The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR. BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. No. 70-M AY, 1907. ISSUED EVERY OTHER MONTH. W A SH IN G TO N : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1907. CONTENTS. Page. The Italian on the land: A study in immigration, by Em ily Fogg Meade . . . A short history of labor legislation in Great Britain, b y A . Maurice Low-----The British workmen’ s compensation acts, by Launcelot Packer, B . L . . . . . . British Workmen’ s Compensation Act of 1906 .......................................................... Digest of recent reports of State bureaus of labor statistics: New York......................................................................................................................... Ohio.................................................................................................................................... Pennsylvania.................................................................................................................. Digest of recent foreign statistical publications.......................................................... Decisions of courts affecting labor................................................................................... Laws of various States relating to labor, enacted since January 1,1904........... Cumulative index of labor laws and decisions relating thereto............................ in 473-533 534-578 579-638 639-652 653-658 658-660 660-664 665-708 709-759 760-782 783-788 B U L L E T IN OF THE BUREAU No. 70. OF L A B O R . WASHINGTON. May , 1907. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND: A STUDY IN IMMIGRATION. BY EMILY FOGG MEADE. INTRODUCTION. The present agitation for the further restriction of immigration is especially directed against the Greeks, Poles, Austro-Hungarians, and Italians from southern Italy and Sicily, who have been coming in ever-increasing numbers since 1870, until in 1905 our immigrants num bered 1,026,499, the Italians ranking second in number with 221,479. Gen. Francis A. Walker was one of the early opponents to the reception of immigrants of these nationalities. He said: “ They have none of the inherited instincts and tendencies which make it compara tively easy to deal with the immigration of the older times. They are beaten men from beaten races, the worst failures in the struggle for existence.77 Recent issues of newspapers and magazines teem with articles on the danger of admitting these people. It is alleged that they are underfed, ill grown, often diseased, unskilled, illiterate, qui escent, lacking in responsibility, with a keen sense of inferiority and the lack of ability to take advantage of new circumstances; that their standard of living is low, and that they do nob improve it when they prosper; above all, that they are likely to become public charges in hospitals, insane asylums, or almshouses. It is furthermore stated that it is no longer the strong and independent who come, but the weak and incompetent, for whom immigration is made easy by the inducements offered by steamship companies. These people huddle together in our large cities, complicating the problems of municipal authorities. In the earlier days the “ digging77— the rough wTork distasteful to Americans— was done by Germans. As the Germans moved up in the scale of living they were succeeded by the Irish, and they in turn by Poles and Hungarians, and the latter finally by the Italians. The 473 474 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Italians have been especially stigmatized by tlie nature of their work. Americans regard them only as dirty, undersized foreigners, who trundle hand organs, tend fruit stands, sweep the streets, or work in mines, in tunnels, on railroads, or in construction work. The news papers are full of lurid tales of fights in which the stiletto is in evidence, of cowardly stabbing in the back, of organized gangs of Italian crimi nals, and there is frequently an expression of doubt as to whether the Italians can rise in the social scale as the immigrants of other nation alities have done. In the meantime the demand for rough and heavy work increases, and the Italians come in large numbers, settling in the seaboard cities, where they are often without work in the winter time. Only within the last few years has anyone had a good word to say for them. The salient points of the different articles on the subject of Italian immigration have been recently summarized in “ The Italian in America.” (a) The southern Italians constitute a simple peasant class, who live in extreme poverty and give the largest portion of what they produce to taxes, rent, and tithes. They are hard-working farmers, whose efforts have met with meager returns; they look toward America as the “ land of the dollar,” and in their desire to make money mortgage their little properties, their five stock, and their tools at high rates of interest to get money enough to send a father or son to New York. Explanation of their crowding into the large cities is very simple. These people do not come from isolated farms but from crowded villages; they are naturally gregarious and seek their own people who can speak their language. They are ignorant of our farming conditions; the years of unremunerative toil in Italy often make them dislike farming, and then, too, they have no money with which to locate in the South or West. In New York or other cities they find work and friends, and as a result their training in agriculture goes for nothing, and they are counted as the lowest kind of unskilled laborers. Americans generally, unfamiliar with the underlying causes of the congestion of Italians in large cities, believe them to be unfit for farm life. In 1896 a Government commissioner requested the officials of the different States to express their wishes in regard to immigration. Only two States desired Italians. The various State immigration officers in the South show a similar prejudice even now. Evidence is abundant that the Italians in our large cities, in spite of the dan gerous influence of the slums, are advancing socially and are becoming Americanized. Nevertheless, the menace of congested conditions, the continuous physical deterioration of these people in cities, and the need of developing large areas of southern lands would seem to be reasons for trying to direct this immigration to that section of the country. a Eliot Lord, New York, 1905. THE ITALIAN OX THE LAND* 475 As a contribution to the growing movement to attract immigration to the land, a minute study has been made of the economic, social, and moral condition of the Italians of a typical rural settlement, in order to show what the southern Italian— the lowest class of immi grant— can do to advance himself in the midst of an American farming community, and to answer the question, Can the Italian immigrant become a good American? The town of •Hammonton, in Atlantic County, N. J., has been selected for the investigation, because the increase of the Italian population in that section has been natural; it has not been stimulated or assisted in any way by Americans, and the immigrant has been thrown upon his own resources and has been left to follow his own bent. Other significant features of the Ham monton settlement are as follows: (1) The immigration has in no way been stimulated except by the Italian farmers themselves; (2) the large number of permanent residents; (3) the annual migration of city Italians to Hammonton during the picking season, which keeps Hammonton Italians in close touch with their fellow-countrymen and diffuses a knowledge of the colony among Italians in Philadelphia and New York, and (4) the Italian farmers with few exceptions come from southern Italy and from Sicify. Hammonton, in other words, is one of a very few Italian settlements in the United States where an American and an Italian population have grown up together, moved by the same impulses to come fo the town, following the same occu pations, and living side by side as neighbors. In Hammonton are found the results of twenty years’ contact of a typical American population with the lowest class of Sicilian immigrants. It is a safe conclusion that what the Italian has been able to accomplish in Hammonton he can achieve elsewhere under similar circumstances. THE COMING OF THE ITALIANS. It has been more than thirty years since Italians first came to Hammonton, and sufficient time has elapsed for a second generation to grow up and to demonstrate what kind of an American citizen can be made out of an Italian born and reared in the country and asso ciated with Americans as neighbors, in school, or in business. The Italian pioneers came to southern New Jersey for the same reasons that settlers came from New York and New England. They were looking for homes not too far from the seaboard, where the climate was congenial and the land cheap. Southern New Jersey was new territory. Up to 1850 the pine barrens were looked upon as waste land, and they were indeed barren from the standpoint of the dairy man or the grain grower. The climate and the forests, however, attracted a few settlers prior to 1860, when the land was first offered for sale. The civil war stimulated a demand for fruits and vegetables, 476 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. for which the sandy soil is specially adapted, and after 1865 the opening of wholesale markets in the large cities made fruit growing a profitable industry. In spite of this inducement the development of southern New Jersey has been comparatively slow, for great labor and expense have been required to clear the land, the appearance of the soil is unpromising, and immigrants who were attracted to farming have preferred the more fertile western lands. If it had not been for the Italian settlers the vicinity of Hammonton might still be a wilder ness. The Italians have picked the berries for market; they have cleared the land and prepared it for cultivation; they have saved their earnings from their labor on the land or on the railroads and bought the farms of retiring owners whose sons had gone to the city or farther west. What the SwTedes and Germans have been to Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota these Italian farmers have been to Hammonton, one of the most attractive spots in the pine region of southern New Jersey. How this Italian community arose can best be told in the brief biographies of some of the pioneers. Probably the first Italians to come to Hammonton were the La Grassos, a family of musicians, who settled in a section now largely built up by Italians. Soon after Matteo Calabrase, who was born in Palermo and was a gardener by trade, came to Hammonton after working in a nursery in Flushing, N. Y . He and La Grasso worked together on farms, and it is of inter est to know that when the war broke out they joined a regiment in which were many Italians. Wlien Calabrase returned to Hammonton he bought 10 acres of land and soon after married a German girl. His taste and training led him to improve his place by planting fine trees, a hedge, bushes, and flowers; shade trees were planted in front of all his land, and he frequently worked for others, laying out their places. Later he added 50 acres to his farm and built a substantial stone house, such as he had been accustomed to in Italy. He wras a Mason and a member of the Grand Army, and was on friendly terms with many Americans. Isaac Nicolai and Michael Rubertone were attracted by the country environment. The former was a northern Italian, who came to this country from Tuscany in 1859 and first settled in San Francisco. When in Philadelphia in 1861 he met Judge Byrnes, one of the founders of Hammonton, who induced him to buy land there. Mr. Nicolai wras a man of superior intelligence, and his son has become a substantial citizen. Michael Rubertone with his four sons left Pastena, near Naples, in 1877, wandered with their violins through France, and finally reached Liverpool, whence they sailed to New York. At the suggestion of Mr. Nicolai that a home in the country would be better for his children, Mr. Rubertone bought 20 acres of forest land in Hammonton, and he now owns 80 acres of ground. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 477 John Berri was something of a wanderer, who came early to the United States and married an Italian woman who had spent most of her life in St. Louis. He bought 10 acres in Hammonton and employed several Italians, but did not remain many years. His son married an American and has accumulated considerable property. Up to the coming of the two Campanella brothers only a few Italians had settled in Hammonton. The Campanellas were the forerunners of a direct immigration. In 1866 Matteo Campanella, a native of Gesso, in Sicily, ran away from home to avoid military service and hid for seven months in Messina, finally escaping to the United States. For about a year he worked for Germans on a farm at Trappe, Pa. He heard of Mr. Berri, came to Hammonton to work for him, and purchased 5 acres and a small house near Mr. Calabrase. About 1870 he sent for his brother, and the two pros pered, purchased more land, and married two English girls. The Campanellas soon encouraged the coming of relatives, who in turn induced others to come, until, as a result of a continuous migration from Gesso, more than one-half the inhabitants of that town are in the United States, many of them still in Hammonton. Usually the father, and occasionally a son, came first to earn the money needed to bring the wife and children, all of whom in turn assisted uncles, aunts, and cousins to come later. Peter Raneri, an uncle of Mr. Campanella, came direct from Gesso and at his death in 1895 had been in Hammonton twentyrone years. He worked on the farm of Mr. Scott, a well-known writer on oriental topics. When Mr. Scott left, he said he would be willing to leave his place in charge of Mr. Raneri, as he was the most honest man he knew. Mr. Raneri finally bought the farm and established upon it a macaroni factory. At his death the place (20 acres) and factory were valued at $12,000. His other holdings amounted to 180 acres. Antonio Capelli, a cousin of the Campanellas, came to Hammonton about 1870, contracted for large tracts of land, and was instrumental in bringing over consider able numbers of his native townsmen to work for him at low wages. One year he is said to have made $9,000. However, he was indicted for importing contract laborers and suffered financial ruin when the price of berries fell. These early comers were Sicilians, scorned by natives of the mainland as a “ little black people— not Italians.” Thomas Tell (originally Dominico Tonsola) is the leader of the Neapolitan element, “ the real Italians,” as they style themselves, who have settled in a different part of the town from the Sicilians. He came from a small town, Casalvelino, near Naples. Finding no work in Philadelphia, he journeyed to Hammonton more than thirty years ago to work for an Italian on the place which he now owns. He was to work for $50 a year and his board, a sample of the hard bargains sometimes made with newcomers by their own 478 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. countrymen. Afterwards Tell worked for Americans, within a few years he purchased 10 acres of cleared land for $500, and he now owns 150 acres of land. He is also a successful ice dealer. He has been instrumental in bringing the Neapolitan element to Hamm on ton. Biazzo Crescenzo came to America in 1872 from Casalvelino. He went from New York to Michigan. At a later date, when employed in a Philadelphia fruit house, he lent some money to Mr. Capelli in Hammonton and became interested in wine making. He came to Hammonton about eighteen years ago and four years after his arrival bought 30 acres for $750, which he sold, after develop ment, for $2,500; 20 acres for $1,400 and 10 acres for $1,000 were later purchased. Joseph Esposito also 'came to the United States in 1872 from Casalvelino. He engaged in the fruit, crockery, and finally in a hotel business in Philadelphia. One year he picked berries in Hammonton; later he became interested in Hammonton and bought a good farm for $5,000. Angelo Foglietti came from Monteroduni, near Naples, to Phila delphia in 1875 with but 50 cents in his pocket. He found work in plowing preparatory to putting up buildings for the Centennial Exposition, and when that work gave out came to Hammonton to pick cranberries. Only a few Italians were employed at that time. Mr. Berri, who had gone surety for a neighboring Italian on a feed store bill, induced Foglietti to take the man’s farm, 18f acres, and cancel the debt. He paid.$30 an acre for the land, upon which there was a log cabin. As he had only his money from the cranberry pick ing to. start with (about $50) he had to make money out of the land and by* working on the railroad. This land, with a better house, recently sold for $1,500. Before his death Mr. Foglietti owned 90 acres. The manner of Mr. Foglietti’s coming to Hammonton illustrates a third cause by which the Italian population has been increased. The clearing of land and making of farms was done by the permanent residents, but at an early date (before 1877) the supply of natives and Germans was found inadequate to pick the berries for market, and Italians who had previously ^settled in cities were obtained from padrones in Philadelphia. Some of them came year after year, realized the opportunity to buy cheap land, and remained to make homes. In one case a young Italian, who came over when a boy and had worked largely on railroads, bought some land from his employer. After a few years he returned, cleared the land, and enlarged his holdings. The largest number of Italians came from 1885 to 1890; however, some came every year. On June 5,1905, for instance, two men, 25 and 30 years old, came to join a brother, and a son of 18 joined his father. A larger party was expected, but when they landed in New York work was plentiful there, and they came no farther. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 479 At first the Americans were suspicious of the Italians, some of whom were very poor and strongly tempted to pilfer from gardens. Cabbages, potatoes, and other vegetables often disappeared, but as the people prospered the tendency to petty thievery decreased. All things considered, the Italians have been found to be good citizens, and their presence has proved an obstacle to the increase of negro labor. The Americans early learned the value of the Italian as a laborer, and that in some cases he became an excellent farmer. Not only did he clear much wild land for Americans, but he purchased and cleared many acres for himself, thereby adding materially to the cultivated area of the town. In fact, the Italians cleared all the southwestern part of the town of pine growth and erected many houses in that section. They came at a time when the Americans were leaving the farms, when labor was growing scarce, and when the development of the pine lands was in a critical condition. From 1880 to 1895 many old residents either died or retired, and as their sons were gone the farms were bought by Italians. A few examples are suggestive: (1) A resident in 1885 sold his outlying farm of 30 acres, one of the best near Hammonton, to one of the early comers among the Italians for $5,000 cash and bought a house in town and 150 acres of wild land 3 miles from town. After he had brought this land under cultivation he sold the most of it in 1904 to other Italians, one of whom had been working as a laborer on the place. (2) An Englishman came to Hammonton in 1857 and cleared 10 acres of land. Just before his death he sold it to an Italian for $1,600, mostly cash. (3) In 1897 an Italian bought 10 acres of land for $1,000 from a man who came in 1865, cleared his land, but did not suc ceed. The property is now worth $2,500, and the Italian purchaser has added 16 acres to his farm. (4) Forty-two years ago a tract of 32 acres was bought for about $550 and afterwards sold to an Amer ican for $3,200 when the land was partly cleared. The land was again resold, and is now in the hands of several Italians. (5) The sons of an early comer left him, and his land, although well manured, was in bad shape and unproductive. A poor Italian bought it for $1,400, a low price. He worked hard, clearing the place of weeds, and paid for it the first year from his crop receipts. From these typical examples the natural growth of the Italian community in Hammonton is evident. There has been no stimula tion or assistance from Americans. Friends have helped friends, one Italian has assisted another, and the immigrant has known that on reaching Hammonton a place would be ready for him, because he would locate among his kindred and his old neighbors. In this way have the foreign populations of the cities been built up in the United States. In the same way must the American rural community attract the immigrant. Immigration of Italians en masse to southern and western farms will be very difficult to promote, because there as elsewhere family connections with Italy must first be established. 480 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. IIAMMONTON THE SEAT OF A COMMUNITY. TYPICAL ITALIAN According to the State census of 1885 Hammonton had a popula tion of 2,525, and according to the Federal census of 1890 it had increased to 3,833. The State census of 1895 showed a falling off to 3,428, but that of 1905 registers a marked increase to 4,334. The State census of 1895 showed that in Atlantic County there were 16 Irish, 71 German, and 694 other foreign born persons (335 male and 359 female), the majority of the latter probably being Italians. Ac cording to the census of 1905 Atlantic County contained 3,102 per sons born in Italy, and of these only 886 were in Atlantic City, the remainder, or 2,216, being scattered about in the county. The fol lowing nationalities were enumerated for Hammonton: NUMBER AND PER CENT OF IIAMMONTON POPULATION OF EACH N A T IV IT Y , 1905. Nativity. ' Number. Per cent. American.. English___ Irish.......... German___ Italian____ Other........ 2,8/5 6G 36 62 1,223 72 66.4 1.5 .8 1.4 28.2 1.7 Total 4,334 100.0 Included in the 2,875 persons of American birth are all the children of Italian parentage born in the United States and living in Hammon ton at the time the census was taken. The school census shows 677 such children of school age, including some children born in Italy; but these figures are incomplete. It is probable that there are at least 700 persons of Italian parentage in Hammonton. The results of this census are of interest, showing not only the large proportion of Italians in the community, but also their preponderance in an otherwise American town, a contrast to the mixture of races found in cities. The largest colony of Italians in southern New Jersey is located in and about Hammonton. When any reference is made to Italian farmers in New Jersey, Vineland, because of its distinguished founder, is usually mentioned. The colony at Vineland is not considered in this article, because it was founded by an Italian leader without any initiative on the part of the farmers. At the last State census only 475 persons of Italian nativity were found in Vineland. The southern portion of New Jersey is of recent geological forma tion. The country is flat, more than one-half of Atlantic County and much of Cumberland County being only 50 feet above the sea level; the pine-clad plains are well watered, sufficiently undulating to allow for drainage, and end to the eastward in a tidal marsh; the rivers THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 481 are generally bordered by cedar swamps. An unbroken pine forest originally covered the region, and one of the greatest difficulties in opening up the country was occasioned by the large amount of clear ing required. The trees and underbrush had to be cut down and the stumps dug out, while ditching and drainage of swamps were often necessary. The average cost for clearing was from $10 to $35 an acre, but one resident of Vineland stated that it had cost him $65 an acre. When this land is once cleared and the peculiarities of the soil are understood farming is comparatively easy. The following descrip tion of these lands is given in the first report of the State geologist in 1888: Occupying the higher parts of the western and all of the eastern slope south from Long Branch is the extensive region known as the Pines, the wildest and most undeveloped portion of the State. In shape it is triangular, beginning in a point at Long Branch and widen ing to 50 miles at Delaware Bay, within a length of 96 miles. Part of this region has the desolation of a wilderness. From Manchester southward to the Mullica River is one of the wildest, most desolate portions of the State. If we except the clearings on the shore road and along the main border, not more than 2 per cent of this area is under cultivation. Here and there narrow roads, barely wide enough for a single vehicle to pass clear of the trees, thread their lonely way from clearing to clearing. Some of them are merely kept as traditions. They are relics of a time when the manufacture of iron from bog ore found in the swamps was an important industry of the region. These roads were then important highways. Now they scarcely retain a reason for existence. Here and there one comes upon abandoned forge sites, or still more suggestive, abandoned villages, the relics of unsuccessful ventures in glass manufacture in the heart of the wilder ness. An indescribable speaking silence prevails. The sighing of the wind through the pines saddens and oppresses, and the crowing of a cock or barking of a dog, which indicates that we approach a clearing and human habitation, come to be most welcome sounds. Still deeper is the gloom of the dark green cedar swamps, often growing so close that the very trunks of the tall, straight trees limit vision to a few yards. The light of the sun scarce penetrates to the earth at all. The above is the description given of the country which is being redeemed with the help of the Italians. The soil “ varies with elevation, the high parts being gravelly, the intermediate sandy, and the lower parts a sandy loam. The last is most fertile, being alluvial in origin.” In general the soil is a coarse, loose, white sand with a porous subsoil. Patches of better soil, made up of gravel, sand, and loam, are found here and there, and form part of the cultivated portion. The Jersey pitch pine occupies the poor soil, while the leaf pine and hard woods indicate the better soil. To make this soil productive two things are necessary, moisture and fertilizer; its loose, sandy, porous character makes valuable anything which prevents the drying out of the surface. Forest fires are very 482 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. disastrous for the wild land. Careful and frequent cultivation, as well as the planting of cow peas, clover, or similar crops that add humus improve the land. The sand contains “ little plant food, but it is an excellent medium through which to convert the elements of plant food into condition fit for plants/7 Manure, if continuously applied, improves the soil, but fertilizers must be renewed every year.. The census of 1870 showed that Landis, in Cumberland County, was the next but one in rank to the most productive township of the United States in agricultural and horticultural values. Fruit and vegetables are the principal products of this region. Berries flourish on the newly cleared land. Raspberries require fertilizer, but strawberries and blackberries are especially adapted to the virgin soil. The strawberry requires low lands that retain their moisture, and large berries are found in the district south of Hammonton. Cranberry bogs are scattered over the pine region; grapes, pears, peaches, apples, and plums grow well, and melons are of a rich flavor. The State of New Jersey is famous for its sweet potatoes, to which the sandy soil is especially adapted. In this sec tion a fine variety is produced, the production ranging from 200 to 300 bushels per acre and occasionally amounting to as high as 450 bushels per acre. This variety commands a price 30 per cent above the quotation for sweet potatoes from other parts of New Jersey, and double the price of the Virginia and Delaware product. The soil is not so well suited to white potatoes, but the better grades of land yield fair returns. Vegetables can be grown successfully if sufficient fertilizer is used. Much has been said of the climate of this region, old residents stating that plowing was often carried on all winter. In recent years the winters have been more severe, and at all times the region is sub ject to sudden changes in temperature. The absorbent character of the sandy soil leaves the air dry and wholesome. Malaria and similar diseases, often incident to newly opened lands, are unknown. The sea air passing over the pines is modified, retaining its bracing char acter and containing certain dry qualities that make it beneficial for lung and throat diseases. This section is also desirable for winter residence, the advantages of Lakewood, in the northern part, being already well known. The forests and the salubrity of the climate were two of the original attractions of this region, some of the early settlers coming to cut the trees for lumber; while others, who required a mild climate, sought health among the pines. At an early date a German colony was founded at Folsom, about 3 miles from Hammonton. As early as 1844 the antiforeign riots in Philadelphia drove a number of Germans to the new land where they lived and worked in the mills of W ey mouth. Another German colony was established at Egg Harbor by 483 THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. Doctor Smalley. An impetus to the settlement of Hammonton was supplied by the purchase in 1856 of large tracts of land by Richard J. Byrnes and Charles K. Latidis, and by the building in the same year of the Camden and Atlantic Railroad. Advertisements were inserted in newspapers; a paper was published and sent to prospective settlers; agents were also sent out, and a lecturer was employed to tour Maine. Over $100,000 was spent in advertising, and about 1857 settlers from New York and New England, with a few English, German, and Irish immigrants began to arrive. The first comers engaged in raising wheat, com , and other grains, as well as vegetables, but they found that this did not pay. The following figures show the continual decrease in the growth of wheat and corn: PRODUCTION OF W HEAT AND CORN IN ATLANTIC AND CUMBERLAND COUNTIES 1879 AND 1889. Atlantic County. Year. 1879...................................................................................... 1889..................................................................................... Wheat (bushels). Com (bushels). 10,519 I 1,152 i i 98,173 63,970 Cumberland County. Wheat 1 Com (bushels), j (bushels). i 157,952 1 117,037 | 002,546 491,590 The opening of the civil war brought discouragement to the settle ment at Hammonton, but it was the war which created the demand for fruit that made Hammonton’s development possible. In 1861 the first patch of strawberries was planted for market. These straw berries were carefully picked, each berry being dusted with a brush, and they sometimes brought $1 a quart. One soldier’s wife, while her husband was at the front, netted $1,000 on 4 acres. After the war many of the homeward-bound soldiers passing through Hammonton thought so favorably of its fruit-growing possibilities that they returned to make it their home. By 1866 there were 1,422 inhabit ants, with 2,031 acres under cultivation— 304 in strawberries, 212 in blackberries, 40 in cranberries, while 53,000 grape vines, 23,906 pear trees, 829 plum trees, and 53,767 cherry trees had been planted. On one day in 1865 70,000 quarts of strawberries were shipped to market. Blackberries* were found to be the best paying crop, and large areas of land were planted, the fruit selling for 30 cents a box. The town grew rapidly from 1880 to 1890. The narrow-gauge railroad of the Camden and Atlantic system was replaced by double tracks, and the West Jersey and Seashore Railroad further increased the transportation facilities. Atlantic City furnished a market for fruit and vegetables, and markets were also found not only in New York and Philadelphia, but in Boston, Providence, and Pittsburg. This was the period when Italians came in the largest numbers, both as pickers and permanent settlers. 484 BULLETIN OF THE BUBEAU OF LABOR. Southern New Jersey was advertised to some extent by the State authorities. As early as 1882-83 the report of the State board of agriculture contained the following: “ Even our lands known as the Pines, which in years gone by were regarded as barren and compara tively worthless except for growing timber, are well suited and adapted for growing fruit and vegetables, and possess a value far beyond that computed by the present owners.” The geological survey of 1888 states that the development of the pine lands has brought some 20,000 people into the State since 1860. B y 1890 the State board of agriculture congratulated itself that the governor’s message and their own efforts had aided in attracting immigration to the pine lands. This migration from other States has been very important for southern New Jersey. The infusion of a population of vigorous New Englanders, New Yorkers, Germans, and English has strengthened the character of the people; it has given to Hammonton a type of population which, in western towns, is considered highly advantageous. For the past twenty years the State board of agri culture, by means of its various organs, has emphasized the desira bility of the cheap lands, fertile and easily tilled soil, transportation facilities, nearness to market, and lack of isolation of New Jersey farms. This has been necessary because of the agricultural trans formation in the Eastern States as the result of the superiority of the Western States in competition for grain production, and New Jersey has changed from the production of grain to raising vegetables, grow ing fruit, and dairying. Market gardening requires (1) more indi vidual and harder labor, (2) makes smaller farms possible, and (3) eventually requires more scientific training for the farmer. More over, oil account of the development of the new grain lands of the West and the growing attractions of city life, the sons of farmers were not inclined to remain at home, for Jersey farm lands were not in demand and farm labor was scarce. The competition of southern fruit growers put an end to the high prices received for strawberries and early vegetables. Blackberries became the crop for which Hammonton was famous; much land was cleared and the business was soon overdone. However, this excessive planting meant the exploitation of new land, similar to the methods of planting tobacco in the South before the war. In the later nineties the price of berries fell to 3 or 4 cents a quart; in 1896 it was 2 cents, and it did not pay to pick the fruit. There followed a period when the old Wilson blackberry was attacked by pests and could not be grown profitably, and a number of farmers were ruined. Some saved themselves by hard labor, replanting with dewberries and raspber ries, but a few Italians, who had overloaded themselves with land, became insolvent, and large tracts were left uncultivated. To-day the old blackberry fields are seen with straggling bushes, occasionally THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 485 bearing fruit, and with weeds ard even young trees growing up among them, showing that the fields have been long neglected. The New Jersey Handbook for 1901 estimated the acreage in the produc tion of fruits as follows: Twenty-seven thousand acres in blackberries; 900 in strawberries; 800 in raspberries; 400 in grapes; 200 in pears, and 300 in cranberries; in addition there were gathered 3,000,000 quarts of huckleberries, which grow wild where the land is not too heavily timbered. It is evident from what has been said that in the early days almost anyone could grow berries in Hammonton. Those days are over. Strawberries must now compete with those grown in the South; the growing of blackberries has met with disaster; the production of raspberries may be overdone at any time; fruits of all kinds are attacked with pests, and in order to get the best results spraying and great care are required. The advance in all lines of business for small producers has been in the improvement of quality. This is especially true of the farmer in southern New Jersey, and leads him. to intensive farming. This means that an acre of land must be so* carefully cultivated that it will bear superior strawberries, which will escape all pests and bring large returns. Also it means a careful study of the uneven soils to see for what they are best adapted, and then to make the product grown the best of its kind. In the case of fruit trees, each individual tree requires cultivation, search for borers, San Jos6 scale, or other pests, as well as constant study and attention. As stated by a successful farmer, a good peach crop is not dependent upon the number of trees, but upon what each individual tree cam bear, and this is also true of all fruit-bearing plants. Some Americans have failed, others have given up, and many do> not yet grasp the situation but continue in the old ways, hoping for an easy solution of the problem. Scientific farming requires intelli gence and hard, patient, constant labor. The Italian has shown him self to be a good laborer, and up to the present has been measurably successful, but it remains to be seen whether he will develop the intel ligence required to meet new conditions. THE ITALIANS AS FRU IT GROWERS AND FARMERS. The average size of farms in Hammonton is 20 acres. The average Italian farm in the same locality is about 14.6 acres. A man working alone can not till more than from twenty to thirty acres of this land. In 1905, 288 Italians, owning 4,226 acres, had land divided in the fol lowing proportions: Eighty-eight farms of from one to two acres; 38,. two to five acres; 39, five to ten acres; 50, ten to twenty acres; 54,. twenty to fifty acres; 16, fifty to one hundred acres, and 3, one hun dred to one hundred and fifty acres. The Italian usually wants 5 304b—No. 70—07-----? 486 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. acres, and these small holdings afford a good living when supple, mented by outside work at the brickyards or on the railroad. The majority of Italians in Hammonton own about as much land as can be cultivated by themselves and their families. The Italian has but one idea of the possibilities of a farm, the culti vation of “ berries and grapes.” Fine strawberries are raised, and in the weekly paper several Italians advertise new plants for sale. While many blackberries are grown, new varieties of dewberries are taking the place of the old ones. Raspberries are a favorite crop with the Italian farmers, who came at a time when this fruit was being largely introduced. Berries form the principal crop, but sweet potatoes and white potatoes are also grown for market where the soil is suitable. Grapes are an Italian specialty, and every farm, no matter how small, has a vineyard. Italians seemingly can make grapes grow on any soil. The grapes are used mainly in making a sour wine, which is sold in Philadelphia and elsewhere. Only a few of the large land owners among the Italians have orchards. They have not given much attention to scientific fruit culture, and spraying and other expensive methods are little used. The younger generation, however, is planting peach, pear, and apple trees. Vegetables are grown largely for the family’s own use, but some of the more success ful farmers supply the markets with potatoes, watermelons, peppers, and tomatoes, and during the berry season the children peddle the freshly picked berries about the town. The vegetables grown by Italians are sweet and white potatoes, cabbage, turnips, com , peas, beans, carrots, onions, parsnips, melons, squashes, pumpkins, peppers, eggplant, and tomatoes. Beans, toma toes, and peppers are grown in the largest quantities. Italians have popularized the sweet pepper and introduced other vegetables, such as a peculiar shaped squash, okra, Italian greens, and various kinds of mint; they also have engaged in the cultivation of such other vege tables as celery and asparagus. As soon as an Italian can save a sufficient amount of money he buys a horse. Until then he relies upon a wheelbarrow to carry his berries to market. Cows are seldom kept, as the pine region does not furnish good fodder and purchased food is expensive. A goat is frequently the source of the milk supply. Nearly every Italian keeps a pig and chickens for his own use, and takes excellent care of them, buying large quantities of feed. The significant features in the Italian’s cultivation of the soil are his primitive methods, his economy, and his imitativeness. When the Italian comes to this country he is familiar with the mattock and the hoe only, the first comers tilling large fields of com with the hoe. Their patient, constant labor, especially the labor of the women, makes the use of this implement very effective, and in times of drought the pulverizing of the soil saves many gardens. It is highly important THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 487 that berries and vegetables should be kept free from the weeds which multiply rapidly in the sandy soil, and the Italian’s method of pulling up weeds by hand is conspicuously successful. In scattering manure from wheelbarrows women and boys are seen using their bare hands. The men are often awkward and unintelligent; for instance, when the chips were to be removed from a piece of ground near a wood pile, an Italian attempted to do it with his hands; leaves are carried some dis tance on a fork, and a laborer frequently retraces his steps for water or supplies instead of carrying at once the required quantity. The older people are slow to learn and persist in their accustomed methods in spite of protest. Their planting is frequently done at certain phases of the moon. Many mistakes are made from lack of knowledge of the English language. The Italian’s economy is noticeable everywhere. They collect leaves from the public streets for bedding for their animals, or beg the underbrush from places that are being cleared to use in their beehive ovens. They are extremely reluctant to trim fruit trees, and nowhere is the Italian’s economy more apparent than in the appearance of his garden. Every inch of ground is utilized, and a great deal is crowded into a small space; if there is an orchard, tomatoes, beans, or potatoes are planted between the trees, and small vegetables are planted between large vegetables and berries. The ground is often utilized for two or three crops, and green peas and onions or early cabbage and kale may be followed by sweet com and tomatoes. The front yard, ordinarily used by Americans for flowers and lawn, is planted with grapes, berries, and vegetables. The character of this economy is noticeable in the purchase of fertilizer, the use of fertilizer being very important for this soil. Where the farm produces an inadequate supply of manure the farmer must buy prepared fertilizer. At first the Italians were slow to purchase fertilizing material, and in their efforts to economize they were often cheated. Finding, however, that good results require artificial fertilizers, they have become heavy buyers, but as yet not always intelligent buyers. A number of Ital ians have attended farmers’ institute meetings, and at these meetings or in watching their neighbors they have learned the value of rotating crops, growing cow peas and red clover for fertilizing the soil, and thus making possible the use of cheaper commercial fertilizers. The more successful Italian farmers are careful to pattern after the best American farmers. In one case, an Italian after buying a farm looked carefully over the farm of a prosperous German and talked over methods with him. The cultivation of berries is comparatively simple. The care of strawberries requires transplanting, cultivating, weeding, and some times covering in winter. Raspberries and blackberries must be care fully trimmed because the lower branches spread and bear heavily 488 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. when the new shoots of the bushes are cut off. The Italians have their own method of planting a vineyard, a method which has been adopted by the Americans. They dig deep trenches, filling in with leather scraps from the shoe factories as a foundation. The vines are tied to poles instead of being allowed to run on a trellis, and the grapes are closely trimmed every year. The harvesting of crops is largely a question of berry picking. Italians are accustomed to pick olives in Italy and are excellent pickers of small fruits. During the picking season they are brought from Philadelphia in car loads. From 1890 to 1893 as many as 1,500 came annually in special trains. The pickers were supplied by padrones, some of whom resided in Hammonton. The padrones stipulated that the farmers should supply no other pickers and received 50 cents per picker from the farmers, besides charging the pickers 50 cents each and full railroad fare, although special rates had been obtained. Some large farms require 150 to 200 pickers as well as a number of foremen. Small farmers do their own hiring and overseeing. Tenacre farms require a number of pickers, and Italians with small farms requiring five or six extra pickers frequently bring their own friends from town. Since the failure of the heavy blackberry crops, fewer pickers come to Hammonton, and recently they have been hard to obtain, because other work for Italians has been more plentiful in Philadelphia. In 1905 the padrones charged the farmers $1 per head for pickers, including children of 9 and 10 years of age. The pickers were often dissatisfied, however, and many did not remain. It was stated that those who were employed in factories did not wish to give up their places for the brief picking season, and that when the men had work they were unwilling to let their wives and children pick berries. Farmers endeavored to get Italians in the vicinity of Ham monton to do their work, and there are now almost a sufficient number of Italian women and children in Hammonton to harvest the berry crops. The berries are picked into six boxes held in trays, the whole family assisting, even little tots of four-or five years of age picking ahead of their mother, or carrying the filled trays to the shed; still younger children mind the babies, who roll in the grass or lie in carriages in the fields or in the shade of the receiving sheds. The price for picking was formerly 2 cents per quart; it is now 1J cents per quart for strawberries and blackberries, and 1 to 1J cents per pint for rasp berries. Unless the picking is very good, the pickers do not average over $1 a day. The pickers are given tickets, which are marked with the fanner’s name and indicate the number of quarts picked, the tickets being later exchanged for money. In one day in 1905 twenty men, women, and children picked 2,250 quarts of raspberries for a farmer, averaging $1.50 per person. Huckleberry picking is THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 489 also an important feature of the pine region, and where the land is not heavily timbered the woods are full of huckleberry bushes, and in the swamps is found the valued swamp berry. While in late years few pickers have come to Hammonton to pick strawberries and raspberries, as many as 600 came for the huckleberry season. The usual price for picking huckleberries averages 5 cents per quart, ranging from 10 cents in the early season to 4 cents later on. Extra help is also necessary for cranberry picking, which is especially profit able for the pickers. In 1904, 104 pickers were obtained for the Atlantic Cranberry Meadow by a local agent, and 4,000 bushels were picked. Occasionally Italian labor is furnished for tomato canning factories in other sections of southern New Jersey, their work consisting in peeling tomatoes, for which 2 cents a pail is paid. The expenses of the Italian farmer are reduced to a minimum, the most important cash outlay being for pickers if the berry crop is too heavy for the family to handle, or for plowing in case he does not own a horse. The fact that he has his family to aid him makes it possible for the Italian to engage in other work and thus to increase his income. Also the women and children can add to his income by working for others during the berry season. It is claimed that the women are better workers than the men. The patient and constant labor and economy of the Italians bring good results on land where Americans would starve; families of eight live well on from 3 to 5 acres. Among the reasons given by the Italian for the success of his countrymen is that they are economical in conducting experiments in the production of new varieties of plants. The American keeps trying new things in a reckless manner; feeling flush,” he will order 1,000 plants of a new variety at 2 J cents each, to which must be added the cost of fertilizer, while, on the other hand, an Italian will try half a dozen plants near a manure pile. The New Jersey soil is too poor to support expensive experiments. The success of the Italian farmer is best shown in a letter from Prof. John B. Smith, one of the agricultural scientists of the State: I have seen considerable of the Italian farmer in South Jersey, and in fact, have watched with much interest the gradual increase of the settlers of this nationality in the southern part of the State. Origi nally they were imported from Philadelphia as berry pickers only. Gradually a few of them settled and took hold of small pieces of land. Their method of farming at the beginning was sloppy in the extreme; they had little or no machinery and everything was done by hand. They were dirty in their habits; dirty in their surroundings; they did not raise as much as their neighbors, but they made as much or more money, because they spent less. Since tnat time matters have improved. The style o f living has improved to some extent; the method of farming has improved materially. The Italian does not use as much machinery as the American farmer, but he does more work on his crops; the result is that he gets just as much out of his 490 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. land, gets it on the whole at less cost, and makes a profit where his neighbor barely makes expenses. Like all other nationalities there are good and bad farmers among them. The better class of farmers are not quite equal to the best class of American farmers; but they are fully as good as the average. The better class of the Italian farmers fully realize the injury done by insects, and are as ready as their American brethren to do whatever is necessary for their control. The difficulty that I find is that they always try tne cheapest things first; but after they have once learned what is necessary there is no further trouble, and after you have once gotten even a single Italian to do the right thing, the rest of his countrymen will follow. It is not difficult to explain the characteristics of these people. They come from the mountain districts of Italy, where they live in crowded villages. In the outlying country, near these villages, each family owns from one to one and one-half acres, to which they walk every day to their work. When they do not own land they work for large landowners at a greater distance. On these little farms are grown lemons, olives, peaches, grapes, a little com and rye, and beans and other vegetables. The taxes are heavy and the markets so poor that the hardest labor can seldom win more than a bare subsistence. Necessity has developed frugal habits, few demands, and the ability to make much out of a very little. Labor-saving machinery is not adapted to mountain farming, and the Italian has therefore never learned to use it. He is used to working for long hours with his hands and to labor under a hot sun. Accordingly he accepts any kind of irksome toil, whether berry picking, clearing land, or railroad work. When he has in prospect the ownership of a number of acres without heavy taxes, his saving instinct is stimulated to the utmost, and he works early and late. When he works in the brickyard he is up at daylight attending to his garden, and after his return from his day’s labor he will be seen toiling away, making a day of from 16 to 18 hours. It is claimed that the yield per acre secured by the average Italian farmer is less than that of the American and that the quality of the product is not so good. The Italian is often mistakenly spoken of as an intensive farmer. He knows how to grow a large amount on a small tract and is successful with berries and vegetables, but he has still the field idea of quantity and does not know how to concentrate effort to obtain the largest return of perfected fruit from a small plot of land. Moreover, the Italian is often too parsimonious, and ships his fruit in unattractive second-hand boxes that injure its appear ance. Americans frequently sell old boxes to Italians and buy new ones for their own use. Again, boxes are sometimes “ slack packed.” This carelessness in packing and shipping, the wreak point of the Italian fruit grower, causes lower prices. The importance attached to the appearance of fruit by the Italian fruit sellers in the cities THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 491 gives hope that the less intelligent Italian fruit growers will soon learn its value. It is claimed that the success of the first genera tion of Italians in Hammonton in farming has been largely due to their economy, which makes it possible for them to live a year on an income upon which Americans would starve in a few months. A few examples of the net profits on special crops may be given: (1) An American-born Italian, in 1903, cleared $500 on a scant two acres of raspberries; his gross receipts were $753, the pickers being paid $99.85. (2) A young Italian farmer netted $160 from one-fourth of an acre of strawberries. (3) Another farmer netted $180 on one acre of strawberries, after paying $50 for picking. (4) Five acres of berries produced $200. Illustrations of some of the yearly incomes of Italian farmers in America are also of interest : (1) One farmer of the first generation estimates $75 an acre yearly on IQ acres in berries and potatoes. (2) Another of the second generation, with 8 acres in berries and one in grapes, clears $700 a year. (3) A young Italian with about 12 acres averages $400 a year, after paying $50 for fertilizer and from $75 to $125 for picking. (4) One of the early comers claims only $1,000 yearly income from 150 acres. (5) An Italian who has been in this country fifteen years, speaks no English, and has his land largely in blackberries and dewberries, is said to have made from $3,000 to $4,000 in 1905. (6) One of the most progressive Italian farmers, who is hardly able to read or write English, in two years had cleared $5,000; in 1903 he claimed to have made $6,000 gross, or $4,570 net, on his 50 acres of raspberries. (7) A young Italian worked for an American farmer for two seasons of six months each, and, together with his father, who had previously worked for another man for eleven years and saved some money, bought a farm for $2,000 in cash, giving a mortgage of $500. In one season (1906) they paid off the mortgage and saved $800. (8) Another young man, a bar ber by trade, but who from observation has learned a great deal about farming, worked for the same farmer for two summers and then rented a farm of 70 acres. He owns a store and, with an American, has the agency for a fertilizer company. The table following shows the number of American and Italian members of the Fruit Growers’ Union, according to their classified gross receipts for various years from 1889 to 1897. 492 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. MEMBERS OF FR U IT GROW ERS' UNION, OF EACH N A TIO N ALITY, RECEIVING SPECI FIED AMOUNTS FOR FRU ITS IN VARIOUS Y EA R S, 1889 TO 1897. [From records of Fruit Growers’ Union.] Number o f members receiving— $100 $200 $300 $400 | $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 J$l, 000 $2,000 Year. 1Nationality. Un $50 or or or or i or | or or or 1 or or or der under under under under under under under under under, under or $50. $100. $200. under $300. $400. $500.. $600. $700. $800. $900. $1,000 $2,000 over. 1889.... Italian....... American.. 1893.... Italian....... American.. 1894___ Italian....... American.. 1896___ Italian....... American.. 1897___ Italian....... American.. 4 7 1 10 7 3 4 6 2 12 8 9 3 9 4 7 2 10 3 28 7 17 5 13 7 8 14 9 5 23 10 13 7 12 6 12 13 5 5 15 6 7 7 8 4 6 9 5 5 12 8 12 ! 1 i i ! 1 6 , 5 3 6 ! 4 i 3 12 7 11 9 4 2 5 4 1 8 2 10 2 3 2 8 5 ! 6 I 2 5 1 4 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 8 2 23 1 6 4 3 4 3 1 4 4 4 6 4 2 7 2 2 ! 7 25 12 13 15 11 4 10 12 io 7 15 5 6 4 12 6 3 i The Hammonton fruit growers have always been at the mercy of the railroads and commission agents, for none of the farmers have shipped in sufficiently large quantities to be able to enforce their demands. The grounds of complaint against the railroads were: The character and number of the cars, their ventilation, and in recent years icing, the cost of loading, and times of shipment. Against the commission men the complaints were as to the prices at which the products were sold, the guaranty of the commission men's honesty and ability to pay, and their failure to return crates and baskets. These matters could not be adjusted by the individuals, and accord ingly various cooperative societies were organized. The Ffuit Growers' Union, organized in 1867, included a large number of Italians among its members, and always had one Italian on the board of directors. The failure of this association was due to the credit allowed in connection with a cooperative store. The accompanying table gives some figures from the books of the association in regard to the gross sales for Italians and Americans. There, have been other cooperative societies, including two exclusively Italian associations. The most successful have been the Shippers' Union, of Hammonton, composed of Italians and Americans, (a) and the Elm Farmers' Club. Elm lies just beyond the boundaries of Hammonton, and some Hammonton farmers belong to the Elm societies. Previous to 1900 there was only the Fruit Growers' Society, with American and Italian members. This society still exists, but as the men in control were not farmers, in 1900 the Elm Farmers' Club was formed of farmers and fruit growers only. This society is managed by a president, treasurer, secretary, and ten directors; three or four leading Italians are always kept on the board of directors, and meetings are held every two weeks in May and August. The Italian members work well with the Americans and are faithful, but seldom take the initiaa In 1906 twenty-three out of sixty-five members were Italians. 493 THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. tive. In a small place like Elm there is a saving in the cost of loading and loading is better done. There are also advantages in having their own ice houses, in chartering their own cars, in knowing the market, and in saving the 3 per cent returned on commissions. The expenses are reduced to the minimum and are for such items as print ing, ice, chartering cars, loading, and small salaries to the secretary and to the agent. The expenses are paid from the 3 per cent rebate, and the small amount of expenses is unnoticeable in the large percent age paid in dividends. The following table shows the extent of the gross sales made through the Elm Farmers’ Club and the dividends paid to members out of rebates allowed by the commission houses from 1900 to 1905: GROSS SALES OF ELM F A R M E R S CLUB AND DIVIDENDS PAID TO MEMBERS OUT OF REBATES ALLOW ED B Y COMMISSION HOUSES, 1900 TO 1905. Dividend Gross sales. (per cent). Year. 1900.................................. 1901.................................. 1902.................................. (a) (®) $61,018:75 6 21 2| 2| Year. 1903.................................. 1904.................................. 1905.................................. Dividend Gross sales. i1(per cent). $67,441.00 52,867.50 76,511.00 i 2| oa 2| ® Not reported. &2.5 per cent on berries and 3 per cent on pears. Balance carried over. The expenses of 1904 were: For secretary’s salary, $34; agent’s salary, $24; printing and incidentals, $14; iced cars, $70; loading (by Italians), $40; dispatchers and delivery (by Americans), $40. In 1900 there were 38 members, 17, or 45 per cent, of whom were Italians; in 1904, 40 members, 23, or 58 per cent, Italians, and in 1905, 44 members, 28, or 64 per cent, Italians. Nineteen hundred and four was a poor year for Italians, as a number were cheated in fertilizers. Some of their dividends, which for that year represented 2 f per cent on gross sales, were $2.95, $3.71, $5.59, $7.61, $8.40, $11.53, $11.60, $13.21, $13.99, $15.34, $15.59, $16.74, $19.03, $20.82, $21.13, $22.55, $23.60, $33.18, $45.14, and $64.53. These dividends represent gross sales of different amounts, varying from $107 to $2,347. Since 1899 the commission houses have sent agents to Hammonton to purchase the fruit before it is shipped. Cooperative socie ties are therefore less important to either Americans or Italians. It is claimed that the first comers among Italians, while good workers, do not naturally like work; that their idea of a gentleman is that of a man who does not labor; that there is no ambition to gain wealth; and that, accordingly, when the pressure of paying for the farm is removed the incentive to labor is gone. This may be true, but farming is not sufficiently remunerative in southern New Jersey to make it possible for the new comer to gain a competence without much labor. The time comes when the importance of intelligent effort in this kind of farming becomes evident. The second genera 494 BULLETIN OF THE BTJBEAU OF LABOR. tion are growing up amidst American ideas, and they are improving sufficiently in their methods of farming to give promise of still further advance in conformity with the changes now taking place in agricul ture in southern New Jersey. THE ITALIANS IN INDUSTRY. Hammonton is fortunate in combining agriculture and manufac turing. To the second generation of Italians, as to their American neighbors, farm life grows irksome, and they seek the quick returns and the excitement of factory employment. The local manufactur ing enterprises enable these young men and women to change their occupation and still remain at home, for in the town are two shoe facto ries, two cut-glass works, a planing mill, a woolen mill, and a^stoeking factory; and there are brickyards at Winslow Junction, 3J miles west. The planing mill was there before the town was built, and glassworks are common all through New Jersey. The brickworks are located at Winslow because of a large deposit of clay in that region. The shoe and stocking factories represent the tendency to remove such indus tries from large centers to outlying districts within easy access of the market. The planing mill is engaged on millwork for building, requiring skilled carpenters, with a few drivers and laborers. The shoe and glass factories use highly developed machinery requiring skill in manipulating them, and necessitating a system of apprentice ship. This is particularly true at the glassworks, where skill in the more delicate processes can be acquired only after long training. The stocking factory employs automatic machinery, which can be easily adjusted. A t the brickyards there is a large amount of purely manual labor, and but a small amount of skilled labor is required. In these various industries in 1906 there were employed about 403 men and 113 girls, and of this number 211 were Italian men and 64 Italian girls. The division of the Italian operatives and the wages paid are shown in the following table; ESTIMATED NUMBER AND EARNINGS OF ITALIAN S INDUSTRIES. EM PLOYED IN PR INC IPA L Estimated number of employees. Industry. Total. Brickyards.. . ....................................... 250 males........... f71 males............. Shoe factories....................................... \50 females......... J69 males............. Glass factories...................................... (8 females_______ Stocking factory.................................. 55 female#.......... Planing m i\\ .......................................... 13 males,............ Railroad................................................ («) a le s............. General store........................................ \8 m females........... Meat market......................................... 4......................... Dry goods store................................... 2......................... Feed store............................................. 5 m ales............. Italian. 150 males........... 30 males............. 10 females.......... 30 males............. 4 females........... 50 females.......... 1 m a l e ............. 10 to 15 m ales... 4 nfaies.............. 1 female............. 1 male................ 1 female............. 4 m a le s ............ Estimated earnings of Italians. $1.25 to $1.40 per day. J$5.50 to $10.00 per week. $10 to $42 per week. $3 to $6 per week. $4 to $0 per week. (<*) $1.15 to $1.30 per day. j$5.50 to $10.00 per week. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 495 Out of the 250 men employed at the Winslow brickyards 150 are Italians, almost all of whom are unskilled laborers. In the shoe factory the cutting, heeling, and soling are done by men and boys, the sewing and finishing by girls. Twenty-five out of the 75 employ ees in 1903, and 40 out of 121 in 1902 were Italians. Until recently only two girls of Italian parentage were employed, one of them as a forewoman. Their father was an educated Italian and their mother a German. From the starting of the shoe factories in 1883 until 1899, when the cut-glass works opened, the employees were all Amer icans. The supply of local labor was, however, scarce, and when the cut-glass works offered special inducements in wages the shoe factory was unable to meet the competition and became obliged to look to Italian boys for a new laboring force. In 1905 of 71 male employees 41 were Americans and 30 Italians, and of 50 female employees 40 were Americans and 10 Italians. The Skinner Glass Works were opened in 1899 with American employees, and in 1903, 20 Italians and 33 Americans were employed. In the roughing department, the most important department, 2 out of 14 employees were American-born Italians; in the smoothing depart ment 5 out of 25 were American-born Italians; the 7 polishers were all Italians; one Italian acted as packer and driver, and 5 out of the 6 girls employed in the inspection department were Italians. Appren tices are taken at the age of 16. The scarcity of local labor, the tendency of American boys to look elsewhere for work after they had learned their trades, and more particularly a strike in 1900, when some Americans were discharged, resulted in the introduction of Ital ians. This strike was in connection with a peculiar development in the polishing department. In this department the work is dirty; and is, therefore, distasteful to Americans, and as soon as they had learned this part of the work they were anxious to be transferred to smoothing. The polishers are now all Italians, who will without murmuring do any kind of work, no matter how unpleasant. In 1905, 25 Italian boys and 4 Italian girls were employed, the whole number of employees being 47, of whom 6 were girls. There are 2 journeymen among the 12 Italian polishers. A new glass factory was started in 1903, which employs 30 persons, 2 of whom are Italians. The stocking factory began work in Hammonton in 1893. The original intention was to employ Russian Jews, but the Italians being at hand workers of that nationality were utilized. The wages paid have not been attractive to American girls. In 1903, 10 Italians and 5 Americans were employed. In 1905 the employees had increased to 55, of which number 50 were Italian girls from 14 to 18 years of age, most of whom were bom in the United States. This number, the manufacturer thinks, includes nearly all the available supply. The planing mill at Hammonton ordinarily employs 12 men, 9 of 496 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. them being skilled workmen. There has been a native-born Italian employed at the mill, and occasionally an Italian as a teamster. It appears, therefore, that the Italians are of some importance to the local industries, but up to the present time, except for manual labor, they have been employed only because American labor was lacking. It meant great effort on the part of the managers to train these boys and girls. In comparing American and Italian factory labor one point must be emphasized— the difference between the Italians born in Italy and those bom in America. The former are seldom suitable for anything but manual labor, unless they come as children; the latter, however, are fitted for work requiring a greater degree of skill. Taking up the characteristics of Italian factory labor, we find, first, that the new comers are to some extent unreliable. Among the work ing force at Winslow a large number of the Italian laborers own farms, and work at the brickyard only part of the year. Some of the men, moreover, are liable to accept, without giving notice, any other profit able job that turns up. During berry-picking seasons it is often neces sary to carry a large number of men on the roll in order to be sure to have a sufficient working force. In its early days the stocking factory suffered considerably from the irregularity of its laboring force; the girls especially were not dependable, and it was always necessary to close the factory during the berry-picking season. The girls have come gradually to realize the demands of their employment, and being anxious to earn money they arrive promptly and begin work on time. The same criticism is true of the first Italian boys employed at the shoe factory. They had no sense of responsibility, no appre ciation of the demands of a job, and would leave at any time without warning. It took about a year and a half to get them in training. The boys employed at the glass factory comprise the highest class of Italian labor. They are glad to get the work and can be depended upon. It is said of the manual workers at the brickyards that they are awkward and careless. On beginning work in the factories the boys and girls are clumsy, but with training they improve and some become expert. In the glass works the Italians become better polishers than do the Americans. The Italian girls, in the stocking factory were at first rough and awkward in operating the hand machines, and sometimes broke them, but they are more proficient in handling the automatic machinery. The endurance of the Italians is greater than that of the Americans, but it takes them longer to learn and their promotion is correspondingly slow. A t the shoe factory the rate of wages is probably lower than if Americans alone were employed. The superintendent of a factory for making trousers— established in the country in order to utilize the cheap labor of Italian women and girls— said that the Italians were in such haste to earn money in doing piecework that they were careless, and, THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 497 as a result, much of the work was frequently spoiled. This fault might have been remedied if there had been sufficient time to ade quately train these employees, but unfortunately it was an impos sibility for the reason that the undertaking was short lived. The girls in the glass works are said to be careful and easy to control. The girls at the stocking factory are ambitious to learn to do good work and make better wages. Unlike the American girls, they do not cry over difficulties, but endeavor to surmount obstacles, even if their perseverance results in breaking machines. Uneducated labor is never efficient. The Italian is as good in his way as were the ignorant Irish and Germans, and is a faithful, steady, and sober worker. Race prejudice has been noticeable, and at the stocking factory the American and Italian girls were at first kept separate. At the glass works more Italian apprentices would be employed if it were not for the objections made by the Americans, who, being well paid for their work in this industry, wish to retain it. The managers of the shoe factory were always able to get a sufficient number of American girls to do the work, and being apprehensive of trouble no attempt was made until 1905 to employ Italians. At the brickyards the Italians formerly received a daily wage of only $1. In 1894 there was a strike among the Italians, who claimed that the Americans received $1.20. The Italians now receive from $1.25 to $1.40. At the shoe factories wages range from $5.50 to $18 per week, Italians receiving about $5.50; a few receive from $9 to $10. Glass making is the best paid industry in Hammonton. Apprentices receive from $10 to $12; some make from $14 to $15 per week, the average pay for piecework in the roughing department being $20. Several of the polishers earn good wages, one Italian averaging $30 per week, and at times has earned as high as $42. The girls earn from $3 to $5 a week. At the stocking factory the girls earn from $4 to $6 a week. Outside the factories there are other demands for both skilled and unskilled labor, but the Italians with trades are few in number. Of the first generation of Italians in Hammonton there is a blacksmith, a few carpenters, a house painter, a horse clipper, and two bakers. Among the younger generation there is a telegraph operator, a line man, a harness maker, a plumber’s helper, and a few carpenters. Day laborers have been in demand in the last few years. The rail roads employ from 40 to 45 men in the winter, as during that season traffic is lighter and improvements can more readily be made. The Reading Railroad regularly employs from 10 to 15 men for section work, and in the winter of 1904-5, 50 men were also employed on special work, the pay ranging from $1.15 to $1.30 per day, according to the number of hours. A number of public-service enterprises have been inaugurated in Hammonton, the establishment of a water 498 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. supply system and the gas works being the most important. Italians were employed for all the digging; for instance, in 1903 about thirty were so utilized in connection with the gas works, at $1.50 per day. They struck for $1.75, but were not successful. Every year the gas and water lines are extended, requiring diggers, and the plumbers employ Italians to dig the trenches for connections with private dwellings or to dig cesspools. In fact, if there is any digging to be done Italians are obtained, and they do a great deal of work on the public roads. The town records of accounts frequently show pay ments to Italians; for example, on September 2, 1905, $397.50 was paid for work on highways, of which $229.12 went to persons of this nationality in sums varying from $6 to $68.03. In 1896 the contract for building the county road from Hammonton to Egg Harbor and Absecon was given" to an Italian of Philadelphia. Advertisements for work frequently appear in the local newspapers as follows: “ Mow lawn, trim hedge, clean yards, carry ashes, guarantee satisfaction,” or “ Whitewashing, papering, pressing clothes.” In truth, the Italian is, in many cases, willing to do any kind of work, though his efficiency is not always equal to his willingness. Several Italians are engaged in business enterprises. One of the most competent and popular builders and contractors in town is a native-born Italian of the second generation, who comes of a family from northern Italy. Among the southern Italians one is a success ful ice dealer, carrying on the business with the aid of his sons. He is considered a fair dealer; is an advertiser, and in 1902 offered free ice to church entertainments. His competitor imports his ice and charges higher prices. Turchi Brothers are prominent merchants in the neighboring village of Elm. There is one store in the principal street of Hammonton stocked with olive oil, fruit, bread, groceries, and clothing. One of the bakers owns a store. Most of the stores conducted by Italians are small, untidy in appearance, located in outlying districts, and are patronized only by Italians. Other busi nesses controlled by Italians include a hotel and saloon, two barber shops, one harness making establishment, one pool room, a junk busi ness, and an automobile repair shop. The steam macaroni factories, formerly operated by Italians, have been idle since the owners died. Some Italian farmers act as agents for fertilizer companies, one young man doing a business of $8,000 in the course of the year, and he is proud of the fact that no bond or security is required. A number act as padrones, supplying not only pickers for Hammonton, but laborers for Atlantic City and elsewhere. As many Italians deal at the large stores owned by Americans it is an advantage for the proprietors to have as clerks Italians who speak the Italian language. The department store of the town employs one Italian woman and four Italian men, as well as another THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 499 Italian to attend to the horses. The woman has charge of a depart ment, is considered an excellent clerk, and receives good wages. None of these Italians are American born. This establishment for merly employed a young Italian who was said to be superior in cour tesy and efficiency to most of the American employees. The large feed store employs three Italians, all bom in Italy, who are able to read and write, and they are highly valued by their employer. One intelligent boy, who came from Italy at an early age, is being trained at a meat store. A clothing store has an Italian woman as clerk, and the two livery stables have had as drivers Italian men or boys. Italian women not only work in the fields, but supplement the family income by other kinds of work; they consider, however, that domestic work is beneath them. Only in a few cases have Italian girls worked for Americans, and then generally as an accommodation, because friendly relations had been established. Unfortunately they do not appreciate the value of this method of learning American customs. Housework is not attractive to the girls, and besides the parents fear to have their daughters away from home, especially in the evenings. A number of Italian women are good laundresses, and either take in washing or go out to the homes of their patrons to do washing and ironing, or to help in house cleaning. One woman has made a con siderable sum of money by doing laundry work. The home industries remain to be mentioned. Italian women are usually knitting when not otherwise engaged, and they also make a kind of trimming for clothing and linen, as well as spreads of elaborate patterns for wedding chests. Hammonton, like other country places, has been provided with work from the city to be done in the homes. One New York firm, dealing in socks and jackets for babies, and in umbrella shawls, has supplied Italian women with consider able work. This work had previously been given out to Americans only, but eight years ago an Italian woman saw what was being done by Americans and applied for work. When it was decided to employ Italians in this industry, their number increased rapidly until there were 200 Italians to 60 Americans. Material and samples are supplied. The Italians make principally babies’ socks, called bootees, for which they are paid from 12 cents to $1 a dozen, according to the quality and stitch, but they do not attempt the work when the pat tern is intricate. Some women knit as many as 27 dozen bootees in two weeks and make as high as $8. A woman or a girl will take work for relatives as well as for herself, and sometimes other women or girls will help in the knitting. When the women first under take the work, they watch carefully while some one instructs them in the operation, but they make no attempt to do the work until they reach home. They usually succeed, but occasionally they try another way, and bring it, with the question, “ How you like?” 500 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. When a mistake is made, they do not think of pulling out the wolk and beginning over, but blunder on. Cleanliness is necessary, and even the most untidy of the women keep their work neatly wrapped in clean handkerchiefs. In case work is returned in a soiled condi tion they must pay for the material. Their employers had some diffi culty in establishing regular hours for serving them, and for a long time, in spite of notices, they would persist in coming at unseason able hours. There have been examples of short weight in returning work, but proper deductions have always been made, and in several cases unusual honesty has been shown by the return of money when too much had been received. For the past twelve years white duck and colored trousers, to be used in the Philippines, West Indies, and Australia, have been fin ished in Hammonton for large Philadelphia firms, and 10,000 were made in Hammonton the first six months of 1905. This work has all gone through the hands of an Irish woman, and neatness and good sewing are required. The trousers are cut and sent to be finished by housekeepers who can not leave their homes. The number of workers varies at different times, the highest having been 40. Only $1 to $6 per week can be made. It is difficult for Italian women to do the work in the summer time, as they are required to help in the picking season when pickers are scarce. When the Work is urgent, they will, however, sew at night and on rainy days. In the summer of 1905 there were 33 names on the list, of whom 13 were Italians, and, in looking over the names, it is noticeable that they belong to the best Italian families. THE ACQUISITION OF PRO PE RTY. The most practical method of ascertaining the amount of property owned by an individual is to refer to the tax list, and in this way it is also possible to compare the possessions of Italians and Americans. Both real and personal property are taxed in New Jersey, and in addition there is a poll tax. According to the last assessment (1906-7), Italians pay $4,493.67, or 17.7 per cent of $25,407.79, the total amount of taxes levied. Real estate in Hammonton is, as a rule, assessed at about one-half its actual value, but in the case of highpriced property the assessed valuation is nearer one-third of the value. Town property is assessed at high valuations, and few Italians own town sites, but within the past year several sites have been purchased. According to the 1906-7 assessment, the assessed value of 26,421 acres is $1,149,021, and there are 323 Italians who own 4,846 acres, assessed at $176,575. There are 1,370 names on the tax register. Of these, 448, or about one-third, are Italians, of whom 96 pay only a poll tax. Forty-eight Italians pay taxes on real estate, but have no personal- 501 THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. property tax. Real estate owned by Italians represents 18.4 per cent of the acreage assessed and 15.4 per cent of the assessed value. Improvements, such as houses, barns, and sheds, are included in the assessed value. The greater value of American properties is in part due to the better houses and barns. Italian houses are ordinarily assessed at $200. All the farms are not owned outright by either Italians or Americans. Many of them are mortgaged, and are being paid for by means of the building and loan associations. The fol lowing tables show, for 1906-7, the number of Italian owners and the range of assessments on real estate holdings of each classified size; also the number assessed for each specified amount of personal property, and examples of high taxes paid: ITALIAN OWNERS AND RANGE OF ASSESSMENTS ON R E A L ESTATE HOLDINGS OF EACH CLASSIFIED SIZE, 1906-7. Size of holdings. Italian 1 Range of owners. assessments. ; 1 acre or under.............. 1 to 2 acres.................... 2 to 3 acres.................... 3 to 4 acres.................... 4 to 5 acres.................... 5 to 8 acres.................... 8 to 10 acres................... 82 $25 to $2,750 50 to 1,875 19 14 75 to 450 9 250 to 625 26 50 to 500 14 25 | 25 to 1,175 Size of holdings. Italian owners. 10 to 20 acres............... 20 to 50 acres............... 50 to 80 acres............... 80 to 100 acres.............. 100 to 150 acres............ 230 acres....................... Range of assessments. 54 62 13 2 2 1 $100 to $5,000 150 to 1,700 875 to 2,300 (a) (a) (a) a Not reported. ITALIANS ASSESSED FOR EACH CLASSIFIED AMOUNT OF PERSONAL PR O PE R TY, 1906-7. Assessments on personal property. $25............................................................. $50............................................................. $75............................................................. $100........................................................... $125........................................................... $150........................................................... $175......................................................... Number of Italians assessed. 183 72 16 10 8 2 2 Assessments on personal property. Number of Italians assessed. 4 2 2 1 1 1 $200......................................................... $250......................................................... $325......................................................... $3o0......................................................... $450......................................................... $575(o)................................................... « Factory, $400; other personal property, $175. EXAM PLES OF HIGH TA XE S PAID B Y ITA LIA N P R O PE R T Y HOLDERS, 1906-7. Assessed value. $1,350........................................................ $1,650........................................................ $1,800........................................................ $1,950........................................................ $2,200........................................................ $2,250....................................................... $2,350........................................................ $2,625........................................................ Tax. o $25.84 o31.36 33.12 o36.88 a41.48 0 42.40 0 44.24 48.30 Assessed value. $2,850...................................................... $2,925...................................................... $3,225...................................................... $3,450...................................................... $4,200...................................................... $5,000...................................................... $5,175...................................................... Tax. $52.44 • 54.82 o 60.34 63.48 o78.28 92.00 0 96.22 a Including $1 poll tax. In its issue of October 18, 1902, the South Jersey Republican remarked, “ Every week or so a new house is built between Rosedale and Winslow by Italians.” This marks a tendency on the part of day 304b— No. 70—07---- 3 502 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. laborers to buy an acre or half an acre and to build a house. In the fall of 1905, 43 houses were erected in Hammonton, 20 of which, at least, were built for Italians. The personal property tax is levied on house furnishings, horses, wagons, store goods or fixtures, and bank stock. An assessment of $50 or $75 ordinarily represents one or two horses, the heavier assess ments, however, being made upon small stores. The assessed value of personal property in Hammonton is $185,450, including all impor tant business enterprises of the town, and of this $15,525, or 8.4 per cent, was assessed against 304 Italians. The ordinary American with a comfortable home is assessed for $50; the poor Italian with his scantily furnished house is assessed for $25, and for $50 if he keeps a horse. This illustrates a general inequality of the taxing methods to the disadvantage of the Italians in many cases. In the personal property assessment, 183 Italians are assessed at $25 each and 121 at higher amounts. In addition there are 29 Italians assessed for personal property who pay no real estate tax, which shows the small number of Italians who rent their houses. The property of Italians consists largely of real estate, and if an Italian buys a few acres he usually has sufficient savings to pay for them. Wild land has been obtained for $20 and $25 per acre, but occasionally, when a large tract of land some distance from the town has been purchased the price has been as low as $5 per acre. This, however, is exceptional, and as a rule the Italians have paid good prices for their land, poor land near the town having recently been sold at from $100 to $200 per acre. When an Italian purchases wild land he spends his leisure time grubbing it out and getting it ready for cultivation, and if, when the land is ready for use he has not suf ficient savings wherewith to build a house, several courses are open to him. He pays for the digging of a cellar and for a pump and gives his note or notes, made negotiable by the signature of a freeholder, to the builder who puts up the house; or he borrows the money from a well-to-do Italian; or he arranges to get the money from one of the building and loan associations; or he buys the entire property on contract. It is noticeable that new houses are usually built in the fall, after the berry picking is over and money is plentiful. The town of Hammonton has been built up by its building and loan associations, and 90 per cent of the shares of the associations are held in the town. It is a mark of intelligence that Italians have made use of this modem institution for securing homes. There are two asso ciations, the Hammonton Loan arid Building Association, organized in 1871, and the Workingmen's Building and Loan Association, organized in 1877. In 1904 the Hammonton Loan and Building Association had 460 stockholders, averaging five and a half shares to each holder. Seventy-nine stockholders, or 17 per cent of the total THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 503 number, were Italians, holding three and a half shares each on the average. The total loans during the year amounted to $182,156, of which Italians took $53,600, or nearly one-third, averaging $800 each. Defaults in payments have numbered 122, of which 19 per cent were by Italians. In the Workingmen’s Building and Loan Association in 1904 there were 553 stockholders, with average holdings of five and a half shares. Of these, 129, or 23 per cent, were Italians. Italians have been on the books for twenty years, and their number is increas ing, a few holding shares as investments. Women as a rule hold shares jointly with their husbands. One woman has 25 shares, repre senting $3,500, which she has paid for out of money earned in launder ing and other work. Occasionally Italians pay their dues for the whole year in August or September. In eight years property amount ing to $3,500 only has been taken over in default of payments by the Hammonton Loan and Building Association. The building and loan associations frequently lend as high as 80 per cent on the value of the land and completed house. The Italians usually build small tworoom houses, 16 by 16 feet, which cost about $350. The double houses, 16 by 32 feet, cost from $650 to $750, while some houses, with porches and improvements, cost from $1,000 to $1,200, and a $1,700 house has just been completed for a prosperous Italian family. Such improve ments as bams and sheds are often made by means of loans from the building and loan associations. Many Italians are prompt in getting out of debt, and are unwilling to assume new obligations until the old debts are liquidated. A debt of $1,200 is usually paid off in eight years. When land is purchased on contract the buyer agrees to pay the taxes and a certain amount each year, and Italians have often paid unnecessarily high prices, as, for instance, in 1896, an Italian took a farm on contract, for which $3,000 was to be paid. After paying $1,200 hard times came, and he gave up the place and went to Provi dence, where he also bought land. Returning in 1902, he bought the place for $1,200 cash, about what it was worth. With improvements, he now values it at $2,000. The estimated wealth of some Italians of Hammonton is repre sented by the following: (1) An Italian, now a resident of Philadel phia, owns six houses and 14 acres of land, which he values at $10,000, a part of the property bordering on a street embracing high-priced real estate. (2) Another has a farm and business estimated at $15,000. (3) One of the second generation has accumulated property worth from $20,000 to $30,000, and (4) a recent comer has not only paid for his farm from the first year’s receipts, but he has put up an expensive house, and he also owns some bonds in addition to some mortgages on surrounding farms. Thrift is one of the strongest characteristics of the Italians. Many of them carry large sums of money about their persons, or hide money 504 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. in their homes. An Italian and his wife, recently killed by a train, had with them a wallet containing $465. The house of an aged Italian was burned in the winter of 1905 and $250, all his savings, lost. In the past the Italians deposited their money with trusted friends, Americans or Italians, but since the local bank was started they have been advised to use the bank as a depository. The following statis tics show to what extent this has been done. The People’s Bank, which is a thriving institution, paying 16 per cent on its capital stock, was opened in 1887. In September, 1890, there were 450 deposit accounts on the books, amounting to $87,080. Only three of these accounts belonged to Italians, and aggregated less than $500. In 1904, however, out of $260,779 on deposit, $56,614, or 21.7 per cent, belonged to Italians. Of the total deposit $172,011 was deposited on demand accounts, of which $30,383, or 17.7 per cent, was owed to Italians, and $88,768 on time or savings’ accounts paying 3 per cent interest, of wdiich $26,231, or 29.6 per cent, was owed to Italians. One of the largest amounts deposited by an Italian at one time was $1,500; one of the largest balances was $2,300. The Italians make fairly good wages. This fact, together with the products of their farms and their frugal habits, makes possible the accumulation of comparatively large savings. The wages received in the various industries have been1mentioned. It remains to be stated that farm wages, originally $1 for a ten-hour day, have risen to $1.25 and even to $1.50. Women receive only from 50 to 75 cents a day. For special work like plowing, where horses and a plow are furnished, from $2.50 to $5 is paid. One farmer employs an Ital ian by the year at $1.40 a day, with house, rent free, and free wood. In summer he is expected to work long hours. During the busy season this farmer also employs 11 Italian farm hands and 150 pickers. When the value of blackberries declined an Italian, farming on a large scale, had to place a mortgage for $900 on some of his property in order to pay off his pickers. It is said that a family of six (man, wife, and four children whose ages ranged from 7 to 22 years) can earn $530 in a good year, as follows: Strawberries in district south of Hammonton, $125; raspberries, $60; blackberries, $90; huckleberries, $80; and cranberries, $175. In 1905 a mother and her 11-year old daughter earned $40 in three weeks; another mother and daughter earned $121 for the season, which sum repre sented $28 for strawberries, $55 for raspberries and blackberries, and $38 for cranberries; and a family of five received $200 for rasp berries and blackberries. In one day in 1904 six men gathered 115 bushels of cranberries in seven hours, in quantities of 25, 20, 19,18,17, and 16 bushels, respec tively, the last two quantities being picked by men 75 and 77 years old. The average earnings of each amounted to $4.79. One family makes $500, as a rule, in cranberry picking. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 505 Some Italians own property in Philadelphia. For instance, one family owns a house worth $6,000, for which $40 a month in rent is received. Some Italian families disposed of small properties in Italy, which properties usually were not valued at more than $500 each, to aid in purchasing places in Hammonton. In order to do this it is necessary to transport the entire family to the United States, but in some cases the old people are left behind. Considerable money is sent back to Italy to support relatives, to bring over friends, or as savings. These remittances can hardly be estimated since the money is sent in various ways, by post-office orders, registered letters, b y returning friends, or by Italian bankers. The Hammonton postoffice orders to Italy in 1903 numbered 408, amounting to $8,774.39. There were 519 registered letters sent, many of which probably con tained Italian money obtained from Italian bankers in Philadelphia. These remittances doubtless include some of the money of outof-town pickers, but they are offset by money sent by Hammonton Italians from Philadelphia. The Italian is seldom a town charge. In fact the taxpayers of Hammonton are not heavily burdened with any charges, and only old age or some misfortune brings an Italian “ on the town.” In 1900 the poor fund was only $400; in 1901, $582.40. In 1901 the town paper mentioned the death of an Italian pauper. It is evident that the property owned by Italians in Hammonton represents the results of hard labor and the actual making of wealth. Starting with practically nothing, they have bettered themselves, and by bringing new land into cultivation they have increased both the productive and the consumptive capacity of the community. STANDARD OF LIVING. In order to appreciate the changes which have taken place in the lives of these people it is necessary to present the conditions under which they lived before they came to this country. Gesso, a typical Sicilian town, 6 miles from Messina, perched on the top of a moun tain, is the locality whence the Sicilians came to Hammonton. The people are crowded together in a little village, one-half mile long by one-quarter mile wide, with three streets running lengthwise. Every possible space is occupied by a brick house of three or four rooms, in one of which the mule is stabled; chickens and pigs are also kept. A boy of Italian birth pictures the conditions as inex pressibly squalid. The residents of the village own small farms of from 1 to 1£ acres in the outlying district, and the few Italians who live in the country are usually tenant farmers. The markets for produce are poor, and the farmers get but meager returns. When working for others a farmer receives only 20 or 30 cents a day, and the taxes are so high that little is left for him to live upon. Living 506 BULLETIN OF THE BUBEAU OF LABOR. is cheap, prices low, and a man can exist on 5 cents a day, the food consisting of polenta, macaroni, green vegetables, bread and cheese, milk, figs, chestnuts, and fresh fruits, little or no meat being eaten. Clothing is coarse and cheap. Only the rich wear hats, wooden sandals take the place of shoes, and collars and neckties are never seen. W ood for fuel is obtained in the forests. The low standard of living of the southern Italians who come to Hammonton is especially apparent among the berry pickers. Poor accommodations are provided for them, but they seldom com plain of their lodgings. Originally these pickers were given a part of the bam with hay for bedding, and men, women, and children would sleep on the floor. Sheds or barns are now prepared with two tiers of wooden bunks, but there is the same promiscuous crowding, with little room for the wearing apparel or the food, con sisting of dried vegetables or bread, which is hung from the rafters. Occasionally a family is given a single room. The farmers some times attempt to justify these conditions, especially the broken pumps and lack of conveniences, b y alleging that the people are indiffer ent and do not know how to take care of what is provided for them. The pickers bring with them queer luggage, consisting of boxes, barrels, and corded wooden tranks, containing bedding, clothing, and some provisions. Their garments are usually old cotton skirts, waists, and aprons for the women, with bright-colored handkerchiefs for their heads; old store clothes for the men, and dilapidated single garments for the children. The children always go barefoot in hot weather, and sometimes are entirely naked. In the matter of food, breakfast frequently consists of dry bread and water, with onions or cucumbers added. A stove is usually supplied by the farmer. The pickers often cook outdoors, and they sometimes make a little furnace over stones in the ground, covering it with an old piece of iron; but little cooking is done, however, bread and cheese forming much of the diet. The people from Calabria live largely on dry bread, which is often stuck in chunks on the fence, where it molds, and water is pumped on it before it is eaten. The Sicilian berry pickers live better, adding a little milk, tea, or coffee to the fare, and polenta, macaroni, or soup is also prepared. When a dish is cooked, whether it be for a group of men or a family, all gather about the dish and each one helps himself with a spoon or with his fingers. The manner of living and appearance of the pickers has improved of late years. Those who at first would sit in the sun eating bread and onions with water from the horse pail, are now particular to cover their food while sweeping is done, and an especial improvement is also noticed in the clothing of some who come from the city. Among the Italian residents of Hammonton different stages of development may be noted. There is a class of newcomers who are THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 507 unspeakably filthy. These people have no knowledge of the physical care of children, and allow their houses to be overrun with dogs and chickens. On the other hand there are homes, especially of the second generation, that are neat and clean. Every Italian desires a home, and this seems to be characteristic of the race. When they first come to Hammonton, several families will crowd into one house, but as soon as they are able they buy houses for themselves, and frequently brothers build a house which they share until each of them is able to own a home. The Italians are always thrifty, and have great contempt for a man who rents a house for $7 a month and will not crowd his five children into one or two rooms until he is able to save enough to build a home. When a family is building a house every member is -interested; even little children are seen carrying the stones for the foundation, while the older children help to earn the money to pay for the home. All spare time, espe cially Sundays, is spent about the new house. Young people never board, but go to housekeeping, if it is only in one room. In one case where a farmer's helper was married, one room was added to the farmer's house, and patched with old tins and tin cans; but this was years ago when the Italians were willing to put up with any kind of a shelter. The surroundings of the Italian house, as a rule, are unattractive, the rear being cluttered with little sheds built of odds and ends, with lumber, and with piles of rubbish of all kinds. There are no flowers or grass in front, and what should be a front yard is frequently a vegetable garden, grape vineyard, or wood yard. As already stated where American farmhouses are purchased by Italians the cost of maintaining them is considered a great drawback, and they are either neglected or several families occupy a large house. In some cases, however, the houses have been kept in good repair, but the flower beds and grass plots are usually plowed up. There are, however, encourag ing signs. A number of Italians have neat, pretty places; one of the men of the second generation maintains a lawn because he thinks it increases the selling value of his place, and some of the recent builders have picketed off little front yards and have made attempts to grow grass and flowers in the sand. There are comparatively few small houses in Hammonton which may be rented, so it is necessary to buy or to build. The Italian, as a rule, builds his house, of which there are three types of construction: (1) The two-room house, (2) houses of four or more rooms, and (3) a modification of the second type. The two-room house is ordinarily 16 by 16 feet, with one room on the first floor and stairs leading to the room above. These houses have doors in the front and back, several windows, and a chimney. The second kind of house, unlike that of the American type, has greater width than depth; it is 32 by 16 508 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. feet, and the two rooms are separated by a tiny hall and a steep stairway. This type of house is modified in several ways, occasionally being a double house with two doors for two families, and sometimes having a plain porch. While these houses are decidedly ugly, with their plain weatherboarding, they are the usual American cheap house, with bay windows or decorative porches omitted. Recently there has been adopted an improved type, with a gable in the roof and porches with balustrades, which make the dwelling more attract ive. Several houses of this style were built in 1905. In the fall of 1905 an Italian family built a typical American house of medium size on a corner lot, with porches on two sides and with bay windows, which will doubtless serve as a model. The houses are built of wood, and, even if small, are fairly well con structed, with good foundations and paper sheathing. In summer the occupants lead an outdoor life, so that they do not greatly feel the lack of space when indoors. Nearly every house has a shed, where the cooking is done in summer, and while some of these sheds have the appearance of covered wells others are nice summer kitchens. Often the cook stove is left outdoors, exposed to all conditions of weather. In some cases the old-fashioned beehive oven, made of brick and cement, has been erected and is used by several families. This is filled with wood, and after the wood is burnt and the oven heated the bread is put in to bake. The houses generally have no heating apparatus except the kitchen stove and, perhaps, oil stoves that are sometimes used in bedrooms. In winter the Italians keep closely housed. While the Italians buy good cooking ranges, little coal is used for fuel as yet, hard wood and sometimes only brushwood being used, women often being seen going home with a bundle of branches on their heads. Water is obtained from a pump outside the house. The houses are plastered, and strips of wood supplied with nails and hooks take the place of closets. The furnishings are meager and not well arranged. The comments of an Irish domestic servant were amusing. She had never seen “ such poverty, such lack of comfort, not a carpet or anything.” There are few cooking utensils, the dishes are of the most ordinary white ware, and the table is without a cover until the Italian learns about oilcloth. Oilcloth with colored figures is very popular, and is often sent as gifts to friends in Italy. The chairs and tables, are either a cheap kitchen grade or well-worn old-fashioned articles which have been picked up at auctions. A jumble of barrels, trunks, and boxes, often used in place of bureaus, gives the cluttered appear ance so familiar in the homes of the poor. General cheerlessness is evident, for instance, in the house of a well-to-do Italian, where the contents of the principal room consisted of a stove, two tables, two shelves with clocks, a barrel, a sewing machine, a printer’s calendar THE ITALIAN ON THE LANDV 509 on the wall, and a few cheap chairs. The distinctive thing about an Italian house is the bed. This is set up high, either on homemade frames or, if purchased, it is made high by feather ticks, and no matter how dirty or forlorn the house the bed is clean. The Italian women and girls spend much time making lace, with which they trim the sheets, while the bed covering is an elaborate piece of lace, occasionally put over some colored fabric. When possible a girl makes several of these coverings for her wedding box, sometimes a year being taken to make one spread, and the designs are simple as well as original. Little else is found in the bedroom. Bureaus are seen, but the absence of washstands is noticeable. Mosquito nettings, screens, and cheap white sash curtains, such as are seen everywhere in American houses, mark the first advance toward comfort and decoration in furnishing. A parlor and more bedrooms constitute the first expansion in living rooms; dining rooms are seldom provided, and carpets and rugs are found only among the well to do, or in the homes of the second generation. Here the furniture— chairs,sofa,couches,lace curtains, lamps, and even pianos— correspond to those of Americans of the same class, and often a silk or plush parlor suit is purchased. When the Italian has money to spend, he is greatly influenced by the example of his American neigh bors as well as by that of the more progressive among his own race. Some Italians have had their homes nicely papered and, if they can afford it, they keep their houses well painted, occasionally in bright blues and greens. When an American housewife went to the city and purchased a new stove to accommodate a hot-water boiler, the stove was duly inspected and similar purchases were made by the Italian neighbors. Hammonton has recently put in a water sys tem; a number of Italians have had water put in their houses, and on one street, where Italians and Americans live in close proximity, several Italian families, when they heard that a family of Americans was going to put in a bathroom, immediately decided on securing the same convenience. Some ideas of bathing have been acquired by the young Italians, and the fresh-water lake at Hammonton makes a pleasant bathing place for the young people of the town. When some Italian boys wanted to try the bathing, they were told by the older Italians that they would die from its effects; but Ameri cans suggested a trial, and since then the boys of both nationalities frequent the lake in summer time. A local telephone system has recently been completed, and thus far 29 telephones have been sub scribed for by Italians. Several notable cases of improved standards in house building and furnishing may be mentioned. In one case a large family had lived for ydars in a tiny story-and-a-half building, but in 1905 this family purchased valuable property in town and put up a nice house with 510 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. store building adjoining. An Italian hotel keeper has improved an old property, making a neat and attractive building, in which he has put a steam-heating plant. Another Italian, of the first genera tion, who a few years ago had practically nothing, bought a farm for $1,500, and, although the land was well manured, it was covered with weeds and was unprofitable. He cleared the ground and paid off his indebtedness from the first year’s crop of berries, and since then, out of his profits, he has purchased a farm of 20 acres on the main road for $700, and has erected one of the best houses in the vicinity, at a cost of $3,500, spending $1,100 of this amount for plumb ing, which included a hot-water heating apparatus, a well-equipped bathroom, and a steam pump for the house and bam. This house is papered and well furnished. When about to purchase the furni ture he went to a well-to-do farmer in the vicinity and asked that he and his wife might be permitted to inspect the interior of the farmer’s house; he also asked the farmer’s wife for advice, and told her what amounts he wished to spend on the different rooms. She told him that in each case he had not allowed enough. Finally the farmer accompanied him to the city and aided him in making his purchases. In spite of these fine surroundings this man’s family have not noticeably departed from the customs of other Italians; his wife dresses like the other Italian women; she walks 3 miles to town and returns with purchases on her head, and the family eat in the pump room in summer. The oldest daughter, however, is being sent away to school, and the children are early becoming accustomed to good surroundings. The food of the Italian newcomer who locates in Hammonton is similar to that of the berry pickers, with the addition of meat, but ter, and eggs, and even among the very poor meat is always eaten on Saturdays and Sundays, while orders for large quantities of meat are given on holidays. Good qualities of meat and the very best brands of flour are used, the latter usually being bought by the bar rel. The bread is made in large well-baked loaves, sometimes twisted into big circles. Fruit and vegetables are supplied from the garden, and dandelions are frequently gathered in season. “ Italians eat everything,” one woman said, and strange plants certainly are gath ered for “ greens.” Olive oil is obtained from Italy when possible, and some Italians send for it by the barrel. The oil retails at 50 cents per quart and is of excellent quality. Olives, sausages, and macaroni are also procured from Italy. The food is in every way superior to that which is obtained b y many of their countrymen in the cities, as the studies of Italians in Chicago and elsewhere show that in large cities these people live largely upon spoiled and rejected vegetables and decaying fruit. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 511 The women know practically nothing about cooking, and give little attention to it. They seldom preserve fruits by canning or drying, but tomatoes are made into a kind of paste, which is dried on a board in the sun, and forms an important article of winter diet. Some of the Italian dishes are as follows: Potatoes with the skins on, each mem ber of the family taking a potato from the pot and paring it; a pot of macaroni with tomato butter; Italian greens (like kale) with pota toes; corn-meal mush with fat meat and onions or garlic, and raisins. They also combine onions, peppers, tomatoes, eggplant, and herbs into one dish. Little seasoning other than pepper or mints is used. Meat is not used more than three times a week. Oatmeal and com meal are the only cereals purchased, which, together with crackers, canned goods, oranges, lemons, and bananas are obtained at the stores. Lemons and oranges are eaten with equal enjoyment. Peanuts are in great demand at social gatherings. Ice is purchased only on July 16 to keep the beer and soft drinks cool. With regard to the use of beverages the Italians are fond of the sour wine of their own make; whisky is sometimes drunk at weddings; beer is frequently given to children; milk, tea, and coffee are ordinarily used at meals. Many of the children say that they do not like wine. Preference is shown by the young Italians for such foods as are used by Americans, and in some cases they do not indulge in onions and garlic lest the odor make them offensive to their American fellow-workmen. Italians show little judgment in the feeding of children, allowing them to eat such things as green apples and cucumbers without protest. The lunches of the school children ordinarily consist of sweet potatoes, apples, bread, and jam, and in the district or country schools their lunches are often copied after those of their teachers. An advance in cooking has resulted from contact with the neighbors. For instance, a daughter will be sent to a neighboring acquaintance to inquire how to make a cake for a special occasion, what use can be made of rhu barb, or how to put up fruit. In the matter of clothes, the older women of the first generation retain their native garb, consisting of cotton skirts and waists, which do not always match, aprons, gay little shawls and handkerchiefs for their heads, or no covering at all. The shawls are pretty, and are made of silk or wool, in bright colors, embroidered and fringed; the handkerchiefs are the bright colored ones so common in Italy. Gala occasions are marked by the wearing of clean dresses, clean aprons and shawls, clean handkerchiefs, and long earrings, the ears of the girls having been pierced when they were tiny babies. Cotton clothes are worn in winter, and woolen “ fascinators” (white “ nubias” ) are the headgear generally worn by girls in cold weather. Strangely enough, the girls will keep their heads covered when no other 512 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. outer wraps are worn. Blue is a favorite color, but orange, yellow, and red are frequently seen. The men wear sweaters and cheap ready-made suits— the ordinary clothing of the poor— and shoes of American make are generally worn. Italians wear shoes until they are unfit to mend, but recently they have learned that the wearing of rubber overshoes saves the shoes. Italian babies are often clothed in the old-time swaddling clothes, and are not well cared for. Babies and little children are allowed to go naked, or are clad in short garments in summer, the moth ers having an idea that it is less trouble not to clothe small chil dren below the waist. The second generation mothers do not bind their babies. A local physician has been trying to teach them that warm clothing and some training will reduce doctors’ bills. Some years ago, when there was great poverty among these people, large numbers of little children died, since when the Americans have tried to impress upon the parents the necessity of warm clothing and proper covering for the feet of the children in winter. Often little children have shoes and no stockings in winter, and they begin going barefoot in April. While some children are inadequately clad, a general improvement is noticed in that respect, although during the winter season many Italian children still suffer greatly from coughs and colds because of scanty clothing. The cotton dresses of the little girls appear dirty simply because they are made of cheap material, which soon looks dingy in spite of washing; however, some of the children are tastefully clothed. When the children go to school, beginning with the kindergarten, if any necessary part of their apparel is lacking, or if any part is soiled, the child is sent home to have proper changes made. The appearance of the children improves after beginning school attendance until, as young men and women, they are frequently not to be distinguished from native-born Americans. The first marked change in the stand ard of living is probably in the clothing. Neatly attired young men and women frequently come from crowded and dirty homes, and many of the younger members of the first generation, as well as of the second, are clothed in American style. The Italian women very generally possess sewing machines, often purchased on the installment plan, and though they do not sew very well, and the children’s made-over garments are frequently not well done, they are improving in the character of this class of work. The frugality of the Italians is evidenced in the patching of clothes, and sometimes an entire suit or dress will consist of nothing but patches. From twenty to thirty sheets, that are a mass of neatly sewed pieces, are often seen hanging on lines, and while they can not as yet be called a cleanly people, they seem to be always washing their clothes. At first they did not use lines, but hung the clothes on fences or left them about on barrels or posts; but the use of lines as well as ironing THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 513 they have learned from Americans. In buying goods their tendency at first was to spend much time in arguing over prices in the effort to get them reduced. They are now learning to accept the one-price system. The outdoor life is one of the most important features of the coun try existence. The women work in the garden and do much of their housework out of doors, such as washing, cooking, washing dishes, shelling peas, etc. Their children are outdoors with them, and often, in the afternoon, groups of women with babies are seen sitting under the trees. Unquestionably the manner of living of the older people is not greatly influenced by their neighbors. In the country they have good food, a good house, and outdoor life, which makes for better health and comfort; but they do not care for American ways, as they are not used to them and because they “ cost too much.” The younger people, on the other hand, learn by observation and by intercourse with their American neighbors to adopt American ways, while the children desire American clothes, food, and homes, and the boy, who helps to build the house, takes pride in a brick walk and grass “ like Americans;” the girl who visits an American learns of American dishes, while marked changes during the past six years have been noticed in the appearance of the younger children, due to the influence of older brothers and sisters. The standard of living is most important in relation to the birth and death rate. It is well known that the Italian men who come to this country die in large numbers from disease and accidents. Fevers, malarial and typhoid, are common diseases among the Italians of the cities. Malaria and typhoid are rarely contracted in the pine regions, and the town of Hammonton is considered a health resort for tuberculous patients. The mortality statistics show a small death rate for adults, but a heavy death rate for children under 10. This rate, however, is less than the rate in Italy or in our own large cities. The deaths among children are mainly due to intestinal dis eases, especially in summer, and to bronchitis, pneumonia, contagious diseases, and accidents. The causes for this high death rate— care lessness in the selection of clothing and food and lax supervision of children— will gradually be remedied by greater intelligence among the mothers. The children born in Hammonton are noticeable for their health, vigor, and size. Contagious diseases are peculiarly dan gerous among Italians, as the family and neighbors crowd into the room of the sick person in spite of the doctor's protest; but this dan ger is at its minimum in the country. The more intelligent Italians, however, are trying to follow the doctor's directions in caring for sick children. One of the chief objections to Italian immigrants has been the belief that the poor Italian has so long been used to a low standard of 514 BULLETIN OP THE BUREAU OP LABOR. living that he is never willing to improve his condition when he has bettered himself financially. While the Italians of Hammonton have, on the average, made no more than comfortable livings, they have shown a marked tendency to improve their way of living, and this is shown in the greater privacy in the family life, in better food, in better clothes, and in the imitation of the mode of life of their American neighbors. SOCIAL RELATIONS. The home life of the Italians, like that of the Jews, has much for Americans to emulate. Family bonds are strong, and social pleas ures are enjoyed by the family as a whole. Italians not only value children for their labor, but they have great affection for them and are uniformly kind to them. To have many children is considered a blessing; on the other hand, to be childless is regarded as a great misfortune. Families of six, eight, and ten children are not uncom mon. Marriage is desired because of the wish for children, while parents look forward to the marriage of their offspring because of the pleasing possibility of grandchildren. The parents have success fully controlled their grown-up children, but recently the sons have shown a tendency to break away; the daughters, however, are closely guarded. Female chastity is highly esteemed, and very rarely does an Italian girl go astray. Only two cases of this kind are known in Hammonton, and in one of these the guTs parents were of different nationalities and the morals of the mother were not above reproach. It is to be noted, however, that Italian men will live with German and Irish women out of wedlock, but this seldom happens with women of their own nationality, and the foreigners are deserted when the Italians are able to send for their wives. Unquestionably the watchful jealousy of the Italian husbands tends to keep the wives in the path of rectitude, and the church is also vigilant to dis courage any moral laxity. A girl, even when betrothed, is not allowed to be alone with a young man, nor to go out with him. The girls do not go to gatherings freely, and to attend dances the permission of the parent is often required. A few of the younger generation are breaking away from such restrictions, the young men finding them especially galling, and they frequently seek American girls in preference to Italian girls. It is customary among the Italians to’ marry off the daughters according to seniority. Even if younger daughters are promised, they can not marry until their elder sister is provided for. Fathers arrange marriages even against the will of the daughters, preferring to have them marry old and established men, and they sometimes send to Italy for wives for their sons. It is said that an Italian in 1899 gave Ids 14-year old daughter in marriage to a man to whom THE ITALIAN ON T.HE LAND. 515 he owed money and who would on that account cancel the debt. The statistics of marriage are of interest. There are a few cases of intermarriage with other nationalities. Two of the first comers married English sisters; some of the northern Italians have married Americans; one thoroughly Americanized Italian married an Ameri can and repudiated his sister who married an Italian, and several have married Germans. In one case a German girl from a neigh boring town married a well-to-do Italian from the city, and two Italians of the second generation married Irish girls in Philadelphia. The results of most jof these marriages have been satisfactory, the children developing into very desirable American citizens. Italian young men are anxious to marry American girls. From 1876 to 1901 there were 672 marriages, of which 250, or 37 per cent, were Italians, and in later years the Italian marriages have increased in number. From 1889 to 1901 they constituted 49 per cent of the total marriages, while in 1894, 1900, and 1901 they reached more than one-half the total number. The average age at which Italians marry seems to be about the same as that for all marriages of other nationalities. Thirteen widows and eleven widowers are included in this investigation, and, as a rule, an Italian widow with a number of children has every opportunity to make a good second marriage. The actual figures show that in 109 marriages out of 250 the woman in each case was under 20. There was one bride at 13 years of age, two at 14, eight at 15, eighteen at 16, fifteen at 17, thirty-six at 18, and twenty-nine at 19. The usual differences between the ages of married women and married men are shown by a few combinations: Twenty-seven and 37; 26 and 50; 21 and 31, and 22 and 33. 'The number of the bridegrooms in various occupations are as fol lows: Ninety-three farmers, 123 laborers, 2 railroad laborers, 1 rag man, 4 merchants, 2 barbers, 1 storekeeper, 2 fruit dealers, 1 lumber man, 4 workmen, 3 brickmakers, 1 machinist, 3 tailors, 1 pipe maker, 1 blacksmith, and 1 agent. This would indicate that a number of them came from the city. The Italian believes in the subjugation of women and thinks he is justified in administering necessary chastisement. It was amusing to see a young Italian shake his head and ejaculate, “ Oh! yes,” when, at a wedding before a justice of the peace, the wife was told to promise to obey. In some cases they beat their wives, and one offender, when told by the justice that he could be made answerable to the law, said he would prefer to return to Italy father than to remain in this country. There are, however, many kind and affectionate husbands among the first comers, men who assist their wives in laundry work and in carrying and also aid their sick wives, and as a result of intercourse with Americans some ordinary attentions are now paid to their wives. Some Italian men exploit their wives and 516 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. children, living upon their earnings. One early comer said: “ In Pennsylvania woman don’t work; here she pick berries and work.” The wives not only care for the homes and the farms, but they are also hired out to other farmers. The life of the Italian woman is one of hard work, and often pretty girls become old in appearance and misshapen before they reach 30 years of age. Some of the younger women, daughters of well-to-do Italians, refuse to engage in outdoor work. While the Italians of Hammonton live in groups, they are neces sarily too scattered for frequent large gatherings. Berry picking is popular, because the people work in common, going to and from the fields together and often having Philadelphia pickers visiting them. In the evening the out-of-town pickers make the night merry with story-telling, dancing, and the music of mouth organs, accordions, and tambourines. As a rule the Italians live quietly, they do not keep late hours, and they are seldom on the streets in the even ing. The isolation of farming life gives a prominent place to home pleasures. On Sundays whole families are seen driving to visit friends, and in the winter neighbors gather at one another’s houses for music, dancing, gambling, or smoking. Occasionally a dance is given at a house or at one of the public halls. Visits to Philadelphia are another source of diversion, and in the summer Philadelphia Ital ians, especially those having sick children, often visit Hammonton relatives. The important social occasions are weddings, christen ings, and church festivals, while large numbers gather at funerals. The Italians generally belong to the Catholic Church. One family, where the Italian married an English woman, attends the Episcopal Church; the Baptist Church has an Italian communicant, and the Presbyterian Church conducts an Italian mission, where an Italian evangelist preaches to the people. This mission has been established for fifteen years, the effort being to reach the people by doctrinal preaching, and when the preacher has been satisfactory the mission has flourished. The mission society has a good building. In 1897 there were 31 members, with 63 children in the Sunday school, and in 1905 there were about 50 members. American women aid in the Sunday-school work. The prosperity of St. Joseph’s Catholic Church has been largely due to the interest of the Irish Catholics of the community. Mr.. Cogley, an old Settler, had services at his house, the children of the early comers were brought there to be baptized, and at Mr. Cogley’s suggestion the bishop provided a visiting priest. The first comers among the Italians were so poor and so engrossed with their work that they were not very enthusiastic contributors. When St. Joseph’s Church was built in 1895, Judge Byrnes donated the lot, and some Americans contributed money. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 517 This church is maintained as a mission, and there have been both German and well-trained Italian priests in charge. The Italians attend church regularly, religious observances playing an important part in their lives, and on holidays and saints’ days all work is laid aside, special masses are said, and large crowds are seen going to church. These Italians, however, are not so devout a people as the Irish. They have less respect for the person of the priest, and, being used to enforced contributions for church maintenance in Italy, they are slow to respond to appeals for voluntary support. In 1899 the priest demanded that they arrive on time at services and that they make larger contributions, and to enforce his demands he even went so far as to lock the church against some of his congregation, where upon his parishioners forced an entrance. The Italians were not instructed in church doctrine in Italy, and their ideas are crude and superstitious. The great religious festival is on July 16, and Hammonton is one of the few places (a) in the United States where it is celebrated on a large scale. It is especially interesting in Hammonton, not only because of the rural surroundings and the large attendance of Ital ians from Philadelphia, Camden, and Atlantic City, but because of the significance given to it by Americans. In the early days there was some opposition to processions and the carrying of images in the streets; the town council was requested not to sanction it, and in 1901 the priest, thinking it best not to arouse prejudice, forbade it, whereupon he was mobbed, and a riot almost ensued. Public opin ion is influenced by commercial considerations and the local mer chants have found July 16 a rich harvest time, one merchant stating that he had taken in more money on July 15 than on any day before Christmas. Many outsiders com e'to the town, and the Ital ians themselves spend their money freely. While berry picking makes money plentiful, the pickers seldom ask to have their tickets cashed before July 15. Large stores of provisions are laid in, includ ing good meats, especially veal, as well as cakes and candies. Every Italian must have new shoes, and all the girls have new dresses. Judging from the conversation heard at the stocking factory, it is the Easter time in the costuming of Italian women. July 16, “ the Italian Fourth,” as it is called, had made such an impression on the American children that in. 1903 the town council authorized a special celebration of the Fourth of July, with a street parade, a gathering in the park, a patriotic address, band playing, and fireworks. • However, no town celebration has equaled the Italian cele bration, especially that of 1905. The following extracts from a local « A great celebration is held in New York where the first Italian Church was built and dedicated to our Lady of M t. Carmel, to whom this day is also dedicated. 