 Mine Workers, United, 61, 62, 
 
 ^3, 70, 91 (note), 117-118, 139, 
 
 141, 142, 147, 150-151. 
 Mitchell, John, 164. 
 Mule Spinners of New England, 
 
 United Operative, 29, 34. 
 Musicians, American Federation 
 
 of, 51 (and note), 68 (and
 
 6i5l 
 
 Index. 
 
 185 
 
 note), 70 (and note), 71, 73' 
 76, 79 (note), 86-88 (and 
 note), 90-91, 103 (note), 118 
 (and note), 140, 144. 
 
 Musicians of the United States, 
 National League of, 86. 
 
 National Association of Manu- 
 facturers, 46, 48, 50. 
 
 National Building Trades Coun- 
 cil, loo-ioi (and note), 104- 
 106. 
 
 National Civic Federation, 53. 
 
 National Founders' Association, 
 
 55- 
 
 National Glass Company, 86. 
 
 National Metal Trades Federa- 
 tion, opposes closed shop, 44- 
 45, 46, 48. _ 
 
 Negroes, in bricklaying industry, 
 29; as railroad firemen, 158. 
 
 New Orleans, Dock and Cotton 
 Council, 115. 
 
 Newspaper Publishers' Associa- 
 tion, American, 11 (note). 
 
 New York, Typographical Soci- 
 ety, 20-23, 69 ; Journeymen 
 Cordwainers, 24, 63 (note) ; 
 Journeymen Tailors of, 26; 
 Hatters of, ^^■, building trades, 
 43, 173 (note) ; Cloak and Suit 
 Makers of, 62-63 (note) ; car- 
 penters of, 93 ; Building 
 Trades Council of, loi (note) ; 
 Marine Trades Council of, 
 US- 
 New York State, Cigar Makers 
 Society of, 28, 34. 
 
 New Zealand, compulsory arbi- 
 tration in, 162 (note). 
 
 Non-union shop, forms of, 12. 
 
 Open shop, meaning of term, 
 10-16 ; conceded by unions, 42 ; 
 effect of Miller case upon, 46- 
 48 (and note) ; demand of 
 organized capital for, 46-51 ; 
 high water mark of, 55. 
 
 " Open-shop schools," 49. 
 
 " Open-shop town," 49. 
 
 Painters, Decorators and Paper- 
 hangers, Brotherhood of, 40 
 (and note), 41, 43 (and note), 
 63, 71, 78, 91, 100, 103. 
 
 Paper and Pulp Makers, Inter- 
 national, 161. 
 
 Parry, David M., 48, 50. 
 
 Pattern Makers' League, 90, 107, 
 
 146. 
 Paving Cutters' Union, 75. 
 
 Pennsylvania Railroad Tunnel 
 (N. Y.), strike concerning, 
 120. 
 
 Philadelphia, Typographical So- 
 ciety, 19-20 ; Journeymen 
 Cordwainers, 23-25, 143, 154; 
 Journeymen Tailors of, 26-27, 
 35; Cigar Makers, 28; Iron 
 Stove and Hollow Ware Mol- 
 ders, 29-30; Master House 
 Carpenters of, 33, 165 (note), 
 177 (note) ; Trades' Union of, 
 33-34 ; Journeymen Black and 
 White-Smiths of, 143; Brick- 
 layers' Protective Association 
 of, 145- 
 
 Photo-Engravers' International 
 Union, 112 (and note). 
 
 Pilots, International Association 
 of, 116. 
 
 Pittsburgh, Journeymen Cord- 
 wainers of, 69, 143 ; Masons' 
 Union of, 72. 
 
 Plasterers, Operative, 65, 84, 90, 
 103. 
 
 Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steam 
 Fitters and Fitter Helpers, ■ 
 Journeymen, 40 (note), 62 
 (and note), 64, 65, 73, 74, 84, 
 90, 131, 138, 144 (and note). 
 
 Pocket Knife Grinders, 70. 
 
 Post Office Clerks of the United 
 States, 31, 160-161. 
 
 Potters, Operative, 29, 73, 125, 
 145 (note). 
 
 Print Cutters' Association of 
 America, 117. 
 
 Printing Pressmen and Assist- 
 ants' Union, International, 11, 
 51 (and note), 52, 63, 69, 74, 
 84, 111-112 (and note), 144. 
 
 Printing Trades Council, Na- 
 tional Allied, 112-113 (and 
 note). 
 
 Prison labor, 94, 105. 
 
 Providence, Master Masons of, 
 41 ; Bricklayers of, 41. 
 
 Quarrymen's National Union of 
 the United States. 119. 
 
 Railroad Telegraphers. Order 
 of, 31, 160.
 
 1 86 
 
 Index. 
 
 [6i6 
 
 Railroad Trainmen, Brother- 
 hood of, 31, 153, 161-162. 
 Railway Conductors, Order of, 
 
 31, 153- 
 Rollers, Roughers, Catchers and 
 
 Hookers, National Union of, 
 
 108. 
 Roosevelt, Theodore, President, 
 
 45, 47- 
 
 St. Louis, Cigar Makers, Union 
 of, 14; Master Stonemasons 
 of, 41 ; Building Trades Coun- 
 cil of, 100. 
 
 San Francisco, City Front Fed- 
 eration, 115. 
 
 Saw Smiths' Union, 90. 
 
 " Scabs," 24-26, 28, 34, 43, 59, 
 69, 72, 79, 91. 
 
 Seamen's Benevolent Associa- 
 tion of the Great Lakes, 64. 
 
 Seamen's Union, International, 
 1 1 5-1 16, 140. 
 
 Sheet Aletal Workers' Interna- 
 tional Alliance, Amalgamated, 
 51 (and note), 55, 63, 84, 92- 
 
 93- 
 Shingle Weavers' Union, 139. 
 Ship Owners' and Ship Builders' 
 
 Association of Buffalo, 37. 
 Ships Carpenters' and Caulkers' 
 
 Union, 2,7. 
 Shirt, Waist and Laundry 
 
 Workers' International Union, 
 
 75, 119- 
 
 Slate and Tile Roofers, Inter- 
 national, 52, 68. 
 
 Sons of Vulcan, United, Na- 
 tional Forge, 38 (and note), 
 108. 
 
 Spanish-American War, 43. 
 
 Spinners' Association, National, 
 146. 
 
 Standard Oil Company, 127. 
 
 Stationary Engineers, National 
 Association of, 31. 
 
 Stationary Firemen, Interna- 
 tional Brotherhood of, no. 
 119. 
 
 Steam Engineers, International 
 Union of, 106 (note), no, 119, 
 160. 
 
 Steam, Hot Water and Power 
 Pipe Fitters and Helpers, In- 
 ternational Association of, 72, 
 74, 84. 
 
 Steel and Copper Plate Printers* 
 Union, International, 79. 
 
 Steel Plate Transferers, 31, 160. 
 
 Steel Roll Hands, 107-108. 
 
 Stereotypers and Electrotypers', 
 International, 84, no, n2-n3 
 (and note). 
 
 Stone Cutters' Association, 
 Journeymen, 65, 103, 106 
 (note), 143, 146 (note). 
 
 Stove Founders' National De- 
 fense Association, 124, 135. 
 
 Street and Electric Railway 
 Employes, Amalgamated, 64, 
 
 139- 
 
 Strikes, 21, 28, 35, 38, 40 (and 
 note)-43, 52, 55-56 (note), 75, 
 86, 88, 93, 102, 130-131, 151. 
 
 Structural Building Trades Al- 
 liance, loi, 103, 105. 
 
 Structural Iron Workers, 103. 
 
 Structural and Steel Erectors' 
 Association, 50. 
 
 Switchmen's Union, 31, 160. 
 
 Sylvis, President, 14. 
 
 Table Knife Grinders' National 
 Union, 75, 132. 
 
 Tailors' Union, Journeymen, 159. 
 
 Teamsters, International Broth- 
 erhood of, 95, 103-104, n8- 
 
 119, 139- 
 
 Textile Workers of America, 
 United, 31 (and note). 
 
 Theatrical Stage Employes, 51 
 (and note), 103 (note), n8, 
 144. 
 
 Tin Plate Workers Interna- 
 tional Protective Association, 
 59 (note), 63, 146. 
 
 Trades and Labor Congress of 
 Canada, 52. 
 
 " Tri-Partite Agreement," in. 
 
 Typographical Union, Interna- 
 tional, 38, 61, 63, 71, 79, 84, 
 no-n3, 131-132. 
 
 Typothetae of America, United, 
 
 52. 
 Union shop, n. 
 United States Army, musical 
 
 bands in, 86-87 (and note). 
 United States Glass Company, 
 
 131- 
 United States Government 
 Printing Office, 161.
 
 6i7] 
 
 Index. 
 
 187 
 
 United States Navy, musical 
 bands in, 86-87 (and note). 
 
 United States Steel Corporation, 
 49, 82, 86. 
 
 Upholsterers' International 
 Union, 83. 
 
 Waiting list, 60-61, 167-168. 
 
 Walking delegate, 49, 143. 
 
 Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, 17. 
 
 Weber, President, 88. 
 
 Window Glass Workers, Amal- 
 gamated, 134. 
 
 Window Glass Workers, Local 
 Assembly No. 300, 39-40 (and 
 note), 70, 74 (note), 149. 
 
 Wood Carvers' Association, In- 
 ternational, 70. 
 
 Woodworkers' International 
 Union, Amalgamated, 65. 
 
 Zanesville, Ohio, brick contrac- 
 tors of, 41.
 
 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Under the Direetion of the 
 
 Departments of History, Political 
 
 Economy and Political Science 
 
 THIRTIETH SERIES, 1912 
 
 The University Studies will continue to publish, as heretofore, 
 the results of recent investigations in History, Political Economy 
 and Political Science. 
 
 For the year 1912 the titles given below are now announced ; 
 other numbers will follow from time to time. 
 
 Administration in Virginia. By F. A. Magrudeb. 
 
 The Standard Rate in American Trade Unions. 
 
 By D, A. McCabe. 
 
 Membership in American Trade Unions. By F. E. 
 Wolfe. 
 
 The cost of subscription for the regular annual series, com- 
 prising about 600 pages, with index is $3.00 (foreign postage, 50 
 '^uts). Single numbers, or special monographs, at special prices.
 
 Disturbing Elements in the Study 
 
 and Teaching of Political 
 
 Economy 
 
 By JAMES BONAR 
 
 M.A. (Oxford), LLn (Glasgow) 
 156 Pages. 8vo. Cloth. $1.00 
 
 This volume consists of five lectures delivered at 
 the Johns Hopkins University in the spring of 1910 by 
 Dr. James Bonar, the distinguished English economist 
 now filling the office of Deputy Master of the Royal 
 Mint, Ottawa. 
 
 As the title suggests, the lectures are discourses 
 not on economic error in general, but on the more 
 subtle fallacies which are apt to invade the reasoning of 
 trained economists in spite of learning and discipline. 
 Such errors creep in from a popular political philosophy 
 (Lecture I), from want of any political philosophy (II), 
 from mistaken aversion to theory (III), from the short- 
 comings of common or technical language (IV), and 
 from the wrong handling of distinctions of time (V). 
 
 The lectures are distinguished by the scholarly 
 tone and philosophical breadth that characterize Dr. 
 Bonar' s writings. 
 
 Orders should be sent to 
 
 The Johns Hopkins Press, 
 
 Baltimore, Maryland
 
 The Quarterly Journal of Economics 
 
 Editor: F. W. TAUSSIG. 
 
 Associate Editors: T. N. CARVER, W. Z. RIPLEY, O. M. W. SPRAGUE, 
 
 C. J. BULLOCK, E. F. GAY, W. M. COLE. 
 
 The Quartsely Journal of Economics deals with all aspects of eco- 
 nomics and has the support of the most distinguished writers on the subject 
 in this country and in Europe. It does not pretend to be popular. Its object 
 is to promote research and to advance economic science, and it receives and 
 welcomes contributions from all schools of thought. It gives a good share 
 of space to economic theory and economic history, but it publishes also 
 substantial articles on questions of the day. 
 