304b—No. 70—07----- i 518 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. paper best describe the Americans’ appreciation of the evening’s entertainment: “ In the evening all the surrounding country was in town— that is, the people— to see the fireworks. We believe it is a safe estimate to claim that not less than two thousand people were present and remained to the close. A large screen was set up near the grand stand, and an exhibition of moving pictures of the life of Christ, mostly taken from the Passion Play, was an unusual feature of the evening. It was about 9 o’clock when the first bomb was fired, and high in air bursted with a deafening crack, scattering colored fire over a wide circle, and eliciting screams of delight. Then followed a display never equaled in the town, lasting an hour and a half. It was noticeable that not a rocket nor a roman candle was included in the programme; all were rare and beautiful. A professional was sent from New York to fire them off.” While this celebration occurs at the hottest time of the year, and the people undergo great fatigue, the crowd is orderly and shows no disposition for quarrelsome or drunken rioting. There is little drinking indulged in, and this occurs only in the saloon near the baseball grounds— where two games are played in the course of the day— at some distance from the church. Excellent management is apparent. The exercises were in the hands of a committee until 1905, at which time the Neapolitan element among the Italians organized a Lady of Mount Carmel Society, this society having been incorporated. Money is contributed by Italians of Philadelphia and Atlantic City, as well as by local Italians and merchants of Hammonton; $400 was spent in 1904 and $600 in 1905. Weddings are especially joyous occasions. Sometimes they are solemnized at the church; often at the office of the justice of the peace. A large crowd sometimes accompanies a wedding party to the latter place, shouting, firing pistols, and showering the wedded pair with pink and white almond-shaped candies. On their return to the house the wedding party frequently spends the whole night in dancing. For music, accordions, tambourines, guitars, and violins are played, and the dances are made up of many impromptu steps. The cele bration of a christening sometimes lasts three days, and the baby is always decorated. Many curious customs are still maintained at funerals, where the emotional and excitable character of the people is peculiarly evident, and the house is usually crowded with people weeping and shouting, apparently almost crazy. The undertaker, when coming to place the body in the coffin, has sometimes felt as if he were being mobbed. Frequently all the clothes of the deceased are put on the body, and in one case a baby had on three coats in addition to dresses .and other clothing. Artificial flowers are placed on the forehead and petunias in the mouth of the corpse. The graves are marked by little wooden crosses or little wooden houses, in which are placed artificial flowers of wax, etc., statues, or pictures. In recent THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 519 years the behavior at funerals has been more subdued and more in accordance with American ideas. The principal Italian society is the Beneficial Society, for which the dues are 50 cents per month and the sick benefit $6 per week. The society has a contract with one of the local physicians to attend its members for a stated sum. Occasionally a social function is held under the auspices of the Beneficial Society; and in 1900 a ball was given, which was largely attended by non-Italians and at which prizes were offered for the “ best lady dancers/’ and in 1901 a game of base ball was played under the protection of the society. The society owns a building 28 by 40 feet. A number of the large fraternities have camps, lodges, or circles in Hammonton, but few Italians as yet are included in the membership. However, a prominent Italian of the second generation, whose father came from northern Italy, is a leading mem ber of the I. O. O. F.; there are a few Italians among the Red Men; some Italians of the second generation are in the Shield of Honor, and recently another lodge of that fraternity has been organized, principally of Italians, but with a few Americans to leaven the loaf and prevent disputes. The Little Ha Ha Circle includes one woman, whose father was an Italian. One Italian, the manager of an Ameri can woman’s farm, is a member of the Hammonton Grange. In their relations with Americans the Italians are good neighbors. They are very appreciative of kindness, and show their liking for Americans by gifts and a willingness to aid where necessity demands. Their gifts often consist of early fruits or vegetables, for which they could get good prices— squashes of a kind not possessed by the neighbor, melons that ripen before his, boxes of berries, and the pickers from town occasionally bring tropical fruits. Their artistic nature is some times shown in their gifts of a full branch of blackberries, a bunch of huckleberry stems, or some rosy apples, arranged with leaves. In one case an American farmer was ill and his Italian neighbor sent his man to work his farm, for which he would take no pay, saying, “ You good to me.” In another case the pickers, who are paid by the quart, left their work to pick beans rather than allow an elderly woman of the household to do the work. An American girl was recently ill, and on that account the carpentry work on a neighboring house was suspended, the Italian workman telling the farmer he would not work even if the contractor ordered it. When there is a fire, when a doctor is needed, or in any emergency, if they can understand what is required they are ready to help. The Italians are essentially a social and cordial people, and the natural politeness of the older people, which so often manifests itself in a pleasant bow to strangers on the country road, has a decided charm. When this courtesy is practiced by the Italians of the younger generation, it makes the young people very agreeable. Some store 520 BULLETIN OF THE BUKEAU OF LABOR. keepers have stated their preference for young Italian men and women as customers. When strangers go to their houses, no matter what their errand, they are treated with courtesy and are offered wine, fruit, or bunches of flowers and mints. Visitors are always welcome. In the few cases where the parents are of different nationalities the social position of the second generation is good. The young men are anxious to mingle with Americans and they go to baseball games, entertainments, the dancing school, and dances. In 1906 an Italian baseball team was maintained. The children enter enthusiastically into celebrations of the national holidays, such as Washington’s Birthday and Decoration Day. American social customs are readily adopted. In cases of death well-known Italians, like Americans, insert cards in the local newspapers, thanking their friends for their kindness; and the movements of prominent Italians, visits to New York or Atlantic City, the presence of guests, weddings, and births form news items in the local papers. One Italian of the second generation had a wedding ceremony performed at the Episcopal Church according to American usage. The generally peaceable character of these people is evidenced by the fact that Americans are not afraid of them. They do not molest Americans; they seldom quarrel or have trouble with them, and many Americans say that when they are out late at night they have less fear of Italians than of Americans. The chief misdoings of Italians that affect Americans are lying and stealing— two vices of an oppressed and poverty-stricken people, which are likely to decrease as their economic condition is bettered. Thievery takes the form of petty larceny. Italians never enter houses, even when the farmhouses are known to be left alone, but they sometimes help themselves to fruit and vegetables, such as watermelons, com in the crib, onions, potatoes, cabbage, and apples and pears on the trees; one Italian had his vine yard robbed on a September night; two pigs prepared for market mysteriously disappeared, and an American’s sweet-potato field was raided in 1900. The pickers take potatoes from the field, carefully recovering the hills. Americans have found it unwise to plant vege tables among berries when fields are far from the house; the pickers unquestionably help themselves to the berries and supply themselves with cranberries for the winter; women hide cranberries in their pockets or by looping up their skirts; agricultural implements or clothes on the line are sometimes taken .when Italians enter a yard on an errand or to dig dandelions in the spring; little children carry off the toys of other children when they come to sell berries, or they pilfer in stores, and it is considered a misfortune rather than a disgrace to get caught. But after all, with ordinary care on the part of Amer icans, little stealing is possible, and the high character of many Italians indicate that this fault will be outgrown. One American THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 521 family which has lived among Italians for more than ten years never lost anything but a bag of potatoes which was left at nightfall near the road. When an Italian begins to own property he becomes solicitous for the good behavior of his neighbors. There is a difference of opinion as to the comparative honesty of the Italians in paying their debts. Many residents of Hammonton declare that Italians are generally honest and pay better than Ameri cans; others claim that they will avoid the contracting of debts if possible. The shoe dealers say that they pay better than Americans, although they generally keep credit accounts, paying for the last pair of shoes when they get new ones. Proprietors of stores carrying other lines of goods speak well of them. In one case an Italian said he could not put in town water until he had paid his bill to the general storekeeper, who had trusted him while he was ill. Unless they are very poor Italians pay taxes promptly, and in a few cases their taxes have been remitted. When other nationalities would ask for relief Italians manage to exist without aid. It is said, however, that they do not pay each other very well, and, indeed it is among their own people that most of their legal difficulties arise. While Italians have great respect for the law they are prone to enengage in litigation, and will litigate about almost anything, spending a good deal of money in this way. It is fortunate, however, that they are learning to substitute legal proceedings for correcting wrongs, instead of resorting to the use of physical force as a means of vengeance. An interesting case occurred in 1894. An old Italian was caught attempting to assault a 9-year-old Italian girl— fortunately the only case of this character on record in the community— and the father and brother choked him, but did not kill him. When the father handed him over to the police he said: “ I first thought I would kill him; but I remembered that I would be punished, and I had better let the squire take charge of him.” Italians are frequently quarrel some among themselves. Americans have great fear of their use of the knife or stiletto; but they forget, as a justice of the peace says, that this is merely the Italian way of fighting, which is more danger ous than the use of the fists, and so their fights get into court while American combats are not heard of. Their knives are sharp, twoedged weapons, and are carried in their shirts. The quarrels are usually the result of love affairs or of drinking, not that Italians are often drunkards, but they can not stand beer and whisky on top of their own make of wine. They are primitive in their display of anger. For instance, one man on the public street, with a crowd of people laughing at him, got into a rage over his bicycle and broke it by slamming it upon the pavement. An occasional criminal makes his way into this country, one resi dent having committed seven murders in Italy and spent twenty-five 522 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. years in the penitentiary. Some brutal murders have occurred, and in a few cases they were committed for money, one being for $100. Sometimes men are stabbed and left for dead; in one fight a man’s ear was bitten off. The leader of a strike in a neighboring town was waylaid and killed, because he had himself returned to work when he received no pay from the strikers, although he had induced the men and boys to leave their places. His own anger gave the opportunity. In falling from his bicycle he lost his hat, and, picking it up, in a rage he tore it to pieces with his teeth. Needing a hat for a wedding he returned to the town and was waylaid. The doctor is sometimes called in to attend a patient “ stabbed bad by a cow.” In one stab bing affray two men, after drinking, got into an altercation while still in their wagon, from which they alighted to fight, and one of the party procured an axe as a weapon, whereupon his opponent plunged a knife into his back, penetrating the lung. In troubles among pickers revolvers are sometimes drawn; and at a funeral where two Italians began a fight they used their fists; one Italian, caught shooting quail out of season, tried to shoot, the officer. As a rule, however, the Italian respects the officers of the law, and when a German priest refused to have the images taken from the church and was mobbed, six constables were able to clear the church with but slight resistance. Before the license law was adopted a number of Italians were indicted for running “ speak easies.” As already said, however, the Italians are not an intemperate people, especially when they stick to their own sour wines, and a drunken Italian is usually not disorderly in public. Gambling on simple games is a vice among Italians. Some of the Italian “ speak easies” were considered places where the employer sold liquor to his ignorant employees and profited by their gambling. It must be remembered that this is a summary of the crimes and misdemeanors of Italians covering a period of more than twenty years, and in many cases the offenders were recent immigrants. The young men of the second generation, while inclined to affect the unfortunate ideal— too frequently put before newcomers to the United States— of being “ sporty,” are quiet and well behaved. Some of them give all of their leisure time to music. The civil cases grow out of small offenses and retaliations— a desire for vengeance. For instance, one woman may hit another with an umbrella, and they may call each other names; pigs may get into a neighbor’s yard; a bicycle may be borrowed and not returned; a boy may be kicked; or they may slap one another, and many quarrels arise from disputes between or about children. While their anger lasts they wish to send each other to jail, no matter what the cost, but the justice can usually reconcile such cases and settle them at THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 523 once. For instance, a peaceable Italian was attacked by a drunken one who used offensive and threatening language; the case, however, ended by their shaking hands, the plaintiff saying: “ Don't wish to make trouble." A number of cases have come up over verbal orders to buy horses, where the parties refused to take the horses and pay expenses; also cases have come up over the charge for the use of a horse. In a case of dispute over wages the prosecutor was willing to pay costs far beyond the amount demanded. The desire for ven geance was shown in a recent case. An Italian was accused by an American of violating a game law, but at the trial before the justice of the peace he proved his innocence, and he immediately swore out a warrant against his accuser for perjury. On the whole it may be said that the Italians are a law-abiding, peaceful people, with some of the faults of grown-up children which will, with improved opportunities and education, tend to disappear. Hammonton is not a suburb, and as yet the Italian population does not take a prominent part in politics. The principal inhabitants are business men, with their business interests in the town instead of in a neighboring city. They accordingly do not leave politics to for eigners and an inferior class of Americans, and, moreover, the town meeting remains as an educational feature. The town officers are usually of a higher order than is found in large cities, although occa sionally it is necessary to get rid of some official who has been in office so long that he fails to discriminate between public and private inter ests. The political questions generally at issue are licenses, care of roads, water supply, drainage, etc. Of recent years reform move ments, sometimes for merely local districts, agitate the State, and they often cause considerable activity in general elections. The town of Hammonton is divided into two voting districts. In 1904 in the first district there were 394 non-Italian and 63 Italian votes; in the second, 361 non-Italian and 130 Italian, or 948 votes in all, with 193, or 20 per cent, Italians. As the Italian bom population is 1,232, it shows that many are not naturalized. The Italians of Hammonton are given to following leaders, and the Americans who influence them have won their ascendancy by assisting these ignorant men and by kindly treatment of them. National politics do not enter into the town elections, and if there is any contest it is usually over either local issues or the character of the candidate. The Italians as yet, in spite of their large numbers, take little part.in town matters, although some of them attend town meetings, especially when they are interested in drainage questions or street openings. The more intelligent Italians protested at the cost of the waterworks, as they claimed that the out-of-town citizens would not be benefited by the plant. They sometimes appear at 524 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. council meetings to protest against the noise made by the gas works, to complain of the condition of some road, or to ask damages, as in one case for a strawberry patch which had been walked over when the road was blocked with snow. Few Italians have held official positions, which is due to the youth of educated Italians. On one occasion (in 1896) the nominating caucus mentioned Italians for councilmen, overseer of highways, and overseer of the poor, but they were not elected. One prominent Italian of the second generation has been a constable for several years; another has been assessor. Three have been called on county juries. An Italian was placed on a recent coroner’s jury, in a case where two Italians were killed by the railroad; Italians have also acted as jurors in civil cases. One of the freeholders of Atlantic County is an Italian, and he serves on the standing committees* for country roads and release of prisoners— he is not a resident of Hammonton, however. An Italian of the second generation serves as one of the election clerks and also as commis sioner of appeals for taxes. The Italians of Hammonton show themselves to be a social people, with simple and natural tastes; their love of home and children is healthful. They are ignorant, primitive, and childlike, but their faults will largely be mended by education and contact with good American customs. Their courtesy, gentleness, and love of outdoor life and simple pleasures are actual contributions to American life. The country environment seems to develop their better qualities and they take a normal part in the life of the community. THE SECOND GENERATION. Throughout the foregoing pages frequent mention has been made of the rapid improvement in efficiency, manners, and customs which the second generation of Italians of Hammonton is making. Com prehensive information upon this point is, however, difficult to obtain, but the facts of improvement can be generally observed, without the possibility of quantitative statement. In one field, however, and that the most important, conclusive evidence of improvement is available. Facts regarding school children are valuable and easily comparable with other statistics, and this study of the second generation of Ital ians will, therefore, be confined to children of school age. A sum mary of urban surroundings of Italian immigrants will emphasize the contrast between city and country environments. The conditions resulting from the massing of immigrants in large cities have brought us face to face with all the serious problems of THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 525 immigration, and no race has been more affected than the Italians, the physical degeneration among them being so great that the Italian Government has been considering some remedy for the evil. To whatever city they go Italians are housed in the most insanitary and ill-built quarters, and in New York City they live on the top floors of old tenements, reached by dark, dirty halls and rickety stairways, with often no water except from a hydrant in the yard; with large families and even lodgers crowded into two or three small rooms, some of which, if not windowless, have no outlet except into an airshaft or into rooms which have in some cases been occupied by tenants suffering from tuberculosis, or which are used as workshops as well as living rooms. In cities where tenements do not exist the Italians, always seeking the cheapest houses, are found in the neglected build ings deserted by former tenants. In New Orleans they are found in the old French quarter; in Chicago, in the frame cottages of the fron tier city, with the rear and side tenements that fill the original open spaces; in Philadelphia, in the ill-lighted houses along small courts and narrow streets. Overcrowding is prevalent everywhere, the small houses intended for one family being often sublet to several families, while only the most primitive bathing and washing facilities are provided. Surface drainage, scattered garbage, bad smells, and insanitary and filthy conditions are present in the Italian quarters in every city. The food consists of fruits and vegetables rejected from better markets, flour paste, pork (too much of which is consumed), wine, beer, and cordials. Little children are seldom fed milk, but share the food of the adults. The effect of bad housing and overcrowding is first apparent'in the health of the women and children. The women, who have been accustomed to an outdoor life, fall easy victims to tuberculosis, bron chial troubles, indigestion, and other disorders, which also affect the health of their infants; rickets is a common disease. There is no opportunity for fresh air to counteract the dirt and lack of proper care for little children, and many children die. The agents of a life insurance company advise against insuring without medical exami nation children under four years of age. I^ad food, accidents, sweat shops, and bronchial diseases impair the health and undermine the constitutions of the second generation. The moral effects resulting from city conditions are still more serious. Children have no playgrounds but the street, and the street associations, as well as their own overcrowded quarters and contact with other tenement-house inmates, too often make them familiar with many forms of vice; the boys grow beyond the control of their parents, who are unable to impart the sterling virtues they have brought with them; child labor in its worst forms is made possible. 526 BULLETIN OE THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Newsboys are Italians in many cases, and little children are found in sweat shops and factories. Nowhere do the children come in contact with Americans. In the schools, as the result of the segregation of nationalities, they are apt to be massed with their own people or other foreigners, and their English is a patois of the slums, a mixture of slang and broken English. The pressure of city life causes the chil dren to leave school at an early age to go to work, consequently they do not have an opportunity to develop physically or mentally, or to measure themselves with Americans and try to emulate them. They are inhabitants of a “ little Italy,” which, as an environment for chil dren, lacks some of the best features of the fatherland. In such an environment the benefit to be derived from American institutions is minimized by the evil accompaniments of the slums. In contrast with this the influences molding the Italian children of Hammonton are: (1) The country environment; (2) the contact with Americans, and (3) the public schools. In Hammonton the Italians lead an outdoor life, and the women not only work in the fields, but wash, cook, and serve the meals out of doors. There is no abrupt transition from country to city life; their health is, there fore, generally good, and their children are robust. While the little children sometimes die from lack of proper care, the fresh air and cleanly surroundings increase a child's chances of life. The larger children are constantly out of doors, and the tasks that are imposed upon them are of a healthy nature and teach them to be useful. There are few shanties that can be converted into homes in Hammon ton, and therefore, as already stated, new houses are built which are fresh, clean, and warm, with an adequate water supply, and there is consequently a constantly rising standard in regard to overcrowding. The food is largely obtained from the gardens; there is no opportu nity to buy secondhand clothing from push carts, and, in fact, an Italian in a place like Hammonton makes a new start in life, with new possessions instead of being forced to use the leavings of his bet ters. While the children are kept busy, child labor in evil forms is impossible; the isolation of the homes prolongs the parents’ control over the children, and #with no vicious influences to intervene, the simple virtues of the Italian family life can take deeper root. Above all, the Italian child in Hammonton is an organic part of an Ameri can community. The Italian immigrant and his children work for Americans, they buy at the same stores, they meet them on the street, they have them for neighbors, and, most important of all, Italian and American children sit side by side in the schoolroom. The public school is one hopeful feature in city life, but it has an added value in Hammonton, because in a country place all American children attend the public school, and as a result the schools are as good as the com munity can afford. THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 527 The location of Atlantic City, in Atlantic County, with its high assessment values, gives the county a generous school fund, and within the past ten years the increasing number of Italian children in Hammonton has required new buildings and more teachers. The school law of New Jersey provides a State appropriation for every additional child or teacher, and accordingly the large number of Ital ian children is not considered a burden but rather a help to the town in obtaining better school facilities. The Italians, moreover, pay a fair share of the taxes. Hammonton has a large central school, con sisting of three well-equipped buildings, containing all the grades from the kindergarten through the four years of high school, and in addition, there are seven suburban schools. The country children who attend the suburban schools have no opportunity to go to the kindergarten, but when they reach the fifth grade they are trans ferred to the central school. The board of education is composed of some of the leading men in the town, the .president of the board being the leading manufacturer in the locality, and the superintend ent, who has been in charge since 1898, is a progressive educator. The teachers, as a rule, have had experience and training. Com mercial courses have recently been introduced into the high school. In 1903 the superintendent took a school census of the town, with a view to enforcing the compulsory feature of the school law, and while the figures are necessarily not complete (a) the results as they stand are of interest. Of the 400 families visited(*6) 242 were Ital ian. Of the total of 1,340 children 1,294 were of school age, and of these 645 were boys and 649 girls. Two hundred and ninety-nine boys and 318 girls were non-Italians and 346 boys and 331 girls were Italians. The preponderance of boys among the Italians is noticeable. The present school enrollment (1906-7) shows how the Italian children are distributed through the grades. There are 1,155 chil dren enrolled, 712 in the central schools and 443 in the suburban schools. The table following shows the total enrollment and the number and per cent of Italian children in the various grades of the central schools and in the district schools of Hammonton. a A large number of children under 4 years were included, and a few above 16 years. As usual the Italians are enumerated from names, which method occasionally causes error. &The average number of children to a fam ily was 2.29 for non-Italians and 2.71 for the Italians. The largest Italian fam ily contained 10 children, the largest non-Italian 8. Of families of 6 children or over there were 13 non-Italian and 28 Italian; of 5 children, 15 non-Italian and 25 Italian; of 4 children, 20 non-Italian and 36 Italian; of 3 children, 62 non-Italian and 51 Italian, and of 2 children, 60 non-Italian and 54 Italian. 528 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. NUMBER AND PER CENT OF IT A LIA N CHILDREN EN ROLLED IN THE HAMMONTON SCHOOLS, 1906-7. All children. School. CENTRAL Fe Males. males. Italian children. Fe Males. males. Total. Per cent of Italian total Total. ofchil dren. SCH OOLS. High school (twelfth grade)............................ High school (eleventlTgrade).......................... High school (tenth grade).............................. High school (ninth grade)............................... Eighth grade..........7....... ................................. Seventh grade................................................... Sixth grade, senior........................................... Sixth grade, junior........................................... Fifth grade, senior............................................ Fifth grade, junior........................................... Fourth grade..................................................... Third grade, A .................................................. Third grade, B .................................................. Second grade, senior I I .................................... Second grade, junior I I .................................... Primary grade, senior I ................................... Primary grade, junior I ................................... Kindergarten.................................................... T otal........................................................ 5 7 7 9 19 15 18 22 18 31 28 21 13 24 15 31 43 34 360 | ! «i «4 a1 2 2 1 5 12 9 14 14 6 6 10 4 13 17 13 1 1 4 7 2 7 10 7 10 5 11 14 5 13 1 4 1 2 3 2 9 19 11 21 24 13 16 15 15 27 22 26 712 128 103 231 32.4 50 73 60 61 61 56 82 21 34 22 24 25 22 45 29 39 23 23 25 13 33 50 73 45 47 50 35 78 100.0 100.0 75.0 77.0 82.0 62.5 95.1 4 13 13 11 11 23 20 19 25 22 29 19 23 12 33 23 16 36 9 20 20 20 30 38 38 41 43 53 57 40 36 36 48 54 59 70 352 29 39 29 28 32 24 37 11.1 20.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5.3 2a 7 46.3 25.6 39.6 42.1 32.5 44.4 41.7 31.3 50.0 37.3 37.1 D IS T R IC T S C H O O L S (F IR S T T O F IF T H G R A D E S ). Middle road........................................................ First road......................................... ................ Union road........................................................ Rosedale............................................................. Magnolia............................................................ Lake................................................................... Main road................................................ .......... 21 34 31 33 29 32 45 T otal........................................................ 225 218 443 193 185 378 85.3 Grand total............................................. 585 570 1,155 321 288 | 609 52.7 a The large proportion of girls is due to the fact that in several families of mixed parentage the children are all girls who are just of high-school age. According to the above table the proportion of Italian children in the central schools in the grades below the high school ranged from 50 per cent in the senior primary grade to only 5.3 per cent in the seventh grade. Few Italians are found in the upper grades, the children usually leaving at the end of the fifth grade. So far only one boy and one girl have been graduated from the high school. The enrollment of Italians in the district schools ranged from 62.5 to 100 per cent of all the children and averaged 85.3 per cent for the seven schools. This shows a marked tendency for the suburban schools to become almost entirely Italian, due not only to the increase in the number of Italian children, but to the removal of Americans to the town and to the growing up of the children of the early American settlers. One new schoolhouse was built in 1902 to accommodate a district recently built up by Italians, and as their children go later to the central school this segregation of these children in the suburban schools is not disadvantageous. The longer the Italians remain in the community the more they learn to value education, especially for boys. One Italian expressed THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 529 a common point of view: “ I no send daughter to school. When 17 or 18 she marry. I send boy ’til 14 or 15. He get education, make more money, stay with me.” They have, therefore, learned to asso ciate greater earning capacity with* education. In some cases the mothers are so anxious to start children in school that very little ones are claimed to be 4 years old; and the number of Italian girls and boys in the upper grades is increasing. The difficulties in the way of enforcing the compulsory education law are the scattered country houses, the tendency to keep one child out of school to care for the younger children or to do other work, and the early withdrawals or late entrance to school of children who are berry picking or working on the farms. Little children of 3 or 4 years of age are started in as nurses for the baby until, in the case of some girls, a child of 10 or 12 years of age has never been to school. A strict enforcement of the law can meet this difficulty. In order to compare the physical development of these Italian chil dren with that of city children the writer in the fall of 1905 examined over 600 Hammonton school children, including the children in four of the suburban schools. In many cases a local physician also exam ined them, and he found that most of the Italian children were in a good physical condition and that their general health compared favor ably with that of American (°) children. Five hundred and ninety-one children (188 Italian boys and 163 Italian girls, and 110 American boys and 130 American girls), from 4 years to 14 years of age were examined. The number of children for the different ages varied, but a fair average was represented. A comparison of the figures showing the average height and weight of Italian boys and girls with those for American boys and girls of Ham monton indicates, as would be expected, that the Americans are superior in physique, but it is significant that the differences are not very great, especially among the younger children; for example, the Italian girls of 5 years old average 41.4 inches in height, the American girls 42.5 inches; the Italian boys 41.6 inches, and the American boys 41.8 inches; the Italian girls weigh 40.9 pounds, the American girls 42.2 pounds; the Italian boys 41.7 pounds, and the American boys 40.5 pounds. In the matter of weight the Italian boys are superior, and the average height and weight for ages of 6 years and 7 years, respectively, are equally satisfactory. As the children grow older the race tendencies are noticeable, and at 12 to 13 years of age the American children have the advantage of almost 3 inches in height for girls and 2 inches for boys, and 6 pounds for both sexes in weight. a ' ‘ Am erican” is used in a broad sense, and includes all children not Italians, a few being born in Germany or elsewhere. About 10 per cent of the Italian children were born in Italy, and had lived in the United States for periods ranging from six months to eleven years. 530 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. The condition of the Italian children is shown to more advantage when their measurements are compared with the measurements of the average American child. The American children of Hammon ton are as a rule slightly above the average in height, but slightly below in weight, while the Italian children are about 1 inch inferior in height, the younger children being almost the average in weight, and none of them are far below the average. For example, the average height of children at 5 years old is 41.5 inches, (a) the Italian boys measured averaging 41.6 inches and the girls 41.4 inches; the aver age of children at 6 years is 44 inches, the Italian boys averaging 42.9 inches, the girls 43.1 inches; the average of children at 7 years is 46 inches, the Italian boys averaging 45.5 inches, the girls 45.5 inches. In weight, the average weight of children at 5 years is 41 pounds, the Italian boys averaging 41.7 pounds, the girls 40.9 pounds; the average of children at 6 years is 45 pounds, the Italian boys averag ing 41.7 pounds, the girls 42.5 pounds; the average of children at 7 years is 49.5 pounds, the Italian boys averaging 47.4 pounds and the girls 48.3 pounds. In a comparison of these figures with measurements of Massachusetts children the Italian children of Hammonton, especially the boys, average well in height, but are slightly inferior in weight. A comparison of the measurements of the Italian children of Hammonton with those of children of Turin, Italy (*&), and of New York City (c) show more valuable results. Measurements of children from Turin, a city in northern Italy, will unquestionably exceed the measurements of children from southern Italy; but even the dis advantageous conditions of New York City show the younger children of New York to be slightly superior in height and weight. (d) For example, at 6 years of age the average height of Turin boys is 40.7 inches and of girls 40.2 inches; of New York boys 42.4 inches and of girls 41.4 inches; in weight Turin boys average 36.8 pounds and the girls 36.2 pounds, while in New York City boys average 44.2 pounds and girls 40.9 pounds. For the older children the New York City children average slightly less in weight than the Turin children; how ever, when the Turin figures are compared with the Hammonton figures, the Hammonton figures are in every case superior to the Turin figures, and the Hammonton figures are also in every case superior to the New York figures, as is shown in the following table: a The figures of Dr. L. E . H olt, as given in “ The Care and Feeding of Children, ” are used. The weight also includes clothing. The figures are for boys, but girls usually weigh one pound less than boys and have the same height. &Official. c Obtained from agent of Prudential Life Insurance Company. d Also include some northern Italians, while Hammonton Italians are all from south ern Italy or Sicily. 581 THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. A VERAG E HE IG H T AND W EIGH T OF IT A LIA N CH ILD R E N IN T U R IN , NEW Y O R K AND HAMMONTON, B Y SEX AND AGE. Average height (inches). Locality. Boys of each age. Average weight (pounds). Girls of each age. Boys of each age. Girls of each age. 5 7 10 5 5 7 10 5 8 10 8 10 years. years. years. years. years. years. years. years. years. years. years. years. Turin................ New Y ork ....... Hamm onton... 38.2 39.6 41.6 44.3 446 45.5 49.8 48.2 51.2 38.0 39.0 43.1 4a 0 442 46.8 50.1 49.2 52.2 33.5 38.9 41.7 45.6 50.1 51.0 54 7 57.2 59.5 3a 1 37.2 40.9 41.9 48.4 49.1 54 5 61.1 62.3 These figures indicate that Italian children tend to improve in physique in the United States, an improvement which is more noticeable in a favorable rural environment. The physical examination of New York and Hammonton children shows other important differences. The agent of an industrial life insurance company reported that in New York City the complex ions of the children were waxy, with dark rings under the eyes, and there were general indications of rickets. Out of 604 children ex amined 59, or 9.8 per cent, had rickets; many children were anemic; their dentition was imperfect; the expressions on their faces were unpleasant, and their clothes were also ragged and filthy. In dif ferent examinations, out of 100 children 44 were considered unde sirable risks; out of 94, 20; and out of 200, 64. The Hammonton children, on the other hand, in the opinion of the examining physi cian, presented fair risks. Their complexions were good and healthy; in only twenty cases were sores or blemishes mentioned, and these not serious; rickets is an unknown disease in Hammonton, and there were no indications of anemia. While the countenances of many of the children were sober, these children seemed happy and well nourished; some had exceptionally bright faces, and few abnormali ties were found. There were three definitely marked cases where the teeth indicated syphilis; there were three cases of tongue-tie, four of flat chests, two of phthisis, one of sore eye, one of sore eyelid, and one of puffy eyes; two boys were feeble-minded, and one was eccen tric. Several boys had spreading ears, one a mapped tongue and an angular jaw, and another could not straighten his arm because of a fracture. These were the only defects noted in over 300 children. The dentition was generally good, although decay of the teeth had sometimes set in, from lack of care. The examining physician made use of the stethoscope, measured the childrens' chests, and tested their breathing capacity, which demonstrated normal development. The clothing of the Hammonton children has already been described. It was, however, noticeable in the examination that the unkempt or ragged children were more generally found in the outlying schools; especially was this the case at one school largely frequented by new comers. Some of these children had strings or strips of calico for 532 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. hair ribbons, torn shoes and stockings, and but few buttons on their patched and ill-fitting garments. Many children were noted as “ not clean,” while others were neatly and even tastefully clothed, notice ably in the higher grades and at the central school. Unquestionably the physical environment of a rural community like Hammonton makes for the well-being of Italian children, and the good results are soon shown in a better physique. The recent history of the United States has shown that our cities have been greatly benefited by the influx of young men and women from the country districts, and that the children of immigrants who enter city life by way of the farm— that is, children whose parents have first settled in rural districts where the children have been subject to good physical conditions and a close contact with Amer icans— undoubtedly are better fitted to cope with the competition and the wear and tear of urban business. There is some slight proof at hand that this is true of Hammonton young men. The following table shows some of the occupations other than farming into which young people have entered. Among those who have gone to Phila delphia it is noticeable that they are engaged in occupations requiring some degree of skill and intelligence. OCCUPATIONS OF ITA LIA N ADULTS OF SECOND GENERATION. Occupation. Where employed. Remarks j. Teacher, since 1898. County schools. Employed in commission house. Druggist...................................... Telegraph operator.................... Barbers (6 in number)............... Barber......................................... Barber......................................... Clerk in market.......................... Employed in fruit store............ Employed in navy-yard............ Wheelwright............................... Harness maker........................... Medical student......................... Employed in paper m ill............. New Y ork ...................... In charge of telephone agency.......... Employed in hat manufactory (18 in number). Builder and owner of glass fa ctory.. Fruit dealer......................................... Constable, labor contractor, agent, fanner. Carpenter............................................. Saloon keeper and agent.................... Employed in commission house....... Employed in fruit store..................... Philadelphia Atlantic City Hammonton. Hammonton. Philadelphia. Philadelphia. Philadelphia. Hammonton. Universit; Philadelphia (o) Philadelphia Hammonton. Philadelphia.. Hammonton. H am m onton. H am m onton. Philadelphia.. Philadelphia.. Graduate of high school and of normal school at Kutztown, Pa.; mother English. Mother English. One married an American. B om in Italy. jBrothers. [•Brothers. Married in Philadelphia, returned to Hammonton, and bought 40acre farm. Mother German. •Sons of a northern Italian. ►Brothers. « Not reported. The work chosen by the Italian young people of Hammonton reveals, however, a tendency of far greater importance for the future of Italian immigrants. A large majority of them are found, in the THE ITALIAN ON THE LAND. 533 local factories, which gives them the continued benefit of country life, with the new homes, the good air, the garden products, the simple pleasures, and the contact with Americans. It also insures that their children— the third generation— will grow up in similar surroundings. For those who finally go to the city it means a previous industrial training that makes them better able to secure good positions. The solution of the problem of assimilating Italian immigrants probably lies in establishing them in country districts where the climate and products are suited to their constitutions and knowledge of farming, and in providing manufacturing plants with simple processes which will require the labor of young people. In order to accomplish this object it is necessary that the immigrants should not be allowed to stop in New York or other cities, but should be conveyed at once to their destination. The Sicilians are especially wedded to country life, but many of the people from southern Italy would be willing to start their new life on our farms if the way were made clear for them. Within the past ten years there has been a tendency for groups of Italians to settle and buy small farms or truck patches near large cities or where some particular kind of work was carried on. Thus, they have located in West Philadelphia near a stone quarry; in Chester, Pa., where manufacturing plants are located; at Rosetta, Pa., where there are quarries, and where the town government is in the hands of Italians; at Alexandria, Va., and at Bryan, Tex*., where Italians were sent to work on the railroad, and finding land cheap they sent for their families and bought farms. Three things are necessary to bring about a proper distribution of Italian immigrants: (1) Well-organized plans, (2) financial support, and (3) an appreciation of the fact that an Italian is a desirable acquisition. The industrial departments of the railroads, the immi gration bureaus of the Southern States, the State and town leagues and business men’s associations for the betterment of their localities, the United States Immigration Bureau, and the philanthropic societies for alleviating the evils arising from immigration and for aiding immigrants need only to cooperate to provide the plan and the money. While the need of labor is felt in the South and in various other localities, the Italian has only recently been considered as a possible substitute for northern Europeans. If this brief study has aided in giving a fairer estimate of the qualities of this people, showing them to be industrious, willing, well behaved, and progressive, its object has been accomplished. 304b— N o . 70—07----- 5 A SHORT HISTORY OF LABOR LEGISLATION IN GREAT BRITAIN. B Y A. MAURICE LOW. E A R L Y FACTORY CONDITIONS AND LEGISLATION. “ Protective labor” legislation in England— that is, legislation designed purely to protect men, women, and children working in factories and workshops from the exploitation of their employers—is the contribution of the nineteenth century to civilization. It owes its inception to England; from England it has spread to all the world. It was forced upon England; English manufacturers were compelled against their will to accept it. Nothing more strikingly typifies the gradually enlarged view of the rights of employees and the duties and responsibilities of capital than the protective laws that are now on the statute books of Great Britain. About the beginning of the last century when the factory dis placed the cottage system of industries in England and England entered upon the beginning of her marvelous rise as a manu facturing and industrial nation, there also was born in a few men with vision keen enough to foresee the future a desire to protect their fellow-men from the cruelty and rapacity of their employers. This legislation, which at the present time occupies the attention of statesmen, legislators, economists, and sociologists to a greater degree than any other, was in the beginning and is now class legislation in its most extreme form. It was for the protection of the masses against the classes; it was wrung from a class for the protec tion of tli& mass. Two names will be forever associated with this move ment; two men who marked the extreme ends of the social scale. To Lord Ashley, better known as the Earl of Shaftesbury, who personally knew none of the hardships of toil and the degradation of want, and to Robert Owen, a man of the people, philosopher, and seer, the world owes its eternal debt of gratitude. Owen, the most practical of men, but whose life was a romance colored by the wealth of his own fantasy, is of peculiar interest to Americans because for a time he abandoned England and came to the United States to attempt to 534 HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 535 carry out a visionary project that he believed would be the means of industrial salvation. It failed, but its failure does not detract from Owen’s genius, his humanity, and his sound common sense when he dealt with practical questions. The system which has grown up, which now includes in its scope in England manual workers in every manufacturing industry, began in a haphazard way, as a makeshift, the result always of a compromise as the system was gradually extended, and without any clear conception on the part either of its advocates or opponents of its economic value. That, perhaps, as we look back at it, is one of the most extraordinary things in connection with this legislation. Men were not capable of realizing the economic value of humanity. They did not understand that human beings had a money value; that men, like machines, would last longer and produce a greater output if their capacity was not overstrained. This phase of the question is strikingly emphasized in a noteworthy preface by Sidney Webb to “ A History of Factory Legislation,” written by Miss Hutchins and Miss Harrison, and published in London in 1903. Says Mr. W ebb: This century of experiment in factory legislation affords a typical example of English practical empiricism. We began with no abstract theory of social justice or the rights of man. We seem always to have been incapable even of taking a general view of the subject we were legislating upon. Each successive statute aimed at remedying a single ascertained evil. It was in vain that objectors urged that other evils, no more defensible, existed in other trades, or among other classes, or with persons of other ages than those to which the particular bill applied. Neither logic nor consistency, neither the overnice consideration of even-handed justice nor the quixotic appeal of a general humanitarianism, was permitted to stand in the way of a practical remedy for a proved wrong. That this purely empirical method of dealing with industrial evils made progress slow is scarcely an objection to it. With the nineteenth century House of Commons no other method would have secured any progress at all. More serious is the drawback of the unevenness of the progress. Some industries— cotton spinning, for example— are now so thoroughly guarded by common rules, enforced either by the factory inspector or by the jointly-acting officials of the trade union and the employers’ association, that no individual mill owner and no individual operative can go far in degrading the standard of life. We have, in the course of a century, in this particular trade so strictly fenced off the down ward way that competition, as far as the manufacturing process is concerned, is exclusively concentrated upon the upward way. How potently the additional freedom which the law thus secures, to master as well as to man, has reacted on the efficiency of the industry is, at the opening of the twentieth century, one of our proudest boasts. In spitfc of the keenest foreign competition the Lancashire cotton mill, in point of technical efficiency, still leads the world, and the Lancashire cotton spinner, once in the lowest depths of social degradation, now 536 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. occupies, as regards the general standard of life of a whole trade, perhaps the foremost position among English wage-earners. It has required a hundred years of unceasing agitation, and at times almost open warfare between capital and labor, for one fact to be irrevocably established which is the basis of all this legislation. That fact is ineluctable. At the present time no one dares to dispute it, notwithstanding that even now the stress of necessity forces it to be disregarded. 'Economically and socially the fact is established that whenever the conditions of an industry compel an operative to work for a wage insufficient to supply him with proper food and clothing to maintain his strength,*whenever he is compelled to work in insanitary surroundings and can not be decently and wholesomely housed, that industry is no less a menace to the worker than it is to society at large; it is as great a menace as an epidemic against which the resources of civilization are constantly warring. For such an industry can be carried on only at the expense of the physical and moral welfare of the worker. It exhausts him in body and soul, it literally uses him up, and in a few years he either dies or he is a hopeless wreck and can secure only a precarious existence, the recipient of charity. This applies especially to what is known as the “ sweated trades,” to which protective legislation has not yet been extended. While factories and workshops in England are now under close governmental supervision; while the hours of labor, sanitation, the prevention of accidents, and generally the health and welfare of the worker are carefully guarded in the skilled trades, in those trades requiring little skill but a certain amount of manual dexterity, especially in the trades in which women and children are largely employed, and in which the work is done in the operative’s own living room, typically in the manufacture of ready made clothing, “ factory legislation is,” to quote Sidney Webb, “ after half a century of agitation, found only in its most rudimentary form.” The year 1802 saw the passage of the first factory act in England. Prior to that time there existed statutes regulating the hours and con ditions of service of craftsmen, but these statutes, as Prof. Stanley Jevons has pointed out, were designed to prevent idleness rather than to prevent overwork. They were class legislation, legislation in the interest of the class of employers as opposed to the interest of the mass of workers. As far back as the reign of Elizabeth, in 1601, a law was enacted which directed that destitute children and orphans should be taught spinning, weaving, and other trades, and later should be apprenticed. At that day this manual training was regarded as the greatest boon of society to its unfortunates, but the condition of the children was deplorable. They worked from 6 to 6 in summer and from 7 to 5 in winter. They were put to work at 5 years of age, and after their long day’s toil they were made to attend school. Between H is t o r y of Br i t i s h labor l e g is l a t io n . 537 8 and 11 years of age their training and education were deemed fin ished, and they were regularly apprenticed, and as such their condition was little better than slavery. They were lodged, fed, and clothed by their masters, many of whom treated them with great brutality, fed them on scraps, and gave them clothing insufficient to conceal their half-starved bodies or protect them from the cold. Nominally under the supervision of the parish authorities, actually when they once left the workhouse or the “ house of industry” they became the chattels of their employers. It is impossible to understand the mental state of men who found in these conditions subject for admiration; but men of learning, pre sumably humane, whose ears were not deaf to the heart throb of humanity, could find only cause for rejoicing because every child over 5 years of age was earning its living by working twelve hours a day! Learned men wrote ponderous tomes setting forth the great profits that were derived from this labor, and how the children earned millions over and above the actual cost of their subsistence. In a word, a child was looked upon as a productive asset, and the more yards its baby fingers could weave or spin the better off was society at large. How often those tiny fingers clutched at the heart of a mother, as the child lay on her breast and she saw its future of hopeless suffering and work and all childhood obliterated under the inexorable task of the master, was not considered by the seventeenth and eighteenth century philosophers. They could measure output in yards and pounds and shillings; there the balance sheet was easily struck. But emotions and human affections were not reducible to mathematical terms and had no place in their equation. In 1801 a man named Jouvaux was convicted and sentenced to twelve months’ hard labor for illtreating and overworking his appren tices. The poor-law overseers had permitted him to employ 16 apprentices, who “ had but two beds amongst them, and were kept at work for such hours, and, owing to the nature of the work, in such attitudes that they came near being deformed and disabled for life.” In pronouncing sentence the judge said: “ Should the manufacturers insist that without these children they could not advantageously fol low their trade, and the overseers say that without such opportunity they could not get rid of these children, he should say to the one, that trade must not for the thirst of lucre be followed, but at once, for the sake of society, be abandoned; and to the other, it is a crime to put out these children, who have no friends to see justice done, to incur deformity and promote consumption or other disease; this obviously leads to their destruction— not to their support.” England, industrial England, of that day was a revelation of the brutality and sordidness in human nature— the lust for gold to be 588 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. coined out of humanity, the braying of blood and flesh in the mortar of commerce. Gibbins gives us this picture of conditions: The manufacturers wanted labor by some means or other, and they got it. They got it from the workhouses. They sent for parish apprentices from all parts of England and pretended to apprentice them to the new employments just introduced. The mill owners systematically communicated with the overseers of the poor, who arranged a day for the inspection of pauper children. Those chosen by the manufacturers were then conveyed by wagons or canal boats to their destination, and from that moment were doomed to slavery. Sometimes regular traffickers would take the place of the manufac turer and transfer a number of children to a factory district, and there keep them, generally in some dark cellar, till they could hand them over to a mill owner in want of hands, who would come and examine their height, strength, and bodily capacities, exactly as did the slave dealers in the American markets. After that the children were simply at the mercy of their owners, nominally as apprentices, but in reality as mere slaves, who got no wage3r and whom it was not worth while even to feed or clothe properly, because they were so cheap and their places could be so easily supplied. It was often arranged by the parish authorities, in order to get rid of imbeciles, that one idiot should be taken by the mill owner with every twenty sane children. The fate of these unhappy idiots was even worse than that of the others. The secret of their final end has never been disclosed, but we can form some idea of their awful sufferings from the hardships of the other victims to capitalist greed and cruelty. Their treatment was most inhuman; the hours of their labor were only limited by exhaustion after many modes of torture had been unavailingly applied to force continued work. Children were often worked sixteen hours a day, b y day and by night. Even Sunday was used as a convenient time to clean the machinery. The author of the History of the Factory Movement writes: “ In stench, in heated rooms, amid the constant whirling of a thousand wheels, little fingers and little feet were kept in ceaseless action, forced into unnatural activity by blows from the heavy hands and feet of the merciless overlooker and the infliction of bodily pain by instruments of punishment invented by the sharpened ingenuity of insatiable selfishness.” They were fed upon the coarsest and cheap est food, often with the same as that served out to the pigs of their master. They slept by turns, in relays, in filthy beds which were never cool, for one set of children were sent to sleep in them as soon as the others had gone off to their daily or nightly toil. There was often no discrimination of sexes, and disease, misery, and vice grew as in a hotbed of contagion. Some of these miserable beings tried to run away. To prevent their doing so, those suspected or this tendency had irons riveted on their ankles, with long links reaching up to their hips, and were compelled to work and sleep in these chains, young women and girls as well as boys suffering this brutal treatment. Many died and were secretly buried at night in some desolate spot, lest people should notice the number of graves, and many committed suicide. The catalogue of cruelty and misery is too long to recite here. It may be read m the Memoirs of Robert Blincoe, liimself an appren HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 539 tice, or in the pages of the blue books of the beginning of this century, in which even the methodical, dry, official language is startled into life by the misery it has to relate. It is perhaps not well for me to say more about the subject, for one dares not trust merely to try and set down calmly all that might be told about this awrul page in the industrial history of England. I need only remark that during this ' )d of unheeded and ghastly suffering in the mills of our native the British philanthropist was occupying himself with agitat ing for the relief or the very largely imaginary woes of negro slaves in other countries. The spectacle of England buying the freedom of black slaves by riches drawn from the labor of the white ones affords an interesting study for the cynical philosopher. (a^ These and other disclosures— notably serious epidemics among the apprenticed children—led to the introduction by Sir Robert Peel, in 1802, of the Health and Morals of Apprentices A ct,(6) which Parlia ment approved the same year with little opposition. That act limited the hours of labor of apprentices to twelve a day; night work was to be gradually abolished, and cease entirely by June, 1804; apprentices were to be instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic (after work ing twelve hours a d a y!); each apprentice was to be given a new suit of clothes once a year; factories were to be whitewashed twice a year, and at all times properly ventilated; separate sleeping apartments were to be provided for apprentices of different sexes, and not more than two were to share the same bed; apprentices were to attend church at least once a month; two justices of the peace, one of whom was to be a clergyman, were appointed as inspectors to visit the factories; all mills and factories were required to be registered annually with the clerk of the peace; power was lodged in the justices of the peace to impose fines varying from £2 to £ 5 ($9.73 to $24.33) for violations of tn^ act. This curious hodgepodge of paternalism, moral and religious regu lation, economic control, and theological supervision was, as might naturally have been expected, a failure. The justices of the peace who were designated as inspectors were either negligent or inefficient, but in some instances they performed good service and brought about an amelioration of conditions. It is not surprising, however, that the act should have failed of its purpose. It would have been remarkable if the first attempt at legislation so revolutionary as this should haye been successful. The important point to be noticed is that a beginning had been made; that prejudice and opposition and sel fishness and criminal greed had been attacked; that the whole con cept of society for centuries had been radically reversed, and that at last a step forward had been taken. To refer again to the revolution that the steam engine had wrought, the following quotation is made: The first steam engine on Watt's pattern had been introduced at Manchester in 1791, but it did not come into general use till the early years of the nineteenth century. With the restoration of peace in E a Industrial History of England, by H . De B . Gibbins, pp. 178-181. b 42 Geo. I l l , c. 73. 