 The Journal is published quarterly in November, February, May, and 
 August. Each number contains from 150 to 200 pages, making the volume 
 700 or more pages. Subscription $3.00 a year, to be remitted to the Publi- 
 cation Agent of Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 JUST PUBLISHED 
 
 Railway Rate Theories of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission 
 
 By M. B. HAMMOND 
 
 Professor of Economics in Ohio State University 
 8vo. 196 pages. Cloth, $1.00 net. 
 
 The most detailed and thoro analysis yet made of the decisions of the 
 Commission. Ihe theories are grouped for examination under the following 
 heads: Value of Service; Cost of Service; Distance; Natural Ad- 
 vantages of Location; Competition; Class and Sectional Interests; 
 Fair Return on Investment. 
 
 A general summary of conclusions is given at the close. 
 
 Students of public service questions, legislators, and railway managers and 
 attorneys will find in the volume a mine of valuable information and clear- 
 headed analysis. 
 
 Banking Reform in the United States 
 
 A Series of Proposals Including a Central Bank of Limited Scope 
 
 BY 
 
 0. M. W. SPRAGUE 
 Assistant Professor of Banhing and Finance in Harvard University 
 
 8vo. 176 pages. Cloth, $1.00 net. 
 Professor Sprague's four articles on banking reform, which have appeared 
 in recent numbers of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, are reprinted 
 in this volume. 
 
 For sale at all bookstores 
 
 Pufclished fcy 
 
 HARVARD UNIVERSITY 
 Publication Office, 2 University Hall, Cambridge
 
 STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS 
 AND PUBLIC LAW 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 THE FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 RECENT NUMBERS. 
 
 VOLITME XXXIX, 1910-1911, 651 pp. Price, cloth, |4.60. 
 1. [lOS] The Making of the Balkan States. 
 
 By William Smith Murray, Ph.D. Price, $1.50. 
 S. [103] Political History of New York State during the Period of the Civil War. 
 
 By Sidney David Brummbr, Ph.D. Price, $3.00. 
 
 VOLUME XL, 1911. 633 pp. Price, cloth, $4.50. 
 1. 1104] A Surrey of Constitutional Development in China. 
 
 By ilAWKLiNQ L. Yen, Ph.D. Price, $1.00. 
 8. [105] Ohio Politics during the Civil War Period. 
 
 By George H. Porter, Ph.D. Price, $1.75. 
 8. [106] The Territorial Basis of Government under the State Constitutions. 
 
 By Alfred Zantzinger Reed, Ph.D. Price, $1.75. 
 
 VOLUME XLI, 1911, 514 pp. Price, cloth, $3.50; paper covers, $3.00. 
 [107] New Jersey as a Royal Provice. By Edgar Jacob Fisher, Ph.D. 
 
 VOLUME XLII, 1911. 400 pp. Price, cloth, $3.00; paper covers, $2.50. 
 [108] Attitude of American Courts in Labor Cases, 
 
 By George Gorham Groat, Ph.D. 
 
 VOLUME XLIII, 1911. 633 pp. Price, cloth, $4.60. 
 
 1. [109] *Industrial Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City. 
 
 By Edward Ewing Pratt, Ph.D. Price, $2.00. 
 
 2. [110] Education and the Mores. By F. Stoart Chapin, Ph.D. Price, 75 cents. 
 
 3. [Ill] The British Consuls in the Confederacy, 
 
 By Milledge L. Bonham, Jr., Ph.D. Price, $2.00. 
 
 VOLUMES XLIV and XLV, 1911, 745 pp. 
 
 Price for the two volumes, cloth, $6.00; paper covers, $5,00, 
 [112 and 113] The Economic Principles of Confucius and his School, 
 
 By Chen Hdai^-Chang, Ph.D. 
 VOLUME XLVI, 1911-1912. 
 
 1. [114] The Ricardian Socialists. 
 
 By Esther Lowbnthal, Ph.D. Price, $1.00. 
 
 2. [115] Ibrahim Pasha, Grand Vizier of Suleiman, the Magnificent. 
 
 By Hester Donaldson Jenkins, Ph.D. Price, $1.00. 
 
 3. [116] The Labor Movement in France. A Study of French Syndicatism. 
 
 By Louis Letine. (In press.) 
 
 The price for each volume is for the set of monographs in paper. Each volume, as 
 well as the separate monographs marked *, can be supplied in cloth-bound copies 
 for fifty cents additional. All prices are net. 
 
 The set of forty-five volumes, comprising monographs 1-113 is offered bound 
 for $152: except that Vol. II can be supplied only in part and in 
 paper covers. No. 1 of that volume being out of print. Vol- 
 umes I, III and rv can now be supplied only in. 
 connection with complete sets. 
 
 For farther information apply to 
 
 Prof. EDWIN R. A. SELIGMAN, Columbia University, 
 
 or to MESSRS. LONGMANS, GREEN & CO., New York. 
 London: P. S. XING & SON, Orchard House, Westminster. 
 
 IT
 
 Books for the Citizen 
 
 GETTELL. Introduction to Political Science. By Raymond G. Gettell, 
 of Trinity College, Hartford. $2.00. 
 A general outline of political science, viewing the state from the stand- 
 point of past development and present conditions. 
 
 " The book shows not only a masterful grasp of the subject, but also a remark- 
 able power of condensation and coordination." 
 
 — Dr. Leo S. Rowe, University of renneylvanla. 
 " It easily outranks any of the texts now In the field." 
 
 — Charles G. Haines, Whitman College, Walla Walla. 
 
 Readings in Political Science. By Eaymond G. Gettell, of Trinity Col- 
 lege, Hartford. $2.25. 
 
 The first book of readings on this subject to be published. It may be 
 read with profit by all who desire introduction to that body of literature 
 which deals with the origin, development, organization, and activities of 
 the state. 
 
 FESS. The History of Political Theory and Party Organization in the 
 United States. By Simeon D. Fess, of Antioch College, Yellow 
 Springs, O. $1.50. 
 
 One of our leading dailies says of President Fess's book: "No book on 
 the market gives a better idea of the history of political organization than 
 this. It presents in a concise and interesting way the story of the struggles 
 and issues involved in the organization of political parties, with sidelights 
 on the motives and character of the great leaders. ' ' 
 
 " This is a delightful book written in just the manner that such a work 
 ought to be. It is sympathetic, graphic, and picturesque. I do not find a dry 
 line in it from cover to cover. 
 
 " Moreover it is as reliable as it is interesting. The author states facts with 
 as little bias as is possible to a human being. In the short space of a little more 
 than four hundred pages only the essentials can be packed In. But the essentials 
 are here and only the non-essentials are left out." 
 
 — Edwin A. Grosvenor, Professor of Modern Government and 
 International Law, Amherst College. 
 
 REINSCH. Readings on American Federal Government. By Paul S, 
 Reinsch, Professor of Political Science, in the University of Wisconsin. 
 $2.75. 
 
 This book contains in a single volume a large amount of documentary 
 material illustrative of almost every branch of our government as it is today. 
 The selections are mainly from the written or spoken words of men actually 
 engaged in the business of government, — presidents, legislators, administra- 
 tors, officials, and judges. 
 
 " The serviceableness of Professor Reinsch's book to the teacher and student, 
 whatever the range of library facilities at command, can hardly be overeetl- 
 mated, and we are glad to give the work hearty commendation." — The Nation. 
 
 Readings on American State Government. By Paul S. Eeinsch, Uni- 
 versity of Wisconsin. $2.25. 
 
 Selected documents, speeches, and other articles, bearing on every impor- 
 tant current phase or movement in American State Government. 
 
 The readings are not abstractly legalistic, but present to the student the 
 organization and workings of our state government with a realism that 
 rouses interest and stimulates understanding. 
 
 GINN AND COnPANY 
 
 BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO LONDON ATLANTA DALLA5 
 
 COLUnBUS SAN FRANCISCO
 
 American Diplomacy under Tyler 
 and Polk 
 
 By JESSE S. REEVES, Ph.D. 
 335 pages. Cloth. Price, $1.50 
 
 This volume discusses the Northeastern Boundary Controversy ; the Ashburtoa 
 Treaty ; the Relations between Mexico and the United States, 1825-1843 ; the 
 Annexation of Texas ; the Northwestern Boundary Controversy ; the Oregon 
 Treaty ; Polk's attempted Negotiation for California ; the Outbreak of the Mexi- 
 can War ; the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. 
 
 International Law and Diplomacy of the 
 Spanish-American War 
 
 By ELBERT J. BENTON, Ph.D. 
 
 300 pages. Cloth. Price, $1.50 
 
 Among the topics discussed are : Cuba and National Policy ; American Neu- 
 trality, 1895-1897 ; Abandonment of Non-intervention Policy ; Intervention ; 
 Transition from Neutrality to Belligerency ; Relations of the Belligerents; Re- 
 lations between Belligerents and Neutrals ; Negotiations of , Belligerents during 
 War ; Restoration of Peace ; Interpretation and Fulfilment of Treaty of Peace. 
 
 British Interests and Activities in Texas 
 
 1838-1846. 
 
 By EPHRIAM D. ADAMS, Ph.D. 
 
 Professor of History In Leiand Stanford Jr. University 
 
 276 Pages. Cloth, $1.50 
 
 This work is the result of extended research in the diplomatic archives of this 
 country and of Great Britain. The author throws new and interesting light on the 
 attitude of the English government toward Mexico, Texas, and the United States 
 during the agitation for Texan independence and annexation. The book is a 
 valuable contribution to the diplomatic questions discussed in part in the previous 
 volume by Reeves, published also in this series. It contains chapters on First 
 Indications of British Interest; The Negotiations of Treat and Hamilton; British 
 Recognition Postponed. Kennedy's Mission to Texas; The Montezuma and the 
 Guadeloupe; First British Offer of Mediation. Elliot in Texas; The Robinson 
 Armistice and the London Abolition Meeting; The Calhoun-Pakenham Corre- 
 spondence; Aberdeen's Plan to Prevent Annexation; Aberdeen's Withdrawal from 
 Joint Action with France; Elliot's Mission to Mexico; Texas Annexed; English 
 Interest in the Annexation of California. 
 
 Orders should be addressed to 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
 Baltimore, Maryland. 
 
 Tl
 
 A REPRINT OF 
 
 ECONOMIC TRACTS 
 
 The Johns Hopkins Press invites subscriptions to a reprint of four 
 important economic essays of the eighteenth century, to be issued consecu- 
 tively under the editorial direction of Professor Hollander: — 
 The Querist, containing several queries, proposed to the consideration of 
 the public. Parts I, II, HI. By George Berkeley. Dublin, 1735-37. 
 (Ready.) 
 An Essay on the Governing Causes of the Natural Rate of Interest; 
 wherein the sentiments of Sir William Petty and Mr. Locke, on that 
 head, are considered. By Joseph Massie. London, 1750. (Ready.) ■ 
 Money answers all Things: or an essay to make money sufficiently plenti- 
 ful amongst all ranks of people, and increase our foreign and do- 
 mestick trade. By Jacob Vanderlint. London, 1734 (In press.) 
 Aa Essay on Ways and Means for raising Money for the support of the 
 present war, without increasing the public debts. By Francis Fau- 
 quier. London, 1756. 
 Each tract will be supplied by the editor with a brief introduction and 
 with text annotations where indispensable. The general appearance of 
 the title-page will be preserved, and the original pagination will be 
 indicated. 
 
 The edition Avill be limited to five hundred copies. With a view to 
 serving the largest student usefulness, the subscription for the entire 
 series of four tracts has been fixed at the net price of Two Dollars. 
 
 Of the tracts heretofore reprinted, a limited number can yet be 
 obtained, as follows. As the editions approach exhaustion, the prices 
 indicated are likely to be increased without notice: — 
 Asgill, " Several Assertions Proved." London, 1696. Price, 50 cents. 
 Barbon, " A Discourse of Trade." London, 1690. Price, 50 cents. 
 For trey, " England's Interest Considered." Cambridge, 1663. Price, 50 cts. 
 Longe, "A Refutation of the Wage-Fund Theory." London, 1866. Price, 
 
 75 cents. 
 Malthus, " An Inquiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent." London, 
 
 1815. Price, 75 cents. 
 North, " Discourses upon Trade." London, 1691. Price, 50 cents. 
 Ricardo, "Three Letters on 'The Price of Gold.'" London, 1809. Price, 
 
 75 cents. 
 West, "Essay on the Application of Capital to Land." London, 1815. 
 Price, 75 cents. 
 