540 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Europe an immense development of the industry took place. The English manufacturers had been improving their processes. They were now able to send their goods to foreign ports, and proximity to coal, labor, and the world’s markets came to be a more important con sideration than water power, though this was still used, sometimes as an alternative to steam, sometimes independently. Pauper children had been eagerly demanded by manufacturers whose mills were sit uate in lonely valleys, where, if water power were cheap, yet labor was scarce; but in the populous centers child workers could easily be had without the trouble and responsibility of taking apprentices, who must be housed, fed, and clothed at the employer’s expense. (a) The mills and factories of England were becoming daily more important in that industrial development that has made England great, and especially in cotton spinning and weaving, for it has been truthfully and epigrammatically said that “ Lancashire carries England on its back; it is the beast of burden of Britannia; ” but side by side with the new order the old survived, and the hand loom and the hand weaver were still at work in cottages and miserable hovels and cel lars. Peel’s act applied to factories alone and not to cottage indus tries, in which industries the hours were anything the master liked. It is notorious that parents treated their children, who were also their apprentices and helpers, with even greater cruelty and harshness than did employers who did not stand in the parental relation. Kinder W ood says that when a father was drunk the mother kept the children to their weaving; “ the children support the father, which is contrary to the common use of nature.” “ Socially and industrially, the first two or three decades of the nine teenth century form a gloomy period in which, as Spencer Walpole observes, it took twenty-five years of legislation to restrict a child of 9 to a sixty-nine hour week, and that only in cotton mills.” (*6) It is now that the name of Robert Owen first appears as the champion of those helpless victims who were being sacrificed to greed. He testified before Peel’s committee that he employed no children under 10 years of age, and the total hours worked were twelve, including an hour and a quarter off for meals. Previously he had worked his children fourteen hours daily and had gradually reduced the limit to twelve. He desired to make a further reduction, and by so doing he did not believe that manufacturers would suffer either in their home or for eign trade. He gave it as his belief that a further reduction of hours would result in a “ considerable improvement in the health of the operatives, both young and old, a very considerable improvement in the instruction of the rising generation, and a very considerable diminution in the poor rates of the country.” One of the most a A History of Factory Legislation, by B . L. Hutchins and A . Harrison, B . A ., p. 19. &History of Factory Legislation, p. 21. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 541 striking economic statements he made, which has since been verified in a thousand different ways, was that shorter hours instead of increasing cost (which was the great fear of the manufacturers) would decrease it, as the improved mental and physical condition of the workers employed under more rational and humane circumstances would enable them to produce a larger amount in a shorter workday. The result of this agitation was the passage in 1819 of an act that was a disappointment to Owen and some of his friends, but still must be regarded as a long step forward in that never-ending conflict between the forces of oppression on one side and altruism on the other * The act placed the age limit at 9 years, and prohibited any person under 16 years of age from working more than twelve hours a day, exclusive of mealtimes. The act applied only to cotton mills, against the opposition of Owens, who wanted it to include all cot ton, woolen, flax, and other mills in which twenty or more persons were employed. It is melancholy to observe that the advocates of child labor maintained that it was cruel to prevent or restrict the Working of young children, because without work they would starve. The choice, as they put it, was too much work or too little to eat. It was thought to be advantageous to the workingmen to have their children employed; it was supposed to be for the advantage of the children themselves, because it kept them out of idleness and from vicious and immoral habits. One pamphleteer used this argument in opposing the passage of the act: “ All experience proves,” he wrote, “ that in the lower orders the deterioration of morals increases with the quantity of unemployed time of which they have the command. Thus the bill actually encourages vice— it establishes idleness by act of Parliament; it creates and encourages those practices which it pre tends to discourage.” (a) Men were not far enough advanced in the study of economics to understand that the employment of children had a tendency to depress wages, and that adults lost rather than gained by child labor. In 1825 a new law was put upon the statute books. (b) The act of 1819 was violated by the mill owners retaining the children three or four days a week during mealtime to clean the machinery, which deprived them of exercise or change of air, and compelled them to eat their food in mouthfuls while they were cleaning and when the air was full of dust and cotton flue. The new act prohibited any person under 16 from working more than twelve hours a day, exclusive of an hour and a half for mealtime. The dinner hour was to be between 11 a. m. and 3 p. m. On Saturday nine hours’ work only was allowed,*& o An Inquiry into the Principle and Tendency of the 3 ill for Imposing Certain Restrictions on Cotton Factories, London, 1818. &6 Geo. IY , c. 63. 542 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. between 5 a. m. and 4.30 p. m. The infamous practice of forcing the children to clean the machinery during the meal hour was not touched by the act. In the act of 1802, it will be remembered, violations of the act were triable by the local justices of the peace. The new act very properly barred justices who were the proprietors of mills, or the sons or fathers of proprietors, from hearing complaints under the acts. In 1831 an act amendatory to the act of 1825 was approved, the principal provisions of which were that justices who were mill owners, or their fathers, sons, or brothers were excluded from hearing com plaints, and if necessary other justices of the county, or within a radius of 12 miles, were to try the cases. On proof that the machin ery had been working during the night the accused might be sum marily convicted, unless he could prove that he had not employed persons below the specified age. It is important to note that for the first time the burden of proof was laid on the employer, which was another safeguard thrown about the helpless children. This act also extended the twelve-hour working day to all persons under 18 years of age, instead of 16, as heretofore, and it prohibited night work for all persons under 21. A year before, in 1830, Richard Oastler had begun a series of impas sioned letters in the Leeds Mercury on “ Yorkshire slavery.” Robert Southey, the poet, had written: “ The slave trade is mercy compared to the factory system.” In 1833 the West Indian slave system was abolished by Great Britain, and it was during the years preceding that enactment that the new school of humanitarians forced upon the people of England the knowledge that a slavery far worse than that of the negroes of the West Indies existed at their very doors. In 1831 Michael Sadler, a recently elected member of Parliament, a Tory in politics, a philanthropist and writer on political economy, introduced a ten-hour bill, the second reading of which he moved in the following year. The great opposition to all legislation of this character was that an attempt to regulate commerce or manufacturing by legisla tion was dangerous and more likely to prove injurious than remedial; furthermore, legislation was an interference with the sacred right of contract and struck at the theory of free agency. It was the same argument that has always been employed when the cause of the help less was championed. Sadler demolished the theory of “ free agency” in an effective speech. He denied that the workingmen were free agents, or that they competed with their employers on equal terms in the market. He admitted that legislative interference was an evil, but so was all legislation, and to be tolerated only when it destroyed a still greater evil. If full-grown men were not free, how much less could little children be considered free? In moving terms he described the long HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 543 hours, and the other conditions under which young children were compelled to work for a starvation wage. The manufacturers opposed this bill, and it was referred to a select committee of which Sadler was chairman. That committee made a most valuable and exhaustive report, but in the autumn of that year, 1832, Parliament was dissolved and Sadler lost his seat. A com mittee interested in carrying on Sadler’s work invited Lord Ashley, son of the Earl of Shaftesbury, to take Sadler’s place, and after delib erate consideration Lord Ashley agreed. “ He now stood at the part ing of the ways,” says his biographer. “ On the one hand lay ease, influence, promotion, and troops of friends; on the other, an unpop ular cause, increasing labor amidst every kind of opposition, per petual worry and anxiety, estrangement of friends, annihilation of leisure, and a life among the poor. It was between these that he had to choose.” But his choice was made. He was a man of over flowing sympathy; his heart beat to the heart throb of humanity. From the time he entered Parliament when he was 25 until his death, nearly sixty years later, he never ceased to be interested in all that tended to promote the happiness and welfare of his fellow-men. FACTORY INSPECTION LEGISLATION. Sadler’s and Ashley’s work quickly bore fruit. The report of Sadler’s committee made it obvious that further and more stringent legislation was necessary, and in 1833 a law(a) was enacted that has been declared “ the turning point of factory legislation.” In sober verity this act may be called the Great Charter of Labor, for like the charter that the barons wrung from the unwilling hands of a craven king, which guaranteed to them their political rights and liberties and is the foundation on which the whole political and social superstruc ture of England has been reared during the past seven centuries, the act of 1833 was the first stone laid in the upbuilding of the great fabric of factory and protective legislation the world over. The act is memorable in that for the first time the beginning of an efficient inspection system was instituted, which modem legislation now recognizes as essential for the protection of operatives. It will be remembered that by the act of 1802 the justices of the peace appointed two of their number to act as inspectors, and, as might have been anticipated, this inspection was neither thorough nor uniform, because the justices, no matter how well meaning or honest, were too much swayed by local bias and the influence of social con tact. The new enactment provided for the appointment of four Government inspectors, under the control of the home secretary and a 3 and 4 W ill. IV , c. 103. 544 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. responsible directly to him, who were given for that day extraor dinarily wide powers. These inspectors were authorized to enter at will any factory at work, to make inquiries, call witnesses, and sum mon any person to give evidence. They were empowered to make such rules and regulations as might be necessary to enforce the pro visions of the act, these to be binding on all persons subject to the act, and to enforce school attendance. The inspectors were given powers coordinate with those of a justice of the peace in the execu tion of the provisions of the act. They were required to make reports twice a year and to meet twice a year to confer on their duties and to secure among themselves as nearlv as possible uniformity in the enforcement of the act. Surely a very good beginning in the direction of an efficient system of inspection. The act also specifically defined the hours of labor of children. All persons under 18 years of age were prohibited from working between 8.30 p. m. and 5.30 a. m. in any cotton, woolen, worsted, hemp, flax, tow, linen, or silk mill, so that the principle for which Owen had contended was thus conceded. No person under 18 years of age was to be employed more than twelve hours a day, or sixtynine hours in all in any one week. The employment of children under 9 years of age was prohibited except in silk mills. Lord Ashley endeavored to have silk mills included in the prohibited class but was defeated. For the first year after the passage of the act no child under 11, during the second year under 12, and during the third year under 13 years of age was to be employed more than forty-eight hours a week, or nine in one day. In silk mills children under 13 years of age might work ten hours a day. In all mills one hour and a half a day was to be allowed for meal times, and children were not allowed in the same room with machinery or in the mill after the expiration of their legal working hours. Penalties for violation of the act ranged from £1 to £20 ($4.87 to $97.33). We must go back a few years to trace properly the logical sequence and development by the State of the interference with and the regu lation of hours of labor that have thrown about the workingman his present protection. As early as 1818 the cotton spinners of Man chester petitioned Parliament for a universal ten-and-a-half-hour day, or nine hours of actual work, but no attention was paid to this petition. From time to time during the succeeding years there were sporadic attempts made to restrict the hours of adults in the cotton districts, but the majority of workingmen were too firmly opposed to any restriction being put on their hours of labor—foolishly believing that it would carry with it a correspoilding decrease of wages— to make it possible for the movement to gain headway. It was not until 1830 that the movement assumed real form, when committees were formed HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 545 and systematic agitation initiated in favor of a general reduction of working hours for adults as well as children. Two things began gradually to dawn on the comprehension of men. One was that in restricting the working time of children a restriction was also placed on adult labor, because, as one observer declared, “ The mistake of Parliament has arisen from supposing that they could effectively legislate for children without including adults; they are not aware that the labor in a mill is, strictly speaking, family labor, and that there is no longer the system of a parent maintaining his children by the operation of his own industry.” In that stage of industrial development, especially in the cotton mills, the adult worker was dependent upon child labor for so much of the subsidiary processes that without the children the work could not proceed. When the children were prevented from working, practically all work ceased. The other fact that men were slowly grasping was an eco nomic fact, which is stated in a resolution adopted at a public meeting in Leeds in 1831: That a restrictive act would tend materially to equalize and extend labor, by calling into employment many male adults who are a burden on the public, who, though willing and ready to work, are obliged, under the existing calamitous system, to spend their time in idleness, whilst female children are compelled to labor from twelve to sixteen hours per day.(a) Of all the complex forces struggling in humanity the world perhaps owes more to selfishness than to any other impulse, paradoxical as this may sound. .But selfishness is a force to gain a certain end; it goes on unchecked until it gains that end and overshoots the mark, and then, by a law of nature, as inevitable as it is inexorable, pays the penalty of its own greed and seeks the remedy. It was so in this case. Selfishness was at the root of the employment of little children. Against the dictates of conscience and humanity parents sanctioned— nay, more than that, compelled— the employment of their offspring at a tender age, so that at the earliest moment they might cease to be a burden and become a profit by contributing their meager pittance to the support of their parents. But the employment of children at a starvation wage displaced adult and more highly paid labor until the parents began to see that instead of really profiting by the labor of their children they were ruining their own market. Once having grasped that sound principle in economics, they were as anxious to prevent the employment of child labor as in the past they had been to encourage it. At a meeting in Manchester one of the speakers declared that “ men were as much entitled to protection for their labor as masters were a Leeds Intelligencer, October 29, 1831. 546 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. for their machines; but men would not apply for it till convinced it was practicable.” (a) The press was voicing the same sentiment. The Manchester and Salford Advertiser of March 10, 1832, said: “ The great difficulty has been to persuade sages like Mr. Hume to pass laws to restrain free labor, it being totally overlooked, in the first place, that Englishmen are not free; that it is because they are not free that they are seeking to become so. It is * * * to avoid this stumbling block that the attempts at regulation have been con fined to the case of persons under age, though the effect of really pre venting them from working beyond fixed hours must have been to interfere with the labor of adults also. It is to avoid this stumbling block that Mr. Sadler has adhered to the principle of legislation for children only.” Even one of the opponents of the interference of the State with the hours of labor was forced to make this admission: “ Whilst the engine runs the people must work— men, women, and children are yoked together with iron and steam. The animal machine— breakable in the best case, subject to a thousand sources of suffering— is chained fast to the iron machine, which knows no suffering and no weariness.” (*6) By the beginning of 1832, we learn from the admirable work of the Misses Hutchins and Harrison, (c) the movement had obtained a firm hold of the working classes of Yorkshire and Lancashire and had spread to London, where a society was formed for the improvement of the condition of factory children. Space will not permit the tracing of the growth of the movement in its various stages. It is sufficient to say that during the next three years the agitation was unceasingly kept up, and in 1832, at a meeting held in Lancashire, it was declared that many years’ experience had shown that “ all attempts made by the legislature for the protection of those employed in factories will be set at naught and rendered com pletely abortive unless the restriction be put upon the machinery.” This testifies that a further fact had been grasped. So long as the engine ran and men, women, and children were yoked to iron and steam, men, women, and children must work. The only way to limit the work demanded of them was to limit the hours in which the machinery was permitted to be in motion. This, then, marks the second stage in the agitation— an effort to secure enactment by which motive power was brought under regulation. The education of the public was slowly progressing, and men could no longer plead ignorance as an excuse for noninterference. Voice of the People, April 16, 1831. &Moral and Physical Conditions of the Operatives Em ployed in the Cotton Manu facture in Manchester, by James Philip K ay, 1832, p. 24. c History ot Factory Legislation, p. 51. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 547 The Parliamentary Commission of 1840 in its report termed existing conditions as “ the most frightful picture of avarice, selfishness, and cruelty on the part of masters and of parents, of juvenile and infan tine misery, degradation, and destruction ever presented.” The next few years are not important in results, notwithstanding an active propaganda was being carried on. In 1841 the operatives executed a tactical flank movement by fighting “ behind the women’s petticoats.” A universal ten-hour day they had not been able to secure, and the legislature was not far enough advanced to sanction the radical remedy of restriction of motive power, but by advocating legislation for the protection of women for the sake of humanity something might be gained. The Government of the day was asked to raise the standard of female child labor, to limit the number of women in proportion to the number of men employed in a factory, and to prohibit the employment of married women in factories during the lifetime of their husbands. (a) Here again selfishness had overreached itself and was now forced to appeal against itself. The employment of women had originally been encouraged by the men for the same reason that fathers encour aged the employment of their children. So long as married women could be employed, marriage laid no burden on the man, but simply gave him the enjoyment of the woman, but with the extension of manufacture women came to be more and more employed, because female labor was cheaper than adult male and for certain processes fully as efficient. This led to the displacement of male labor, and the deputation of Yorkshire operatives that in 1841 went to London to lay their grievances before Sir Robert Peel talked in a lofty moral strain of “ home, its cares and its employments, is woman’s true sphere.” While the question of the regulation of the hours of women working in factories was under consideration, in the following year— that is, in 1842— the report of the commission on the employment of children in mines and collieries was made public, and the publication of the report had much to do with subsequent factory legislation affecting the status of women. This report created a profound impression. The conditions under which little children, as well as young girls and women of all ages, were compelled to work are simply indescribable. Like animals, they were harnessed to heavy trucks; like animals, they were driven by brutal taskmasters, who used the lash unsparingly; unlike even the meanest animal, which has a commercial value, the masters had no regard for their health or safety, because fresh “ stock” was always to be obtained without cost. The indecency, the dirt, the demoralization, the ruination of body and soul, no one a Manchester and Salford Advertiser, January 15, 1842. 548 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. in this day can understand unless one has read these official reports, which are as painful to read as it is shameful to contemplate a state of society that permitted such things. Action swift and drastic followed, the most striking illustration on record of legislative interference with the rights and liberties of the individual when interference became necessary to correct an evil. The employment of women of all ages, as well as young children of both sexes, was prohibited in underground work. THE TEN HOURS MOVEMENT. We come now to 1844, to the sociologist a year memorable. The Government brought in a bill to fix the hours of labor of women and young persons working in factories at twelve a day. The operatives sought to have the bill amended so as to have the normal working day run from 6 a. m. to 6 p. m., minus the time allowed for meals, or in effect the ten-hour day, for which they had been contending for nearly a quarter of a century. Lord Ashley brought forward an amendment defining “ night,” during which the employment of women and young persons was illegal, as between the hours of 6 p. m. and 6 a. m., which was the Government measure. Lord Ashley’s amendment was carried by a majority of nine, and thus Parliament affirmatively declared in favor of a ten-hour day. The adoption of Ashley’s amendment made other changes necessary in the text of the bill, which, under ordinary parliamentary practice, would have fol lowed as a matter of course, but the Government was stubborn, and when a later clause had to be modified to conform to the previous section as amended it forced a division and was sustained by a major ity of three votes. The House of Commons was therefore in the anomalous position of having reversed itself, and having voted in favor of both ten and twelve hours as a legal day’s work. The Gov ernment, as well as its opponents, refused to accept a compromise, and the bill was abandoned, but in its place a new bill was immediately introduced and became a law by which the hours of work of women and young persons were limited to a maximum of twelve, between 5.30 a. m. and 8.30 p. m. Nominally the ten-hour men were defeated, but they had made many converts and won over to their cause such prominent Whigs as Macaulay, Lord Palmerston, and Lord John Russell. The agita tion continued. In 1846 Lord Ashley again introduced a ten-hour bill, which was defeated, but in the following year the bill was rein troduced in the House and was approved by a majority of seventyeight. The great struggle of three years before had exhausted both sides. But perhaps the greatest argument in its support was the state of trade. Three years earlier the mill owners had contended that HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 549 to cut down the working day two hours was to invite bankruptcy, since it was the conviction of mill owners as well as economists of that day “ that the whole profit is derived from the,last hour.” (a) In 1847 “ so great was the depression of trade that the mill owners found it impossible to keep their mills working for so long as ten hours.” Thus the work of a quarter of a century was finished. The ten-hour day was a reality. RESULTS OF FACTORY INSPECTION. It is necessary to return to the act of 1833, “ The Great Charter of Labor Legislation,” to show the far-reaching and beneficent effects that resulted from that act. The magnitude of its importance has not been overstated. That act, it will be remembered, provided for the appointment of four inspectors, responsible to the home secretary, to secure the proper enforcement of the act. Heretofore all such legislation depended for its enforcement upon the voluntary work of philanthropists or the generosity of manufacturers; but the phi lanthropists, suffering from the intemperance of most reformers, were apt to be carried away by an excess of zeal; and while there were among the manufacturers men of humanity, such men as Owen and a One of the most uncompromising opponents of the ten-hour day was Nassau Senior, a distinguished economist and professor of political economy at Oxford, whose ‘ ‘ Let ter on the Factory A cts,” made a profound impression on the public mind and was regarded as irrefutable by his admirers, who believed that he had discovered a new principle in economics. This letter has perhaps been more quoted and has served as the text for more arguments than any other piece of writing of equal length; it influ enced legislators as well as manfuacturers, to whom political economy was an unknown science, and for years it was tilted at by tractarians and economists. Time has proved that the fallacy of its conclusions are exceeded only by the false premises on which the argument is based. Senior wrote: The following analysis w ill show that in a m ill so worked [i. e., on the plan of twelve houifc a day and nine on Saturday, laid down by the act of 1833] the whole profit is derived from the last hour. I w ill suppose a manufacturer to invest £100,000 [$486,650], £80,000 [$389,320] in his m ill and machinery and £20,000 [$97,330] in raw material and wages. The annual return of that m ill, supposing the capital to be turned once a year and gross profits to be 15 per cent, ought to be goods worth £115,000 [$559,648], produced by the constant conversion and reconversion of the £20,000 [$97,330] circulating capital from money into goods and from goods into money in periods of rather more than two months. Of this £115,000 [$559,648] each of the twentythree half hours of work produces 5-115ths of [or] l-23d . Of these twenty-three twentythirds (constituting the whole £115,000 [$559,648]), twenty, that is to say, £100,000 [$486,650] out of the £115,000 [$559,648], sim ply replace the capital; l-23d (or £5,000 [$24,333]) out of the £115,000 [$559,648] makes up for the deterioration of the m ill and the machinery. The remaining 2-23ds, the last two of the twenty-three half hours of every day, produce the net profit of 10 per cent. If, therefore (prices remaining the same), the factory could be kept at work thirteen hours instead of eleven and a half by an addition of about £2,600 [$12,653] to the circulating capital, the net profit would be more than doubled. On the other hand, if the hours of working were reduced by one hour per day (prices remaining the same), net profit would be destroyed; if they were reduced by an hour and a half even gross profit would be destroyed. The circulating capital would be replaced, but there would be no fund to compensate the progressive deterioration of tl\e fixed capital. 304b— N o. 70—07-----6 550 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Peel, the majority of manufacturers were too much governed by greed and too grossly ignorant of economics to understand that their own profit lay in the conservation of the health and the raising of the physical and moral standard of the class from which the labor supply was drawn. When one of the foremost economists of his day preached the doctrine that profit could be made only out of the last hour’s excessive labor, and not only preached it but really believed it, it is not surprising that men of far less intelligence and education, who knew little except the practical business of manufacturing and selling should have been victims of the same delusion. From the mass of testimony available, from a careful study of the condition of society of that period, and what is believed to be a just estimate of the general level of intelligence, the conclusion is reached that what now appears to have been, viewed by the light of a more advanced civilization and a greater scientific knowledge, brutality and indifference to human wrongs was not, as a fact, brutality inherent in the English manufac turer but, rather, ignorance. It was the same ignorance that makes a small child thoughtlessly tease an animal. The great lesson that we have slowly learned was then unknown. “ Factory legislation,” says Victorine Jeans (Factory Act Legisla tion, London, 1892) “ has always been primarily sanitary or educa tional in aim. * * * As economic measures, the various acts have stood almost entirely on the defensive.” This is a concise presenta tion of the case. Economists and legislators believed that any reduction of the hours of work would be accompanied by a reduction of wages or an increase in the price of manufactured goods, or both, which would destroy England’s foreign trade. This argument is used time after time in the books; it is read in the debates in Parliament. It was, of course, the most powerful argument that could be employed. It needed nothing more to league capital against legislation that threatened to destroy trade; it arrayed labor against legislation that was to raise its condition because, pitiful as was the condition of labor, that condition, labor mistakenly believed, was better than that which would follow from a decrease in wages and an increase in the price of commodities. These fears were groundless. “ We have seen,” says Jeans, “ that as soon as legislation was brought to bear on the textile industries, every effort was made to economize time and labor by the introduc tion of better machines. * * * Manufacturers, under pressure of the factory act, resorted to better methods of work to keep up pro duction. These better methods proved even more satisfactory than had been expected. Cost of production fell enormously, prices could be lowered without loss of profit, consumption increased, more capi talists were attracted into the business, new mills were established to meet the growing market, and new mills meant more work people.” HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 551 The first inspectors appointed under the act of 1833, fortunately for the successful working of that act, were practical men, of much common sense; they were not philanthropists, nor were they biased in favor of the manufacturer; it was their duty, they considered, to hold the scale level between master and men. These four men were men of intelligence, courage, and honesty. Their appointment was, as might naturally have been expected, bitterly opposed— opposed as much by the operatives as by the manufacturers. The powers invested in the inspectors were for that age looked upon as plenary, yet they were mild compared with the authority of inspecting officials of the present day, and the manufacturers bitterly resented govern mental “ prying into” their business. At first the inspectors were sneered at. It was said that they could do no good; that they were simply appointed to give somebody a little more patronage; that their salaries were an added burden laid upon the taxpayer. Then, when it was seen that they were really efficient, they were made the target of abuse. It was satirically said that only one thing more was needed to complete this most unholy interference with the liberty of the freeborn Englishman. The inspectors should have the power to put the manufacturer to the torture if he failed to answer questions to the satisfaction of these inquisitorial inspectors. Nor did the operative, at first, regard the inspector as his friend; rather he regarded him as his enemy, whose unwarranted interference with his rights as a freeborn Englishman cut into his pocket. One of the most important duties of the inspectors was to prevent the employment of children under the prohibited age, and here masters and men were leagued against the common enemy; for the masters wanted children— children of any age— to work in the factories, and the parents were only too willing to put their children to work at any age so that the few pence they earned might go to swell the family earnings. It was not until 1837 that it was made obligatory to reg ister births in England; before that time the age of a child was largely a matter of guesswork, and no reliance could be placed on the state ment of parents. The act required that no child should be employed without a certificate from a duly qualified medical practitioner that the child was of the ordinary strength and appearance of its presumed age. But this of course opened the door to fraud of the most flagrant character. Doctors were complaisant; “ doctors” who signed the certificates were found not to have even a rudimentary knowledge of medicine; certificates were traded in; in scores of ways the law was evaded. We now see with what intelligence and courage the inspect ors acted. Mr. Rickards, the first inspector for the Manchester dis trict, appointed a certain number of surgeons who alone were author ized to issue these certificates, this arrangement pertaining only to the city of Manchester. Lord Melbourne, the home secretary, with 552 BULLETIN OF THE BUBEAU OF LABOB. less courage and intelligence than his subordinate, at first vetoed this regulation, but Rickards was so persistent that he was permitted to have his way, and the system was extended over the entire inspection district. It was then put in force by Mr. Horner, the inspector for Scotland, and finally by the other inspectors. In a brief article like the present it can not be told in detail how the inspectors, with a devotion that commands the highest admiration, worked with unflagging interest to ameliorate the condition of these tiny industrial slaves and require the strict enforcement of the law in their interest. What they did was of the highest importance, but even a more important service they rendered were the reports which the law required them to make twice a year to the home secretary. These reports were published and unquestionably influenced subse quent legislation. For the first time the people of England read in unemotional Government reports the facts regarding industrial con ditions. Happily these men were not controversialists, and they laid no pretensions to literary style. They were plain men reporting facts, and the absence of all heat and passion, the simplicity of their state ments, and the direct language they used were far more effective than the impassioned vehemence of Oastler or the other disinterested men who had pioneered the way to reform. The years 1847-48, when the Ten-Hour Act came into full effect, were years of great depression in England, but with the revival of trade many manufacturers attempted to evade the provisions of the law by working their operatives in shifts or “ relays,” and by juggling with the distribution of hours made it practically impossi ble for the inspectors to determine whether the law was being violated by children being required to work beyond the prohibited limit. The inspectors held the relay system to be illegal and contrary to the spirit of the law and prosecuted many manufacturers; but while some of the magistrates sustained the inspectors, several refused to con vict on the ground that the act was loosely worded and would not sustain the construction sought to be put upon it by the inspectors. In 1849, in an effort to obtain a final decision, a test suit was brought b y Inspector Horner in the court of exchequer. (a) The court held that the wording of the act was not sufficiently explicit to carry into effect what the court “ strongly conjectured” to be the legislative intent, thus making the relay system legal. There was no alterna tive but a fresh appeal to Parliament, and in March, 1850, Lord Ash ley introduced a bill in the House of Commons to correct the act of 1844. It was found that this was more difficult than appeared on its face, and the Government brought in a bill to fix the hours of work for protected persons within a twelve-hours’ limit— from 6 a. m. to 6 p. m., or from 7 a. m. to 7 p. m.— with the customary hour a Court of Exchequer, Ryder v. M ills, P. P. 67, sess. 1850, p. 3. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 553 and a half for meals; work on Saturdays to cease at 2 p. m. Lord Ashley accepted this amendment, and the bill became law. Workingmen had never ceased to agitate for a law that would place a restriction upon motive power. So long as it was legal for machin ery to run twenty-four hours a day, so long would men be compelled to work long shifts. Children and women were under the protection of the law and were not permitted to labor more than a specified time, but the only limit to the working hours of an adult male was his physical endurance. In 1853 Cobbett, Liberal member for Old ham, introduced a bill with the following specific purpose in view: To restrict the labor of women and young persons to ten hours a day; to prohibit motive power in factories between 5.30 p. m. and 6 a. m. Cobbett admitted that the real object of the bill was to regulate the hours of labor for adult males, and in the course of his speech said: “ Is there no consideration for adult men? You have already put them in connection with and chained them to the mule, and to the loom, and to the engine. You have bound them to iron, and to brass, and to steel, and you are now— whilst they had before certain protection in the physical weakness of the women and the youths with whose working they were associated— you are now going to infuse fresh life and blood into those beings with whom they are to be coworkers on the relay system; so that the question is now to be, as to the adult male, whether he shall be worked to death or not— fifteen hours a day! Sixteen hours a day! Allow the relay system, and who will tell where mammon will stop in its attempt to destroy men’s lives? For my part I can regard it as little less than murder, and I trust the legislature will never allow a system to which such strong objections may be offered. The argument on the other side will be, ‘ But these are free men. You talk of their inevitable con nection with brass and iron! These are all figures of rhetoric. f” To this Cobbett’s reply was: “ Are these figures of rhetoric? We know here they are practical facts. Talk of freedom! The man in the factory is not free.” (a) Cobbett, however, was in advance of his age, and the bill was not considered. In place of it Lord Palmerston brought forward a Gov ernment measure, which became a law, by which children might not be employed before 6 a. m. or after 6 p. m., which had the desired effect of the masters not being able to work their mills fifteen hours a day. Protective legislation now and for the next few years took another shift, which was almost as important in its results as the limitation of hours. Accidents in factories using steam as a motive power were frequent. Shafting, gearing, and all forms of machinery in fact, were insufficiently protected, and men, women, and children, the latter « Hansard, 3 S ., Yol. C X X V III, p . 1255. 554 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. especially, were often caught in the machinery and killed or maimed for life. The inspectors called attention to this state of affairs in their reports and insisted upon adequate protection. The manufac turers complained of the “ undue restrictions and mischievous inter ference^ of the inspectors and sent deputations to the home secre tary to induce him to curb the activity of his subordinates, but that official declined to interfere, and the courts upheld the inspectors. For many years this fight was kept up, and even if at times the manu facturers were able temporarily to secure advantages, the enlarged view of the duty of society gained gradual headway, until at the present time we find its culmination in the most rigid requirements properly to safeguard workers from injury, while the recent enact ment of the Workman s Compensation Act makes an employer pecuniarily responsible for an accident to a workman arising out of the cause of his occupation, provided the workman has not contrib uted to it by negligence or a violation of regulations made for his own protection. LEGISLATION RELATIN G TO THE T E X T IL E INDUSTRY. The earliest factory act applied to the textile industry alone, and it was the stock argument of the manufacturers and the advocates of the policy of laissez faire, conspicuously the so-called “ Manchester School” to whom State interference was criminal and maudlin senti mentality— Carlyle, for instance, wrote of “ this universal syllabub of philanthropic twaddle” — that any attempt at regulation would work the doom of industry. But when facts routed prophecies made with all the confidence of inspiration, when the amazing dis covery was made that it was possible to produce a greater output in eleven hours than in twelve; that the lowest-paid labor was not the cheapest; when it was established that there was no economy in the employment of children of tender years— astounding discoveries then but elementary truisms now— the Manchester School and their Carlyles and their advocates of laissez faire were driven from their last stronghold. Every argument advanced had been refuted. Every prophecy made had been proved false. Every prediction of gloom had been dispelled by the sunlight of a broader and more complete humanity. The Manchester School did not surrender, but the world swept it to one side and went on with the work that civilization found necessary if civilization was to be something more than a mock. In the early days of the agitation for the regulation and control of the textile industry the manufacturers contended that they were being discriminated against, and, as an argument for Government noninterference, they maintained that there were other industries even more in need of regulation. As late as 1874 Mr. Fawcett HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 555 uttered this plaint: “ Why, I should like to know, should the great textile manufacturers be singled out as so peculiarly deficient in independence and lacking in experience to manage their own affairs that they must be taken under the special patronage of the Govern ment whose peculiar mission it is to harass no industry and worry no trade/ 9 It was not, however, that conditions in the manufacture of textiles were worse than they were in other industries, but it was simply that it was easier to make a beginning there. When statesmen, philan thropists, and sociologists turned to the print works, they found conditions existing there parallel with the conditions that existed in the textile factories in the early years of the century. There was the same callous indifference to the employment of young children, the same requirements of long hours amid unsanitary surroundings, the same excuse that the work was really not injurious, and the same craven plea that if industrial slavery were abolished ruin would fol low. When Lord Ashley in 1845 came forward with a bill to regulate the hours of children in print works, he faced a hostile assemblage. This passion for regulating, for interfering, for meddling, must be .discontinued. The definite question was put to Ashley: “ Where will you stop?” The reply was worthy of the man and showed that he was satisfied with no halfway measures. “ I reply, nowhere, so long as any .portion of this mighty evil remains to be removed,” and he went on to say that his desire and ambition was “ to bring all the laboring children of this Empire within the reach and the opportuni ties of education— within the sphere (if they will profit b y the offer) of happy and useful citizens.” The Government inquiry made in 1843 as to the age of children working in print works showed that nearly two-thirds had been put to work before they were 9 years old, and some of them had actually been forced into the factory at a little more than 4 years of age. Children were extensively employed in the various processes of calico printing, and while the hours of work in the machine room nom inally did not exceed ten and a half, as a matter of fact when the demand was active the machines were kept in motion from twelve to eighteen hours without stopping, and frequently they ran day and night. Children .were employed as “ teerers” to spread the color for the block printer, and a witness before the Parliamentary Commission of 1843 testified he had known a man to work three days and three nights without going home, and the same “ teerer” was kept all the time. The hours of labor in the print works were very irregular owing to the nature of the trade. In the slack season they were not excessive, but in the busy season men and young persons and children were kept at their tasks all day and far into the night. Once again a law of nature was demonstrating its infallibility and shaming man’s 556 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. ignorance. Evidence adduced before the Parliamentary Commission showed that after a certain length of time the strain was so enormous that the men were physically incapable of turning out proper work and that the proprietors instead of profiting by inordinately long hours were actually losers by them. In one works for four months the machines were run from morning until night (fifteen hours) with out the usual dinner-hour intermission. For the first month the production was steady and there was only the normal proportion of spoiled work, but from that time on production decreased and propor tionately the spoiled work increased. “ The amount of spoiled work increased to such an alarming degree that the parties referred to felt themselves compelled to shorten the hours of labor to avoid loss, and as soon as the alteration was made the amount of spoiled work sank to its former level.’ ’ Mr. Kennedy, who had been deputed by the Government to make this inquiry, points out that the men had been paid extra wages for overtime and therefore had no motive to produce inferior work. Remembering the dictum of Senior that the profit begins in the last hour, it is interesting to note that Kennedy reached the conclusion that in trades requiring skill and attention “ the loss, rather than the profit, begins in the last hour.” This conviction was gradually forcing itself on the manufacturers, and they were especially convinced that overtime which was paid for at an extra price was detrimental and too costly to be commercially profitable. It is worth while to quote from the report: A legislative restriction does no individual an injury; it places all upon a footing; it protects the more humane or the more discerning manufacturer from the compulsion exercised upon him by those who do not entertain his objections to excessive hours of labor. An unlimited competition exposes each manufacturer [worker] to the caprice, and places him at the mercy of his employer. Lord Ashley’s bill of 1845 to restrict the hours of children in print works was opposed on the ground that it was unnecessary. Ashley’s opponents pointed out that in the cotton factory manufacturing was carried on by steam, and when the engine halted the whole business came to a standstill; but in calico print works half the process of manufacture was dissevered from machinery, and therefore it would be difficult, if not impossible, to make suitable restrictions for those works and properly enforce the law. Strong protest was also made against extending the law to dyeing, bleaching, and calendering. Lord Ashley was forced to accept a compromise. Dyeing, bleaching, and calendering were omitted from the bill, but no child under 8 years of age was to be employed in print works, no child under 13 years of age or a woman was to be employed between 10 p. m. and 6 a. m., and children under 13 years of age were to be required to attend school thirty days in each half year. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 557 Parliament refused to include dyeing and bleaching in the Print Works Act of 1845 on the ground that the irregularity of the trade made that impossible. The men who worked in those industries felt that they were rightly entitled to the protection of the law, and in 1853 the operatives began an agitation to obtain legislative regula tion. In that year the bleachers of the west of Scotland presented a characteristically Scotch memorial to their employers. They objected to the long hours not only because they were exhausting and unhealthy, but also because they “ leave us no time for the cultivation of our intellectual faculties. * * * If no change takes place in our trade, the consequence will be that your memorialists will feel themselves degraded in the eyes of their fellow-workmen. * * * Man needs periodic seasons of rest. If that be infringed on during the six working days it can not surprise us if nature demands it back on the Sabbath. We are therefore compelled to acknowledge that the present system either forces us to remain at home, or renders us dull, listless, and haggard in the House of God.” After having advanced these pious reasons why their hours should be diminished they used a more cogent and more practical argument to appeal to their Scotch employers. “ A careful examination of work done in the morning,” the memorial runs, “ and similar work performed after a day of thirteen hours will, we are confident, show that the work done at the thirteenth hour is either unequal in amount or quality to that done at the first. Other trades have the hours of labor reduced, and we believe the result generally is such as to corroborate our state ment that short hours produce more work, and that of a better quality than under the old system.” Ashley in the meantime had succeeded his father to the earldom of Shaftesbury, but his transfer from the Commons to the House of Lords in no way made him less keenly interested in the welfare of the work ing classes. In 1854 he brought in a bill for regulating bleaching works, which the Lords approved practically without opposition, but which was resisted in the Commons, and Mr. H. S. Tremenheere was appointed a commissioner by the Government to report on conditions in the trade. As a result of his investigations several bleaching and dyeing bills were introduced only to meet with stormy opposition, and, as further information was considered necessary, in 1857 a select committee of the House of Commons was appointed to inquire into the subject. Among other evidence brought out was the fact “ that the workers were subject to the evil of being constantly on foot, exposed to great heat, often 90 degrees to 130 degrees, for long hours, occasionally as much as sixteen or eighteen a day.” Mr. Richmond, a surgeon who attended a house in which lodged a large number of women and girls employed in these works, said that the sick list varied in proportion to the hours of work. In slack times he would 558 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. have very few patients among them, and many more when they were working full time or overhours. A master gave evidence that there was no necessity for the long hours of work; he was forced to work long hours because others did it. Another master found that he lost ten to thirty pieces a day by working overtime. (a) The committee made a report to the House that the hours of work of women and young persons were excessive and should be reduced. In 1860 Lord Brougham again brought the subject to the attention of the Lords, and the Commons also debated it with much vigor. One of the most important speeches in the lower house was made by Roebuck, who sixteen years before had declaimed against the peril of State interference with the profits of the manufacturer; but the intervening years had brought about his conversion, and with all the fiery zeal that he had used before in opposing legislation he now supported it. “ I appeal to this House,” he said, “ whether the manu facturers of England have suffered by this legislation. The honorable member for Manchester still makes the same objection. He gets up and prophesies all sorts of evil if we interfere now, but he has left out of view the evils for the prevention of which we are asked to inter fere. * * * When he tells me the Manchester manufacturers are likely to suffer, I say, let them suffer. * * * We complain bitterly of the hours of this House, and if we come at 4 with liberty to go away and dine at 7 and then do not go home till 2 in the morn ing we say, ‘ What a terrible night's work we have had.' Well, then, think of the poor child between 13 or 14 or between 10 and 11 not Able to go away and get a good dinner, not sitting while at work upon these soft cushions, but standing upon her poor, tired, little legs for hours and hours together.” The battle had been won. On July 27, 1860, a bill (23 and 24 Viet., c. 78) placing bleaching and dyeing works under^the factory acts passed its third reading. But the law was not so rigid as its advo cates hoped for. Two years later a further law was enacted to pro hibit night work in open-air bleach fields, and in 1863 and 1864 amendatory acts were enacted regulating calendering and finishing. It followed as a matter of course that, society having recognized its right to regulate the employment of factory operatives, and not only its right but its duty, it was only a question of time when all industries would be subjected to governmental regulation. In 1860 Mr. Tremenheere was directed by the secretary of state for home affairs to investigate conditions in the lace industry, and in the following year an act regulating the hours of work in that industry was approved. It is interesting to note, as showing the change that had taken place in public sentiment, that not only did the bill not have to encounter opposition, but the amendments made to it "H istory of Factory Legislation, Hutchins and Harrison, pp. 137, 138. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 559 increased its ‘stringency. As originally introduced the bill per mitted work on Saturdays until 4.30, and children of 11 years of age were allowed to work full time, but the amended bill raised the full time age of children to 13 years and made the Saturday half holiday begin at 2 o’ clock. LEGISLATION RELATING TO N ONTEXTILE AND WORKSHOPS. FACTORIES So far protective legislation related to textile factories and allied industries alone. But the time had now come when, in the opinion of Lord Shaftesbury and others, nontextile factories and workshops should also be subjected to legislative control. On August 15, 1861, Lord Shaftesbury moved in the House of Lords for an inquiry to be made into the conditions of the employment of children and young persons in trades not then regulated by law. It was known that conditions in the pottery, glass, metal, hosiery, and many other industries were as bad as they had been at the beginning of the century in the textile trade. The employment of children at a very tender age, forced to work long hours and far into the night, unsani tary conditions, and an almost total disregard for the health or comfort of the workers were the marked characteristics of the con ditions existing in these trades. In the pottery trade especially the evidence adduced showed increasing deterioration of the workers due to their constant contact with poisons and the excessively high temperature in which many of the operations were carried on. In the manufacture of lucifer matches the workers were affected with necrosis of the jawbone, which frequently resulted in death after excruciating agony. As a result of Lord Shaftesbury’s'inquiry, in 1864 a law was enacted regulating employment in the manufacture of pottery, match making, percussion-cap and cartridge making, paper staining, and fustian cutting. The latter was largely a home industry, and this is the first attempt at legislative control of industry carried on outside a factory. The definition of a factory was widened so as to include “ any place in which persons work for hire.” It is impossible within the scope of this report to take up separately every industry as it was brought under legislative control; it is only necessary to say that by 1867 legislation had been extended so as to include within its scope practically every important industry in the United Kingdom. That such legislation was necessary is shown by the report on the hosiery trade. Children of 4 and 5 years of age were required to work by their parents, and we read in the report that “ mothers will pin them to their knee to keep them to their work and give them a slap to keep them awake. If the children are pinned up so, they can not fall when they are slapped or go to sleep.” (a) a Second Report, p. xxxvi. 560 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. The end of the period named, 1867, witnessed the passage of one of the most important factory acts on the statute books. (a) Without making any change in the regulations then existing governing textile factories, bleaching and dyeing works, and other industries already subject to legislative enactment, it regulated employment in a large number of new industries. Blast furnaces, copper mills, iron, steel, and tin plate mills; iron, copper, and brass foundries; factories in which machinery, metal articles, gutta-percha, paper, glass, or tobacco was manufactured, and printing establishments were brought within the purview of the act; and all these industries were subject to the sanitary provisions and regulations as to hours of work, age of child laborers, education, and fencing of machinery of the previous acts. The advancement of public opinion is shown by the leading articles in the Times. When the ten-hour amendment act of 1844 was approved it was styled “ a triumph of humanity,” but the act of 1867 was simply and soberly defined as a measure of common sense and economic prudence. The Times said: The worst result of the old system of unrestricted freedom was that it tempted men to indulge in alternate fits of idleness and excessive labor. They would be drunk for two days at the beginning of the week and would then endeavor to recover their lost wages, not only by overworking themselves during the remainder of the week, but by compelling their wives and children to work unreasonable hours. The result was that no more money was gained on the average than would have been earned by steady, moderate labor. After all, there is but a certain amount of work to be got out of men, women, or children in the 24 hours. Only a certain amount of work is, in point of fact, got out of them, and the effect of this regulation in the Factory Acts is simply to recognize the fact and induce all classes to act upon it. Nothing can be gained in the end by anticipating our resources, and to employ women and children unduly is simply to run in debt with nature. ( 6) LEGISLATION RELATING TO TRAD E UNIONS. Before closing a survey, necessarily fragmentary, of a subject so vast as a century of legislation which, next to the laws of the Ten Tables, has exercised a greater influence on the betterment of the human race and the advancement of civilization than perhaps any other agency of man, mention must be made of legislation which while not properly to be classed as “ protective legislation” is so closely allied to it, and is the logical outgrowth of the development of ethical considerations, that unless this protective legislation had been enacted the latter would have been impossible— the right of workingmen to combine to secure their material advancement and the right of work ingmen to be recompensed when injured in the discharge of their duty. a 39 and 3L V iet., c. 103. &The Tim es, London, March 4, 1867. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 561 Prior to 1824 the law of England treated the workingman who endeavored to secure an amelioration of his condition with great severity. Strikes of any magnitude or duration were almost impossible, as all attempts at organization for such a purpose were prevented as far as ever possible by the law against combination then in force. The great labor disputes which took place previous to that time, and indeed for many years after, were rather outbreaks of actual industrial revolt against grievances become intolerable than deliberately arranged and skillfully organized methods for bringing about changes in existing conditions. There were then very few disputes during which the leaders of the men were not sent to prison ana in which there were not committed some acts of violence against property or persons. The combination laws in operation from 1799 to the time of their repeal in 1825 were very stringent in their character, and a very brief summary of a few of their provisions and penalties will show how work men on strike might be dealt with. The preamble of the act of 1799 (39 Geo. I ll, c. 8) strikes the keynote of the industrial legislation of that period. It says: “ Whereas great numbers of journeymen man ufacturers and workmen in various parts of this Kingdom have by unlawful meetings and combinations endeavored to obtain advance of their wages and to effectuate other illegal purposes; and the laws at present in force against such unlawful conduct have been found to be madequate to the suppression thereof, whereby it is become neces sary that more effectual provision should be made against such unlawful combinations; ana for preventing such unlawful practices in future and for bringing such offenders to more speedy and exem plary justice.” The act then goes on to declare null and void all agreements “ between journeymen manufacturers or workmen” for obtaining an advance of wages or for lessening or altering their hours of labor, and for various other stated purposes. Workmen entering into any such agreement were, upon conviction before a magistrate, to be committed to jail for three months or to the house or correction for two months with hard labor. The same punishment was also to be awarded to any journeymen or workmen who entered into any combination to “ obtain an advance of wages, lessen or alter the hours ,of work, decrease the quantity of work, or who by giving money or by persuasion, solicita tion, or intimidation endeavor to prevent any unhired or unemployed journeymen or other person wanting employment from hiring him self to any manufacturer or tradesman; or who should, for any pur pose contrary to the provisions of the act, directly or indirectly, decoy, persuade, solicit, intimidate, influence, or prevail, or attempt to prevail on any journeyman hired or to be hired to quit or leave his work, service, or employment, or who should hinder or prevent, or attempt to hinder or prevent, any employer from hiring such work man as he might think proper, or who (being hired or employed) should refuse to work with any other journeymen employed therein.” Like penalties were enacted for those who attended meetings held for making agreements rendered unlawful by the act, or who should pay money in support of such a meeting, or collect money from other persons, or by any means induce other persons to attend such a meet ing. Nor might anyone contribute to the support of persons who 562 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. had quitted work. Any sums so collected were forfeit one-half to the King and one-half to the informer. A subsequent act (40 Geo. I ll, c. 60) somewhat qualified these stringent provisions, but only by inserting such words as “ falsely and maliciously” before the various prohibited acts. It will thus be seen that the work of attempting in any way to better his condition was rendered extremely hazardous to the workman. It was even an offense to assist in maintaining men on strike. Stringent as was this legislation, however, it failed in its object, secret societies began to multiply, and trade disputes took place in spite of the law, if not, indeed, by reason of it.