 Subscriptions and orders should be sent to 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 
 
 BALTIMORE, MD.
 
 New Series of Extra Volumes 
 
 of the 
 Johns Hopkins University Studies in Histor- 
 ical and Political Science 
 
 The Johns Hopkins Press announce the inauguration of a new 
 series of Extra Volumes to its regular annual series of Studies in His- 
 torical and Political Sciences. These volumes will be in imiform cloth 
 binding and will vary in size from 200 to 500 pages with corres- 
 ponding prices. Subscription to the annual series of Studies will not 
 include subscription to these extra volumes, although these will be 
 ofiered to subscribers at reduced prices. 
 
 No. I of this new series of Extra Volumes is now ready 
 and is entitled 
 
 The Revision and Amendment of 
 State Constitutions 
 
 BY 
 WALTER FAIRLEIGH DODD 
 
 Sometime Henry E Johnston Scholar in the Johns Hopkins University. 
 
 368 Pages. 8vo. Cloth. Price $2.00 
 
 This important study in American Constitutional Law gives a 
 statement, descriptive and critical, of the methods adopted in this 
 coimtry for the amendment and revision of State Constitutions, and 
 discusses with a thoroughness not elsewhere to be found the legal powers 
 of conventions and of legislatures with reference to constitutional re- 
 vision and amendment. The historical aspects of the subject, 
 especially with respect to the Constitutional Convention, also receive 
 careful consideration. 
 
 Orders should be addressed to 
 
 The Johns Hopkins Press, 
 
 Baltimore, Maryland.
 
 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 IN 
 
 Historical and Political Science 
 
 Edited by HERBERT B. ADAMS, 1882-1901 
 
 * Not sold separately. 
 
 FIRST SERIES.— 1883.— $4.00. 
 
 I. An Introduction to American Institutional History. Uy K. A. Freeman. 25 cents. 
 
 II. The Germanic Origin of New England Towns. By H. B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 III. Local Government in Illinois. By Allekt Shaw. — Local Government in Pennsyl- 
 vania. By E. U. L. Gould. 30 cents. 
 
 IV. Saxon Tithingmen in America. By H B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 V. Local Government in Mictigan and the Northwest. By E. W. Bemis. 25 cents. 
 
 VI. Parish Institutions of Maryland. By Edward Ingle. 40 cents. 
 
 VII. Old Maryland Manors. By John Hemsley Johnson. 30 cents. 
 
 VIII. Norman Constables in America. By H. B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 IX-X. Village Communities of Cape Ann and Salem. By H. B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 XI. The Genesis of a New England State. By A. Johnston. 30 cents. 
 •XH. Local Government and Schools in South Carolina. By B. J. Rajiage. 
 
 SECOND SERIES.— 1884.— $4.00. 
 •I-n. Methods of Historical Study. By H. B. Adams. 
 
 m. The Past and Present of Political Economy. By R. T. Ely. 35 cents. 
 IV. Samuel Adams, the Man of the Town Meeting. By James K. Hosmer. 35 cents. 
 V-VI. Taxation in the United States. By Henky Carter Adams. 50 cents. 
 
 VII. Institutional Beginnings in a Western State. By Jesse Macy. 25 cents. 
 VIII-IX. Indian Money in New England, etc. By William B. Weedbn. 50 cents. 
 *X. Town and County Government in the Colonies. By E. Channing. 
 
 •XI. Endimentary Society among Boys. By J. Hemsley Johnson. 
 XTT. Land Laws of Mining Districts. By C. H. Shinn. 50 cents. 
 
 THIRD SERIES.— 1885.— $4.00. 
 L Maryland's Influence upon Land Cessions to the TJ. S. By H. B. Adams. 75 cents. 
 II-III. Virginia Local Institutions. By E. Ingle. 75 cents. 
 rv. Recent American Socialism. By Richard T. Ely. 50 cents. 
 V-VI-VII. Maryland Local Institutions. By Lewis W. Wii.helm. $1.00. 
 
 VIII. Influence of the Proprietors in Founding New Jersey. By A. ScoTT. 25 cents. 
 IX-X. American Constitutions. By Horace Davis. 50 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. The City of Washington. By J. A. Porter. 50 cents. 
 
 FOURTH SERIES.— 1886.— $3.50. 
 L Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson River. By I. Elting. 50 cents. 
 Il-ni. Town Government in Rhode Island. By W. E. Foster. — The Narragansett Plant- 
 
 ers. By Edward Channing. 50 cents. 
 
 •IV. Pennsylvania Boroughs. By William P. Holcomb. 
 
 ▼. Introduction to Constitutional History of the States. By J. F. Jameson. 50 cents. 
 
 •VI. The Puritan Colony at Annapolis, Maryland. By D. R. Randall. 
 
 Vn- VIII-IX. The Land Question in the United States. By S. Sato. $1.00. 
 
 X. Town and City Government of New Haven. By C. H. Levermore. 50 cents. 
 
 XI-XH. Land System of the New England Colonies. By M. Egleston. 50 cents. 
 
 FIFTH SERIES.— 1887.— $3.50. 
 I-II. City Government of Philadelphia. By E. P. Allinson and B. Penrose. 50 cents. 
 m. City Government of Boston. By James M. Bugbee. 25 cents. 
 •IV. City Government of St. Louis. By Marsitall S. Snow. 
 V-VI. Local Government in Canada. Bv John George Bourinot. 50 cents. 
 vn. Effect of the War of 1812 upon the American Union. By N. M. Btjtler. 25 cents. 
 
 VIII. Notes on the Literature of Charities. Bv Herbert B. Adams. 25 cents. 
 
 IX. Predictions of Hamilton and De Tocqueville. Bv James Bryce. 25 cents. 
 
 X. The Study of History in England and Scotland. By P. Fredbricq. 25 cents. 
 
 XI. Seminary Libraries and University Extension. By H. B. Adams. 25 cents. 
 XH. European Schools of History and Politics. By A. D. White. 25 cents. 
 
 SIXTH SERIES.— 1888.— $3.50. 
 Tha History of Co-operation in the United States. 
 
 SEVENTH SERIES.— 1889. 
 
 (Volume sold only with complete set.) 
 L Arnold Toynbee. By F. C. Montagttb. 50 cents. 
 
 H-m. Municipal Government in San Francisco. By Bernard Moseb. 50 cents. 
 IV. Mnnicipal History of New Orleans. By Wm. W. Howb. 25 cents. 
 •V- VI. E nglish Culture in Virginia. Bv William P. Trent. 
 
 Vn-Vni-IX. The River Towns of Connecticut. By Charles M. Andrews. $1.00. 
 •X-XI-Xn. Federal Government in Canada. By John G. Bodrinot.
 
 EIGHTH SERIES.— 1890. 
 
 (Volume sold only witb complete set.) 
 I-II. The Beginnings of American Nationality, By A. W, Small. $1.00. 
 III. Local Government in Wisconsin. By D. E. Spbncbk. 25 cents. 
 •IV. Spanisli Colonization in the Southwest. By F. W. Blackmab. 
 V-VI. The Study of History in Germany and France. By P. Fkhdhricq. $1.00. 
 VII-IX. Progress of the Colored People of Maryland. By J. R. Bkackett. $1.00. 
 •X, The Study of History in Belgium and Holland. By P. Fkedekicq. 
 ZI-XII. Seminary Notes on Historical Literature. By H. B. Adaus and others. 50 cents. 
 
 NINTH SERIES.— 1891. 
 
 (Volume sold only with complete set.) 
 •I-II. Government of the United States. By W. W. Willodghby and W. F. Willotjshbt. 
 lU-IV. University Education in Maryland. By B. C. Stbineb. The Johns HopUai 
 
 University (1876-1891). By D. C. Oilman. 50 cents. 
 •V-VI. Municipal Unity in the Lombard Communes. By W. K. Williams. 
 VII-VIII. Public Lands of the Koman Bepublic. By A. Stephenson. 75 cents. 
 
 IX. Constitutional Development of Japan. By T. Iyenaga. 50 cents. 
 •X. A History of Liberia. By J. H. T. McPhekson. 
 
 XI-XII. The Indian Trade in Wisconsin. By F. J. Tukneb. 50 cents. 
 
 TENTH SERIES.— 1892.— $3.50. 
 
 I. The Bishop Hill Colony. By Michael A. Mikkelsbn. 50 cents. 
 
 II-III. Church and State in New England. By Paul E. Lauer. 50 cents. 
 
 rv. Church and State in Maryland. By George Pbtbib. 50 cents. 
 
 •V-VI. Religious Development in the Province of North Carolina. By S. B. Wbisks. 
 
 VII. Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. By J. W. Black. 50 cents. 
 VIII-IX. The Quakers in Pennsylvania. By A. C. Applegarth. 75 cents. 
 
 X-XI. Columbus and his Discovery of America. By H. B. Adams and H. Wood. 50 cents. 
 XII. Causes of the American Revolution. By J. A. Woodburn. 50 cents. 
 
 ELEVENTH SERIES.— 1893.— $3.50. 
 
 I. The Social Condition of Labor. By E. R. L. Gould. 50 cents. 
 
 II. The World's Representative Assemblies of To-Day. By E. K. Aldbn. 50 cents. 
 III-IV. The Negro in the District of Columbia. By Edward Ingle. $1.00. 
 
 V-VI. Church and State in North Carolina. By Stephen B. Weeks. 50 cents. 
 VII-VIII. The Condition of the Western Farmer, etc. By A. F. Bbntley. $1.00. 
 IX-X. History of Slavery in Connecticut. By Bernard C. Steiner. 75 cents. 
 XI-XII. Local Government in the South. By E. W. Bemis and others. $1.00. 
 
 TWELFTH SERIES.— 1894.— $3.50. 
 
 I-II. The Cincinnati Southern Railway. By J. H. Holiander. $1.00. 
 
 III. Constitutional Beginnings of North Carolina. By J. S. Bassett. 50 cents. 
 
 IV. Struggle of Dissenters for Toleration in Virginia. By H. R. McIlwainb. 50 cents. 
 V-VI-VII. The Carolina Pirates and Colonial Commerce. By S. C. Hughson. $1.00. 
 VIII-IX. Representation and Suffrage in Massachusetts. By G. H. Haynes. 50 cents. 
 
 X. English Institutions and the American Indian. By J. A. James. 25 cents. 
 XI-XII. International Beginnings of the Congo Free State. By J. S. Reeves. 50 cents. 
 
 THIRTEENTH SERIES.— 1895.— $3.50. 
 
 I-II. Government of the Colony of South Carolina. By E. L. Whitney. 75 cents. 
 III-IV. Early Relations of Maryland and Virginia. By J. H. LatanS. 50 cents. 
 
 V. The Rise of the Bicameral System in America. By T. F. Moran. 50 cents. 
 VI-VII. White Servitude in the Colony of Virginia. By J. C. Ballagh. 50 cents. 
 
 VIII. The Genesis of California's First Constitution. By R. D. Hunt. 50 cents. 
 
 IX. Benjamin Franklin as an Economist. By W. A. Wetzel. 50 cents. 
 
 X. The Provisional Government of Maryland. By J. A. Silver. 50 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Government and Religion of the Virginia Indians. By S. R. Hbndrbn. 50 centa 
 
 FOURTEENTH SERIES.— 1896.— $3.50. 
 
 I. Constitutional History of Hawaii. By Henry E. Chambers. 25 cents. 
 
 II. City Government of Baltimore. By Thaddeus P. Thomas. 25 cents. 
 
 III. Colonial Origins of New England Senates, By F. L. Riley. 50 cents. 
 IV-V. Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina, By J. S. Bassett. 50 cents. 
 VI-VII, Representation in Virginia, By J. A. C. Chandler. 50 cents. 
 
 VIII. History of Taxation in Connecticut (1636-1776). By F. R. Jones. 50 cents. 
 IX-X. A Study of Slavery in New Jersey, By Henry S. Coolby. 50 cents. 
 XI-XII, Causes of the Maryland Revolution of 1689, By F. E. Sparks. 50 cents. 
 