(a) In 1824 a law was enacted “ to repeal the laws relative to combi nations of workmen,” which repealed many acts and parts of acts dating back as far as the reign of Edward I. The passage of this act was marked by numerous strikes and labor disputes, and in the fol lowing year Parliament appointed a committee to inquire further into the subject. As a result of this investigation the act of 1825 was approved, one of its most important provisions being that it should not be held unlawful for persons to meet “ for the purpose of consult ing upon and determining the rate of wages or prices which the per sons present at such meeting should demand for their work.” But the interpretation of the law was left to the courts, and the judges soon declared labor combinations to be unlawful at common law on the ground that they were in restraint of trade. This led to further agitation and the passage in 1859 (22 Viet., c. 34) of a law which enacted that workingmen were not to be held guilty of “ molestation” or “ obstruction,” under the act of 1825 simply for entering into agreements to fix the rate of wages or the hours of labor, or to endeavor peaceably to persuade others to cease or abstain from work to pro duce the same results. Here again the decision of the courts gave the law an effect which was unsatisfactory to its creators, and in 1867 a commission was appointed to inquire and report on the subject. The result of this investigation brought forth two acts in 1871— the Trade Union Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act, the latter repealing the acts of 1825 and 1859. This new act made stringent provisions, both as against masters and men, to prevent coercion, violence, threats, following, molestation, and obstruction, but there was no prohibition against doing or conspiring to do any act on the ground that it was in restraint of trade unless it came within the scope of the enumerated prohibitions. B y the passage of these two acts it was thought that strikes as ordi narily conducted were legal, provided the limits recognized vere not exceeded, and it was certainly assumed that if men went on strike they were not in danger of prosecution for criminal conspiracy. But the following year certain gas stokers, who were under contract, a British. Board of Trade; John Burnett: Report on the Strikes and Lockouts of 1888. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 563 struck and were indicted for conspiracy, Mr. Justice Brett, at the Old Bailey, before whom the men were tried, holding that “ a threat of simultaneous breach of contract by the men was conduct which the jury ought to regard as a conspiracy to prevent the gas company carrying on its business.” The defendants were sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment. “ The severity of the sentence, however,” says Mr. John Burnett, of the Board of Trade, in the report previously quoted, “ caused a great deal of agitation in the country, a special fund was raised to support the wives and families of the men con victed and eventually a remission of eight months of their punish ment was obtained. The feeling thus raised resulted in the appoint ment of another commission, which reported in favor of further alter ations in the law.” In 1875 Mr. R. A. Cross, the home secretary, introduced the Con spiracy and Protection of Property Act (38 and 39 Viet., c. 86), which received the royal assent on August 13 of that year. This act did hot repeal the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1871, but amplified it. The picketing clauses of the act of 1871 were retained in the new law, but the important addition in the home sec retary's act was contained in the first paragraph of section 3, which reads as follows: An agreement or combination of two or more persons to do, or to procure to be done any act in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute between employers and workmen shall not be punishable as a conspiracy if such act as aforesaid when committed by one person would not oe punishable as a crime. This section must be read in conjunction with- section 2 of the Trade Union Act of 1871, which legalizes combinations of workmen. The text of that section is: The purposes of any trade union shall not, by reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, be deemed to be unlawful, so as to render any member of such trade union liable to criminal prosecution for conspiracy or otherwise. B y this section of the act of 1871 every combination of workingmen, which prior to the passage of that act would have been unlawful merely on the ground of its purpose being in restraint of trade, is expressly legalized whether it be a temporary or permanent combina tion. Had this law been in operation in 1872 the gas stokers could not have been convicted of conspiracy. To show how the legislative mind has widened it is necessary to read only the first sections of the Trade Union Act of 1871: S e c t io n 2 . The purposes of any trade union shall not by reason merely that they are in restraint of trade be deemed to be unlawful so as to render any member of such trade union liable to criminal prosecution for conspiracy or otherwise. 564 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. S e c . 3. The purposes of any trade union shall not by reason merely that they are in restraint of trade be unlawful so as to render void or voidable any agreement or trust. By the Trade Union Act of 1876, which did not repeal the parent act but is amendatory of it, a trade union is thus defined: The term “ trade union” means any combination, whether tem porary or permanent, for regulating the relations between workmen and masters, or between workmen and workmen, or between masters and masters, or for imposing restrictive conditions on the conduct of any trade or business, whether such combinations would or would not, if the principal act had not been passed, have been deemed to have been an unlawful combination by reason of some one or more of its purposes being in restraint of trade. These two acts and the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act give the workingmen full liberty of action. They make the object of a trade dispute lawful provided the means adopted by the workingmen are also lawful. That is to say, what A may do himself A and B may with equal impunity do in concert. At least two persons are required to “ conspire ” in the eyes of the law. In the old days individual action might be lawful, but the moment that action was undertaken by two persons the action became illegal and the men were liable to be punished for conspiracy. “ Con spiracy, therefore,” says Mr. George Howell in his Handy Book of the Labor Laws, “ as relating to trade disputes must now be defined as a combination to commit a crime, whether that crime be the object or the means of the combination, for the common law of conspiracy as affecting trade disputes has been by this statute practically abolished.” Under the protection afforded by these acts British workingmen have carried on strikes against their employers. B y the seventh section of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act it is made a penal offense for any person to attempt to compel any other person to abstain from doing or to do any act which such other person has a legal right to do and in that attempt uses violence or intimidation, follows such person about from place to place, hides any tools, clothes, or other property, watches or besets the house or place where such person resides or works, or follows such person with two or more persons in a disorderly manner through any street. Numerous prosecutions have been based on this section. What con stitutes “ intimidation” or “ violence,” how far a person may “ com municate information” and not be deemed guilty of “ watching or besetting” have given rise to many judicial decisions, generally more satisfactory to the employer than to the employee, to quote from a report made by the present writer on the British Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act published by this Bureau in Bulletin No. 33: HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 565> a As a general thing it may be said that the courts have given a broad construction to the act and have been inclined to protect work ingmen against ‘ intimidation 7even when that method of coercion has not been attended by violence/7 Generally speaking, English working men are satisfied with the law. “ It has permitted u s /7 further to quote from the report already mentioned, “ to do in combination what we are permitted to do as individuals, but which we were pro hibited from doing in association before that law came into effect; it has more particularly established our rights; it has given us certain privileges and restrictions, and at the same time has laid equal privileges and restrictions upon employers.77 THE CASE OE AL L EN VERSUS FLOOD. Before leaving this branch of the subject attention must be called, to the celebrated case of Allen v. Flood, because labor no less than capital long regarded it as one of the most important decisions affecting their rights. Flood and Taylor, shipwrights, expert artisans,, and men of excellent character, were employed by the Glengall Iron Company. Their dismissal was demanded by the IndependentSociety of Boiler Makers and Iron and Steel Shipbuilders solely o n the ground that they were workers both in wood and iron. Allen,, the London delegate of the union, frankly admitted that his union had no ill feeling against their employers or the two men, but that the union was determined to prohibit men from working both in wood and in iron, and he threatened that unless his demands were complied with the other members of the union would strike. The two men. were discharged. They then brought suit against Allen and obtained damages. From this verdict Allen appealed, and the decision of the. court below was affirmed. Allen took a further appeal to the House, of Lords, the court of last resort in England. Eminent counsel on both sides argued the case for four days, December 10, 12, 16, 17,, 1895, but their lordships required further argument and from March 25 to April 2, 1897, the case was reargued, when their lordships did a thing done once in a generation and requested the attendance of eight of the most eminent judges of the Kingdom to give their opinion on. questions of law. At the conclusion of the arguments the law lords, propounded the following question to the judges: “ Assuming the evidence given by the plaintiffs7witnesses to be correct, was there any evidence of a cause of action fit to be left to the jury?77 Two monthslater the judges delivered their opinion, six of them, agreeing with the two lower courts, the other two answering their lordships in the nega tive. The opinion of the judges, however, was advisory merely and not the action of the court. On December 14,1897, the decision was rendered, the judgment of the court below being reversed; of the* 304 b — N o. 70— 07------ 7 566 BULLETIN OE TH E BUREAU OE LABOR. nine law lords who sat in the case only three joined in the dissenting opinion. Put in its most concise form the judgment of the highest court of the British Empire is this: Where an act is lawful in itself the motive with which it is done is immaterial. To induce a master to discharge a servant, if the discharge does not involve a breach of contract, or to induce a person not to employ a servant, even if done maliciously, and resulting in injury to the servant, does not give him any cause of action. This decision broke down many of the restraints of both civil and criminal law, and as Lord Morris, one of the dissenting lords, said, “ It overturned the overwhelming judicial opinion of England.” The overwhelming importance of this decision will be better understood when later the Taff Yale decision is considered. From the date of the passage of the two trade union acts in 1871 and 1876 until 1900 British workingmen believed that the code of industrial warfare was precisely defined and that they could carry on defensive or offensive operations against capital without subjecting themselves to the penalties of the law. But in the latter year there arose a labor dispute that led to one of the most important judicial decisions affecting labor in England. THE TAFF V A L E DECISION. In June, 1900, the men employed by the Taff Vale Railway Com pany, a Welsh railroad system, were dissatisfied and generally in a state of discontent. James Holmes, one of the organizing secretaries of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (the railway men’s trade union), stationed at Cardiff, sent a circular to the signalmen on the Taff Vale system, asking them if they were in favor of a movement to obtain an advance of wages, promotion by seniority, additional pay for Sunday duty, and a rearrangement of their hours. In his circular Mr. Holmes said: “ A more favorable opportunity will never present itself, and if you are dissatisfied with present conditions, sign this paper and return it to me.” When this circular was brought to the attention of Mr. Richard Bell, the general secretary of the society in London., he wrote to Mr. Holmes warning him that he was exceeding his authority and was in danger of incurring the displeasure of the executive committee. Holmes, however, refused to heed the warning and showed that he was determined to make trouble between the company and its men. Despite Bell’s warning, in making his official report for July to his superior officer, Holmes used this language: There is nothing I would like better than to measure swords with this T. V. R. dictator, and who knows how soon the,chance may come? I not only do not fear him, but court a try, and if the men will onlv prove men, I shall have no fear of the results. There is a black mart to rub out, and I swear I w^on’t rest till it has been done. HISTOBY OF BBITISH LABOK LEGISLATION. 567 The feeling among the men grew. Holmes spoke at several meetings at which he used language similar to that in his letter to Mr. Bell. The men were in a mood to strike, but while still in an uncer tain frame of mind the company drove them to action. Ewington, a signalman who had been for more than twenty years in the company's service, and who had taken a leading part in the agitation in favor of improved conditions, was ordered to be trans ferred to a remote part of the system. Rightly or wrongly, the men interpreted the order as an attempt to intimidate them and make a victim of Ewington. The company asserted that, on the contrary, Ewington's transfer was in the nature of a promotion, as it carried with it an advance of about 50 cents a week. At the time Ewington received his notice of transfer he was confined to his bed with rheu matism and therefore was physically unable to comply with his instructions. He protested against being transferred, even at an increase of wrages, as he was satisfied where he was; but, on recovery, finding that his protest was unheeded, offered to accept the new place, only to be told that inasmuch as he had refused the place the vacancy had been filled, and so also had been his old box or 16cabin." The company then offered him a new cabin, but at 75 cents a week less than he formerly received. This Ewington declined and demanded that he be restored to his former place. The company refused his demand. Holmes immediately made the Ewington case an additional reason for war, and he wrote to Bell again denouncing the company. Bell replied cautiously hoping that the protests made by the men would lead to Ewington's reinstatement. On August 6, the men determined to strike unless Ewington was immediately reinstated. Bell wrote to Holmes saying, “ I can not help but think that the men have been very impatient and very undecided as to their course of action, and I fear whether what they have done will be conducive to the best results. They [the men] seem to have gone absolutely on their own responsibility, disregarding the society's rules, the executive commit tee decisions, and all reasonable advice." Bell also called Holmes's attention to the fact that the movement had not received the sanction of the executive committee, and that for the men to strike without the sanction of the executive committee was in violation of the rules. Holmes knew that he was proceeding unconstitutionally, but he was determined to force the men to strike. In an endeavor to avert a strike, Mr. Ritchie, the president of the Board of Trade, a member of the cabinet, invited Mr. Bell to an unofficial conference, and Bell went to Cardiff to try to induce the men to accept a compromise. There Holmes bluntly told him that he did not want his interference, and that the men were acting inde pendently of the society. Both Mr. Ritchie and Mr. Bell continued 568 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. their efforts to bring about a settlement, but on August 19 the execu tive committee of the society adopted a resolution censuring the men for having acted without the prior consent of the committee, com demning the company for the arbitrary removal of Ewington, recom mending that every effort be made to bring the dispute to a speedy termination, and agreeing to support financially the men. In obedi ence to the resolution of the executive committee, Mr. Bell went to Cardiff personally to take command, and on August 20 the men went on strike. Ten days later a compromise was reached, and within a week practically all the men had been reinstated. Thus the strike, one of the shortest and one of the most important in the history of English labor, was brought to an end, but it proved to be one of the most costly for labor and had results that no one could have anticipated. As soon as the men went on strike, the Taff Yale Company brought suit against more than two hundred for breach of contract in having left the company’ s service without notice or on insufficient notice, and in the Cardiff police court sixty of the men were each fined £4 ($19.47) and costs. The company then applied for an injunction to restrain (a) the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, Bell, Holmes, and the other officers, and the members generally from doing certain acts alleged to be illegal, such*as picketing, “ besetting” the plaintiff’ s stations, intimidating and using violence toward the com pany’ s employees, and generally interfering with and obstructing the conduct of the company’s business; also claiming damages in the sum of £24,626 ($119,842) for the injury done to the plaintiffs by the loss of their business and the extra expense involved arising out of the unlawful and malicious conspiracy of the defendants. A temporary injunction and restraining order was issued against Bell, Holmes, et al., and the writ made returnable on August 30. The ease was heard in the high court of justice before Mr. Justice Farwell, who took under advisement the application against the soci ety, but granted an interim injunction against Bell and Holmes to restrain them from watching and besetting the works of the plaintiffs or the places of residence of any workman employed b y the plaintiffs, for the purpose of persuading or preventing any persons from working for the plaintiffs. On September 5 he made two orders, one refusing to strike the name of the society out of the action, and the other grant ing an interim injunction against the society, holding, contrary to the contention of the society, that it could be sued as a trade union. The defense set up by the society was that under the two acts of Parlia ment enacted for the creation of trade unions (34 and 35 Viet., c. 31, and 39 and 49 Viet., c. 22, more generally known as the Trade Union a Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 50, January, 1904, “ Labor Unions and British Industry,’ 5 b y A . Maurice Low. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 569 Acts of 1871 and 1876), a trade union was neither a corporation nor an individual nor a limited-liability company, and while the trustees of the union were empowered to bring or defend any action touching the property of the union, and in all cases concerning the real or personal property of the union might sue or be sued, the union, as a union, was not collectively liable for the acts of its members or responsible for those acts either civilly or criminally. The importance of a judicial interpretation of this section of the act was of the utmost consequence to the trade unions no less than to the general public. Justice Farwell gave a new status to the trade unions by deciding that the union, as a union, was an entity to be reached by the process of the court, arriving at his conclusion in these words: Although a corporation and an individual, or individuals may be the only entities known to the common law who can sue or be sued, it is competent to the legislature to give to an association of individ uals, which is neither a corporation nor a partnership nor an individ ual, a capacity for owning property and acting by agents; and such capacity, in the absence of express enactment to the contrary, involves the necessary correlative of liability, to the extent of such property, for the acts and defaults of such agents— in other words, the liability of being sued in its registered name. As to the competency of the action against Bell and Holmes, as: individuals, no question was raised, but from the decision granting the interlocutory injunction against the society an appeal was taken. The strike terminated long before the appeal could be heard, and, therefore, so far as the injunction affected the freedom of action of the parties involved, it was a dead letter, but both sides saw at once that a vital question was at issue. The Taff Vale Company knew that an action for damages against individual members, in the event of that action being successful, would, in all probability, be a barren victory, as on other occasions employers had obtained verdicts and damages against their employees which could not be satisfied because the employees, not being men of substance, had no property that could be attached. But here was an entirely different case. Here was a soci ety with $1,500,000 in its treasury, and if the decision went against the society it could not escape its responsibility. Naturally, both sides were determined to defend what each considered to be its rights. The appeal came on. for hearing in the court of appeals before the master of the rolls, Lord Justice Collins, and Lord Justice Sterling, on November 12, 1900. The only question at issue was whether Mr. Justice Farwell had erred in deciding that the society could be sued. Mr. Haldane, Q. C., M. P., for the appellants, maintained that, follow ing the strict letter of the acts of 1871 and 1876, a trade union could not be sued. Sir E. Clark, Q. C., for the respondents, contended that if this argument was sound the act of 1871 had created a “ society that 570 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. would bear the character of a chartered libertine. I maintain/’ he said, “ that the legislature intended to create an entity.” Judgment was given on November 21, the master of the rolls read ing the unanimous opinion of the court. In his opinion the master of the rolls said: If a trade union can be sued in the manner proposed in this case, the funds of the union will be liable to be taken in execution under a judg ment obtained against the union in the society’s name. Whether this ought to be so or not is one thing which I have not to inquire into. Whether it is so, that is, whether the union can be sued in this manner proposed, is another matter, and this I have to decide. Mr. Justice Far well has held that this action is maintainable against the union in the society’s name, and against this judgment it is that the members of the trade union appeal. The learned judge in the early part of his judgment says what is undoubtedly the truth when he said that a ‘ ‘ trade union is neither a corporation nor an individual, nor a partner ship between a number of individuals,” and in this I entirely agree. There can, in m y judgment, be no doubt that at common law the defendants could not be sued in the name in which they are sued in this action, any more than a tradesman could sue a defendant in the name o f a West End club for goods supplied by him to that club, for the simple reason that the name of a club is not the name of a corpo ration nor an individual member of a partnership, which, apart from statute, are the only entities known to the law as being capable of being sued. In order, therefore, that the action can be maintained against the defendants in the name of “ Amalgamated Society of Rail way Servants,” there must be some statute enabling this to be done, either by creating the society a corporation or enacting that it may be sued in its registered name, and this, as the learned judge states, and in this I also agree, depends upon the true construction of the trades union acts. The court held that there was no section in the acts empowering a trade union to sue or be sued, and that if the legislature had intended to make that possible “ the legislature well knew how, in plain terms, to bring about such a result.” In conclusion the master of the rolls said: As there is no statute empowering this action to be brought against the union in its registered name, it is not maintainable against the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, eo nomine, and these defendants must therefore be struck out, the injunction against them must be dissolved, and the appeal as regards these defendants must be allowed with costs here and below. From the judgment the company asked leave to appeal, and served notice on the society that it had lodged an appeal in the House of Lords. The appeal was heard before the Lord Chancellor and Lords Macnaghten, Shand, Brampton, and Lindley, the court, by a unanimous bench, overruling the court of appeal and sustaining the judgment HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 571 of Mr. Justice Farwell. In pronouncing the opinion of the court the Lord Chancellor said: In this case I am content to adopt the judgment of Farwell, J., with which I entirely concur; and I can not find any satisfactory answer to that judgment in the judgment of the court of appeal which overruled it. If the legislature has created a thing which can own property, which can employ servants, which can inflict injury, it must be taken, I think, to have impliedly given the power to make it suable in a court of law for injuries purposely done by its authority and procurement. I move your lordships that the judgment of the court of appeal be reversed, and that of Farwell, J., restored. Mr. Sidney Webb, perhaps the foremost of contemporary English sociologists, thus comments on this decision :(a) At first sight there would seem little or nothing to complain about. The judgment professes to make no change in the lawfulness of trade unionism. No act is ostensibly made wrongful which was not wrong ful before. And if a trade union, directly or by its agents, causes injury or damage to other persons, by acts not warranted in law, it seems not inequitable that the trade union itself should be made liable for what it has done. The* real grievance of the trade unions, and the serious danger to their continued usefulness and improve ment, lies in the uncertainty of the English law and its liability to be used as a means of oppression. This danger is increased, and the grievance aggravated, by the dislike of trade unionism and strikes, which nearly all judges and juries share with the rest of the upper and middle classes. The public opinion of the propertied and professional classes is, in fact, even more hostile to trade unionism and strikes than it was a generation ago. In 1867-1875, when trade unionism was struggling for legal recognition, it seemed to many people only fair that, as the employers were left free to use their superiority in economic strength, the workmen should be put in a position to make a good fight of it against the employers. Accordingly, combinations and strikes were legalized, and some sort of peaceful picketing was expressly author ized b y statute. So long as no physical violence was used or openly threatened, the mild tumult and disorder of a strike, a certain amount of harmless obstruction of the thoroughfares, and animated persua sion of blacklegs by the pickets, were usually tolerated by the police, and not seriously resented by the employers. It all belonged to the conception of a labor dispute as a stand-up fight between the parties, in which the State could do no more than keep the ring. Gradually this conception has given way in favor of the view that, quite apart from the merits of the case, the stoppage of work by an industrial dispute is a public nuisance, an injury to the commonweal, which ought to be prevented by the Government. Moreover, the conditions of the wage contract are no longer regarded only as a matter of pri vate concern. The gradual extension of legislative regulation to all industries, and its successive application to different classes of workers and conditions of employment, decisively negatives the old assump tion of the employer that he is entitled to hire his labor on such a Industrial Democracy, preface to 1902 edition. 572 BULLETIN OF TH E BUBEAU OF LABOB. terms as he thinks fit. On the other hand, public opinion has become uneasy about the capacity of English manufacturers to hold their own against foreign competition, and therefore resents as a crime against the community any attempt to restrict output or obstruct machinery of which the trade unions may be accused. And thus we have a growing public opinion in favor of some authoritative tribunal of conciliation or arbitration, and an intense dislike of any organized interruption of industry by a lockout or strike, especially when this is promoted by a trade union which is believed— often on the strength of the wildest accusations in the newspapers— to be unfriendly to the utmost possible improvement of processes in its trade. Labor, naturally, bitterly, denounced the decision and regarded it as another scandalous illustration of “ judge-made law ;” of the perversion of the intent of the legislature by hostile judicial inter pretation. Labor at once began a campaign to secure the amend ment of the Trade Union Acts, by which the legislature should affirma tively declare that the funds of trade unions were not liable for any act of a trade union that was not in itself criminal, even if its pur pose was to cause injury; and further that the union should not be held civilly liable for the acts of its individual members if such acts, had not been sanctioned, or had been repudiated, by the duly authorized executive body. Mr. Bell, who, in addition to being secretary of his union, is a, member of Parliament, introduced a bill “ to legalize the conduct of trade disputes.” Mr. Bell’s bill provided that: Where an act is done in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, the person doing the act shall not be liable to an action on the ground that by that act he interfered, or intended to interfere, either with the exercise by another person of his right to carry on his business, or with the establishment of contractual relations between other persons: Provided, That nothing in this section shall exempt such persons from liability on any other ground. An agreement or combination by two or more persons to do or procure to be done any act in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute shall not be ground for an action, if such act when done by one person is not a ground for an action. A n action shall not be brought against a trade union, or against, any person or persons representing the members of a trade union in his or their respective capacity, for any act done in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute. Attending at or near the house or place where a person resides, or works, or carries on business, or happens to be, or the approach to such a house or place, in order merely to persuade such person peaceably to do or abstain from doing that which he has a legal right to do or abstain from doing, shall not be deemed as watching or besetting within the meaning of section 7 of the Conspiracy and. Protection of Property Act, 1875. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 573 TRADE DISPUTES ACT, 1906. The bill, however, did not become a law, but the Government of the day admitted that an inquiry was necessary, and a royal commission was appointed. In March, 1906, the Government brought in a bill amendatory of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, to meet the demands of labor, which was finally passed, December 21, 1906, as the Trade Disputes Act 1906. This act contains the follow ing provisions: An act done in pursuance of an agreement or combination by two or more persons shall, if done in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, not be actionable unless the act, if done without any such agreement or combination, would be actionable. It shall be lawful for one or more persons, acting on their own behalf or on behalf of a trade union or of an individual employer or firm in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, to attend at or near a house or place where a person resides or works or carries on business or happens to be, if they so attend merely for the pur pose of peacefully obtaining or communicating information, or of peacefully persuading any person to work or abstain from working. An act done by a person in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute shall not be actionable on the ground only that it induces some other person to break a contract of employment or that it is an interference with the trade, business, or employment of some other person, or with the right of some other person to dispose of his capital or his labor as he wills. An action against a trade union, whether of workmen or masters, or against any members or officials thereof on behalf of themselves and all other members of the trade union in respect of any tortious, act alleged to have been committed by or on behalf of the trade union, shall not be entertained by any court. Nothing in this section shall anect the liability of the trustees of a trade union to be sued in the events provided for by the Trader Union Act, 1871, section nine, except in respect of anj tortious act committed by or on behalf of the union in contemplation or in fur therance of a trade dispute. It will be seen that this act give^ to trade unions, whether of work men or masters, immunity from being sued “ in respect of any tor tious act.” If it had been a law at the time of the Taff Yale Rail way strike that company could not have recovered damages from the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants. It has been made manifest that at the beginning of the last century society had no recognition of the duty it owed to the manual worker.. There was no conception of what in latter days has been termed “ paternalism,” usually employed as a term of reproach and disap probation; of the ethical relations between employer and employee;, of the obligations capital owes to the means by which it is produced— that is, the men whose labor creates wealth. It has already been observed that all the legislation which has here been considered is 574 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. class legislation; legislation for the protection and the moral and material advancement of a class— the so-called “ working class/’ to use a generic term— that required the protection of society to save it from the depredations of society. It was the frank recognition of weakness; it was an acknowledgment that in the complex organiza tion of society the worker and the producer, born to a lower intellec tual plane, unable to advance themselves by means of their own unaided efforts, and yet the agency whereby society advanced, were entitled to at least a share of their contribution to society’s welfare. At the beginning of the nineteenth century the legislator who would have proposed that the workingman should be compensated by his employer for an injury received in the course of his employment, not caused by his own negligence or violation of rules, would have been regarded as mad or an enemy to society. We have seen how the manufacturers opposed regulations for the proper protection of machinery. W e have seen the callous disregard manufacturers had for the lives and health of their employees. We have seen all this, and to-day we find on the statute books of England a law by which men injured in the course of their employment are compensated by their employers. It is the fitting end to legislation that, beginning with an attempt to save mere babies from the lash of industrial slavery, now seeks to give to men a just proportion of their labor. W ORKM EN ’S COMPENSATION ACTS. On August 6, 1897, the royal assent was given to the Workmen’s Compensation Act (60 and 61 Viet., c. 37), which came into operation on July 1, 1898. This act provides, in brief, that a workman killed or injured in the course of his duty, whose death or injury was not due to his own negligence or the willful violation of any rule or regulation made by the proper authorities or his employers for his protection or safety, shall be compensated according to a fixed schedule. The law was important for more than one reason. It was, in the first place, a great advance in social legislation; in the second place, this act had the effect practically, even if not statutorily, to destroy the old doctrine of “ common employment.” The common law of England recognized the liability of an employer to compensate an employee for an injury received by the employee in his service, sub ject to certain conditions, but it relieved the employer of liability where the injury was caused by a fellow-employee, their employment being common. Thus, to quote from the Report of the Departmental Committee of 1903 Appointed to Inquire into the Law on Workmen’s Compensation, “ the representatives of a deceased sailor who has lost his life through the negligence of the captain of the ship have no remedy against the owners, who are the common employers both of the captain and of the injured man.” The new law fastened the HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 575 liability upon the employer irrespective of the joint agency of employer and fellow-employee. The purpose sought to be attained was concisely set forth by Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, M. P., who moved t o amendment to the bill of 1893, which failed to become a law, in these words: “ That no amendment of the law relating to employers’ liability will be final or satisfactory which does not provide compensation to workmen for all injuries sustained in the ordinary course of their employment, and not caused by their own acts or default.” To quote again from the departmental report already cited: In 1897 the measure which is now law was introduced. It is diffi cult to overrate the boldness or the importance of the step then taken by the legislature. * * * The proposal was somewhat startling, for hitherto the law had never recognized a personal lia bility, except as a consequence of breach of contract or some wrong ful act or omission. It is true that our law and the law of the United States of America, which was derived from it, had gone very far in recognizing a personal liability in the employer for the wrongful act or omission of persons employed by him, even without any personal default on the part of the employer himself. Vicarious responsibility of this kind is in some form an element of all systems of European law and of those derived from it;, but, as already stated, the English law carried the idea further than that of most other countries. But it was a departure from legal principle to enact that a personal responsibility should exist, although there had been no breach of contract or wrong doing on the part either erf the employer or of anyone for whom he was responsible. However, the step was taken, and this anomaly has been established as part of our law. Other European countries and British colonies have followed the example of the legislature of the United Kingdom. In effect, upon the coming into force of the Work men’s Compensation Act, 1897, the legislature attached to every con tract of employment in the industries to which the act related the term‘that for industrial accidents arising out of the occupation under the specified conditions compensation should be paid by the employer to the amount and in the manner provided for by the act. There are no means of escaping or limiting this liability, except under condi tions (to be noticed hereafter) by which equal or greater benefits are secured to the workmen. This legislation was stated by the ministers responsible for its introduction to be of an experimental character. But it is obvious that as soon as it was passed the contractual relations of employers and employed who fell within its scope underwent a vast change. Whatever the true economic view may be as to the ultimate incidence of the cost of compensation, a burden of greater or less weight was, in the first instance, at all events, thrown upon the employers and a benefit conferred on the workmen. This change has been too farreaching to admit of any recurrence to the former state of things. The questions for the future must be, not whether the workman should continue to have a legal right to be relieved from some portion o f the loss caused b y industrial accidents, but what amendments are required in the law providing for that relief as regards the general method and detailed means of affording it, whether any ana what 576 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. changes are required in the extent or limits of that relief, or in the security for its provision and maintenance, and whether similar privileges should be extended to classes of work people not now; within the law. The former controversies as to “ common employ ment,” “ volenti non fit injuria,” “ contributory negligence,” so far as the scope of the Workmen’s Compensation Act is concerned, have practically passed away. The history of the law is the history of all similar legislation. It has become a proverb that history repeats itself, and certainly it is true that the evolution of society is circumgyratory, that society in its progressive movement does not ascend perpendicularly, but reaches a higher plane only by working around and touching in its path the circumference of prejudice and preconceived error. This law encountered the same opposition that the early factory acts did. It met the resistance of capital, which saw in it another attack on its rights; it was antagonized by workingmen, for whose benefit it was sought to be enacted, because they believed the burden of its cost would be laid upon them. We have here a dramatic illustration of this circular evolution of society to which reference has been made. The opposition to the Workmen’s Compensation Act was parallel to that which made both employers and employees league against the acts in the earlier years of the last century, restricting the hours of labor of adults in factories. The employers believed that any reduc tion would affect their profits; the workingmen believed that the reduction of hours, and consequently a reduction of output, would enhance the cost of production and diminish their wages, and that they would suffer by the proposed legislation. The lapse of three-quarters of a century found prejudice and igno rance as firmly intrenched as ever, and despite the advancement in the science of economics men were still unenlightened by its teachings. Prior to the passage of the bill Mr. John Wilson, a member of Parlia ment and the secretary of the Durham Coal Miner’s Association, who had previously declared that “ there is not a question within the probabilities of legislation which so vitally affects our interests,” thus commented on the bill in a circular sent to his association: But suppose a universal scheme of compensation for all accidents established, and as easily as water flowing down a hill we received the amount arranged by the State for the class of accident we had received. Whence comes the money? The ready but incorrect answer will be, no doubt, from the employer. It will come no more from him than the water we drink comes from the tap or pipe it runs out of. It may run out of the tap, but it must first come from the spring or other source. So the money paid will come from the spring of the employer’s wealth— the labor of the workman. The employers are alive to that simple truth of political economy. In conversation with one large employer he admitted that, and it can not be successfully controverted. It may be denied, but not refuted. HISTORY OF BRITISH LABOR LEGISLATION. 57 r This was the view of labor, but the view of what may be fairly called the representative of capital was not dissimilar. Mr. Asquith, a former secretary of state for home affairs and the chancellor of the exchequer in the present Government, in discussing the bill in the House of Commons, said that a large share of the burden would fall upon wages and that little benefit would accrue to workmen. To this Mr. Chamberlain replied that even admitting the correctness of the argument, “ every addition to the cost of manufacture must come out of wages, which, I think, will reduce the argument to an absurd ity*/; The colliery proprietors protested against the legislation because, they maintained, it would create a liability that would be ruinous and impose a charge of about 6 cents a ton on mining. Mr. Wilson scoffed at these fears and again asserted that the compensa tion would come out of the pockets of the workingmen. No one can have read this imperfect history of factory legisla tion without being impressed with the fact that dangers anticipated by legislative control have never been realized, and that instead of harm having resulted from legislative interference good has followed* It is so in the case of the compensation act of 1897. Employers have not been ruined and the wages of workingmen have not been reduced because of the passage of the law. The original enactment applied to employment on railways, in factories, mines, quarries, and engi neering works, and in building operations exceeding 30 feet in height. B y an amendment to the act, in 1900, argicultural laborers were included in its provisions. On December 21, 1906, the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1906, was passed, under the provisions of which practically all workingmen are entitled to compensation. This act will take effect July 1, 1907. “ Whether the Compensation Acts of 1897 and 1900 have conferred substantial benefits on those classes of workingmen who are in a position to take advantage of them, we think that the general answer must be decidedly in the affirmative,” is the judgment of the depart mental commission already referred to. “ Previous to the coming into operation of these acts,” the report continues, “ it is no exag geration to say that the whole burden of the losg occasioned by industrial accidents fell upon the workmen, subject to the numerous exceptions where the burden was alleviated by the generosity of the employer, either by help afforded immediately to the injured work man, or by contribution to sick or accident funds. Perhaps the sub stitution of a claim enforceable by law for assistance voluntarily given may in some cases be matter of regret, as interfering with very satisfactory relations between employer and employed. But, notwithstanding this consideration, it seems right and necessary to make by law systematic provisions for relief from the consequences of industrial accidents. In this way alone can some degree of uni 578 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. formity be obtained, and workers in the industries within the law of compensation and those dependent on them have reasonable secu rity for obtaining substantial relief from the consequences of indus trial accident, and that, in the great majority of cases, without liti gation, delay, or expense.” The first “ protective legislation” was placed on the statute books in 1802. The year 1906 saw the latest^ most important enactment. Compare, for a moment, those two periods— the nineteenth centurj^ at its birth and the century at its close. Then the workingman, his wife, and his children were at the mercy of the master. Hours of labor were long, work was done in unsanitary surroundings, accidents due to criminal carelessness and greed were frequent; the moral and material welfare of the worker was no concern of the employer and a matter of supreme indifference to the State. An attempt on the part of work ingmen to redress their wrongs^ to obtain a higher wage, or a decrease of the working day that was destroying their souls as well as their bodies, degrading their wives, and devitalizing their offspring, was an offense against the laws and punishable as such. At present the Trade Union Acts and other acts cited give workingmen the fullest liberty of action and freedom o f choice. They may work or not, as it may seem good to them; they may enter into combinations to secure an increase o f wages or a decrease of hours; their actions may be frankly taken “ in restraint of trade,” but they face no penalties of the law. The State is jealous of its women and children, it protects them against their own ignorance and weakness and from the. avarice of the employer, and, as the capstone of benevolent legislation, it gives the workman injured or killed in the line of his duty a pecuniary claim on his employer, who must compensate him according to a well-defined schedule. “ The ultimate end of factory legislation is to prescribe conditions of existence below which population shall not decline,” (a) was a state ment made at the time when it was contended that unless little children were worked to the last remnant of their feeble strength trade would be ruined. The end sought to be attained has, in a measure, been reached. « The Times, June 12, 1874® BRITISH WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACTS. B Y L A U X C E L O T P A C K E R , B. L . CHANGING A T T IT U D E OF P U BLIC OPIN IO N AS TO R E LA TIO N S OF M A ST E R AN D SERVANT. The attitude o f public opinion in England toward the relations of master and servant, o f which the latest law regulating the accidents o f industry is an outcome, is shown by the current decisions of judges, by attempted legislation, and by the legislation adopted. That this attitude has changed greatly with the times is illustrated by Parliament’s expression o f view in 1825, that “ all combinations o f workmen are injurious to trade,” while in 1875 a diametrically opposite view was held, and legislation was enacted in accordance with that view, it being then admitted by the Conservative leader, Lord Beaconsfield, that u for the first time in the history o f the country employer and employed sit under equal laws.” Again, in 1837 it is said that “ principles of justice and good sense ” require “ that a workman should take on himself all the ordinary risks o f his employ ment,” while in 1897 the legislature said, “ sound economic doctrine requires that the employer shall take all the ordinary and extraor dinary risks involved in the carrying on of his industry.” ( a) Examination of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1897, as amended in 1900, o f the parliamentary steps by which it became law, and o f its working, leads at the outset to an inquiry into judicial decisions o f sixty years before, and the measures subsequently intro duced into Parliament dealing with accidents which were the result o f the growth and concentration o f industries. COMMON L A W OF NEGLIGENCE. In 1837 the general principles of the common law o f negligence formed the only basis of recovery by a workman from his employer for an accident Under these general principles a man was held to be responsible to others, including his servants, for injuries resulting from his own negligent acts, or from the negligent acts of his agents in the scope o f their employment. FELLOW-SERVANT DOCTRINE. A decision rendered by Lord Abinger in 1837 under the common law of negligence, in the case of Priestly v. Fowler (3 Mees. & W. 1, a See lectures by A. H. Ruegg, K. C. 579 580 BULLETIN OF THE BUBEAU OF LABOB. Murph. & H. 805), is largely responsible for subsequent attempted legislation and for legislation enacted affecting a master’s responsi bility to his servant in case of negligence. In this decision was enunciated the doctrine “ that a master could not be held responsible for an accident to his servant if such accident were caused by the negligence o f a fellow-servant,” this being called “ the fellow-servant doctrine,” or “ the doctrine of common employment.” This doctrine, whether rightly or wrongly expounded in this decision, has operated as a defense to actions by servants against their masters for damages for injuries resulting from the negligence of their master’s agents, i f such agents were fellow-servants, and has thus left the workman no redress in many cases where a stranger would have had redress. The fellow-servant doctrine has been supported on the ground o f its expediency (as preventing accumulation o f alarming liability), on the ground o f “ its tending to prevent accidents ” (by making each servant watch his fellow-servant), and on the ground of “ con tract ” (it being held to be one of the “ implied terms ” of the contract o f employment). On the other hand, it has been the subject o f bitter attack ever since it was enunciated, the statement having been made that it was an exception to the general law of negligence, putting workmen in a worse position than strangers to their employer; that it tended to make employers less careful in the selection of their employees, and that it was founded on a legal fiction, not on a voluntary contract. The doctrine was entirely repudiated in Scotland until imposed on that country by a House of Lords’ decision in 1858 (Bartonshall Coal Company v. Beed, 3 McQ., H. L. Cas. 266). Though it remains operative to a certain extent, as modified by the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880, the practical workings o f the Workmen’s Compensation Acts have largely counteracted its effect in the trades to which these acts apply. From allusions to it in debates in 1897 on the W ork men’s Compensation Act it seems likely to be soon entirely extin guished by Parliament. Opinions o f lawyers have differed as to the soundness o f the decision, some holding that it rightly interpreted the existing common law, and others that it entirely without warrant engrafted a new doctrine into the law, but it is now according to high English legal authority almost universally admitted to be not only unjust, but also based on illogical reasoning. DOCTRINE OF ASSUMED RISK. The doctrine o f assumed risk was another defense against an em ployer being held liable for accident, a doctrine generally based on an “ implied term ” in the contract of service. It was laid down in the BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 581 case o f Priestly v. Fowler (supra) that a servant “ assumes all the ordinary risks which are incidental to his employment.” (A n im portant corollary o f this doctrine o f assumed risk is the aforementioned' doctrine o f fellow service, namely, that one o f the risks incident to the* service which the workman agrees to assume is the risk from the negli gence o f a fellow-servant.) This implied term of his contract o f' service left the workman to bear the risks he knew or ought to have * known, including the burden o f dangers inherent in the business such as unavoidable accidents, etc. This doctrine has been justified on the ground that the servant ig~ as well able to guard against the risk as his employer, and that it is calculated to secure fidelity and prudence on the servant’s part; on the other hand, it has been doubted whether it has the effect claimed for it, and it has been suggested that the “ dread o f personal injury has always proved sufficient to bring into exercise the vigilance o f the servant. Another attempt to justify the doctrine, on the ground that the amount o f the workman’s wages is adjusted with reference to the character o f these risks, is answered by the statement that this theory is borne out only to a very limited extent by the actual fa cts o f everyday life. (Labatt, sec. 259, etc.) This principle was applied to the relations o f master and servant in the case o f Dynen v. Leach (26 L. J. Exch. N. S. 221) in 1857,. and also in Saxton v. Hawkesworth (26 L. T. N. S. 851) in 1872, in* such a manner that it was made to operate as a defense against & claim by the servant for damages for injuries resulting from “ negli gence actually existing ” on the part o f his master, on the theorythat the servant had voluntarily agreed to encounter the risks from nonfulfillment o f his master’s legal duty as to system and appliances.. A t the time o f these early cases cited, the voluntary agreement o f: the servant was implied from his continuing in the service of the employer, “ with knowledge o f the defects,” so that if the servant remained in the service, with knowledge, he was debarred thereby from maintaining any action for recovery from the master for injuries^ resulting from such defects. D O C TRIN E OF V O LEN TI NON F IT IN JU R IA . This old defense of assumed risk, enumerated as a defense peculiar to the relation o f master and servant, has been thought by some, authorities to be only a form o f the wider and more comprehensive doctrine o f “ volenti non fit injuria ” of the common law, which means-; that “ one who voluntarily incurs a risk can not recover.” The., latter has, by other authorities, however, been stated to be different, from the doctrine o f assumed risk, as the doctrine o f assumed risk arises out o f the contract of service between master and servant, whila 304 b — N o. 70— 07------ 8 582 BULLETIN OF TH E BUBEAU OF LABOR. the doctrine volenti non -fit injuria is a general principle applicable whether the relation o f master and servant exists or not. Thomas v. Quartermaine. (L. R. 18 Q. B. Div. 685, 56 L. J. Q. B. N. S. 340. See Labatt, sec. 370, note.) This doctrine o f volenti non -fit injuria was thought not to be a hardship on the servant in the same sense as were the fellow-servant doctrine and the assumed-risk doctrine, as it wTas common to the whole law o f negligence and w^ould be a good defense to a stranger’s action against the master for damages for injuries resulting from negligence. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. The doctrine o f contributory negligence was another defense against claims for damages for injuries resulting from negligence and, in very many instances, defeated a workman’s claim against his employer. It is sometimes stated thus: “ A plaintiff can not recover damages if but for his own negligence the accident would not have happened, though there was negligence on the part o f the defendant.” This was also recognized by Lord Abinger in Priestly v. Fowler (supra), and applied to a master and servant case, when he laid down that “ the relation of master and servant cam not imply an obligation on the part o f the master to take more care of the servant than he may be reasonably expected to do of himself,” thereby recognizing that the servant’s right to recovery for an accident was conditioned on his showing that he did not contribute to his own injury. (See Labatt, section 313.) This defense, however, was available against the claim o f a stranger as well as against the claim o f a workman upon his employer. It was based upon the idea that if the plaintiff was negligent his negligence and not that o f the defendant was the real or proximate cause of the injury. (Thomas v. Quartermaine, supra.) This doctrine was never accepted as sound in the Admiralty courts, where if both parties were negligent the loss was divided. EFFECT OF DEATH UPON PERSONAL ACTIONS. Another defense that operated to defeat a workman’s claim was the rule o f the common law that every personal action dies with the person entitled to bring it, or on the death o f the person against whom it can be brought ( actio 'personalis moritur cum persona). This rule of the common law, which relieved an employer from responsibility for all injuries causing death, was, howTever, abrogated by parliamentary enactment in 1846, under the statute commonly called “ Lord Camp bell’s Act.” Until that act the representatives of a workman killed By accident had no redress whatever against his employer. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 583 BTJRDFN OF PROOF ON PLAINTIFF. A final stumbling block to recovery by an injured workman lay in the fact that at common law in an action for damages for injuries resulting from negligence the burden o f proof lies upon the plaintiff. He has to show (1) negligence, namely, a duty and a breach of that duty; and (2) injury, as a consequence of that breach. In many cases, therefore, even where a workman had a legal right of recovery, he got nothing, as he was unable to prove his case. A T T E M P T E D L E G ISL A TIO N , 1875 TO 1879. An examination of attempted legislation and legislative enactments shows that bills were introduced in 1875 and 1876 to abolish entirely the doctrine o f common employment and the defense o f assumed risk. These bills were doubtless introduced because the princi ples so laid down were being pressed more and more severely against the workmen until the restrictions which were conceivably equitable in the case of the smaller industries o f former years were made to apply in the case of more recent and indefinitely extended undertakings. Thus the doctrine of common employment was applied to the slight relationship existing between a miner and the engineer of the mine and between the general manager o f a railway and a trackman in the service of the same company, resulting in the master in a large undertaking escaping responsibility by delegating authority. These bills were withdrawn, however, on the understand ing that Lord Beaconsfield, who was the prime minister, should cause an inquiry to be made into the subject by a select committee of Par liament. This committee was duly appointed, and in 1877 submitted a report: This report recommended that where a master delegates his duty of selecting proper servants, material, and plant wholly to agents, instead of performing them himself, such persons to whom those duties are delegated should be held to be the “ alter ego ?? of the master and not to be fellow-servants of the injured servant. During the proceedings of the committee, before the adoption of the report, it had been proposed that the committee recommend that the defense o f common employment should be abolished in the case o f accident through the negligence of any employee exercising author ity, however low in the scale he might be, so long as he was not employed in actual manual labor. This recommendation, however, was rejected in favor o f the report above given. About the same time a report from the Royal Commission on Acci dents on Railways was brought in, to the effect that the master should 584 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. be made liable for damages for injuries resulting from the negli gence o f those to whom the master’s authority had been delegated on railways. The following year, 1878, one of the bills to totally abolish the doctrine o f common employment wTas reintroduced. It, however, was 44talked out ” and then dropped. The attorney-general, how ever, promised to bring up a bill later. It was then contended that there was no difference between railways and other industries. In 1879 three bills Avere introduced, none o f which passed. O f these, one proposed to abolish the doctrine of common employment and the other two to modify that doctrine. One o f the latter was introduced by the Government and was limited in its operation to 66railways, mines, factories, and wTorks.” It made the employer liable for damages for injuries resulting from the negligence o f servants with 44managerial ” authority; it failed to pass, as there was a dissolution o f the Government before it had left committee. E M P L O Y E E S ’ L IA B IL IT Y A C T OF 1880. In the following year, 1880, a bill was introduced oy Mr. Glad stone’s government, which was finally enacted into law and became known as the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880. A t the general elec tion, following the dissolution of Lord Beaconsfield’s government, the abolition o f the doctrine o f common employment became an election cry. Therefore, at the entry o f the next government Mr. Gladstone said: 44The present law is unsatisfactory and further protection to workmen is necessary,” and immediately reintroduced the bill introduced by Lord Brassey in 1879. Mr. Dobson, whose name was on the back o f the bill, showed, in his statement, that 44the common law had ended in giving the workmen no compensation at all unless he could trace the accident to personal negligence on the part o f his employer.” He stated that the bill reverted to the ancient state o f the law and would take a middle course, making the employer liable for injuries resulting from the negligence o f those to whom he deputed his duties, or from defects in the plant due to negligence o f his deputies. Many amendments, which become interesting from their frequent reappearances in later Parliaments, were introduced. One pro vided for a general system o f insurance, and though this amendment was negatived the Government said that while they did not deem compulsory insurance practicable, they Avould consider proposals thereto. Another amendment, which was negatived, allowed a work man to recover, if injured by a fellow-servant 44in a separate depart ment.” An amendment to extend the benefits of the bill to Her Majesty’s arsenals and dock yards was negatived on the ground BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 585 that they now had greater benefits, although it was said that the Government employees would ultimately be treated the same as others. It was claimed by the opponents o f the bill that if passed it would result in the ruin o f industries. Mr. Chamberlain strenu ously denied this in debate. When the bill became a law it was restricted to a limit of seven years, but it was subsequently extended, year by year, until the passage o f the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1897, and is still in force. It, however, imposed a limit upon the amount o f damages (previously unlimited at common law) that could be recovered for an accident, namely, “ three years’ wages of the injured person, or of a person in the same grade, in the same district.” This limitation has operated as a hardship upon injured children, since their earn ings were usually only a few shillings weekly. The act being a compromise was imperfectly drawn, and resulted “ in a large crop o f litigation.” While in introducing the bill the Government had intended to bring back the law to what it was supposed to be in England before the case of Priestly v. Fowler, and in Scotland, up to the decision in the Bartonshall Coal Company v. Reed (3 McQ., H. L. Cas. 266), the result o f the act was to prima facie entitle the workman to recovery for injuries resulting from the negligent performance of master’s duties and powers delegated to superintendents and to other persons. It therefore only obliterated the doctrine o f common em ployment, as far as the five causes of injury to a workman mentioned in section 1 o f the act were concerned. That doctrine, therefore, remained in force as to accidents from other causes than those men tioned in section 1 o f the act, but placed the workman in the same position as if he had been a stranger to his employer, so far as the five causes mentioned in that section were concerned. The five causes mentioned were as follows: (1) Defective ways, works, machinery, and plant (if due to the negligence of the employer or of the person to whom had been dele gated his duty thereabout). (2) Negligence o f a superintendent (if superintendence was his principal duty and he was not ordinarily engaged in manual labor). (3) Negligence of persons to whom the employer had delegated his power o f giving orders. (4) Acts or omissions in obedience to rules or by-laws or in obe dience to instructions of persons authorized by employers to give them. (5) In the case of railway companies, the negligent management o f trains, points, and signals. The act was also at first thought to have taken away the defense o f volenti non -fit injuria (see Weblin v. Ballard, 17 Q. B. D. 125); how 586 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. ever, the later leading case of Thomas v. Quartermaine, supra, showed that this defense still survived, although the subsequent case of Smith v. Baker (60 L. J. Q. B. 683), in the House of Lords, minimizes its application. CO N TRACTIN G OUT. After the passage of the Employers’ Liability Act of 1880, it was found that employers were, by special contracts with their men^ free ing themselves from the liability imposed by that act, and the case o f Griffiths v. Earl Dudley (9 Q. B. D. 357) decided that such con tracts were “ not contrary to. public policy.” Therefore, in 1881, a bill was introduced to prevent an employer from contracting himself out o f the act. The bill failed, and in the following years, 1882 and 1883, similar bills again failed. It was stated that “ it was inexpedi ent to interfere with freedom of contract and with private schemes that made provision for every accident, whether under the Employ ers’ Liability Act, or not.” In 1886 a similar bill contained a further clause that the definition o f a person intrusted with superintendence was not thereafter to be limited to “ one who is not ordinarily engaged in manual labor, and whose principal duty is that of superintend ence.” The bill was dropped on the appointment of a select com mittee to inquire into the workings of the act of 1880. The committee’s recommendations were as follow s: (1) The repeal of the 66limiting definition ” o f a superintendent. (2) .That no contracting out should be allowed, unless for adequate consideration (namely, a contribution to insurance approved by out side authority and guaranteed against deficiency by the employer). In 1887-88 a bill was introduced by a labor member practically abrogating the doctrine of common employment, and while not affect ing existing “ contracts out,” providing that in future there should be none, but that the “ court in any suit ” should “ reduce the damage ” if it was found the plaintiff had received benefits from insurance funds. The bill was dropped on the Government itself introducing a bill on the lines o f the select committee’s recommendations. That bill was emasculated in committee, and thereafter dropped on opposi tion by labor members, who insisted on abolishing the defense of common employment and contracting out. In 1890 another bill was introduced by a labor member abolishing common employment as a defense, and repealing the act o f 1880. But the Government again reintroduced its bill, allowing contracting out only when “ a written request was made by a workman,” and even then allowing the court in any subsequent suit to pass on the question o f the adequacy o f consideration received by him for so doing, and to see that it was a substantial one, other than “ continuance in service.” BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 587 The following year a labor member introduced a bill, which did not pass, entirely prohibiting contracting out, and actually invalidat ing all such existing contracts. It will therefore be seen that the Government was on the horns of a dilemma: On the one hand it was shown that from the workmen’s standpoint there seemed to be no equitable reason for the distinction o f the exist ing law between accidents, the result of negligence, traced to a supe rior servant, and accidents traced to an inferior servant, the neglect o f one being as liable to cause an accident as the neglect o f the other, or for the law treating workmen less liberally than strangers, even where the accident was caused by an inferior servant. Again, if a distinction were maintained making “ mere authority ” on the part o f the offending servant the test, it would still be unjust and would practically amount to no distinction at all. The elimination there fore o f the distinction by abolition o f the doctrine of common employ ment was put forward as one remedy. On the other hand, the only other remedy would have been to change the general law by taking away from the master his liability to anyone, to a stranger as well as to a servant, for his servant’s acts. This would have caused altogether too great an upheaval of general legal relations, and probably could not have been enacted, owing to opposition not only by the workmen interest but also by the public interest. The difficulties that confronted the Government, if they permitted contracting out were: (1) Examination of adequacy of contracting out schemes before hand would necessitate a Government department. (2) To allow the adequacy o f contracting out schemes to be passed on by a court in suits would take from the employers “ the preven tion o f suit feature,” their chief incentive to contract out. The Government found, on inquiring into how far contracting out had been carried, since the act o f 1880, that as regards mines, a very large number did contract out, and desired to; in railways contract ing out was general; in the building trades, the iron trades, and other trades there was generally no contracting out. Among the reasons advanced for prohibiting contracting out were: (1) That the act tends to safety through exposing negligent employers in court. But the Government found the number of cases in court were insignificant, and from such statistics as were available concluded that the claim was not borne out. (2) That if allowed to contract out, workmen will be coerced to contract out for no consideration. The Government found prac tically no such cases, and also found that employers’ contributions to 588- b u l l e t in OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. benefit societies under contracting-out schemes exceeded vastly the amount payable under the act. The contracting-out schemes covered all accidents, both those for which the master could be held liable and those for which the master could not be held liable. They seemed to work advantageously to both parties, the workmen getting larger pecuniary benefits for every accident, and also having an incentive to insure, while the mas ter was freed from suit and was placed on better terms with his men. Therefore it was felt that an absolute prohibition o f contracting out wTould be disadvantageous to both parties. A T T IT U D E OF P O L IT IC A L ECONOM ISTS. The Government had before it, on the one hand, the view o f law yers, employers, and workmen, who argued as if there was then prac tically no indemnity recoverable for accident, and further that abol ishing the doctrine o f common employment would give such an indemnity, but that contracting out, if allowed, would take it away again. On the other hand was the view, from the political-economy stand point, winch admitted that industry ought to bear the cost of all accidents (as risks as well as labor should be paid fo r), but main tained that it actually did so, in whatever state o f the law7, in a frac tional reduction o f the current rate o f wages which the employer took from the men and ultimately paid back to them in occasional damages recovered against him for accidents. Political economy was not, therefore, concerned with such changes, since, if the law were made more drastic by abolishing common employment, a slightly larger amount would be retained by the employer from the wages, and if contracting out were permitted again a less amount would be retained by him. The political economists’ view was, therefore, that there was no sound economic reason for making distinctions between accidents which were the result of negligence and pure accidents; that all accidents might be properly compensated; that it merely made the employer an insurer, who took the premiums from the wages in a greater or less, degree, and that it was only a political and not an economic question. TH E A S Q U IT H BILL. In 1893 the Liberal government, then in power, through the home secretary, Mr. Asquith, introduced a bill to amend the existing employers’ liability law. This bill provided for the repeal of the act o f 1880 and for the abolition of the doctrine o f common employ ment entirely and the limit o f damages recoverable; it prohibited contracting out entirely. Though it did not take away the defense BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 589 o f contributory negligence and acquiescence ( volenti non fit injuria), it left the servant in the same position as a stranger, thus practically going to the limit of previous comtemplated legislation. At once, on the introduction o f this bill, Mr. Chamberlain, who was a member o f the opposition (the Conservative Party), intro duced an amendment to the effect that no change o f the law 44will be final or satisfactory which does not provide compensation for all injuries in the ordinary course of employment not caused by injured’s own act or default.” This departure eliminated the ques tion of whether the master was negligent or not. The attitude toward industrial accidents as expressed in this, amendment had for some time past found expression in legislation in Germany and Austria, as well as in other European countries. There the basis o f recovery for accidents had been changed from that o f the general common law o f negligence to the principle that, 44workmen should receive certain compensation, but limited in amount, for all accidents of industry,” irrespective o f whether neg ligence attributable to the master caused them or not; contracting out was prohibited. In one country (Germany), as a machinery for carrying this out, a general system of insurance had been adopted,, the industries o f equal degree o f danger being formed into mutual insurance guilds. A second bill was therefore introduced by private members making the employer liable to pay 44compensation for all injuries due to employment,” excepting the willful default of the injured workman,, placing limits on such compensation, however, and providing that it should take the form o f purchase of annuities from the post-office o f the amounts specified in the schedule of the bill. This bill was onlytentative, and was withdrawn, as was Mr. Chamberlain’s amendment to the Asquith bill. PRINCIPLE OP THE BILL. Mr. Asquith, in debate of the Government bill, said the principle o f it was exactly similar to the act o f 1880, namely, that 44if a man,, for his own profit, sets on foot industrial operations he ought to bo made responsible for the selection o f his servants and the supervision o f his business, so as to reduce the risks to the smallest possible* number,” and that this bill would diminish the area o f accidents. The opposition pointed out that masters could not control the acts: o f the fellow-servants. After lengthy debate throughout the session, and the introduction o f a new clause dealing with employments injurious to health, the* Government bill passed the House of Commons. In the House o f Lords an amendment, passed by 148 votes to 28 (known as the Dudley Amendment), permitted the continuance o f 590 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. existing contracts out, if subsequently approved by a two-thirds vote o f the men, and future contracts out on the granting o f a certificate by the board o f trade 46that the scheme compensates all cases of injury, that the employer contributes at least one-fourth, and that an actuary certifies that contributions are proportionate to the liabilities o f the fund.” On the House o f Lords refusing to eliminate their amendment and concede the unrestricted prohibition o f contracting out, on the ground that the workmen were opposed to the prohibition and that it would minimize the. prevention of accident feature o f the bill, the House of Commons rejected the amendment and threw up the whole bill. It will be seen that the attitude in England toward the subject o f industrial accidents, and the law in force there at the time o f the failure o f the Asquith Bill, corresponded very closely to the attitude toward the subject and to the laws in force in the United States to-day, with the exception that verdicts higher in amount are ren dered here by juries. The law in England then was the common lawr o f negligence, subject to the defenses o f contributory negligence, assumption o f risk, and fellow-servant negligence, as modified by the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880. The legislation attempted indi cated clearly the tendency o f public opinion toward trade compensa tion for accident irrespective o f negligence. In the United States the existing law is the same common law o f negligence, subject to the same defenses o f contributory negligence, assumption o f risk, and fellow-servant negligence, as modified in some States by similar employers’ liability acts, and in others by a more limited interpreta tion o f the defense o f fellow-servant negligence. In the United States, as then in England, in certain States (as in Massachusetts) there have been suggested changes to laws of compensation irre spective o f negligence. W O RK M EN ’S COM PEN SATION A C T OF 1897. PRINCIPLE OF THE BILL. The next serious attempt to deal with the subject o f accidents to workmen was the introduction by the Conservative Government o f a bill which became the Workmen’s Compensation Act o f 1897. The Government in introducing the bill said: “ The present law is notoriously inadequate; it fails to compensate for accidents if caused by fellow-servants, i f contributed to by the injured, and if resulting from the risks o f occupation; it causes costly litigation, 85 per cent o f the amount recovered being legal expense; it leaves the employer ignorant o f what his liability is.” The home secretary said that the Asquith Bill had attempted the prevention o f accidents by making the master responsible for acci BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 591 dents from the negligence o f fellow-workmen, as well as from his own, and without limiting the amount o f damage, putting the work men ill the same position as strangers; that such legislation rendered proof o f negligence necessary, which meant increased litigation, and such a law would still reach only 50 per cent of the accidents that happened. The Government held that giving a right o f action for injuries resulting from negligence could not adequately meet the serious results o f accidents to workmen, that they should be put in a better position toward their employers than a stranger and be given a cer tain but limited compensation for all accidents, not at the expense o f taxes or public charity, and that this would tend to prevent acci dent, though the true method o f prevention was by criminal statutes. The Government said the purpose o f their bill was to define and limit the liability and devise a simple and inexpensive method o f settling doubtful questions. That the principle was hew, based on the doctrine that “ When a person on his own responsibility and for his own profit sets in motion agencies which create risks for others, he ought to be civilly responsible for the consequences,” but in apply ing this and granting compensation it was the general opinion that a limit o f liability should be adopted with it. The opposition (Mr. Asquith) admitted the principle of universal compensation and of giving u some solatium for a pure accident, the result o f no negligence, to soldiers in the army o f industry.” He said it was revolting to sentiment and judgment that “ men who met with accidents through the necessary exigencies of daily occupation should be a charge upon their own families,” and though the bill created a new legal right, so did the Poor Law, which recognized everyone’s right to State food and shelter. He, however, criticised the bill as drawn. ' ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE BILL. The following are the leading arguments, pro and con, of the extended debates that followed, grouped under their respective heads, and referred to the different provisions o f the bill. By its opponents the bill was called “ a radical revolution ” and “ a plunge into socialism.” It was said to exceed the proper func tion o f government, which was the protection o f property and liberty, transferring the burden of accidents from one set of people to an other ; it was said to put legal responsibility where no moral respon sibility existed, and to be contrary to the tenets of the Conservative Party introducing it. This was answered by Mr. Chamberlain, the author o f the bill, who admitted that it was a new principle, only applicable if a “ great 592 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU/ OF LABOR. public human interest is involved,” but said that the bill dealt with u a great scandal; ” not with absolute rights, but with questions o f humanity and expediency. He stated that it contained two prin ciples, as follows: (1) That a workman was entitled for all accidents o f occupation to a moderate and reasonable compensation. (2) That the compensation should be a charge on the trade, like repair o f machinery. He said, moreover, that the bill distinguished between an employer’s moral negligence (employer's willful or wrongful act) and an em ployer’s technical negligence (his foreman causing an accident) and an employer’s criminal negligence (employer’s neglect of precaution after warning). Mr. Balfour (afterwards prime minister) said that the bill was consistent with previous legislation, the country felt it desirable to 44 diffuse the shock ” of accidents, and had already granted such a relief to the public, and it should be granted to a workman in his vocation. He answered the objection that it put a legal where no moral responsibility existed by showing that the law already did that, as it made a railroad responsible for an injury to a passenger, even where caused by the mistake of a good engineer. Lord Salisbury (the prime minister) said that the existing law was socialistic and not the bill, since the existing law made the taxpayer through the Poor Law pay for a railroad engineer killed by an out sider obstructing the track, and so transferring the burden to the industry itself (the railroad) was less socialistic. He said that there was a proper distinction between State inter ference when saving life as against saving property; that in no wellregulated State wras mere liberty allowed to endanger lives; that it was the supreme duty o f the State to see that the claims o f property must bow to the interests of citizens represented by safety, life, and limb. He added that the bill was part o f the series of old factory legislation preventing disease and death. He said the history o f the law o f compensation was a history o f a great machinery for saving life. The following objections to the bill and answers to these objections were also made: (1) That it was unfair, as it made the employer liable for acts of strangers, and as a social experiment, if it was expedient for* the country, the country should pay for it; but it was answered that it was 44 fair, moral, and right;” that those for whose emolument the trade was carried on should p a y; that as the employer risked only his capital, but the workman his life, he had a right to compensation when injured at his employment; that wear and tear should be borne by the industry; that a maximum o f one-half wages lost was fair. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS, 593 (2) That the German system was better, as under it trade respon sibility existed, as opposed to individual responsibility under the bill, and that the State should insure or assume the pensions; but Mr. Chamberlain answered that the German system was too elaborate and was impossible for English people, and that State insurance was a gigantic question. (3) That it would cause social strife, as it was alleged the German law had done; but its advocates maintained that it would insure social peace and diminish litigation, as they alleged the German law had done. (4) That the trades unions and friendly societies would suffer through i t ; but this was denied by the labor-union members. (5) That it would take away self-reliance and thrift from the workman; but it was said that individualistic theories about the rights and habits o f grown men had become obsolete. (6) That it would reduce wages; but this was not admitted. (7) That it would increase accidents, as it was alleged the German law had done; but this was denied. (8) That it would injure old men, as employers would not employ them; but (though the Government was willing to limit the pro visions o f the bill to men under 60 years) this was strenuously denied by the representatives of labor, who said older men were more careful. (9) That it was illogical, as it excluded health. The Government admitted this, but said that health was too large a question to tack onto it. (10) That it would injure trade, especially export trade, and that the bill taxed industry; but it was answered that the employers* liability act o f 1880 had been said to impose “ terrible liabilities on trade,” which experience had shown to be unsound. Mr. Chamberlain said the Asquith bill was a punishment bill cov ering 10 per cent o f accidents, and this bill was a benefit bill covering 80 per cent o f accidents. Other members admitted it would relieve poverty, distress, and ruin to thousands o f workmen through accidents. Mr. Euegg, a leading English commentator on this subject, states the principle of the bill to be that “ the pecuniary results from loss o f life and injury incident to the carrying on o f industrial enter prise ” should be regarded as “ a part of the expense of production; ” that the employer who initiates it should, for convenience sake, pay this expense in the first instance, and that “ ultimately it will be paid by the community ” for whose use and enjoyment industry is car ried on. 594 BU LLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. SCOPE OF THE BILL. The act o f 189T is limited in its application to employment on or in or about a railway, factory, mine, quarry, or engineering work, and a building which exceeds 80 feet in height being constructed or repaired by means of a scaffolding, or being demolished, or on which machinery driven by power is being used for those purposes. (Sec. 7 (1 ).) The act of 1900 added agriculture. The scope o f the act o f 1897 was criticised generally as being too exclusive and covering only selected industries; as failing to cover large classes o f workmen, such as seamen, agricultural laborers, em ployees in workshops (factories without mechanical power),and other small employers’ work people ; as only partially covering building employees; as failing to cover the first two weeks’ disability from accident; as failing to cover injuries to health, and as covering trades like coal mining, which would be ruined by the bill. Generally the Government said that the bill was a tentative meas ure, and as it involved a new principle it was limited to the more dangerous industries, i. e., to those which had the most accidents; that it covered 6,000,000 work people (leaving 7,000,000 unprotected), but it had covered 60 or 70 per cent o f all accidents; that the two exceptions to liability were serious and willful misconduct on the part o f the injured employee (sec. 1 (2) ( c ) ) , and the exemption of employers from liability for the first two weeks o f accidents (sec. 1 (2) ( a) ) , which would foster benefit societies and knock off 25 per cent o f accidents (which were trivial) and 80 per cent o f the compen sation payable; that injury to health was too large a question to add to this. In discussion Mr. Balfour indicated that a reason for omitting small employers and selecting the great' organized trades was to obviate what would be merely transferring the “ shock o f accident ” from one individual to another, the shock being diffused if applied to the great organized trades. It was admitted that when experience had proved there was no injury to the trades covered, such experience would be an unanswerable argument in favor o f the extension o f the scope o f the bill. In debate it was said that there were three tests o f the scope: (1) Bisk, (2) capital in industry, (3) insurance feasibility, SEAM EN . The arguments against inclusion of seamen, presented by Mr. Cham berlain, were that shipping was a great industry “ of special circum stances,” and therefore separate legislation was necessary; that the great steamship lines were different from the merchant service; that BRITISH W O R K M E N ^ COMPENSATION ACTS. 595 the inclusion o f seamen under the bill would breed opposition; that already injured sailors were paid their wages and medical attention according to special laws. It was said that deaths on sailing vessels were 50 to 1 o f deaths on steamers; that it would kill the sailingvessel industry and the fishing business to include them; that the owner had no control over accidents at sea. Several owners in big steamship lines recommended inclusion, and Mr. Havelock Wilson (who had fought to have the act o f 1880 applied to sailors, but failed) pointed out, as to payment o f wages when a seaman was injured, that there was no loss to the owner as the other sailors did the injured sailor’s work; that shipowners paid no poor-rate tax, and therefore 44landsmen paid for injured sailors; ” that there was no medical attention supplied except in the big liners; that the trade was a most dangerous one. W O R K SH O P S. It was urged that women and children were employed in work shops, that there wore no 44compassionate allowances ” in workshops, and that the tendency o f modern legislation was to unite workshop and factory; but it was answered that they wore not dangerous, the proportion being only two deaths in workshops to 188 in factories. B U ILD IN G S. The Government refused to eliminate the restriction and cover buildings under 30 feet in height, saying that the inclusion of build ings was a compromise, and that 30 feet wTas an arbitrary line, based on the factory act. G O VERNM EN T EM PLO YEES. Persons in the naval and military service of the Crown were ex cluded (sec. 8) ; otherwise Government employees wore covered. M A LIN G ER IN G . It had been claimed by the opponents of the bill that the German law had increased malingering on the part o f injured workmen, and that this bill wrould have the same effect, but the Government felt that these provisions for medical examination would prevent it, and, further, that cooperative schemes formed under the contracting-out clause, as they would be controlled by workmen, would also pre vent it. ACTS OF STR ANG ERS. In reply to the criticism that the bill was unjust in making an employer responsible for injuries to his men caused by acts o f strangers, the answer was made that all employers with their fellowmen in their power through industry should 44be forced to make 596 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. them safe.” The Government said if the employer was not made liable it would necessitate the inquiry, “ Who caused the accident? ” • and result in litigation, defeating the object o f the bill, which was to compensate without inquiry. With a view to this principle, and chiefly to include under it subcontractors’ workmen (sec. 4) as em ployees o f the chief employer, so enabling them to get their benefits, section 7 (1) provides that “ the act shall apply only to employment by the undertakers,” though in all cases, except those in section 4, the injured’s own employer is the undertaker (sec. 7 ( 2)) defining the undertaker as “ the company ” in a railway, “ the occupier ” in a factory, quarry, or laundry, “ the owner ” in a mine, “ the person undertaking the construction, etc.,” in engineering work and in building. Section 4, however, gives the undertaker a right o f in demnity against the subcontractor. COAL M IN IN G . It was urged that 80 to 90 per cent of the coal in Northumberland competed with foreign coal, and that, therefore, employers could not transfer the burden to the foreign consumer; that any raise in the price would destroy the glass trade and injure the steel trade; that the bill would shut down a number o f coal mines. The Government answered that foreign competitors had compensation laws. A G R IC U L T U R A L LAB O RERS. It was urged that agricultural laborers should be covered, as acci dents occurred from agricultural machinery, and their poor wages did not enable them to insure; that they presented the most pathetic figure in the social system— a life o f unremitting toil, followed by the poorhouse in old age. The Government in 1897 said the bill was only tentative, and agriculture was not a dangerous trade. They did, how ever, by a separate bill in 1900, include agriculture, which covers horticulture, forestry*, husbandry, inclusive of keeping live stock, poultry, or bees, and the growth o f fruit or vegetables. PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS. The Asquith bill had been put forward as effecting the prevention o f accidents, and his party urged that this bill would not prevent accidents; that the criminal law was ineffectual to prevent them; that there was nothing incompatible in granting universal compensa tion, and at the same time providing special liabilities for preventable accidents; that the German system provided compensation with pre vention under its danger schedule; that in Germany the trades had a remedy against a negligent employer; that under this bill there would BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION L A W . 597 be insurance, and that insurance deprived the master o f incentive to care. It was answered that the Asquith bill only made the master responsible in a greater number of accidents than the preexisting law* and that the master could not prevent the accidents caused by feliow-servants, by which only that bill increased his responsibility 7 that this bill covered a still greater number of accidents than the Asquith Bill, and so was more powerful than it to prevent accidents; that increased responsibility meant increased care; that the employ ers’ financial responsibility was a greater preventive than State financial responsibility; that the true method of prevention was b y criminal enactment, by factory and workshop acts, and other health: and safety acts, and that section 1 (5) of the bill made special reference to the fines applied for the benefit o f the injured workmen^ and provided that the act should in no way restrict proceedings fo r such fines. In regard to insurance, it was stated that employers had always been able to insure; that want of care would affect employers* pockets, as insurance companies would differentiate rates; that they saw to it that machines were well guarded; that it was cheaper, how ever, not to insure at all, which was feasible now that compensation: was definite and limited. BURDEN IMPOSED BY THE BILL. On the question as to where the burden imposed by the bill would and should fall, Mr. Asquith said that in trades with foreign com petition it could not be transferred to the consumer, but that it would fall on the employer and workman, with consequent injury to tha small employer. To prevent the latter happening and to insure the workman getting his benefits, he advocated placing it on the trade asa whole as in Germany, and, to prevent injury to the trades with, foreign competition, he suggested placing the burden of the bill on the community as a whole. He admitted it would not be crushingto industries generally, and that it would be perfectly fair even i f the burden fell on wages. Other members said that the small employer was being crushed out o f existence, and advocated some Government scheme o f insur ance, as well for small employers as for trades with foreign competi tion like the coal trade, which would be ruined, because they could not stand the burden; the foreigners now (though they already had accident compensation laws) were winning in competition. They also said that mine owners would run the risk themselves o f bank ruptcy through a mine disaster, since rates of insurance would be sa heavy to cover them; it was no help to a mine owner wTith an explo304 b — No. 7 0 -0 7 ------9 598 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. sion costing £80,000 ($389,320) on his hands to be told that the average cost was 1 per cent. Mr. Chamberlain answered that the cost fell ultimately on the con sumer ; that it would not be a burden on wages, but would become a part o f charges which in foreign countries were called trade charges, as much as fire insurance, and an addition to the cost o f raw material; that the price o f wages was settled by the supply o f labor and not by these charges, unless it could be shown that every business charge became a charge on wages; that wages in Germany had advanced. He characterized the cry o f ruining trades as ridiculous and said that generous employers already made similar contributions, and they were glad their competitors wTere to be brought up to their level. The attorney-general said the main criticism, “ that the cost would be 2d. [4 cents] a ton on coal,” meant that the cost would only be 10 to 20 per cent more than the Asquith Bill, and that catastrophes, like explosions, were not arguable; that the bill covered every-day accidents. Mr. Broadhurst, who had taken a keen interest in labor matters as a member for twenty years, said that a great principle had been established by the bill, but there was “ no answer to where the burden would fall.” Sir EdwTard Clark said the burden would fall first on the employer, second on the consumer, and third on wages, which was fair. It was believed that it would only fall on wages when the bottom price in foreign markets had been reached. It was pointed out that the income tax showed industrial profit of £336,000,000 ($1,635,144,000), so that industry could well bear the bill; that the fears of coal owners in 1860, 1872, and 1877 had not been borne out by subsequent facts;. that the bill, in reality, was not a serious burden, as improving the conditions o f labor by shortening hours, etc., always benefited a trade; that the charitable donations o f employers, who voluntarily did as much now, would be saved. COST OF T H E B ILL. The cost o f the bill to the trades involved was urged as the strongest argument against it. Mr. Chamberlain -believed that on the basis of the Government experience, 1 per cent on the wages in coal mining would cover the cost, and one-fourth o f 1 per cent in factories, less the cost o f present charitable payments and the cost o f the Employ ers’ Liability Act o f 1880, and that in textile trades one-twentieth to one-tenth o f 1 per cent would be sufficient. Other estimates advanced showed that the existing English law cost one-eighth to one-fourth o f 1 per cent, wdiile for the Asquith bill the cost would have been one-half o f 1 per cent, and that the cost would be three-fourths o f 1 per cent i f this bill passed. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 599 One member, an employer in a large engineering firm, said that examination o f his experience for ten years past showed that the result o f the bill would be one-eighth o f 1 per cent on his wages, and another member, the head of another large engineering firm (also manufacturing iron and steel), reached precisely the same result. Still another member gave figures o f one-third o f 1 per cent for a trade involving 15,000 men. COAL. On the figures o f the Cheshire Miners’ Permanent Eelief Fund the result o f practically 1 per cent o f wages on coal was reached, but other estimates varied from fd. (1.35 cents) a ton (Professor Merivale, Newcastle) to as high as 3d. (6 cents) a ton (Sir William Lewis, South Wales), and from 1 per cent on wages (Government) to 4J per cent on wages (Mr. Neison), and it was said that 2 d. (4 cents) a ton would ruin the trade. The Government answered that Germany now paid 2 per cent, and Lord Salisbury pointed out that freights varied from 5s. lid . to 8 s. 3d. ($1.44 to $2.01) a ton, so that 2d. (4 cents) a ton would be insignificant, and only the equivalent o f carrying 4 miles farther, as freight cost |d. (1 cent) a ton. B A N K R U P T C Y OF EM PLO YER. Bankruptcy o f the employer might be caused by a disastrous acci dent or might arise in the ordinary course o f business. In the first event the workman would lose his benefits and in the latter any annuity he was receiving. To deal with the difficulty o f bankruptcy o f the employer reme dies were urged ( 1 ) making the whole particular trade responsible for accidents affecting each individual employer by compulsory masters’ combination, like the German system, ( 2 ) adopting com pulsory insurance, or (3) inaugurating State insurance. It was answered that though a hardship the workman must take his chance; that bankruptcy was just as likely through an action for damages for injuries resulting from negligence as through this bill. An amendment to allow the substitution o f an approved insurance for the liability under the bill wTas negatived, as the Government could not undertake to Certify the solvency o f insurance companies. To deal with the difficulty o f losing annuities the payment o f lump sums instead o f annuities was urged, it being pointed out that those sums could then be invested to produce an annuity. The Government later accepted amendments to make the undertaker liable to subcontractors’ men (see. 4) and giving workmen a lien on any insurance the master had if the master became insolvent (sec. 5 ), but refused an amendment to make him a preferential creditor on the insolvent master’s total assets. 600 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. CHOICE OF REMEDIES AND LIABILITY OF EMPLOYEE. The bill left a choice o f remedies to the workmen—i. e., of claim ing at his option under the bill or suing under the common law or under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880—but did not leave the employer liable to pay compensation both independently o f and under the act. (Sec. 1 ( 2 ) (&).) It was the intention in passing the bill to restrict the workmen’s rights at common law and under the Employers’ Liability act of 1880 somewhat in inserting the words “ personal ” and “ willful ” (personal negligence or willful act o f the employer or o f some per son for whose act or default the employer is responsible). Mr. Asquith moved to omit those words and leave the old rights intact, but Mr. Chamberlain, who had said the bill distinguished between “ moral, technical, and criminal ” negligence, refused to sanction the omission, saying the old remedies were only left for cases o f moral negligence and liability—i. e., where there was deliberate and peculiar negligence, corresponding to the serious and willful misconduct which defeated the claim o f the workman. However, the words have not limited the previous rights to any extent. Mr. Ruegg, who dis cusses the point in his treatise, says: u None of the workmen’s rights, either under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880 or at common law, are taken away by the Workmen’s Compensation Act.” As the act o f 1880 also limited the compensation recoverable for death or dis ablement to three years’ wages, Mr. Haldane said, “ There would be no incentive to sue under it,” and an amendment taking away the existing rights under that act and the common law, but also taking away the limits o f compensation under the bill, was lost by only 24 votes. I f a workman su$d independently of the bill and lost his suit, sec tion 1 (4) provided that he should not thereby lose his compensation under the bill, but the court should then and there on his request assess it, deducting the costs of suit therefrom, i f justifiable, and give a certificate o f it, which should be the equivalent of an award under the act. I f he proceeded under the bill and failed through any technicality he could not, however, subsequently sue. I f a stranger was liable for the accident, section 6 gave the work men the option o f suing the stranger or o f proceeding under the act, and, i f he chose the latter course, gave the employer a remedy against the stranger for indemnity. DEFENSES OF FELLOW-SEBVANT NEGLIGENCE AND ASSUMPTION OF BISK. Amendments to the bill were introduced to eliminate the defenses o f fellow-servant negligence and assumption o f risk. It was urged that these defenses still applied in the trades not covered by the bill, BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 601 if suit were brought independently o f the bill, and also in the small injuries o f less than 2 weeks’ duration excluded by the bill. Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that the amendments would necessarily be limited in effect to the trades within the bill, and that, so far as those trades were covered, the bill practically obliterated those doctrines, and in no way defended them; that only a small part o f the trivial injuries were traceable to the negligence o f fellow-servants. The amendments were lost. DEFENSE OF CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. The question o f eliminating the defense o f contributory negligence was a difficult one. Mr. Chamberlain said that, morally, cases caused by the injured’s own negligence should not be compensated, but as a matter o f expediency, to avoid litigation, they should be. The Government, however, later approved and passed an amend ment to exclude payment for injury to a workman, if it was the result o f his “ serious and willful misconduct” (sec. 1 ( 2 ) (c))» Mr. Chamberlain said the wording o f the clause destroyed the old doctrine o f contributory negligence; but it was unfair to penalize the employer where grossly negligent and not the employee also, and it would tend to prevent accident. Even this amendment was urged to be contrary to the principle o f the bill, and it was feared would open inquiry into the cause o f accidents and so promote fictitious defenses and litigation, in an attempt to provide for cases necessarily rare, and it was said that the real beneficiaries, i. e., the family o f the negligent employee, were innocent even if he was negligent. Amendments were then introduced to define serious and willful misconduct, but were negatived, as being a question for the arbi trator in each case. Lord Salisbury, however, said that any breach o f rules justifying fine or imprisonment would bar compensation. ARBITRATION AND LITIGATION In furtherance o f the Government’s purpose to get rid o f litiga tion about accidents o f employment and the friction and expense involved, and to devise a simple and inexpensive method o f settling doubtful questions, the bill provided (sec. 1 (3 )) that on a dispute arising (and then only) it must be settled by arbitration, and the decision o f the arbitrator be registered as a judgment, in the way provided in the Second Schedule ( 1 ), ( 2 ), (3 ), namely: First. By a committee formed by the workmen and their employer for the purpose. This committee might settle the matter or refer it to a single arbitrator. 602 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. The Government said the workmen would predominate on the committee or refuse to form a committee. Second. I f there be no committee, or if the committee is objected to by either party before it meets, or if the committee fails to settle the matter or refers it, by a single arbitrator agreed on by the parties. Third. In the absence of agreement on an arbitrator, then by the county court judge of the district sitting as an arbitrator without fees. Fourth. I f the county court judge is unable to act, then by an arbi trator appointed by him (paid by the State). APP EALS. The right o f appeal vras limited to reduce litigation. There was no appeal from the arbitrator on questions o f fact, but he might, if he saw fit, submit questions o f law to the county court judge (Sec ond Schedule (4) ) wThose decision was final, unless either party ap pealed direct to the court o f appeal. At first appeal was not con templated, but the appeal on the lavr to the court o f appeal was admitted as necessary to reduce the numerous county court decisions to authoritative general principles. It was then intended that such appeal should be final, but though no appeal to the House o f Lords lies for Scotch and Irish cases it has been decided that it does for English cases. COSTS. The payment o f the cost o f arbitration by the State was urged, but the Government said so doing would promote litigation. Second Schedule ( 6 ) therefore leaves the costs to the discretion o f the arbi trator, but limits them to the ordinary county court costs, none to be paid prior to the award (Second Schedule ( 11 ) ) . R E G IST R A T IO N . Second Schedule ( 8 ) provides that all agreements and decisions by committees or arbitrators shall be recorded by the registrars of county courts as judgments. LAW YERS. Lawyers were entirely barred from the proceedings at first, but before the passage of the bill the clause barring them was eliminated on the recommendation o f the attorney-general, as otherwise the con duct o f them would fall into the hands o f advisers o f a low type. Mr. Chamberlain said he had changed his mind on the point and approved the change, as their fees were restricted, and a clause (Sec BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS 603 ond Schedule ( 12 ) ) was inserted controlling their fees, in the discre tion o f the arbitrator and by the court taxing scale. Any party could appear in person as advocate, instead o f lawyers, and appearance was also permitted, on leave o f arbitrator, to others, including tradesunion secretaries, etc., but without any right to fees. DOCTORS. The estimate of the disability sustained being one of the most important questions o f the bill, it was provided (First Schedule (3 )) that a workman, on giving notice of accident, must submit himself for examination by the employer’s doctor, and on refusal to do so his benefits were to be suspended. During disability he must again submit himself for examination, if required, with the option, how ever, if he objected to the doctor or his certificate, o f submitting him self to examination by one o f the doctors appointed by the secretary o f state (First Schedule ( 11 ) ) , the certificate o f the doctor appointed by the secretary o f state to be final, and his fees to be paid by the State, as also those of other doctors appointed unde? the same authority “ to report on any matter arising in the arbitration ” (Second Schedule (1 3 )). Against this whole system o f arbitration it was urged in debate that arbitration was really the equivalent o f litigation, and that in the previous year in Germany there had been 38,000 appeals from associations of employers and 12,000 appeals to Berlin, but the Government felt that the bulk of accidents would not need to be arbitrated, and that the arbitration machinery wTas simple and wTould save expense. COMPENSATION PAYABLE. The benefits or amount o f compensation under the act were based on the wages earned by the injured. It was pointed out in debate that this worked a hardship on children permanently injured, as their wages are small. It wTas suggested that if based on the wages at the time of the acci dent that might prove too little or too much, so the average weekly wage was fixed upon as a basis. For the three years’ death benefit, i f deceased had not been under the same employer for three years, “ 156 times his average weekly earnings during the period of his actual employment under the same employer ” was fixed by the First Schedule ( 1 ) (a ), and for the incapacity benefit, the average weekly wages over twelve months or such less period as he had been employed by the same employer, was fixed as a basis by the First Schedule a ) (&)• 604 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. D E A T H B E N E F IT S . Where the deceased leaves persons wholly dependent, the First Schedule (1) (a) (i) provides a compensation equal to three years* earnings, but not less than £150 ($729.98) nor more than £300 ($1,459.95). Where the deceased leaves persons partially dependent, First Schedule (1) (a) (ii) provides a compensation of what may be agreed on or determined by arbitration as reasonable and propor tionate to the injury to the dependents, but not more than three years’ earnings nor £300 ($1,459.95). Where deceased leaves no dependents, First Schedule ( 1 ) (a) (iii) provides reasonable medical and burial expenses up to £10 ($48.67). An amendment to make the death benefits equal, whether there were any dependents or not, on the ground that inequality would injure married men and prevent their employment, was lost, Mr. Chamber lain pointing out that the friendly societies had the same distinctions without that result. The dependents were limited (sec. 7 ( 2 ) (a)) to the persons men tioned in the Fatal Accidents Act, 1846, i. e., to wife, husband, parents, and children (an amendment to add brother and sister having been negatived, as the Government would not extend the scop e); and ques tions as to dependency and amounts payable therefor to be arbitrated in defaultT)f agreement. (First Schedule (5 ).) The minimum sum being omitted from the First Schedule ( 1 ) (a) (ii), dealing with partial dependents, compensation to parents for the death o f a child who contributed to the family fund could be properly restricted to the pecuniary loss occasioned, and be fixed by the arbitrator or otherwise at a proper proportionate sum instead o f allowing the family to gain by the death. The same rule applied to amounts payable to other partial dependents, the attorney-general saying that they got nothing unless they suffered pecuniary loss through the death. IN C A P A C IT Y B E N E F IT S . For injuries causing incapacity, temporary or permanent, and total or partial incapacity, the First Schedule ( 1 ) (&) provides for a com pensation, after the second week, up to a limit of £1 ($4.87) a week, o f not exceeding 50 per cent o f injured’s average previous weekly earnings. In fixing the amount of compensation actually payable within those limits (which is done by agreement or arbitration), clause 2 provides, that regard should be had to the difference between his earnings before and his ability to earn after the accident. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 605 LU M P-SU M PAY M EN TS. Before adopting the above benefits there was much discussion in debate as to the merits o f adopting lump sum and weekly payments, respectively, as the benefits under the bill. By those advocating lump-sum payments it was said that the bene fits under continued weekly payments would aggregate more than the benefits for death; that payment o f a lump sum would be better for a man; that investments o f lump sums were possible which would prevent loss of benefit through the employer becoming insolvent; that the continuance o f weekly payments during incapacity would be hard on employers; that lump sums would facilitate the employer obtain ing insurance. Amendments were introduced, but lost, making the benefits o f the bill for death and permanent injuries lump-sum payments, like an ordinary accident-insurance policy, namely, a definite sum down, three years’ wages for death or permanent total disablement, and six months’ wages for permanent partial disablement. It was pointed out that payments o f lump sums to widows, dependents, and persons unaccustomed to manage money would result in loss and its being quickly squandered, thus defeating the object o f the bill. Mr. John Burns strongly advocated weekly payments in lieu o f lump sums. Other members said lump sums would bankrupt and ruin employers. Mr. Chamberlain said that the permanent incapacity weekly bene fit might be hard on an employer if he had no insurance, but if he had insurance it would be trivial; that the limits enabled insurance to be got. He said that disability pajunents should be more than the death payments, as beneficiaries got the latter. The views as to lump sums and wTeekly payments were compro mised as follows: First. By giving authority to the arbitrator in his discretion to invest the lump sums awarded (see First Schedule ( 6 ) to ( 10 ) ) —i. e., by agreement or by order o f arbitrator a dependent’s compensa tion may be either invested or not. I f invested, to be either by way o f deposit in or purchase o f annuity through the’Post-Office Savings Bank, subsequently to be drawn out only on written order o f the treasury or county court judge, and, Second. By providing for liberty to commute the weekly benefits payable. CO M M U TATIO N OF B E N E F IT S . Mr. Chamberlain introduced a clause allowing a commutation o f future weekly benefits to be agreed upon, after weekly benefits had been paid for twelve months, either at the request of the workmen 606 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. or at the request o f the employer, limiting such commutation amount, however, to three years’ full wages. Strong argument was introduced against this proposal, pointing out that commutation reduced benefits under the bill, and Mr. John Burns said it would after seven years “ relegate the injured people to charity.” For the clause arguments were advanced that, as the indefinite con tinuation o f weekly payment wTas defined by commutation, insurance would be cheaper; also, that commutation would protect workmen against insolvent employers. The Government said that commuta tion was very different from putting a stop on weekly payments, since the sum paid down in commutation would purchase an annuity. When this clause, however, reached the House o f Lords they took away from the workmen the power to commute, and as a quid pro quo eliminated the limit o f three years’ full wages imposed on the amount o f commutation. The House of Commons approved this change. The First Schedule (13), therefore, provides that where any weekly payment has continued for not less than six months the liability therefor may be redeemed by the employer by payment o f a lump sum, fixed by agreement or arbitration, which may be ordered to be invested or otherwise applied by the committee or arbitrator. R E V IE W OF A W A R D . First Schedule ( 12 ) also provides that either the master or the workman may, on request, have any weekly payment reviewed, so that it may be ended, diminished, or increased according to the facts then found by agreement or arbitration. M A N N ER OF PAY M EN T. The First Schedule (4) requires death payments to be made “ to the legal personal representative,” and if none, “ to or for the benefit o f his dependents; ” and if no dependents are left, “ to the person to whom the expenses are due; ” while the Second Schedule ( 12 ) speci fies that compensation shall be paid on the receipt o f the person to whom it is payable. The Second Schedule ( 10 ) empowers the county court to make its necessary rules. N OTICE OF AC C ID E N T A N D CLAIM . It was urged that requiring notice o f accident and claim would protect employers against bogus claims, and would protect employees against losing their claims; that notice should be given before work men left the service. BRITISH W O R K M E N 'S COMPENSATION ACTS. 607 On the other hand, it was said that requiring notices would cause litigation, as attorneys would urge they were necessary in order to have the notices properly given, and further, that no notices were required under the general law o f negligence. After considerable debate, following the precedent o f the Em ployers’ Liability Act o f 1880, the act provides (sec. 2 ( 1 ) ) for notice o f accident as soon as practicable thereafter and before the workman has voluntarily left the service, while claim must be made in six months from date o f accident, i f not fatal, and in six months from date o f death, if fatal; but to prevent the claim o f the work man from being prejudiced through want o f or any defect or inaccuracy in notice o f accident by a bona fide mistake or other rea sonable cause (as through a trivial accident later developing into a serious one), the section provides that such want o f or defect in notice shall not be a bar i f it is found in the claim proceedings that the employer is not prejudiced in his defense by such want or defect or that it was occasioned by mistake or other reasonable cause. CONTRACTING OUT. Contracting out was the question on which the Asquith Bill had been wrecked, and was debated at length. The Government intro duced a clause into their bill on the lines o f the Dudley Amendment to the Asquith Bill (which the House of Commons had then re jected). The home secretary said that under it the workman could not deprive himself o f the benefits o f the bill, but was to have freedom to arrange his own wants in his own way, provided that such arrangement was not less favorable to him than the benefits o f the b ill; in the words o f Mr. Chamberlain, that he should have freedom to “ contract out ” provided he was “ not a pecuniary loser ” by so doing; that the Government held to the principle o f con tracting out with that proviso. To effect this, the bill as passed repealed existing contracts by section 9, but by section 3 permitted the employer to substitute, by contract with his workmen, any “ scheme o f compensation, benefit, or insurance,” which was certified to beforehand by the registrar o f friendly societies (a permanent Government official), after taking steps to ascertain the views o f the employer and workman, as “ not less favorable to the general body o f workmen and their dependents than the provisions o f this act; ” but save that, the bill was to apply notwithstanding any contract to the contrary. Section 3 ( 2 ) provides that the registrar’s certificate might expire at the end o f a limited period o f not less than five years, and section 3 (3) prohibited the issue of a certificate for any scheme “ which contains an obligation upon the workmen to join ” as a “ condition 608 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. o f their hiring.” Section 3 (4 ), moreover, made it the duty o f the registrar to examine into any complaint on behalf of the workmen that the scheme is no longer so favorable or is not being fairly administered, etc., and revoke his certificate i f good cause exists, unless such cause is removed. v It was urged by the opposition (Mr. Asquith) that a workman should not be permitted to waive advantages given in the interest of the community, but it was answered there was no objection, i f he gets better terms. Other objections to the clause were that the schemes would localize men; that the clause would injure friendly societies, as the workmen’s contributions to schemes would take the place of contribution to the benefit and friendly societies whose income was mainly from that source; that the workmen and trades unions were against it. It was answered that the clause would give a great impetus to friendly societies and would alloW existing associations to use their own machinery and go further than the bill, since employers would figure out the cost o f accidents over 5 to 10 years, and contribute the necessary amount to the existing associations, allowing the work men to manage them; that the latter would deal with the slight acci dents themselves and prevent malingering, and reduce the cost o f accidents so as to have more to spend on their sickness features. It was also urged that friendly societies were based on considerations other than pecuniary ones, and that the clause compelled the regis trar to ascertain the views of workmen and employers before certify ing a scheme. Mr. Chamberlain introduced an amendment to make the employer liable i f the funds o f the scheme failed, but against this it was urged that such a liability would prevent the clause being used, as employ ers would consider it a “ heads you win, tails I lose ” clause. Mr. Balfour said the employers’ inducement to form schemes was the establishment o f better relations with their men, and the work men’s inducement to. get more money from their 'employers. But the clause guaranteeing the solvency o f the fund was ultimately eliminated by the House o f Lords on the ground that as the work men would spend the money it would prevent all contracting out, and the elimination was subsequently agreed to by the House o f Com mons on the ground that the registrar had to be satisfied that the employers’ liability was the equivalent o f the bill. The House of Lords passed an amendment allowing the registrar to consider as a basis for his certificate all the circumstances of the case, which was disagreed to by the House of Commons, however, and failed. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 609 P R A C T IC A L W O R K IN G O F T H E ACTS AN D RECOM M EN D ATIO N S. In November, 1903, a committee was appointed by the home sec retary to inquire and report to the home office— ( 1 ) What amendments in the law relating to compensation for in juries to workmen are necessary or desirable, and ( 2 ) To what classes o f employments not now included in the Workftien’s Compensation Acts those acts can properly be extended with or without modification. This committee consisted of the following gentlemen: Sir Kenelm Digby, K. C. B. (chairm an); Sir Benjamin Browne, D. C. L., Memb. Inst. C. E .; His Honor Judge Lumley Smith, K. C .; Capt. A. J. G. Chalmers, of the Board o f Trade; Mr. George N. Barnes, secretary o f the Amalgamated Society of Engineers; and Mr. Robert Reid Bannatyne, o f the home office (secretary). The committee utilized information furnished by the labor depart ment o f the Board o f Trade and other Government departments, by inspectors o f factories and mines and other Government officials, and by the judges o f the county courts. It took extended evidence from representatives o f both employers and workmen in the chief industries, from employers’ associations and trades unions, from mutual and ordi nary insurance companies, and from numerous other sources. It made an exhaustive report in August, 1904, which has been accepted as a basis for future legislation, and its evidence and findings are therefore referred to at length here. SCOPE OF THE ACTS. The restriction of the scope of the acts to a few industries was carefully considered by the committee, and they concluded that the experience justified extension to other industries. The act o f 1900 including agriculture had taken away the danger ous-employment test for inclusion, and that test could not therefore be adopted as the general principle in extension to other occupations. The two alternatives presented were to amend the acts ( 1 ) by a general extension o f their scope to cover all occupations with cer tain definite exceptions, such as (a) small employers, ( 6 ) some forms o f casual labor, ( c ) employments which are not by way o f trade or for the purpose o f profit, as limited in the factory acts; or ( 2 ) by extension to further specially specified industries. The committee recommended the latter course, suggesting inclusion o f any industries which were dangerous, and also those to which the advantage o f the act could be applied without imposing an undue burden on the employers, provided that the industry to be included 610 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. was not one composed largely of small employers who did not insure. As to the limitations on the employments already covered in the act, which had been found to be unsatisfactory, they recommended chang ing section 7 ( 1 ) limiting the act to accidents 44 on or in or about ” the places or works, to cover accidents 44 while on the business o f the employers,” since they found that, though they were intended to limit responsibility to places wThich were under the employers’ con trol, those words o f the act had resulted in dissatisfaction and incon gruity, a mechanical engineer, for instance, being covered in the fac tory, but not while superintending erection for his employer. They recommended covering all building, all quarries, and practically all laundries (except only those without more than two persons outside o f the fam ily). They also recommended including under the defini tion o f engineering, roadmaking, well sinking, and other excavating operations, also the construction o f telegraphs, telephones, and other electric appliances. T R A D E D ISE A SE S . The committee did not, however, consider it advisable to include trade diseases, thinking it better to leave those to special legislation for sickness, and to still leave to the courts such questions as 44 whether anthrax is an accident.” SEAM EN . Employers urged the hardship and impracticability o f including seamen under the act, owing to prolonged absence o f ships and absence o f owners’ control, frequent changes in crew, and consequent impossibility o f securing evidence, as well as the fact that the 44whole venture is frequently imperiled through act o f God,” and conse quently compensation should be undertaken by the State. On the other hand, Mr. Havelock Wilson, who has strongly advocated the cause o f seamen, urged that exactly the same conditions as to compen sation should prevail at sea as on shore. He testified that ship owners were heavy insurers and could bear a loss. The committee found that as the principle o f the act established compensation, whether blame existed or not, the absence o f control, etc., gave no reason (nor did they find any) why the principle should not extend to those afloat as well as to those on land. However, after considering the construction of the existing Merchants’ Shipping Act, which already amply provided for minor injuries, they recom mended an extension o f that act to cover death and permanent total and partial disablements o f seamen rather than an extension of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. As coasting and fishing vessel own ers frequently had no assets if their vessels were lost, and as the lives o f master and crew frequently had to be risked at sea in the cause o f BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 611 humanity, the committee recommended compulsory insurance with State contribution for seamen, recommending, however, further in quiry as to the fishing trade. C A R R IE R S. They recommended inclusion of all carriers by land or inland navigation W O R K SH O PS. They recommended inclusion o f the larger workshops, excluding all employing not more than 5 persons. SHOP A S SIS T A N T S. They did not recommend inclusion of shop assistants, unless there was a general extension of the act, as this was not a hazardous occu pation, and “ there would also be considerable difficulty as regards small shops.” D O M ESTIC SE RVAN TS. For a similar reason, as well as on the ground of not further ex tending the principle to persons not employed in trade or for pur pose o f gain, they did not recommend the inclusion o f domestic ser vants, unless under special circumstances of danger, such as coach man, etc. PU B LIC SE R VAN TS. As to public servants, the committee saw no reason for treating them differently from other workpeople. D E F E N SE OF SERIOU S AN D W IL L F U L M ISCONDUCT. Section 1 ( 2 ) (c ).—The evidence of both employer and workman indicated that this defense had been in practice infrequently enforced or sustained by the courts (perhaps with the exception o f coal-mine cases), though employers who desired a more specific definition had possibly suffered hardship from it rather than the men. The commit tee felt it better to leave it open to the arbitrator to look at the sur rounding circumstances whenever the defense was set up, and they, therefore, did not feel justified in recommending any change in the wording or clause. TWO W E E K S ' IM M U N IT Y — M A LIN G ER IN G . Section 1 ( 2 ) (a) and First Schedule ( 1 ) (&).— In the evidence be fore the committee from the workmen’s side it was almost universally represented that a reduction of the period o f nonpayment from two weeks to two or three days, and in the case o f serious accidents dating the compensation back to the day of the accident, would save much 612 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. hardship, especially in those trades where women were employed, where pay was low (in which connection it was stated that 150,000 railroad employees earned less than 18s. ($4.38) a week), or where the injured people were not members o f any friendly society; while from the employers’ side it was shown by figures submitted that the two weeks’ nonpayment prevented malingering by workmen absent ing themselves from work for injuries that were trivial and more or less unreal. The committee concluded that while it was true that a large num ber o f workmen w7ere put to suffering by this provision if it were eliminated a large number who had also allowances from friendly societies, etc., would prolong the period for trivial accidents, which it was impracticable'for employers to supervise, and that dating back the. compensation if the disablement lasted for two weeks would also produce malingering. Again, having regard to the additional cost involved o f including all cases during the first two weeks, shown by insurance companies to be from 25 to 50 per cent, varying with the different trades, and by the registrar o f friendly societies for the schemes he had certified to be 39 per cent o f the total cost, while dating compensation for disablements lasting two weeks back to the day o f accident produced estimates of a somewhat less addi tion to the cost, the committee found no sufficient reason to justify them in recommending a departure from the principle of two weeks’ immunity deliberately adopted by the legislature. AC TS OF STR ANG ERS. Employers liable under the act being limited by section 7 ( 1 ) to “ undertakers ” with a view to prevention of the workmen’s loss of benefits or evasion o f employers’ responsibilities by subcontracting, it was found that section 4 o f the act, which made the undertaker liable to subcontractors’ men, might become a dangerous extension o f liability if the act were changed to cover work being done off the premises o f the undertaker (for instance it might make a cloth manu facturer liable to the cloth dyers’ men), and the committee recom mended avoiding the extension o f undertaker’s liability away from his works. It was also pointed out that while it was the intention of the act (sec. 4) that the undertaker should have an indemnity over against the actual employer of the injured man, technical interpretation of the wording o f the act had precluded him in many cases from getting it, as in the case of railways, factories, mines, and quarries. The committee therefore recommended treating the undertaker more as a surety in any judgments rendered, etc., and making him, in fact, merely a guaranty o f compensation payable by subcontractors. BRITISH W O RKM EN S COMPENSATION ACTS. 615 ACT OF 1900. This act in adding agriculture was different from the act o f 189 T in that it attempted to exempt small employers, and was not con fined to trade or industry, but extended to persons in private employ ment. One difficulty found in the application o f this act was the legal interpretation o f the limitation of the act to employers who habitually employ one workman, and it was recommended that this be changed to “ employ throughout the year at least one workman in agricul ture; ” it Was also recommended that the casual laborer, including; harvesters, etc., at hay time, be not covered. Another difficulty was: that the small farmer did not insure, with consequent danger o f ruin to him financially and failure to compensate his workmen. PREVENTION OE ACCIDENTS. As to the effect of the Workmen’s Compensation Act in the direc tion o f the prevention of accident, the committee found it extremely difficult to estimate it. The evidence o f the chief inspector o f factories showed that the act somewhat tended to eliminate the probability o f recoveringpenalties for failures to guard machines, etc., owing to the fact that a provision in the act (the latter part of section 1 (5 )) dealt with penalties and limited the amount of their payment to the injured workmen. Other evidence showed that there had been some tendency to make employees more careless. On the other hand, a coal mining employers’ association said that the act had resulted in a great diminution o f real accidents, namely,, serious cases, but that it had been accompanied by a great rise in obscure accidents, namely, cases like sprains and trivial accidents; and other testimony was to the effect that increased precautions to* avoid accidents had resulted. The committee, on the whole, came to the conclusion that the act had not had any marked or ascertainable effect one way or the other upon the safety o f the workmen. They, however, recommended the repeal o f the latter part o f section 1 (5 ), as they did not consider there was any serious objection, where negligence caused an injury,> to the injured workmen receiving additional compensation by having a penalty, recovered under criminal enactment, paid over to him in whole or in part by the secretary o f state. BURDEN OF THE ACTS. The committee took testimony as to the extent o f the pecuniary burden resulting from the acts, with a view to seeing that no excessive burden was thrown on the employer, with consequent injury to the trade and ultimate loss to the workmen. 304 b — No. 70— 07------10 614 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. They expressed the opinion that employers might be reaping an advantage from having a defined obligation by law imposed on all employers, instead of trusting to moral obligations, which were met by some employers and hot by others; that in some instances employ ers threw the burden on the consumer (as, for instance, they found stevedores to be including the cost in their contract prices); that when labor was unorganized it was sometimes directly thrown upon wages (which they suggested might be checked by extending legis lation in line with the Truck Acts). One of the members of the committee, Sir Benjamin Browne, had estimated that the act affected trade profits to the extent of reducing a 5 per cent profit on capital to 4| per cent, saying also that English manufacturers had so much competition with foreign trade that it would restrict employment and fall (as permanent burdens do) on workmen. The committee, however, believed from the evidence submitted that so far as employ ers were concerned their chief desire seemed to be for greater cer tainty in their liability, as certainty made insurance premiums less, and they found that the steady growth o f the burden o f the perma nent weekly payment benefits was a difficulty preventing employers arriving with certainty at the cost, as these necessarily go on accumu lating year by year until the point is reached at which the number of new pensioners is balanced by the dropping off o f the old. COST OF T H E ACTS. The committee took the effect on the coal-mine industry as a cru cial test o f the act. In the evidence before them on the subject of cost one coal owners’ mutual insurance association, which had been formed by the large coal owners in the North, after the passing of the act, testified that the cost o f all the accidents in their mines had been 0.36d. (0.73 cent) per ton in 1809, increasing to 0.64d. (1.30 cents) in 1903, or a trifle over one-half o f 1 per cent on wages in 1899, increasing to nearly nine-tenths of 1 per cent in 1903, the increase being attributed to the growth o f the permanent weekly payments. The association itself paid for the cost of supervision and for all legal expenses, as well as for all disasters (accidents involving more than four deaths), and later for all deaths, leaving the employ ers individually to pay for nonfatal cases. Another similar asso ciation in the Midlands gave similar evidence, namely, that their increase in cost was most marked in the accidents which fell into their classification of nonfatal cases over twenty-six weeks’ duration. , A similar Yorkshire association, covering 20,000,000 tons o f coal raising yearly, testified that their actuary estimated on their experi ence that the cost (including medical), which was a trifle higher than the first association quoted, would, through the permanent allowances, BRITISH W O R K M E N ^ 615 COMPENSATION ACTS. go nearly as high as 1J per cent o f wages before reaching the maxi mum. And a South Wales association, covering 80,000 men, showed that the cost had risen from a little over one-half of 1 per cent on wages in 1900 to three-fourths of 1 per cent in 1903, attributable to the permanent allowances, with a guess that it might reach double the last figure. The committee therefore felt that the rapid growth of com pensation in the coal industry, its uncertainty, and the liability to disasters in that trade were reasons for caution in materially increas ing the benefits payable under the act. One cotton trade mutual insurance association covering 40,000 work people originally estimated the cost at one-'eighth of 1 per cent on wages for weaving, and three-eighths of 1 per cent for spinning, but found that one-sixteenth of 1 per cent was adequate for weaving, and thought a little more than one-fourth o f 1 per cent would suffice for spinning. The Master Cotton Spinners’ Association, paying £3,000,000 ($14,599,500) a year wages, which had estimated the cost o f spinning up to one-half of 1 per cent, gave evidence showing a similar cost, though it had secured insurance at less. A mutual builders’ accident insurance company that “ insured some thousands o f firms,” found without, however, reserving for permanent injuries, that the cost was one-half o f 1 per cent. A large firm of building contractors courteously related their own experience. They stated that they transfer the cost to the purchaser in their contracts, and that they also protect themselves by contract with their subcon tractors against claim by the subcontractors’ men, though in practice the latter invariably proceed against the subcontractors. R A T IO OP ACCIDEN TS TO TO T AL W ORKM EN EM PLOYED AND OP COM PENSA TION TO T O T A L W AGES P A ID BY A FIR M OP BU ILD ING CONTRACTORS, 1901 TO 1906. Compensation for accidents. Accidents. Per cent Per cent total Amount. of total Number. ofwork wages men. paid. 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 84 72 84 114 133 94 6.6 4.8 5.4 7.8 8.2 6.6 $1,645 3,601 3,256 4,034 5,358 7,412 0.15 .68 .50 .64 .75 1.10 As to the regular commercial insurance companies, the committee quoted especially the evidence o f Mr. S. Stanley Brown, general man ager o f a leading company, who said that rates o f insurance against accidents charged by an association o f these insurance companies, which were at first based on the German and Austrian experiences, had been found too high, and in June, 1899, were reduced one-third, 616 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. resulting in the percentage of rates on wages shown in the second column of the following table, while his own company’s rates for December 31, 1903, are shown in the last column of the table. His company gives the average of all rates charged by them as nearly 1 per cent. R A TE P E R CENT ON W AGES IM POSED FOR INSURANCE A G A IN ST ACCIDENTS IN VARIOU S IN D U STRIE S BY AN A SSOCIATION OF INSURANCE COM PANIES IN 1899 AND BY A LE AD IN G COM M ERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY IN 1903. Rate per cent on wages imposed by— Industry. Builders, general................................................................................................ Contractors.......................................................................................................... Stevedores............................................................................................................ Quarries............................................................................................................... Engineers and iron sm elting............................................................................ Textiles................................................................................................................. Manufactures, lig h t ........................................................................................... Manufactures, h ea vy.......................................................................................... An associa A leading in tion of com surance com panies, 1899. pany, 1903. 1.25 1.67 to 2.38 2.38 1.50 1.00 .33 1.00 1.20to 2.50 2.38 to 10.00 1.20 .50 to 1.00 .20 .55 The reports o f the same insurance company show an almost steady yearly increase in the average cost o f each accident settled, as follow s: Each death case cost £113 ($550) during 1901, increasing to £117 ($569) during 1905; each permanent disablement case cost £55 ($268) during 1901, increasing to £87 ($423) during 1905, and in 1906 to £97 ($472) ; each temporary disablement case cost about £5 ($24), with little fluctuation during the period. The committee said that it was through such associations o f masters and men, respectively, and the ordinary insurance companies that the financial burden was removed from the shoulders of the individual employer and distributed more or less equally throughout the trade. The actual cost of the compensation acts to the different trades is not to be had officially, with one exception, that of railways. In the home office returns it is stated that the total amount paid by the rail way companies as compensation under the act in the whole country was £118,849 ($578,379) in 1899, £146,027 ($710,640) in 1900, £153,928 ($749,091) in 1901, £144,155 ($701,530) in 1902, £155,495 ($756,716) in 1903, and £162,155 ($789,127) in 1904. B A N K R U P T C Y OF EM PLO YER . It was found that so far, owing to prosperous times and the act being limited to the larger employers, there had been little difficulty from this source; however, the committee felt that the danger o f distress to workmen through it happening was very real and should be provided for, especially i f the act were extended to cover small employers. They advocated substituting for the personal BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 617 responsibility o f the individual employer the security of a solvent insurance fund. The committee attached great weight to recom mendations o f statutory regulation o f all insurance companies under taking the risk, such as exist in America, etc., to provide against dangerous competition, and drew attention to the necessity o f seri ously considering a State or compulsory insurance, in some form or other; especially was this necessary to enable the workmen of the small employer to get his benefits, since through ignorance or inability his employer failed to insure in many instances. The committee concluded that this evidence showed that the bur den on employers had as yet not been excessive, but that it tended to increase. This suggested caution in legislation increasing it and especially in adding to its indefiniteness or uncertainty. CHOICE OF REMEDIES AND LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER. The committee reached the conclusion that the provisions o f section 1 (2) (&) and (4 ), permitting choice o f the remedies of suit under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880 or common law, or proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and also allowing the bene fits under the latter to be assessed on failure of suit under the former, had worked largely to the disadvantage of both employers and workmen and were responsible for a large amount o f illegitimate litigation, in that they had resulted in the illegitimate use or threat o f use against the employer of the remedies at common law and under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880, either for the purpose of benefiting the unscrupulous lawyers, who could thereby run up the costs, or for the purpose of improperly forcing settlement under 'the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and that the judge’s power to assess the costs o f an unsuccessful suit against the compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act was in practice rarely used, and was therefore ineffective as a check. That this abuse had assumed somewhat extended proportions was shown in the fact that, accord ing to Mr. Troup’s testimony, in litigated cases in 1902 the cases under the Employers’ Liability Act amounted to about half the W ork men’s Compensation cases in Scotland, as against one-third in Eng land, and that the costs under the Employers’ Liability Act aver aged £25 ($ 121 .6 6 ) as against £11 ($53.53) under the Workmen’s Com pensation Act. A simple remedy for these abuses would have been to repeal the Employers’ Liability Act and common law rights or consolidate them with the Workmen’s Compensation A ct; however, while ad mitting that the testimony showed that the advantages to workmen were great o f proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act in preference to taking the risks, uncertainty, and costs o f suit under 618 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. the old remedies, they believed repeal o f those old remedies was not justified, as there were cases where they were the more appropriate remedies, though they anticipated they would fall more and more into disuse. Another suggestion considered was to grant higher benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act where there was much pain or suffering, disfigurement, extraordinary expenses o f cure, or wrong ful act or default of employer. This they believed would only be reenacting the Employers’ Liability Act as part o f the Workmen’s Compensation Act and would be more o f an incentive to attorneys to litigate in a larger number o f cases, on the chance of securing the higher benefits, than the existing election, which tended to prevent litigation somewhat. Therefore to prevent these abuses without preventing recourse to those old remedies in cases where they were really appropriate, and at the same time without inflicting any real loss upon the workmen, the committee recommended the repeal of section 1 (4 ), which gave the court power to assess compensation after unsuccessful suit under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880 or at common law, and the adoption o f provisions enabling employers to apply to the judge for a stay o f any such suits (commenced or threatened) on evidence that the workman had an adequate remedy under the Workmen’s Com pensation A c t ; also that a plea to that effect might be made available as a defense to suits under the Employers’ Liability Act of 1880 or at common law. This would leave it open to the court, if it thought the Workmen’s Compensation remedy inadequate, or that there was good ground for a suit at common law or under the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880, to refuse the application, or, if it thought otherwise, to stop the suit. DEFENSES OF FELLOW-SERVANT NEGLIGENCE, ASSUMPTION OF RISK, AND CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. The committee said that the principle o f the Workmen’s Compen sation Act was essentially different from that on which the old rem edies were based, and that it had largely superseded the old remedies, and would in future entirely supersede them; that it was, therefore, undesirable to bring those old remedies into more active operation, which would result from any attempt to abolish the doctrine o f fellow-servant negligence, etc., and that so doing would open the flood gates to a stream o f litigation without affording any more effect ive remedy than now provided by the Workmen’s Compensation Act. They, therefore, recommended leaving the common law and Employers’ Liability A ct unchanged, on the expectation that they would gradually cease to be used. 619 BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. The wisdom o f this is illustrated by the home office returns o f the figures for death, which is more likely to result in suit than less serious injury, given in the following table: A V E RAG E DAM AGES IN CASE O F D EATH UNDER EM PLOYERS’ L IA B IL IT Y ACT AND AVE R AG E COMPENSATION UNDER W ORKM EN’S COM PENSATION ACTS, 1809 TO 1904. Employers’ Liability Act. Workmen’s Compensa tion Acts. Year. Cases of death. 1901.................................................................................... a Including 14 7 9 8 14 9 Average damages. $556.18 772.94 436.77 561.55 «1,198.44 575.54 Cases of death. 219 245 301 264 323 451 Average compensa tion. $842.29 795.37 916.75 817.59 880.84 864.03 tw o cases o f special damages. The average amount of lawyers’ costs was approximately £25 ($ 122 ) under the Employers’ Liability Act, and £13 ($63) under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. ARBITRATION AND LITIGATION. The committee inquired as to how far criticism o f the act was justi fied on the score o f litigation, and how far it was due to preventable causes. They found that the vast majority of cases were settled by agree ment, without litigation. Secretaries o f the leading trade unions gave details showing that many unions had all accidents reported, and settled the bulk of the cases for the men without any cost, and that some cases o f diffi culty were settled by their lawyers. The use o f lawyers varied somewhat in the different trades, as did the arbitration and court cases, the latter being covered in most trades by 5 to 10 per cent of the cases. In the South Wales Miners’ Federation (130,000 men) the number o f court cases was said to be u infinitesimally small,” and then were cases only where a question o f principle existed to be set tled, or a dispute as to facts, although there had been several disasters in the trade. Employers’ associations and mutual insurance associa tions corroborated the trades union testimony that 95 per cent o f the cases were settled out of court. Other insurance societies and two leading railways said that only I f per cent of claims were arbitrated, the rest being settled by agreement. The secretary of the Cotton Trades’ Insurance Association (formed after the 1897 act) said that his practice was to settle with the trades union secre taries; that he had only 1 per cent o f cases in court, and that only 620 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. two cases had been brought under the Employers’ Liability Act of 1880, and those in the first year of the association’s existence; that it was in the nonunion trades that men went to attorneys, who ran up the costs. The limitations of employment covered by the acts were found to be responsible for most o f the litigation. In 1902, 43 appeals out of 95 turned on the question as to whether the employment was or was not within the act. The committee felt that the inclusion of all building operations under the act, even the small builders, would obviate litigation arising out of the limit to over 30 feet in height, the requirement o f scaffolding, and the employment of machinery, etc., and that the removal of the 20 feet deep limit from quarries and the removal of the special requirements as to laundries would also obviate litigation. Definitions which had also caused litigation were considered, such as “ accidents arising out o f and in the course o f the employment.” No change as to these was recommended, however, as they had been so often judicially passed on and were best left to the courts. The com mittee had no recommendation to make as to factories proper, rail ways, or mines. As to constructive factories, although the House o f Lords’ decisions had modified the difficulties as to loading and unloading on docks, the committee recommended that employment on docks, wdiarves, quays, and warehouses be specifically stated in the act, covering also the incidental machinery or plant, and they recommended a change in the definition o f engineering. The committee drew especial attention to the fact that in the one district (the Durham Coal Mining District) where, under Second Schedule ( 1 ) a committee of employers and men had been formed and exercised their statutory power of arbitration, a most excellent example o f satisfactory reduction o f litigation was shown. It re sulted in the benefits being paid automatically, even the committee having/ during five years, to pass only on 205 cases out of 28,000 nonfatal cases, and on 204 out of 664 fatal cases, while o f these only 29 nonfatal and 27 fatal cases were taken into court, and some of those were accidents in which the men’s own committee told them they had no case. A R B IT R A T IO N PRO VISION S. It was found that the arbitration by the system of committee of employer and Avorkman (Seconcj. Schedule (1 )), which, however, had not been extensively used, had been most successful where used, practically rendering the operation of the act automatic, nor was there any complaint o f the provision ( 2 ), that the parties appoint a single arbitrator. But the provisions ( 2 ) and (3) for use o f the county-court judge or his appointee as arbitrator, had resulted in BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 621 the arbitrations thereunder being practically county court trials somewhat simplified; however, no recommendation was made to change that. A strong recommendation of change wTas, however, directed to the clause (Second Schedule ( 8 ) ) as to registration of memoranda of agreements, with a view to controlling the agreements made; it took the form o f placing a duty on the employer to register them, empow ering the court to enforce a penalty for failure to do so, and render ing them, if unregistered, unavailable as a defense to future claim for weekly payments. APPEALS. The creation of a special court (two county-court judges and one permanent judge) to hear appeals on both law and fact, with appeals therefrom to both the court o f appeals and the House o f Lords, was suggested by Mr. Ruegg, in order to obviate the delay of appeals, and bring the different county court decisions more into harmony. The committee, however, recommended that no appeal be allowed on questions o f fact, and no change be made except in the direction of unification o f decisions on law, by permitting appeal on law to the House o f Lords from both Scotland and Ireland, the chief dispute on fact being as to serious and willful misconduct, which was dealt with by the arbitrator. Greater facility o f appeal would, they believed, add to delay and expense. DOCTORS. As the clauses o f the act dealing with doctors (First Schedule (3 ), ( 11 ), and Second Schedule (13)) made provision for calling in the official medical referee in arbitration proceedings only after the other medical testimony had been heard, practically no use was made of him, nor was he much used when a review of compensation being paid was contemplated, as then it was only optional with the workman to go to him at his own expense. The committee, therefore, recommended that the medical referee should be used at a much earlier stage; that after the examination by the employer’s doctor, the result should be communicated to the workman, in order that the workman might then be examined by his own doctor, and if a dispute existed, it should then and there be submitted to the medical referee before the dis puted case goes to court, and that his decision should be final for any subsequent proceedings. One modification, however, was suggested for new accidents, namely, o f leaving to the discretion of the regis trar, after the reports of both the doctors o f the employer and the workman had been filed with him, the question of using the medical referee. 622 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. It was thought advisable to leave the judge his power o f summoning the medical referee to sit with him as assessor in the actual trial if a case reached the court. It was further suggested that the medical referee should have the duty o f giving employment certificates as to aged, infirm, or maimed persons for their special rate o f compensation, which the committee had recommended. As to the position of the medical referee himself, it was strongly urged that he, should be a public officer rather than a medical man in practice, paid by salary not by fees, in other words, a civil servant in the permanent civil service— one to act for each district, and, to prevent making him a partisan by his employment either by one side or the other, that he should have his salary paid by the State. The committee found that where the organization of the master and men was most complete there was the least amount of litigation, the workmen who had no organization to resort to necessarily having to call in the assistance o f lawyers. They concluded that authorita tive decisions being necessary the actual litigation produced by the act had been very small, and they felt that providing more effective machinery for settling doubtful questions and increasing the functions o f the medical referee would further reduce it. From the official figures o f the proportion o f cases that reach the courts, it will be seen that in the home-office statistics for 1904 it is stated that even in cases o f death (including cases finally settled out o f court, and also those in court solely to apportion benefits among beneficiaries) not 25 per cent came in anyway before the courts, while probably less than 1 per cent o f incapacity cases did, COMPENSATION PAYABLE. T H E B E N E F IC IA R IE S . As to the persons entitled to receive compensation, though the definition o f workman in the act was wide (covering all employees, whether in manual labor or otherwise, etc.), the committee recom mended the inclusion o f brother and sister in the beneficiaries, in addition to descendants and ancestors (i. e., the English definition o f dependents). This was opposed by employers, who said it would tend to increase their difficulty, in that they now had to pay compen sation exceeding what was necessary for the support o f dependents, as, for instance, to pay a father earning good wages for the death o f a son, provided as a fact the son contributed slightly to the family fund. BRITISH W O R K M E N ’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 623 Aliens killed or injured within the United Kingdom have the same right o f recovery (as have their beneficiaries while resident also) that British subjects have under the act. The committee, however, recommended that the act be made not to extend to bene ficiaries who are nonresident aliens, or to beneficiaries who are non resident British subjects, so as to obviate difficulty in determining the liability involved. D E A T H B E N E F IT S . The committee found little criticism, when the deceased left per sons wholly dependent, o f the amount o f the limits payable—mini mum £150 ($730), maximum £300 ($1,460).—and concluded they had been found satisfactory in practice, and though they found some complaint from employers o f decisions as to what constituted partial dependency and awards that disregarded consideration o f whether such dependency was for necessaries or not, they concluded that no change in that definition was desirable. IN C A P A C IT Y B E N E F IT S . Interpretation o f the courts as to what constituted average weekly earnings resulted at one time in excluding all casual labor, through the difficulty o f reaching an average for a man employed spasmod ically, casual labor covering not only men employed for a job, but large classes, like dock labor. Although the House o f Lords reversed this decision, the committee recommended that the duty o f “ esti mating ” the injured man’s own earnings should be placed upon the judge, guided somewhat by the standard o f the district for like employment (as provided by the Employers’ Liability Act o f 1880), instead o f taking the district standard of wages alone, though the latter would be a simpler method. They also recommended an amendment to base it on the net and not on the gross earnings, as the latter often included pay for helpers, tools, etc. LUM P SUM PA Y M E N TS. Evidence submitted showing the squandering and loss o f lump sums paid to widows and the advantage to them and to children o f weekly payments in lieu o f lump sums, as well as. evidence showing the cost to the employer in getting valid releases, led the committee to recommend more elasticity in the powrers conferred on the arbi trator in this regard under First Schedule ( 6 ) by payment of* the money into court by the employer and granting the arbitrator a voice in the method o f distribution. They recommended that the mode o f payment be settled in each case by the county court judge, with power to reduce the amount o f any weekly payment to a widow 624 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. on remarriage, neglect of children, etc., and to decide on the amount, time, and mode o f payments to beneficiaries other than the widow, using the office o f the county court as the machinery for that purpose whether the amount and compensation was settled by agreement or otherwise. O F F IC IA L CO UN TY COURT R ETU R N S. The official returns o f cases under the Workmen’s Compensation Acts, dealt with by county court judges and their arbitrators in England and Wales, show that in the six years, 1899 to 1904, the average avrard for deaths where there were dependents varied from £168 8 s. 9d. ($795.37) to £188 7s. 7d. ($916.75); for total incapacity, from 10s. lid . to 12s. 2d. ($2.66 to $2.96) per week, and for partial incapacity, from 9s. 2d. to 10s. 9d. ($2.23 to $2.62) per week, while in 1904 the average lump-sum award for incapacity was £34 12s. 8 d. ($168.54), there being in that year 105 lump-sum against 650 weekly payment awards. M IN O RS. Both employers and workmen agreed that one-half wages paid to minors permanently injured had proved to be often insufficient com pensation. Proposals were made to consider, in fixing compensation, the full wages earned by the highest grade workmen in the same employ; to fix a higher scale than one-half wages— say full wages; to fix a minimum of 10s. ($2.43), with power to increase that on reaching 21 years of age. The committee recommended fixing a maximum and leaving it to the discretion of the judge to assess an amount up to that maximum. OLD M EN A N D M A IM E D A N D D IS E A S E D PER SO NS. The committee found from extended evidence o f both employers and workmen that the acts had largely increased the.difficulty already existing o f old men getting and retaining employment. They found further that employers were being compelled to discharge persons maimed, as, for instance, one-eyed men, and to refuse to reemplov them after accident. While the case o f Lysons v. Knowles (1 Q. B. 780; 69 L. J. Q. B. 449; 82 L. T. 189), decided by the House o f Lords, finally settled that casual labor was not excluded from the act, it was felt, too, that this decision would further operate to bar old men from employment. This the committee considered to be such a serious drawback to the other advantages o f the act that they recommended amendments to be made enabling employers to hire such persons upon special terms as to compensation for accidents, and they suggested an age limit of BRITISH W O R K M E N ^ COMPENSATION ACTS. 625 60 as desirable, if hale, and under that age if infirm or maimed, tc which the amendment should apply, with a minimum compensation o f 5s. ($1.22) a week for injury and £25 ($121.66) for death. CO M M U TATIO N OF B E N E F IT S . The evidence showed that in practice the employer’s right under First Schedule (13) to apply for a redemption by arbitration of weekly payments by a lump sum was rarely used; that few agree ments for commutation were registered even under Second Schedule ( 8 ) ; but that great numbers of unregistered commutations had actually taken place by voluntary agreement. The latter permitted the defense o f accord and satisfaction to subsequent claim for weekly payments. These commutations were often made at figures very much below what the weekly benefits justified, and in many cases were improvident and also oppressive settlements, brought about by improper pressure on the workmen. Though it was found undoubt edly advantageous to workmen, as well as masters, that commutation should be possible, the committee said that better control over it should be adopted. They considered that the evidence showed it would be disadvantageous to give the workman a right to demand a commutation, as likely to increase the evils attendant on lump-sum payment generally, but in order to render the principle of compul sory commutation workable, i f demanded by the masters, the com mittee recommended the adoption of a maximum limit on the amount o f commutation o f £500 ($2,433), and urged, after making the obli gation to register commutations stringent by rendering an unregis tered agreement inoperative, etc., also the giving of discretion to the registrar as to registering, and to the judge as to reopening an entry within six months for fraud or undue influence. R E V IE W OF A W A R D . The difficulty arose o f determining, under First Schedule (2) and' (12), when and to what extent the compensation granted should be reduced. From the workmen’s standpoint, as they got only one-half o f their loss to begin with, it was advocated and decided by some judges that this one-half wage compensation allowance should not be reduced until they could again earn full wages, and that no reduction o f com pensation should take place so long as what they earned, while par tially incapacitated, added to the compensation allowed, was not more than their full wages before the accident. Other judges divided the loss, holding that the difference between their partial earnings and their full wages should be divided, the employer bear ing one-half the loss and the workman bearing one-half. The com 626 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, mittee recommended a more explicit clause adopting the latter mode, thus making the workman share the loss with the employer. The test o f earning capacity had proved to be another difficulty, as, for instance, to determine whether a man who had lost one eye was incapacitated, etc. It was suggested that in the highly-organized trades something approaching a tariff for injuries might ultimately be agreed on, apart from parliamentary enactment. The committee thought earning capacity, not only at the same kind o f work as before the accident, but at any kind of work should suffice, and strongly recommended clearer enactment. They advocated bringing the medical representatives of employer and workman together at an earlier stage, with the official medical referee as arbiter. As to increase o f weekly payments, it was found that in practice the maximum payment had been so universally allowed that the provision for increase had become unimportant. N OTICE O F A C C ID E N T A N D C LAIM . The requirement in section 2 ( 1 ) for notice o f accident as soon as practicable after the happening thereof caused laxness in practice and resulted in employers’ complaints that it failed to attain the object o f enabling them to verify the facts and ascertain the nature and extent o f the injury. The committee recommended a limit o f six days for notice. As to the claim for compensation, the House o f Lords had decided that a mere demand was sufficient to entitle the workman at any time thereafter to institute proceedings. The com mittee recommended that a written notice o f claim be required in three months after the accident. After the expiry o f these periods, however, they recommended that leave be given to the workman to file a sworn statement before the registrar showing sufficient rea son for the necessary steps not having been taken within the limited time, that notice of this action be served on the employer, and if the latter should object to waiving notice that the registrar should refer the matter for decision o f the judge. CONTRACTING OUT. As to the effect on mutual benefit and friendly societies, the com mittee found that where these were supported jointly by the work men and employers such schemes had been practically put an end to by the act, except in those cases where schemes were framed under section 3 o f the act, through the discontinuance o f employers’ con tributions. They found, however, that in some cases voluntary arrangements continued unaffected by the act, where employers were already providing benefits on a more liberal scale than the act, and that workmen’s benefit clubs, which were entirely supported by the BRITISH W O R K M E N ’S COMPENSATION ACTS. 627 workmen, continued. There was evidence submitted that through these benefit funds, etc., workmen sometimes received more when disabled than if working. The committee in considering the contracting out o f the act by con tracting into definite schemes under section 3 found that, owing to the expense and trouble such schemes entail on both employers and workmen, no extensive use had been made o f the section, and they also found that under those schemes which had been certified under the section, the actual payments exceeded the maximum that the act would have paid by 75 per cent, 65 per cent o f that excess being pay for the first two weeks not covered by the act. Both workmen’s and employers’ representatives testified that the schemes, being based on the active cooperation o f and being jointly administered by masters and workmen, brought special advantages over the act provisions, such as permitting provision for minor accidents, allowances for old age, and annuities instead of lump sums. They testified that the schemes led to prevention of accident, to litigation being reduced to a minimum, and to good feeling being promoted. Mr. J. D. Stuart Sim, the chief registrar of friendly societies, characterizes section 3 as a splendid opportunity for regulating the relations between wrorkmen and masters in a thoroughly satisfactory manner and on a sound financial basis; while Sir George Livesey, the chairman o f the extensive South Metropolitan Gas Company, has succeeded in demonstrating the practicability o f such a regulation in his ten years’ operation of a successful copartnership arrangement with all employees, one feature o f which is his jury system, namely, having all accidents in his plants submitted to a jury of workmen, resulting in a large reduction o f accidents, which feature was spe cially commended by the committee, who thoroughly indorsed the fact that the above advantages from the section existed, and recom mended that it remain practically unchanged. The following is a summary o f receipts and expenditures of work men’s compensation schemes authorized by the Registrar o f Friendly Societies, under the workmen’s compensation acts o f 1897 and 1900, for the seven years from 1898 to 1905. 628 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. SUMMARY OF R E C E IP T S AND E X P E N D IT U R E S OF W ORKM EN ’ S COM PENSATION SCHEMES A U T H O R IZE D BY TH E R E G ISTR A R OF F R IE N D L Y SOCIETIES UNDER TH E W ORKM EN ’ S COM PENSATION ACT, FOR TH E 7-YEAR PERIO D, 1898 TO 1905. [F rom R eport o f the Chief R egistrar o f Friendly Societies fo r the year ending December 31, 1905, P art A .] Items. Railways. Factories. Mines. Quarries. Total. 2 24 21,100 28 58,638 $296,185 578,918 $107,054 221,295 8,453 1,649 $995,238 1,334,944 95,846 14,600 $6,370 $1,404,847 12,025 2,147,182 389 104,688 862 17,111 875,103 338,451 2,440,628 19,646 3,673,828 237,101 41,589 1,402 231,475 23,247 501 117 510,666 24,766 542,668 70,482 4,194 138,067 17,534 11,811 4,088 40,344 516 23,125 4,526 928,684 71,153 99,530 13,003 130,680 6,341 38,684 169,004 7,018 365 2,681 453 1,309 1,616,437 159,534 114,022 17,644 176,527 6,857 64,938 174,508 T o ta l.................................. . 854,445 283,002 1,711,801 16,551 2,865,799 Funds on hand at end of period. 20,658 70,725 804,700 6,993 903,076 Number of schem es................................................... Average number of workmen contracting out — 38,491 2 861 56 119,090 R E C E IP T S . Contributions of— W orkm en................ Employers................ Interest on investments . Other receipts................ Total receipts E X P E N D IT U R E S . Benefits for death from— Injury..................................... Natural causes...................... Benefits for incapacity— Weekly payments................. Lump sum payments............ Medical a i d .................................. Subscriptions to hospitals, e tc... Other benefits.............................. Law costs....................................... Other payments........................... Management expenses............... SCHEME ADOPTED BY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. Following are the benefits under the scheme authorized by the reg- i istrar o f friendly societies for Government establishments: For death o f a workman leaving dependents wholly dependent, three years’ earnings, or not less than £150 ($729.98) nor more than’ £300 ($1,459.95), payable to the dependents or to a trustee; i f the dependents are only in part dependent, one-half o f the above; if there are no dependents, not more than £10 ($48.67), for medical attendance and burial. In the discretion o f the treasury, a portion o f the lump sum payable, up to one-half if there is one dependent child or up to two-thirds if there are more than one, may be set aside, and a pension equal to the annuity which the remainder o f the lump sum would purchase granted to the widow or mother. For incapacity, up to six months, one-half the average wages and hospital or medical attention while the beneficiary is on the hurt list, but “ more favorable treatment while on the hurt list” i f he is entitled to this under the regulations o f his department. F or incapacity beyond six months, the following proportions o f his average weekly earnings, according to degree o f incapacity: Capacity totally destroyed, twenty-four-sixtieths o f his earnings; materially impaired, eighteen-sixtieths; impaired, twelve-sixtieths; BRITISH WORKMEN’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 62tf" slightly impaired, six-sixtieths. I f he continues in or returns to the Government service after the injury, the above allowance to be paid in addition to the earnings he then receives, up to the average fullearnings before the injury, with periodical adjustments as sanctionecL by the treasury. I f he leaves the service and is entitled to a pension,, the above allowance to be added to the pension, provided both together shall not exceed his earnings at time of injury or £300" ($1,459.95) a year, whichever is the less. I f the workman is a minor, the above compensation may be? increased, in the discretion o f the treasury, upon his reaching the age^ when in ordinary circumstances the pay o f an adult workman would, be granted him. Commutation o f allowances to a single payment may be made oix agreement between the workman and the authorities o f the depart ment, with sanction o f the treasury. A claim for an injury which occurred more than three years before? such claim was preferred can not be entertained unless such injury caused the applicant’s discharge from the service or diminished his: prospects for future employment. B E N E F IC IA L E F F E C T OF T H E ACT. As regards workmen, the committee found that the acts had con ferred substantial benefits on those included in them; that prior to> them practically the whole burden o f industrial accident had fallen on the workmen, and it was right and necessary that some systematic* provision for relief by law should be provided; that the act gave sub stantial relief, not complete indemnity, and there w as little complaint from workmen o f the limitation to one-half wages and other maxi mum limits in them. Personal inquiry by the author concerning the practical workings o f the act made during 1906 o f Government officials, of employers,, and of representatives o f labor disclosed a unanimity o f opinion that: the principle o f the act wTas sound, the extent to wThich it should be carried being the only question. The act w*as said to have proved a great boon to the workmen covered by it, labor strongly advocating" its extension, while employers generally accepted it. In the building' trades the secretary of one of the conciliation boards of a large master builders’ association said that the principle was accepted by employ ers; that the burden wras transferred to the building owner and not to wrages, which had risen; that the act had tended to prevention of' accident, as it had stimulated employers to have better plants; that it had reduced litigation, w?hich was largely^ confined to nonunion workmen. In the cotton trade a gentleman wTho was thoroughly^ 304b—N o . 70—07-----11 680 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. informed as to its effect on that trade said that there had been no risk of injury to the trade through the burden of the act; that it had not, however, fallen on wages, which had increased 10 per cent; that the act had operated strongly as a prevention o f accident, the mone tary liability for every accident, as well as the trade mutual insurance inspection, conducing thereto; that it had caused a large reduction in negligence claims, and that litigation on test cases under the act had practically disappeared, so that friction was reduced to a minimum, while the administration cost nothing, as no lawyers were necessary. As regards railways, an influential employee’s organization said that the principle was regarded as absolutely just and valuable to the recipients o f the benefits and had kept many from the poorhouse; that the burden was generally conceded to have been transferred to the public; that it did not come out o f wages, which had increased (only reaching them to the extent of 25 per cent o f the compensation paid in unorganized trades); that litigation on questions of law had now practically disappeared, most cases being settled without even arbitration, and that arbitration cost little, generally under £5 ($24.38) a case; that the act had tended to prevent accidents, owing to expense now arising for every accident; moreover, that there had been no case o f deliberate self-injury on railroads. A representative of the coal miners corroborated the fact that all labor was in favor of the act and illustrated the almost automatic working of it in the case of the Durham miners. The parliamentary attitude toward workmen’s compensation is shown by the fact that the Compensation Act o f 1897 had been intro duced and passed by the Conservative Party,* while, in 1906, the opposite party, then in power—the Liberal party—introduced and passed an amending bill, extending the principles o f the act to prac tically every relation o f master and servant, and adding thereto compensation for certain specified trade diseases. The act of 1906 becomes operative after July 1 , 1907. The text of this act is given in full in this bulletin. Laws o f a similar character to the ^workmen’s compensation acts have superseded the negligence basis for treatment o f industrial accidents in almost all the countries of Europe, as well as in the colonies o f England. However, when it is remembered that England is a free-trade country, with consequent difficulty in transferring the burden o f the act to their foreign consumers, their nine years’ expe rience o f the satisfactory working o f it is the strongest possible argu ment in favor o f the feasibility of such legislation. Considering the overwhelming extent to which the energies of this country are directed into mechanical industry and the high ratio of accident to population therefrom, entailing such widespread hardship through the haphazard treatment o f each accident on the negligence basis, BRITISH WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACTS. 631 with its result o f serious injustice in so many cases to employer and workmen alike, as well as the enormous waste o f energy and money in the ever-increasing volume of personal-injury litigation, which clogs our courts, it is manifest that the subject requires the earnest and careful consideration o f serious people. Nor is it unlikely that the principle o f a wise and practical step toward the solution of this difficult, but most important, subject may be found in the British workmen’s compensation acts. W O K K M EN ’S COM PEN SATION ACT, 1897. Following is the text of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897, and o f the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1900, which extends the benefits o f the act o f 1897 to workmen in agriculture: A n A ct to amend the law with respect to compensation to workmen for acci dental injuries suffered in the course o f their employment [6th August 1897]. « Be it enacted by * the same , as fo llow s: * * P arliam ent assembled , and by the autho rity of 1.— (1 ) I f in any employment to which this act applies personal injury by accident arising out o f and in the course of the employment is caused to a workman, his employer shall, subject as hereinafter mentioned, be liable to pay compensation in accordance with the first schedule to this act. (2 ) Provided th a t:— (a) The employer shall not be liable under this act in respect of any injury which does not disable the workman for a period of at least two weeks from earning full wages at the work at which he was employed; (b) When the injury was caused by the personal negligence or willful act of the employer, or of some person for whose act or default the employer is respon sible, nothing in this act shall affect any civil liability of the employer, but in that case the workman may, at his option, either claim compensation under this act, or take the same proceedings as were open to him before the commencement of this a c t ; but the employer shall not be liable to pay compensation for injury to a workman by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment both independently o f and also under this act, and shall not be liable to any proceedings independently of this act, except in case of such personal negligence or willful act as aforesaid; , (c) I f it is proved that the injury to a workman is attributable to the serious and willful misconduct of that workman, any compensation claimed in respect of that injury shall be disallowed. (3 ) I f any question arises in any proceedings under this act as to the liability to pay compensation under this act (including any question as to whether the employment is one to which this act applies), or as to the amount or duration of compensation under this act, the question, if not settled by agreement, shall, subject to the provisions o f the first schedule to this act, be settled by arbitra tion, in accordance with the second schedule to this act. (4 ) If, within the time hereinafter in this act limited for taking proceedings, an action is brought to recover damages independently of this act for injury caused by any accident, and it is determined in such action that the injury is one for which the employer is not liable in such action, but that he would have been liable to pay compensation under the provisions of this act, the action shall be dism issed; but the court in which the action is tried shall, i f the plain tiff shall so choose, proceed to assess such compensation, and shall be at liberty to deduct from such compensation all the costs which, in its judgment, have been caused by the plaintiff bringing the action instead of proceeding under this act. In any proceeding under this subsection, when the court assesses the compen sation it shall give a certificate of the compensation it has awarded and the directions it has given as to the deduction for costs, and such certificate shall have the force and effect of an award under this act. 632 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR (5 ) Nothing in this act shall affect any proceeding for a fine under the enact ments relating to mines or factories, or the application o f any such fine, but if any such fine, or any part thereof, has been applied for the benefit of the person injured, the amount so applied shall be taken into account in estimating the compensation under this act. 2. — (1 ) Proceedings for the recovery under this act of compensation for an injury Shall not be maintainable unless notice o f the accident has been given as soon as practicable after the happening thereof and before the workman has voluntarily left the employment in which he was injured, and unless the cla im ; for compensation with respect to such accident has been made within six months from the occurrence of the accident causing the injury, or, in case of death, within six months from the time of death. Provided always that the want of or any defect or inaccuracy in such notice shall not be a bar to the maintenance of such proceedings, if it is found in the proceedings for settling the claim that the employer is not prejudiced in his defence by the want, defect, or inaccuracy, or that such want, defect, or inaccuracy was occasioned by mis take or other reasonable cause. (2 ) . Notice in respect of an injury under this act shall give the name and address of the person injured, and shall state in ordinary language the cause of the injury and the date at which it w’ as sustained, and shall be served on the employer, or, if there is more than one employer, upon one of such employers. (3 ) The notice may be served by delivering the same to or at the residence or place of business of the person on whom it is to be served. (4 ) The notice may also be served by post by registered letter addressed to the person on wrhoin it is to be served at his last known place of residence or place of business, and if served by post shall be deemed to have been served at the time when the letter containing the same would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post, and in proving the service of such notice it shall be sufficient to prove that the notice was properly addressed and registered. (5 ) Where the employer is a body of persons corporate or unincorporate, the notice may also be served by delivering the same at, or by sending it by post in a registered letter addressed to the employer at, the office, or, if there be more than one office, any one o f the offices o f such body. 3. — (1 ) I f the registrar of friendly societies, after taking steps to ascertain the view’ s of the employer and workmen, certifies that any scheme of compensa tion, benefit, or insurance for the workmen o f an employer in any employment, whether or not such scheme includes other employers and their workmen, is on the whole not less favorable to the general body of workmen and their dependents than the provisions of this act, the employer may, until the certifi cate is revoked, contract with any of those workmen that the provisions of the scheme shall be substituted for the provisions of this act, and thereupon the employer shall be liable only in accordance wTith the scheme, but, save as aforesaid, this act shall apply notwithstanding any contract to the contrary made after the commencement of this act. (2 ) The registrar may give a certificate to expire at the end of a limited period not less than five years. (3 ) No scheme shall be so certified which contains an obligation upon the workmen to join the scheme as a condition of their hiring. (4 ) I f complaint is made to the registrar of friendly societies by or on behalf of the workmen of any employer that the provisions of any scheme are no longer on the whole so favorable to the general body of workmen of such employer and their dependents as the provisions of this act, or that the pro visions of such scheme are being violated, or that the scheme is not being fairly administered, or that satisfactory reasons exist for revoking the certificate, the registrar shall examine into the complaint, and, if satisfied that good cause exists for such complaint, shall, unless the cause of complaint is removed, revoke the certificate. (5 ) W hen a certificate is revoked or expires any moneys or securities held for the purpose of the scheme shall be distributed as may be arranged between the employer and workmen, or as may be determined by the registrar of friendly societies in the event of a difference of opinion. (6 ) Whenever a scheme has been certified as aforesaid, it shall be the duty of the employer to answer all such inquiries and to furnish all such accounts in regard to the scheme as may be made or required by the registrar of friendly societies. (7 ) The chief registrar of friendly societies shall include in his annual report the particulars of the proceedings of the registrar under this act. BRITISH WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACTS. 633 4. Where, in an employment to which this act applies, the undertakers as hereinafter defined contract with any person for the execution by or under such contractor of any work, and the undertakers would, if such work were executed by workmen immediately employed by them, be liable to pay com pensation under this act to those workmen in respect of any accident arising out of and in the course of their employment, the undertakers shall be liable to pay to any workman employed in the execution of the work any compensa tion which is payable to the workman (whether under this act or in respect of personal negligence or willful act independently of this act) by such con tractor, or would be so payable if such contractor were an employer to whom this act applies. Provided that .the undertakers shall be entitled to be indemnified by any other person who would have been liable independently of this section. This section shall not apply to any contract with any person for the execu tion by or under such contractor of any work which is merely ancillary or incidental to, and is no part of, or process in, the trade or business carried on by such undertakers respectively. 