 FIFTEENTH SERIES.— 1897.— $3.50. 
 I-II, The Tobacco Industry In Virginia since 1860, By B. W. Arnold. 50 cents. 
 III-V. Street Railway System of Philadelphia. By F. W. Speirs. 75 cents. 
 
 VI. Daniel Raymond. By C. P. Nhill. 50 cents. 
 
 VII-VIII. Economic History of B, & O, R. R, By M. Reizenstein. 50 cents. 
 
 IX, The South American Trade of Baltimore. By F. R. Ruttbr. 50 cents. 
 
 X-XI, State Tax Commissions in the United States, By J. W. Chapman. 50 cents. 
 XII, Tendencies ta American Economic Thought, By S. Sherwood. 25 cents. 
 
 SIXTEENTH SERIES.— 1898.— ^3-5o. 
 I-IV. The Neutrality of the American Lakes, etc. By J. M. Callahan. $1.25. Cloth, $1.60. 
 
 V. West Florida. By H. B. Chambers. 25 cents. 
 
 VI. Anti-Slavery Leaders of North Carolina. Bv J. S. Bassett. 50 cents. 
 VII-IX. Life and Administration of Sir Robert Eden. Bv B. C. Steiner. $1.00. 
 
 X-XI. The Transition of North Carolina from a Colony. By E. W. Sikes. 60 cents. 
 XII, Jared Sparks and Alexis De Tocqueville, By H. B. Adams. 25 cents.
 
 SEVENTEENTH SERIES.— 1899.— $3.50. 
 
 Z-Q-IU. History of State Banking in Maryland, By A. C. Bbyan. $1.00. 
 r7-V. The Know-Nothing Party in Maryland. By L. F. Scumeckediee. 75 cents. 
 
 VI. The Labadist Colony in Maryland. By B. B. James. 5l» cents. 
 VII-VUI. History of Slavery in North Carolina. By J. S. Bassett. 75 cents. 
 IX-X-XI. Development of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal. By U. W. Ward. 75 cents. 
 XII. Public Educational Work in Baltimore. By Hebbebt B. Adams. 25 cents. 
 
 EIGHTEENTH SERIES.— 1900.— $3.50. 
 
 I-TV. Studies in State Taxation. Edited by J. H. Hollander. Paper, $1.00 ; cloth, $1.2S 
 V-VI. The Colonial Executive Prior to the Restoration. By P. L. Kate. 50 cents. 
 
 VII. Constitution and Admission of Iowa into the Union. By J. A. James. 30 cents. 
 VUI-IX. The Church and Popular Education. By 11. B. Adams. 50 cents. 
 Z-XU. Keligious Freedom in Virginia: The Baptists. By W. T. Thom. 75 cents. 
 
 NINETEENTH SERIES.— 1901.— $3.50. 
 
 I-Xn. America in the Pacific and the Far East. By J. M. Callahan. 75 cents. 
 
 rV-V. State Activities in Relation to Labor. By W. F. Willodghby. 50 cents. 
 
 Vl-V n. History of Suffrage in Virginia. By J. A. C. Chandler. 50 cents. 
 
 Vni-IX. The Maryland Constitution of 1864. By W. S. Myers. 50 cents. 
 
 X. Life of Commissary James Blair. By D. E. Motley. 25 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Gov. Hicks of Maryland and the Civil War. By G. L. Radcliffe. 50 centa. 
 
 TWENTIETH SERIES.— 1902.— $3.50. 
 t. Western Maryland in the Revolution. By B. C. Steiner. 30 cents. 
 II-III. State Banks since the National Bank Act. By G. E. Babnett. 50 cents. 
 
 IV. Early History of Internal Improvements in Alabama. By W. E. Martin. 80 cents. 
 •V-VI. Trust Companies in the United States. By George Catob. 
 
 VU-VIII. The Maryland Constitution of 1851. By J. W. Harby. 50 cents. 
 
 ZX-X. Political Activities of Philip Freneau. By S. E. Fobman. 50 cents. 
 
 XI.-XII. Continental Opinion on a Middle European Tariff Union. By G. M. FiSK. *0 cts. 
 
 TWENTY-FIRST SERIES.— 1903.— $3.50. 
 
 I-II. The Wabash Trade Route. By E. J. Benton. 50 cents. 
 
 ni-IV. Internal Improvements in North Carolina. By C. C. Weaver. 50 cents. 
 
 V. History of Japanese Paper Currency. By M. Takaki. 30 cents. 
 
 VI-VII. Economics and Politics in Maryland, 1720-1760, and the Public Serrlces oi 
 
 Daniel Dulany the Elder. By St. G. L. Sioussat. 50 cents. 
 
 Vni-IX-X. Beginnings of Maryland, 1631-1639. By B. C. Steiner. 75 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. The English Statutes in Maryland. By St. G. L. Sioussat. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-SECOND SERIES.— 1904.— $3-5o. 
 
 I-n. A Trial Bibliography of American Trade-Union Publications. 50 cents. 
 
 m-rv. White Servitude in Maryland, 1634-1820. By E. I. McCormac. 50 cents. 
 
 V. Switzerland at the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century. By J. M. Vincent. SO cents. 
 
 VI-VII-VIII. The History of Reconstruction in Virginia. By H. J. Eckenrodb. 50 cts. 
 
 IX-X. The Foreign Commerce of Japan since the Restoration. By Y. Hattobi. 50 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Descriptions of Maryland. By B. C. Steiner. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-THIRD SERIES.— 1905.— $350. 
 
 I-IT. Reconstruction in South Carolina. Bv J. P. HoLi.is. 50 cents. 
 
 in-IV. Political Conditions in Maryland, 1777-1781. By B. W. Bond, Jr. 50 cents. 
 
 V-VI. Colonial Administration under Lord Clarendon, 1660-1667. By P. L. Kayh. 50 eta. 
 
 VII-VIII. Justice in Colonial Virginia. By O. P. Chitwood. 50 cents. 
 
 rX-X. The Napoleonic Exiles in America, 1815-1819. By J. S. Reeves. 50 cents. 
 
 XI-XII. Municipal Problems in Mediaeval Switzerland. By J. M. Vincent. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-FOURTH SERIES.— 1906.— $3.50. 
 
 I-n. Spanish-American Diplomatic Relations before 1898. By H. E. Flack. 50 cents. 
 m-IV. The Finances of American Trade Unions. By A. M. Sakolski. 75 cents. 
 V-VI. Diplomatic Negotiations of the United States with Russia. By J. C. Hildt. 50 cts. 
 Vn-VIII. State Rights and Parties in North Carolina, 1776-1831. By H. M. Wagstaff. 50c 
 IX-X. National Labor Federations in the United States. By William Kirk. 75 cents. 
 XI-XII. Maryland During the English Civil Wars. Part I, By B. C. Steineb. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-FIFTH SERIES.— 1907.— $3.50. 
 
 I. Internal Taxation in the Philippines. By John S. Hord. 30 cents. 
 IT-in. The Monroe Mission to France, 1794-1796. By B. W. Bond. Jr. 50 cents. 
 rV-V. Maryland During the English Civil Wars, Part II. By Beenard C. Steiner. 50c. 
 VI-VII. The State in Constitutional and International Law. By R. T. Crane. 50 cents. 
 Viri-IX-X. Financial History of Maryland, 1789-1848. By Hugh S. Hanna. 75 cents. 
 Xl-Xn. Apprenticeship in American Trade Unions. By J. M. Motley. 50 cents.
 
 TWENTY-SIXTH SERIES.— 1908.— $3.50. 
 I-ZII. British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 1822- 
 
 1S76. By C. M. Andrews. 75 cents. 
 rV-VI. Neutral Rights and Obligations in the Anglo-Boer War. By R. G Campbell. 
 
 75 cents. 
 Vn-Vm. The Elizabethan Parish in its Ecclesiastical and Financial Aspects. By S. L. 
 
 Wake. 50 cents. 
 IX-X. A Study of the Topography and Municipal History of Praeneste. By R. V. D. 
 
 Magoffin. 50 cents. 
 Xl-ZU. Beneficiary Features of American Trade Unions. By J. B. Kennhdt. 50 cents. 
 
 TWENTY-SEVENTH SERIES— 1909— $3.50. 
 I-n. The Self-Reconstruction of Maryland, 18S4-1867. By W. S. Mtees. 50 cents. 
 m-rV-V. The Development of the English Law of Conspiracy. By J. W. Bryav. 
 
 75 cents. 
 VI- VII. Legislative and Judicial History of the Fifteenth Amendment. By J. M. 
 
 Mathews. 75 cents. Cloth $1. 
 Vm-XII. England and the French Revolution, 1789-1797. By W. T. Laprade. $1. 
 
 TWENTY-EIGHTH SERIES.— 1910— $3.50. 
 
 (Complete in four numbers.) 
 L History of Reconstruction in Louisiana (Through 1868). By J. R. Ficklhn. <1.00. 
 Cloth $1.25. 
 
 II. The Trade TJnion Label. By B. R. Spbdden. 50 cents. Cloth 75 cents. 
 
 III. The Doctrine of Non-Suability of the State in the United States. By K. Singh- 
 WALD. 50 cents. Cloth 75 cents. 
 
 rv. David Ricardo: A Centenary Estimate. By J. H. Hollander. $1.00. Cloth $1.25. 
 
 TWENTY-NINTH SERIES.— 191 1— $3.50. 
 (Complete in three numbers.) 
 
 I. Maryland Under the Commonwealth: A Chronicle of the years 1649-1658. By B. C. 
 
 Steinep.. $1 ; cloth, $1.25. 
 
 II. The Dutch Republic and the American Revolution. By Frederick Edler. $1.50 ; 
 
 cloth $1.75. 
 m. The Closed Shop in American Trade Unions. 
 
 By F. T. Stockton. $1.00; $1.25 Cloth. 
 
 The set of twenty-nine series of Studies is offered, uniformly bound in 
 cloth, for library use for $103.00 net. 
 
 NOTES SUPPLEMENTARY TO THE STUDIES IN HISTORY AND POLITICS. 
 
 PRICE OF THESE NOTESj TEN CENTS EACH. 
 
 Municipal Government in England. By Dr. Albert Shaw. 
 
 Social "Work in Australia and London. By William Grey. 
 
 Encouragement of Higher Education. By Prof. H. B. Adams. 
 
 The Problem of City Government. By Hon. Seth Low. 
 
 The Libraries of Baltimore. By Dr. P. R. Uhler. 
 
 "Work Among the "Workingwomen of Baltimore. By Prof. H. B. Adams. 
 
 Charities: The Relation of the State, the City, and the Individual to Modem PMlaH- 
 
 thropic Work. By Dr. A. G. Warner. 
 Law and History. By Dr. Walter B. Scaife. 
 
 The Needs of Self-Supporting Women. By Miss Clara de Graffenreid. 
 Early Presbyterianism in Maryland. By Rev. .T. W. McIlvain. 
 
 The Educational Aspect of the U. S. National Museum. By Professor O. T. Mason. 
 University Estension and the University of the Future. By Richard G. Moulton. 
 The Philosophy of Education. By Dr. William T. Harris. 
 Popular Election of U. S. Senators. By John IIaynes. 
 A Memorial of Lucius S. Merriam. By J. H. Hollander and others. 
 Is History Past Politics? By Professor Herbert B. Adams. 
 
 Lay Sermons. By Amos G. Warner ; with a biographical sketch by George E. Howard. 
 Price twenty-five cents.
 
 iNsnWfv#s.4^m''^t^l-Fo'iSi\^'llfLlARv 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 DEC 1 3 1957 
 FEB 2 1 ^5^* 
 ftR 14 1338 
 
 MAY 1 * t;*;^ 
 'JWVi *® 
 
 DEC ^ ^ ^^^^ 
 JAN 1 2 1962 
 
 , MAY 2 9 19%c'D 
 
 
 
 LD-URl^ 
 
 % 1967 
 
 KC'D LD-URL 
 
 May 1 4 197! 
 
 Form L9-:37m-a,'5T(C5424s4)444 
 
 Library 
 Institute of Industrial Relatioi 
 University of California 
 Lofl Anaelee «4> Q^li.'tomi^ THE LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA' 
 LOS ANGELEv«
 
 ^^ 
 
 L 009 603 725 4