5. — (1 ) Where any employer becomes liable under this act to pay compen sation in respect of any accident, and is entitled to any sum from insurers in respect of the amount due to a workman under such liability, then in the event of the employer becoming bankrupt, or making a composition or arrange ment with his creditors, or if the employer is a company of the company having commenced to be wound up, such workiflan shall have a first charge upon the sum aforesaid for the amount so due, and the judge of the county court may direct the insurers to pay such sum into the Post Office Savings Bank in the name of the registrar of such court, and order the same to be invested or applied in accordance with the provisions of the first schedule hereto with reference to the investment in the Post Office Savings Bank of any sum allotted as compensation, and those provisions shall apply accordingly. (2 ) In the application o f this section to Scotland, the words " have a first charge upon ” shall mean “ be preferentially entitled to.” 6. Where the injury for which compensation is payable under this act was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability in some person other than the employer to pay damages in respect thereof, the workman may, at his option, proceed, either at law against that person* to recover damages, or against his employer for compensation under this act, but not against both, and if compensation be paid under this act, the employer shall be entitled to be indemnified by the said other person. 7. — (1 ) This act shall apply only to employment by the undertakers as here inafter defined, on or in or about a railway, factory, mine, quarry, or engineer ing work, and to employment by the undertakers as hereinafter defined on in or about any building which exceeds thirty feet in height, and is either being constructed or repaired by means of a scaffolding, or being demolished, or on which machinery driven by steam, water, or other mechanical power, is being used for the purpose o f the construction, repair, or demolition thereof. ' (2 ) In this act— “ Railway ” moans the railway of any railway company to which the Regula tion of Railways Act, 1873, applies, and includes a light railway made under the Light Railways Act, 1896; and “ railway ” and “ railway company ” have the same meaning as in the said acts o f 1873 and 1896: “ Factory ” has the same meaning as in the Factory and Workshop Acts, 1878 to 1891, and also includes any dock, wharf, quay, warehouse, machinery, or plant, to which any provision o f the Factory Acts is applied by the Factory and Workshop Act, 1895, and every laundry worked by steam, water, or other mechanical pow er: “ Mine ” means a mine to which the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887, or the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act, 1872, applies: “ Quarry ” means a quarry under the Quarries Act, 1894: “ Engineering w o rk ” means any work of construction or alteration or repair of a railroad, harbor, dock, canal, or sewer, and includes any other work for the construction, alteration, or repair of which machinery driven by steam, water, or other mechanical power is u sed: “ Undertakers ” in the case o f a railway means the railway com pany; in the case o f a factory, quarry, or laundry means the occupier thereof within the meaning o f the Factory and Workshop Acts, 1878 to 1895; in the case of a mine means the owner thereof within the meaning of the Coal Mines Regula tion Act, 1887, or the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act, 1872, as the. case may 634 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. be, and in the case of an engineering work means the person undertaking the ■construction, alteration, or repair; and in the case o f a building means the persons undertaking the construction, repair, or demolition: Employer ” includes any body of persons corporate or unincorporate and the legal personal representative of a deceased employer: ** Workman ” includes every person who is engaged in an employment to which this act applies, whether by way of manual labor or otherwise, and whether his agreement is one o f service or apprenticeship or otherwise, and is expressed or implied, is oral or in writing. Any reference to a workman who has been injured shall, where the workman is dead, include a reference to his legal per sonal representative or to his dependents, or other person to whom compensa tion is payable: “ Dependents 99 means— (a) in England and Ireland, such members of the workman’ s family speci fied in the Fatal Accidents Act, 1846, as were wholly or in part dependent upon the earnings o f the workman at the time of his d eath ; and (b) in Scotland, such of the persons entitled according to the law of Scotland to sue the employer for damages or solatium in respect o f the death o f the workman, as were wholly or in part dependent upon the earnings of the work man at the time o f his death. (3 ) ,A workman employed in a factory which is a shipbuilding yard shall not be excluded from this act by reason only that the accident arose outside the yard in the course of hi^ work upon a vessel in any dock, river, or tidal water near the yard. 8. — (1 ) This aet shall not apply to persons in the naval or military service o f the drown, but otherwise shall apply to any employment by or under the Crown to which this act would apply if the employer were a private person. (2 ) The treasury may, by warrant laid before Parliament, modify for the purposes o f this act their warrant made under section one o f the Superannua tion Act, 1887, and notwithstanding anything in that act, or any such warrant, may fram e a scheme with a view to its being certified by the registrar of friendly societies under this act. 9. Any contract existing at the commencement of this aet, whereby a work man relinquishes any right to compensation from the employer for personal injury arising out of and in the course of his employment, shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to continue after the time at which the work m an’s contract o f service would determine if notice of the determination thereof were given at the commencement o f this act. 10. — (1 ) This act shall come into operation on the first day of July one thousand eight hundred and ninety-eight. (2 ) This act may be cited as the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897. SCH ED U LES. F ir s t S c h e d u l e . SCALE AND CONDITIONS OF COM PENSATION. S cale . (1 ) The amount o f compensation under this act shall be— {a ) where death results from the injury— <i) if the workman leaves any dependents wholly dependent upon his earnings at the time of his death, a sum equal to his earnings in the employment o f the same employer during the three years next preceding the injury, or the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds [$729.98], whichever o f those sums is the larger, but not exceeding in any case three hundred pounds [$1,459.95], provided that the amount o f any weekly payments made under this act shall be deducted from such sum, and if the period o f the workman’s employment by the said employer has been less than the said three years, then the amount o f his earnings during the said three years shall be deemed to be 156 times his average weekly earnings during the period of his actual employment under the said employer; <ii) if the workman does not leave any such dependents, but leaves any de pendents in part dependent upon his earnings at the time of his death, such sum, BRITISH WORKMEN’ S COMPENSATION ACTS. 635 not exceeding in any case tlie amount payable under the foregoing provisions, as may he agreed upon, or, in default of agreement, may be determined, on arbitra tion under this act, to be reasonable and proportionate to the injury to the said dependents; and (iii) if he leaves no dependents, the reasonable expenses of his medical attend ance and burial, not exceeding ten pounds [$48.67] ; (&) where total or partial incapacity for work results from the injury, a weekly payment during the incapacity after the second week not exceeding fifty per cent, of his average weekly earnings during the previous twelve months, if he has been so long employed, but if not, then for any less period during which he has been in the employment of the same employer, such weekly payment not to exceed one pound [$4.87]. (2 ) In fixing the amount of the weekly payment, regard shall be had to the difference between the amount of the average weekly earnings of the workman before the accident and the average amount which he is able to earn after the accident, and to any payment not being wages which he may receive from the employer in respect o f his injury during the period of his incapacity. (3 ) W here a workman has given notice of an accident, he shall, if so required by the employer, submit himself for examination by a duly qualified medical practitioner provided and paid by the employer, and if he refuses to submit himself to such examination, or in any way obstructs the same, his right to compensation, and any proceeding under this act in relation to compensation, shall be suspended until such examination takes place. (4 ) The payment shall, in case of death, be made to the legal personal repre sentative o f the workman, or, if he has no legal personal representative, to or for the benefit o f his dependents, or, if he leaves no dependents, to the person to whom the expenses are d u e; and if made to the legal personal representative shall be paid by him to or for the benefit of the dependents or other person entitled thereto under this act. (5 ) Any question as to who is a dependent, or as to the amount payable to each dependent, shall, in default of agreement, be settled by arbitration under this act. (6 ) The sum allotted as compensation to a dependent may be invested or otherwise applied for the benefit of the person entitled thereto, as agreed, or as ordered by the committee or other arbitrator. (7 ) Any sum which is agreed or is ordered by the committee or arbitrator to be invested may be invested in whole or in part in the Post Office Savings Bank by the registrar o f the county court in his name as registrar. (8 ) Any sum to be so invested may be invested in the purchase of an annuity from the national debt commissioners through the Post Office Savings Bank, or be accepted by the Postmaster-General as a deposit in the name of the reg istrar as such, and the provisions of any statute or regulations respecting the limits of deposits in savings bank, and the declaration to be made by a depositor, shall not apply to such sums. (9 ) No part of any money invested in the name of the registrar of any county court in the Post Office Savings Bank under this act shall be paid out, except upon authority addressed to the Postmaster-General by the Treasury or by the judge of the county court. (10) Any person deriving any benefit from any moneys invested in a post office savings bank under the provisions of this act may, nevertheless, open an account in a post office savings bank or in any other savings bank in his own name without being liable to any penalties imposed by any statute or regulations in respect o f the opening of accounts in two savings banks, or of two accounts in the same savings bank. (1 1) Any workman receiving weekly payments under this act shall, if so required by the employer, or by any person by whom the employer is entitled under this act to be indemnified, from time to time submit himself for examina tion by a duly qualified medical practitioner provided and paid by the employer, or such other person; but if the workman objects to an examination by that medical practitioner, or is dissatisfied by the certificate of such practitioner upon his condition when communicated to him, he may submit himself for ex amination to one of the medical practitioners appointed for the purposes o f this act, as mentioned in the second schedule to this act, and the certificate of that medical practitioner as to the condition of the workman at the time o f the ex amination shall be given to the employer and workman, and shall be conclusive 686 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. evidence o f that condition. I f the workman refuses to submit himself to such examination, or in any way obstructs the same, his right to such weekly payments shall be suspended until such examination has taken place. (12) Any weekly payment may be reviewed at the request either o f the employer or of the workman, and on such review may be ended, diminished or increased, subject to the maximum above provided, and the amount of payment shall, in default of agreement, be settled by arbitration under this act. (13) Where any weekly payment has beeif continued for not less than six months, the liability therefor may, on the application by or on behalf of the em ployer, be redeemed by the payment of a lump sum, to be settled, in default o f agreement, by arbitration under this act, and such lump sum may be ordered by the committee or arbitrator to be invested or otherwise applied as above mentioned. (14) A weekly payment, or a sum paid by way of redemption thereof, shall not be capable of being assigned, *charged, or attached, and shall not pass to any other-person by operation of law, nor shall any claim be set off against the same. (15) Where a scheme certified under this act provides for payment o f com pensation by a friendly society, the provisions of the proviso to the first sub section of section eight, section sixteen, and section forty-one of the Friendly Societies Act, 1896, shall not apply to such society in respect of such scheme. (16) In the application of this schedule to Scotland the expression “ regis trar of the county court ” means “ sheriff clerk of the county,” and “ judge of the county court ” means “ sheriff.” (17) In the application of this act to Ireland the provisions of the County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877, with respect to money deposited in the Post Office Savings Bank under that act shall apply to money invested in the Post Office Savings Bank under this act. Second Schedule. ARBITRATION. The following provisions shall apply for settling any matter which under this act is to be settled by arbitration: (1 ) I f any committee, representative of an employer and his workmen, exists with power to settle matters under this act in the case of the employer and workmen, the matter shall, unless either party objects, by notice in writing sent to the other party before the committee meet to consider the matter, be settled by the arbitration of such committee, or be referred by them in their discretion to arbitration as hereinafter provided. (2 ) I f either party so objects, or there is no such committee, or the committee so refers the matter or fails to settle the matter within three months from the date of the claim, the matter shall be settled by a single arbitrator agreed on by the parties, or in the absence o f agreement by the county court judge, according to the procedure prescribed by rules of court, or if in England the Lord Chan cellor so authorizes, according to the like procedure, by a single arbitrator appointed by such county court judge. (3 ) Any arbitrator appointed by the county court judge shall, for the pur poses of this act, have all the powers of a county court judge, and shall be paid out o f moneys to be provided by Parliament in accordance with regulations to be made by the treasury. (4 ) The Arbitration Act, 1889, shall not apply to any arbitration under this a c t ; but an arbitrator may, if he thinks fit, submit any question of law for the decision of the county court judge, and the decision of the judge on any question of law, either on such submission, or in any case where he himself settles the matter under this act, shall be final, unless within the time and in accordance with the conditions prescribed by rules of the Supreme Court either party appeals' to the court of appeal; and the county court judge, or the arbitrator appointed by him, shall, for the purpose o f an arbitration under this aict, have the same powers of procuring the attendance of witnesses and the production of docu ments as if the claim for compensation had been.made by plaint in the county court. (5 ) Rules of court may make provision for the appearance in any arbitration under this act of any party by some other person. BRITISH WORKMEN*S COMPENSATION ACTS. 037 (6 ) The costs of and incident to the arbitration and proceedings connected therewith shall be in the discretion o f the arbitrator. The costs, whether before an arbitrator or in the county court, shall not exceed the limit prescribed by rules of court, and shall be taxed in manner prescribed by those rules. (7 ) In the case of the death or refusal or inability to act of an arbitrator, a judge of the high court at chambers may, on the application of any party* appoint a new arbitrator. (8 ) Where the amount of compensation under this act shall have been ascer tained, or any weekly payment varied, or any other matter decided, under this, act, either by a committee or by an arbitrator or by agreement, a memorandum thereof shall be sent, in manner prescribed by rules of court, by the said cornmittee or arbitrator, or by any party interested, to the registrar of the countycourt for the district in which any person entitled to such compensation resides* who shall, subject to such rules, on being satisfied as to its genuineness, record such memorandum in a special register without fee, and thereupon the said memorandum shall for all purposes be enforceable as a county court judgment. Provided that the county court judge may at any time rectify such register. (9 ) Where any matter under this act is to be done in a county court, or by to or before the judge or registrar o f a county court, then, unless the contrary intention appear, the same shall, subject to rules of court, be done in, or by to or before the judge or registrar of, the county court of the district in which all the parties concerned reside, or if they reside in different districts the district in which the accident out of which the said matter arose occurred, without prejudice to any transfer in manner provided by rules o f court. (10) The duty of a county court judge under this act, or of an arbitrator appointed by him, shall, subject to rules of court, be part o f the duties of the county court, and the officers of the court shall act accordingly, and rules o f court may be made both for any purpose for which this act authorizes rules o f court to be made, and also generally for carrying into effect this act so far .as it affects the county court, or an arbitrator appointed by the judge o f the county court, and proceedings in the county court or before any such arbitrator, and such rules may, in England, be made by the five judges o f the county courts appointed for the making of rules under section one hundred and sixty-four o f the County Courts Act, 1888, and when allowed by the Lord Chancellor, as pro vided by that section, shall have full effect without any further consent. (11) No court fee shall be payable by any party in respect of any .proceeding under this act in the county court prior to the award. , (12) Any sum awarded as compensation shall be paid on the receipt of the person to whom it is payable under any agreement or award, and his solicitor or agent shall not be entitled to recover from him, or to claim a lien on, or deduct any amount for costs from, the said sum awarded, except such sum as. may be awarded by the arbitrator or county court judge, on an application made by either party to determine the amount of costs to be paid to the said solicitor or agent, such sum to be awarded subject to taxation and to the scale of costs prescribed by rules of court (13) The secretary of state may appoint legally qualified medical practi tioners for the purpose of this act, and any committee, arbitrator, or judge may, subject to regulations made by the secretary of state and the treasury, appoint any such practitioner to report on any matter which seems material to any question arising in the arbitration; and the expense of any such medical prac titioner shall, subject to treasury regulations, be paid out of moneys to be pro vided by Parliament. (14) In the application of this schedule to Scotland— (a ) “ Sheriff ” shall be substituted for “ county court judge,” “ sheriff court ”' for “ county court,” “ action ” for plaint,” “ sheriff clerk ” for “ registrar of the county court,” and “ act of sederunt ” for “ rules of court ” : (b) Any award or agreement as to compensation under this act may be com petently recorded for execution in the books of council and session or sheriff court books, and shall be enforceable in like manner as a recorded decree arbitral: (c) Any application to the sheriff as arbitrator shall be heard, tried, and determined summarily, in the manner provided by the fifty-second section of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act, 1876, save only that parties may be represented by any person authorized in writing to appear for them and subject to the declaration that it shall be competent to either party within the time and in accordance with the conditions prescribed by act of sederunt to require the 638 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, sheriff to state a case on any question of law determined by him, and his decision thereon in such case may be submitted to either division of the court o f session, who may hear and determine the same finally, and remit to the sheriff with instruction as to the judgment to be pronounced, (15) Paragraphs four and seven o f this schedule shall not apply to Scotland. (16) In the application of this schedule to Ireland the expression “ county court judge ” shall include the recorder of any city or town. W O R K M E N ’S CO M PEN SATIO N A C T , 1900. A n A ct to extend the benefits of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897, to workmen in agriculture [30th July 1900]* Be it enacted by same , as fo llow s: * * * p a rlia m e n t assembled , and by the au th o rity of the 1. — (1 ) From and after the commencement of this act, the Workmen’s Com pensation Act, 1897, shall apply to the employment of workmen in agriculture by any employer who habitually employs one or more workmen in such employ ment. (2 ) Where any such employer agrees with a contractor for the execution by or under that contractor of any work in agriculture, section four of the W ork men’s Compensation Act, 1897, shall apply in respect o f any workman employed in such work as if that employer were an undertaker within the meaning of that act. Provided that, where the contractor provides and uses machinery driven by mechanical power for the purpose of threshing, ploughing, or other agricultural work, he, and he alone, shall be liable under this act to pay compensation to any workman employed by him on such work. (3 ) Where any workman is employed by the same employer mainly in agri culture but partly or occasionally in other work, this act shall apply also to the employment of the workman in such other work. The expression “ agriculture” includes horticulture, forestry, and the use of land for any purpose of husbandry, inclusive of the keeping or breeding of live stock, poultry, or bees, and the growth of fruit and vegetables. 2. This act may be cited as the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1900, and shall be read as one with the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897, and that act and this act may be cited together as the Workmen's Compensation Acts, 1897 and 1900. 3. This act shall come into operation on the first day of July one thousand nine hundred and one. BRITISH WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT OP 1906. In the following pages is given in full the text of the British Workmen's Compensation Act o f 1906, enacted December 21 , 1906, to take effect July 1, 1907. It is given here to complete the record to date o f British legislation in regard to the compensation o f workmen for injuries received in their employment: A x A ct to consolidate and amend the law with respect to compensation to work men for injuries suffered in the course of their employment [21st December 1900]. Be it enacted by * the same , as fo llow s: * * P arliam en t assembled , and by the au th o rity of 1.— (1 ) I f in any employment personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment is caused to a workman, his employer shall, subject as hereinafter mentioned, be liable to pay compensation in accordance with the first schedule to this act. (2 ) Provided that— (a) The employer shall not be liable under this act in respect o f any injury , which does not disable the workman for a period of at least one week from earning full wages at the work at which he was employed: (b) When the injury was caused by the personal negligence or willful act of the employer or of some person for whose act or default the employer is responsible, nothing in this act shall affect any civil liability of the employer, but' in that case the workman may, at ,his option, either claim compensation under this act or take proceedings independently of this a c t ; but the employer shall not be liable to pay compensation for injury to a workman by accident arising out of and in the course o f the employment both independently of and also under this act, and shall not be liable to any proceedings independently of this act, except in case of such personal negligence or willful act as aforesaid: (c) I f it is proved that the injury to a workman is attributable to the serious and willful misconduct of that workman, any compensation claimed in respect of that injury shall, unless the injury results in death or serious and permanent disablement, be disallowed. (3 ) I f any question arises in any proceedings under this act as to the liability to pay compensation under this act (including any question as to whether the person injured is a workman to whom this act applies), or as to the amount or duration of compensation under this act, the question, if not settled by agree ment, shall, subject to the provisions of the first schedule to this act, be settled by arbitration, in accordance with the second schedule to this a c t (4 ) If, within the time hereinafter in this act limited for taking proceedings, an action is brought to i*ecover damages independently of this act for injury caused by any accident, and it is determined in such action that the injury is one for which the employer is not liable in such action, but that he would have been liable to pay compensation under the provisions of this act, the action shall be dismissed; but the court in which the action is tried shall, if the plaintiff so choose, proceed to assess such compensation, but may deduct from such compensation all or part o f the costs which, in its judgment, have been caused by the plaintiff bringing the action instead of proceeding under this act. In any proceeding under this subsection, when the court assesses the compensa tion it shall give a certificate of the compensation it has awarded and the direc tions it has given as to the deduction for costs, and such certificate shall have the force and effect of an award under this act. (5 ) Nothing in this act shall affect any proceeding for a fine under the enact ments relating to mines, factories, or workshops, or the application o f any such fine. 639 640 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, 2. — (1 ) Proceedings for the recovery under this act of compensation for an injury shall not be maintainable unless notice of the accident has been given as soon as practicable after the happening thereof and before the workman has voluntarily left the employment in which he was injured, and unless the claim for compensation with respect to such accident has been made within six months from the occurrence of the accident causing the injury, or, in case of death, within six months from the time of death : Provided always that— (a) the want of or any defect or inaccuracy in such notice shall not be a bar to the maintenance of such proceedings if it is found in the proceedings for settling the claim that the employer is not, or would not, if a notice or an amended notice were then given and the hearing postponed, be prejudiced in his defense by the want, defect, or inaccuracy, or that such want, defect, or inaccu racy was occasioned by mistake, absence from the United Kingdom, or other reasonable cause; and (&) the failure to make a claim within the period above specified shall not be a bar to the maintenance of such proceedings if it is found that the failure was occasioned by mistake, absence from the United Kingdom, or other reason able cause. (2 ) Notice in respect of an injury under th is'a ct shall give the name and address of the person injured, and shall state in ordinary language the cause of the injury and the date at which the accident happened, and shall be served on the employer, or, if there is more than one employer, upon one of such employers. (3 ) The notice may be served by delivering the same at, or sending it by post in a registered letter addressed to, the residence or place of business of the person on whom it is to be served. (4 ) 'Where the employer is a body of persons, corporate or unincorporate, the notice may also be served by delivering the same at, or by sending it by post in a registered letter addressed to, the employer at the office, or, if there be more than one office, any one of the offices of such body. 3. — (1 ) I f the registrar o f friendly societies, after taking steps to ascertain the views of the employer and workmen, certifies that any scheme o f compen sation, benefit, or insurance for the workmen of an employer in any employment, whether or not such scheme includes other employers and their workmen, pro vides scales of compensation not less favorable to the workmen and their dependents than the corresponding scales contained in this act, and that, where the scheme provides for contributions by the workmen, the scheme confers benefits at least equivalent to those contributions, in addition to the benefits to which the* workmen would have been entitled under this act, and that a majority (to be ascertained by ballot) of the workmen to whom the scheme is applicable are in favor of such scheme, the employer may, whilst the certificate is in force, contract with any of his workmen that the provisions of the scheme shall be substituted for the provisions of this act, and thereupon the employer shall be liable only in accordance with the scheme, but, save as aforesaid, this act shall apply notwithstanding any contract to the contrary made after the commence ment o f this act. (2 ) The registrar may give a certificate to expire at the end o f a limited period of not less than five years, and may from time to time renew with or without modifications such a certificate to expire at the end of the period for which it is renewed. (3 ) No scheme shall be so certified which contains an obligation upon the workmen to join the scheme as a condition of their hiring, or which does not contain provisions enabling a workman to withdraw from the scheme. (4 ) I f complaint is made to the registrar of friendly societies by or on behalf of the workmen of any employer that the benefits conferred by any scheme no longer conform to the conditions stated in subsection (1 ) of this section, or that the provisions of such scheme are being violated, or that the scheme is not being fairly administered, or that satisfactory reasons exist for revoking the certifi cate, the registrar shall examine into the complaint, and, if satisfied that good cause exist for such complaint, shall, unless the cause o f complaint is removed, revoke the certificate. (5 ) When a certificate is revoked or expires, any moneys or securities held for the purpose o f the scheme shall, after due provision has been made to discharge the liabilities already accrued, be distributed as may be arranged between the employer and workmen, or as may be determined by the registrar of friendly societies in the event of a difference of opinion. BRITISH WORKMEN’ S COMPENSATION ACT OF 1906. 641 (6 ) Whenever a scheme has been certified as aforesaid, it shall be the duty of the employer to answer all such inquiries and to furnish all such accounts in regard to the scheme as may be made or required by the registrar of friendly societies. (7 ) The chief registrar of friendly societies shall include in his annual report the particulars of the proceedings of the registrar under this act. (8 ) The chief registrar of friendly societies may make regulations for the purpose o f carrying this section into effect. 4. ^ - ( l ) W here any person (in this section referred to as the principal), in the course of or for the purposes o f his trade or business, contracts with any other person (in this section referred to as the contractor) for the execution by or under the contractor of the whole or any part of any work undertaken by the principal, the principal shall be liable to pay to any workman employed in the execution of the work any compensation under this act which he would have been liable to pay if that workman had been immediately employed by h im ; and where compensation is claimed from or proceedings are taken against the principal, then, in the application of this act, references to the principal shall be substituted for references to the employer, except that the amount o f compensation shall be calculated with reference to the earnings of the.w ork man under the employer by whom he is immediately employed: Provided that, where the contract relates to threshing, plowing, or other agricultural work, and the contractor provides and uses machinery driven by mechanical power for the purpose of such work, he and he alone shall be liable under this act to pay compensation to any workman employed by him on such work. (2 ) Where the principal is liable to pay compensation under this section, he shall be entitled to be indemnified by any person who wTould have been liable to pay compensation to the workman independently of this section, and all ques tions as to the right to and amount of any such indemnity shall in default o f agreement be settled by arbitration under this act. (3 ) Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing a workman recovering compensation under this act from the contractor instead of the principal. (4 ) This section shall not apply in any case where the accident occurred elsewhere than on, or in, or about premises on which the principal has under taken toH execute the work or which are otherwise under his control or management. 5. — (1 ) Where any employer has entered into a contract with any insurers in respect of any liability under this act to any workman, then, in the event o f the employer becoming bankrupt, or making a composition or arrangement with his creditors, or if the employer is a company in the event o f the company having commenced to be wound up, the rights of the employer against the Insurers as respects that liability shall, notwithstanding anything in the enact ments relating to bankruptcy and the winding up o f companies, be transferred to and vest in the workman, and upon any such transfer the insurers shall have the same rights and remedies and be subject to the same liabilities as if they were the employer, so however that the insurers shall not be under any greater liability to the workman than they would have been under to the employer. (2 ) I f the liability of the insurers to the workman is less than the liability o f the employer to the workman, the workman may prove for the balance in the bankruptcy or liquidation. (3 ) There shall be included among the debts which under section one of the Preferential Payments in Bankruptcy Act, 1888, and section four of the Prefer ential Payments in Bankruptcy (Ireland) Act, 1889, are in the distribution o f the property of a bankrupt and in the distribution of the assets of a company being wound up to be paid in priority to all other debts, the amount, not exceeding in any individual case one hundred pounds, due in respect of any compensation the liability wherefor accrued before the date of the receiving order or the date of the commencement of the winding up, and those acts and the Preferential Payments in Bankruptcy Amendment Act, 1897, shall have effect accordingly. Where the compensation is a weekly payment, the amount due in respect thereof shall, for the purposes o f this provision, be taken to be the amount of the lump sum for which the weekly payment could, if redeem able, be redeemed if the employer made an application for that purpose under the first schedule to this a ct (4 ) In the case, o f the winding up o f a company within the meaning of the Stannaries Act, 1887, such an amount as aforesaid, if the compensation is 642 BULLETIN OF THE BUKEATJ OF LABOR. payable to a miner or the dependents o f a miner, shall have the like priority as is conferred on wages o f miners by section nine o f that act, and that section shall have effect accordingly. (5 ) The provisions of this section with respect to preferences and priorities shall not apply where the bankrupt or the company being wound up has entered into such a contract with insurers as aforesaid. (6 ) This section shall not apply where a company is wound up voluntarily merely for the purposes of reconstruction or o f amalgamation wTith another company. 6. Where the injury for which compensation is payable under this act was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability in some person other than the employer to pay damages in respect thereof— (1 ) The workman may take proceedings both against that person to recover damages and against any person liable to pay compensation under this act for such compensation, but shall not / be entitled to recover both damages and com pensation; and (2) I f the workman has recovered compensation under this act, the person by whom the compensation was paid, and any person who has been called on to pay an indemnity under the section of this act relating to subcontracting, shall be entitled to be indemnified by the person so liable to pay damages as aforesaid, and all questions as to the right to and amount of any such indemnity shall, in default of agreement, be settled by action, or, by consent o f the parties, by arbitration under this act. 7. — (1 ) This act shall apply to masters, seamen, and apprentices to the sea service and apprentices in the sea-fishing service, provided that such persons are workmen within the meaning of this act, and are members o f the crew of any ship registered in the United Kingdom, or of any other British ship or vessel o f which the owner, or (if there is more than one owner) the managing owner, or manager resides or has his principal place o f business in the United Kingdom, subject to the following modifications; (a) The notice o f accident and the claim for compensation may, except where the person injured is the master, be served on the master o f the ship as if he were the employer, but where the accident happened and the incapacity com menced on board the ship it shall not be necessary to give any notice of the accident: (&) In the case o f the death of the master, seaman, or apprentice, the claim for compensation shall be made within six months after news of the death has been received by the claim an t: (c ) Where an injured master, seaman, or apprentice is discharged or left behind in a British possession or in a foreign country, depositions respecting the circumstances and nature of the injury m ay be taken by any judge or magistrate in the British possession, and by any British consular officer in the foreign country, and if so taken shall be transmitted by the person by whom they are taken to the Board of Trade, and such deposition or certified copies thereof shall in any proceedings for enforcing the claim be admissible in evidence as provided by sections six hundred and ninety-one and six hundred and ninety-five of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and those sections shall apply accordingly: (d ) In the case o f the death of a master, seaman, or apprentice, leaving no dependents, no compensation shall be payable, if the owner of the ship is under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, liable to pay the expenses o f bu rial: (e ) The weekly payment shall not be payable in respfect of the period dur ing which the owner of the ship is, under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, as amended by any subsequent enactment, or otherwise, liable to defray the expenses of maintenance of-the injured master, seaman, or apprentice: ( f ) Any sum payable by way of compensation by the owner of a ship under this act shall be paid in full notwithstanding anything in section five hundred aqjd three o f the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (which relates to the limitation o f a shipowner’s liability in certain eases of loss of life, injury, or dam age), but the limitation on the owner’s liability imposed by that section shall apply to the amount recoverable by way of indemnity under the section of this act relating to remedies both against employer and stranger as if the indemnity were damages for loss of life or personal in ju ry : (0 ) Subsections (2 ) and (3 ) o f section one hundred and seventy-four o f the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (which relates to the recovery of wages of seamen lost with their ship), shall apply as respects proceedings for the recovery of compensation by dependents of masters, seamen, and apprentices lost with their BRITISH WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT OF 1906. 643 skip as they apply with respect to proceedings for the recovery of wages due to seamen and apprentices; and proceedings for the recovery of compensation shall in such a case be maintainable if the claim is made within eighteen months o f the date at which the ship is deemed to have been lost with all hands: (2 ) This act shall not apply to such members of the crew o f a fishing vessel as are remunerated by shares in the profits or the gross earnings of the working o f such vessel. (3 ) This section shall extend to pilots to whom Part X . o f the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, applies, as if a pilot when employed on any such ship as aforesaid were a seaman and a member of the crew. 8.— (1 ) Where— (i) the certifying surgeon appointed under the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, for the district in which a workman is employed certifies that the work man is suffering from a disease mentioned in the third schedule to this act and is thereby disabled from earning full wages at the work at which he was em ployed; or (ii) a workman is, in pursuance of any special rules or regulations made under the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, suspended from his usual employ ment on account of having contracted any such disease; or (iii) the death of a workman is caused by any such disease; and the disease is due to the nature of any employment in which the workman was employed at any time within the twelve months previous to the date o f the disablement or suspension, whether under one or more employers, he or his dependents shall be entitled to compensation under this act as if the disease or such suspension as aforesaid were a personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of that employment, subject to the following modifications:— O ) The disablement or suspension shall be treated as the happening of the accident; (k) I f it is proved that the workman has at the time o f entering the employ ment willfully and falsely represented himself in writing as not having previ ously suffered from the disease, compensation shall not be payable; (c ) The compensation shall be recoverable from the employer who last employed the workman during the said twelve months in the employment to the nature of which the disease was d u e : Provided that— (i) the workman or his dependents if so required shall furnish that employer with such information as to the names and addresses of all other employers who employed him in the employment during the said twelve months as he or they may possess, and, if such information is not furnished, or is not sufficient to enable that employer to take proceedings under the next following proviso, that employer upon proving that the disease was not contracted whilst the workman was in his employment shall not be liable to pay compensation; and (ii) if that employer alleges that the disease was in fact contracted whilst the workman was in the employment of some other employer, and not whilst in his employment, he may join such other employer as a party to the arbitration, and if the allegation is proved that other employer shall be the employer from whom the compensation is to be recoverable; and (iii) if the disease is of such a nature as to be contracted by a gradual proc ess, any other employers who during the said twelve months employed the workman in the employment to the nature of which the disease was due shall be liable to make to the employer from whom compensation is recoverable such contributions as, in default of agreement, may be determined in the arbitration under this act for settling the amount of the compensation; (d) The-amount of the compensation shall be calculated with reference to the earnings of the workman under the employer from whom the compensation is recoverable; (e ) The employer to whom notice of the death, disablement, or suspension is to be given shall be the employer who last employed the workman during the said twelve months in the employment to the nature of which the disease was due, and the notice may be given notwithstanding that the workman has vol untarily left his employment. ( f ) I f an employer or a workman is aggrieved by the action of a certifying or other surgeon in giving or refusing to give a certificate of disablement or in sus pending or refusing to suspend a workman for the purposes o f this section, the matter shall in accordance with regulations made by the secretary of state be referred to a medical referee, whose decision shall be final. 644 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. (2 ) I f tlie. workman at or immediately before the date o f the disablement or suspension was employed in any process mentioned in the second column of the third schedule to this act, and the disease contracted is the disease in the first column of that schedule set opposite the description of the process, the disease, except where the certifying surgeon certifies that in his opinion the disease was not due to the nature of the employment, shall be deemed to have been due to the nature o f that employment, unless the employer proves the contrary. (3 ) The secretary of state may make rules regulating the duties and fees of certifying and other surgeons (including dentists) under this section. (4 ) For the purposes o f this section the date o f disablement shall be such date as the certifying surgeon certifies as the date on which the disablement com menced, or, if he is unable to certify such a date, the date on which the certificate is given : Provided that— (a) W here the medical referee allows an appeal against a refusal by a certi fying surgeon to give a certificate of disablement, the date of disablement shall be such date as the medical referee may determine: (b) Where a workman dies without having obtained a certificate of disable ment, or is at the time of death not in receipt of a weekly payment on account of disablement, it shall be the date of death. (5 ) In such cases, and subject to such conditions as the secretary o f state may direct, a medical practitioner appointed by the secretary of state for the purpose shall have the powers and duties of a certifying surgeon under this section, and this section shall be construed accordingly. (6 ) The secretary of state may make orders for extending the provisions of this section to other diseases and other processes, and to injuries due to the iiature of any employment specified in the order not being injuries by accident, either without modification or subject to such modifications as may be contained in the order. (7 ) Where, after inquiry held on the application of any employers or work men engaged in any industry ’to which this section applies, it appears that a mutual trade insurance Company or society for insuring against the risks under this section has been established for the industry, and that a majority of the employers engaged in that industry are insured against such risks in the com pany or society and that the company or society consents, the secretary o f state may, by provisional order; require all employers in that industry to insure in the company or society upon such terms and under such conditions and subject to such exceptions as may be set forth in the order. Where such a company or society has been established, but is confined to employers in any particular locality or of any particular class, the secretary of state may for the purposes of this provision treat the industry, as carried on by employers in that locality or of that class, as a separate industry. (8 ) A provisional order made under this section shall be of no force what ever unless and until it is confirmed by Parliament, and if, while the bill con firming any such order is pending in either House o f Parliament, a petition is presented against the, order, the bill may be referred to a select committee, and the petitioner shall be allowed to appear and oppose as in the case of private bills, and any act confirming any provisional order under this section may be repealed, altered, or amended by a provisional order made and confirmed in like manner. (9 ) Any expenses incurred by the secretary of state in respect of any such order, provisional order, or confirming bill shall be defrayed out o f moneys pro vided by Parliament. (10) Nothing in this section shall affect the rights of a workman to recover compensation in respect of a disease to which this section does not apply, if the disease is a personal injury by accident within the meaning of this act. 9.— (1 ) This act shall not apply to persons in the naval or military service of the Crown, but otherwise, shall apply to workmen employed by or under the Crown to whom this act would apply if the employer were a private person: Provided that in the case of a person employed in the private service of the Crown, the head of that department of the royal household in which he was employed at the time of the accident shall be deemed to be his employer. (2 ) The treasury may, by warrant laid before Parliament, modify for the purposes of this act their warrant made under section one of the Superannua tion Act, 1887, and notwithstanding anything in that act, or any such warrant, may frame schemes with a view to their being certified by the registrar of friendly societies under this act. BRITISH WORKMEN’ S COMPENSATION ACT OP 1906. 645 10. — (1 ) The secretary of state may appoint such legally qualified medical practitioners to be medical referees for the purposes of this act as he may, with the sanction of the treasury, determine, and the remuneration of, and other expenses incurred by, medical referees under this act shall, subject to regula tions made by the treasury, be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament. Where a medical referee has.been employed as a medical practitioner in connection with any case by or on behalf of an emploj^er or workman or by any insurers interested, he shall not act as medical referee in that case. (2 ) The remuneration of an arbitrator appointed by a judge of county courts under the second schedule to this act shall be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament in accordance with regulations made by the treasury. 11. — (1 ) I f it is alleged that the owners of any ship are liable as such owners to pay compensation under this act, and at any time that ship is found in any port or river of England or Ireland, or within three miles of the coast thereof, a judge of any court of record in England or Ireland may, upon its being shown to him by any person applying in accordance with the rules of the court that the owners are probably liable as such to pay such compensation, and that none of the owners reside in the United Kingdom, issue an order directed to any officer of customs or other officer named by the judge requiring him to detain the ship until such time as the owners, agent, master, or consignee thereof have paid such compensation, or have given security, to be approved by the judge, to abide the event of any proceedings that may be instituted to recover such compensation and to pay such compensation and costs as may be awarded thereon; and any officer of customs or other officer to whom the order is directed shall detain the ship accordingly. (2 ) In any legal proceeding to recover such compensation, the person giving security shall be made defendant, and the production of the order of the judge, made in relation to the security, shall be conclusive evidence of the liability of the defendant to the proceeding. (3 ) Section six hundred and ninety-two of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, shall apply to the detention of a ship under this act as it applies to the deten tion of a ship under that act, and, if the owner of a ship is a corporation, it shall for the purposes of this section be deemed to reside in the United Kingdom if it has an office in the United Kingdom at which service of writs can be effected. 12. — (1) Every employer in any industry to which the secretary of state may direct that this section shall apply shall, on or before such day in every year as the secretary of state may direct, send to the secretary of state a cor rect return specifying the number of injuries in respect of which compensation has been paid by him under this act during the previous year, and the amount of such compensation, together with such other particulars as to the compensa tion as the secretary o f state may direct, and in default of complying with this section shall be liable on conviction under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts to a fine not exceeding five pounds [$24.33]. (2 ) Any regulations made by the secretary of state containing such direc tions as aforesaid shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after they are made. 13. In this act, unless the context otherwise requires,— “ Employer ” includes any body of persons corporate or unincorporate and the legal personal representative of a deceased employer, and, where the serv ices of a workman are temporarily lent or let on hire to another person by the person with whom the workman has entered into a contract of service or apprenticeship, the latter shall, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to con tinue to be the employer of the workman whilst he is working for that other person; “ Workman ” does not include any person employed otherwise than by way of manual labor whose remuneration exceeds two hundred and fifty pounds [$1,216.63] a year, or a person whose employment is of a casual nature and who is employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer’s trade or business, or a member of a police force, or an outworker, or a member of the employer’s family dwelling in his house, but, save as aforesaid, means any person who has entered into or works under a contract of service or apprentice ship with an employer, whether by way of manual labor, clerical work, or other wise, and whether the contract is expressed or implied, is oral or in w riting; Any reference to a workman who has been injured shall, where the workman is dead, include a reference to his legal personal representative or to his 304b— No. 70—07----- 12 646 BU LLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. dependents or other person to whom or for whose benefit compensation is pay able ; 44 Dependents ” means such of the members of the workman's family as were wholly or in part dependent upon the earnings of the workman at the time of his death, or would but for the incapacity due to the accident have been so dependent, and where the workman, being *the parent or grandparent of an illegitimate child, leaves such a child so dependent upon his earnings, or, being an illegitimate child, leaves a parent or grandparent so dependent upon his earnings, shall include such an illegitimate child and parent or grandparent respectively; “ Member of a family ” means wife or husband, father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, step-father, step-mother, son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, stepson, step-daughter, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister; 44 Ship,” “ vessel,” 44 seaman,” and 44 port ” have the same meanings aft in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894; 44 Manager,” in relation to a ship, means the ship’s husband or other person to whom the management of the ship is intrusted by or on behalf o f the ow ner; 44 Police force ” means a police force to which the Police Act, 1890, or the Police {Scotland) Act, 1890, applies, the City of London Police Force, the Royal Irish Constabulary, and the Dublin Metropolitan Police F orce; “ Outworker ” means a person to whom articles or materials are given out to be made up, cleaned, washed, altered, ornamented, finished, or repaired, or adapted for sale, in his own home or on other premises not under the control or management of the person who gave out the materials or articles; The exercise and performance of the powers and duties of a local or other public authority shall, for the purposes o f this act, be treated as the trade or business o f the authority.; 44County court,” 44 judge of the county court,” 44 registrar of the county court,” “ plaintiff,” and “ rules of court,” as respects Scotland, mean respectively sheriff court, sheriff, sheriff clerk, pursuer,* and act o f sederunt. 14. In Scotland, where a workman raises an action against his employer inde pendently of this act in respect of any injury caused by accident arising out o f and in the course o f the employment, the action, if raised in the sheriff court and concluding for damages under the Employers’ Liability Act, 1880, or alternatively at common law or under the Employers’ Liability Act, 1880, shall, notwithstanding anything contained in that act, not be removed under that act or otherwise to the court of session, nor shall it he appealed to that court other wise than by appeal on a question of la w ; and for the purposes of such appeal the provisions o f the second schedule to this act in regard to an appeal from the decision o f the sheriff on any question of law determined by him as arbi trator nnder this act shall apply. 15. — (1 ) Any contract (other than a contract substituting the provisions of a scheme certified under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897, for the pro visions of that act) existing at the commencement of this act, whereby a work man relinquishes any right to compensation from the employer for personal injury arising out o f and in the course of his employment, shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to continue after the time at which the work man’s contract o f#service would determine if notice of the determination thereof were given at the commencement of this act. <2) Every scheme under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897, in force at the commencement of this act shall, if recertified by the registrar of friendly societies, have effect as if it were a scheme under this act. (3 ) The registrar shall recertify any such scheme if it is proved to his satisfaction that the scheme conforms, or has been so modified as to conform, with the provisions of this act as to schemes. <^4) I f any such scheme has not been so recertified before the expiration of six months from the commencement of this act, the certificate thereof shall be revoked. 16. — (1 ) This act shall come into operation on the first day of July, nineteen hundred and seven, but, except so far as it relates to references to medical referees, and proceedings consequential thereon, shall not apply in any case where the accident happened before the commencement o f this act. (2 ) The Workmen's Compensation Acts, 1897 and 1900, are hereby repealed, but shall continue to apply to cases where the accident happened before the commencement of this act, except to the extent to which this act applies to those cases. 17. This act may be cited as the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1903. BBITISH W O R K M E N ’ s COMPENSATION ACT OP 1906. F ir s t 647 Schedule! SCALE AND CONDITIONS OF COMPENSATION. (1 ) The amount of compensation under this act shall he— (a) where death results from the injury— (1) if the workman leaves any dependents wholly dependent upon his earn ings, a sum equal to his earnings in the employment of the same employer during the three years next preceding the injury, or the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds [$729.98J, whichever of those sums is the larger, but not exceeding in any case three hundred pounds [$1,459.95], provided that the amount of any weekly payments made under this act, and any lump sum paid in redemption thereof, shall be deducted from such sum, and, if the period of the workman’s employment by the said employer has been less than the said three years, then the amount of his earnings during the said three years shall be deemed to be one hundred and fifty-six times his average weekly earnings during the period of his actual employment under the said employer; (ii) if the workman does not leave any such dependents, but leaves any dependents in part dependent upon his earnings, such sum, not exceeding in any case the amount payable under the foregoing provisions, as may be agreed upon, or, in default of agreement, may be determined, on arbitration under this act, to be reasonable and proportionate to the injury to the said dependents; and (iii) if he leaves no dependents, the reasonable expenses of his medical attendance and burial, not exceeding ten pounds [$48.67] ; (ft) where total or partial incapacity for work results from the injury, a weekly payment during the incapacity not exceeding fifty per cent, of his aver age weekly earnings during the previous twelve months, if he has been so long employed, but if not then for any less period during which he has been in the employment of the same employer, such weekly payment not to exceed one pound [$4.87] ; Provided that— ( a ) if the incapacity lasts less than two weeks no compensation shall be pay able in respect of the first w eek; and (b) as respects the weekly payments during total incapacity of a workman who is under twenty-one years of age at the date of the injury? and whose average weekly earnings are less than twenty shillings [$4.87], one hundred per cent, shall be substituted for fifty per cent, of his average weekly earnings, but the weekly payment shall in no case exceed ten shillings [$2.43]. (2 ) For the purposes of the provisions of this schedule relating to “ earn ings ” and “ average weekly earnings ” of a workman, the following rules shall be observed:— (a) average weekly earnings shall be computed in such manner as is best calculated to give the rate per week at w^hich the workman was being remuner ated. Provided that where by reason of the shortness of the time during which the workman has been in the employment of his employer, or the casual nature of the employment, or the terms of the employment, it is impracticable at the date of the accident to compute the rate of remuneration, regard may be had to the average weekly amount which, during the twelve months previous to the accident, was being earned by a person in the same grade employed at the same work by the same employer, or, if there is no person so employed, by a person in the same grade employed in the same class of employment and in the same district; (b) where the workman had entered into concurrent contracts of service with two or more employers under which he worked at one time for one .such employer and at another time for another such employer, his average weekly earnings shall be computed as if his earnings under all such contracts were earnings in the employment of the employer for whom he was working at the time of the accident; (c) employment by the same employer shall be taken to mean employment by the same employer in the grade in which the workman was employed at the time of the accident, uninterrupted by absence from work due to illness or any other unavoidable cau se; ((?) where the employer has been accustomed to pay to the workman a sum to cover any special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment, the sum so paid shall not be reckoned as part of the earnings. (3 ) In fixing the amount of the weekly payment, regard shall be had to any payment, allowance, or benefit which the workman may receive from the em ployer during the period of his incapacity, and in the case of partial incapacity 648 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. the weekly payment shall in no ease exceed the difference between the amount of the average weekly earnings of the workman before the accident and the average weekly amount which he is earning or is able to earn in some suitable employment or business after the accident, but shall bear such relation to the amount of that difference as under the circumstances o f the case may appear proper. (4 ) Where a workman has given notice of an accident, he shall, if so re quired by the employer, submit himself for examination by a duly qualified medical practitioner provided and paid by the employer, and, if he refuses to submit himself to such examination, or in any way obstructs the same, his right to compensation, and to take or prosecute any proceeding under this act in relation to compensation, shall be suspended until such examination has taken place. , (5 ) The payment in the case of death shall, unless otherwise ordered as hereinafter provided, be paid into the county court, and any sum so paid into court shall, subject to rules of court and the provisions of this schedule, be invested, applied, or otherwise dealt with by the court in such manner as the court in its discretion thinks fit for the benefit of the persons entitled thereto under this act, and the receipt of the registrar of the court shall be a sufficient discharge in respect of the amount paid i n : Provided that, if so agreed, the payment in case of death shall, if the work man leaves no dependents, be made to his legal personal representative, or, if he has no such representative, to the person to whom the expenses of medical attendance and burial are due. (0 ) Rules of court may provide for the transfer of money paid into court under this act from one court to another, whether or not the court from which it is to be transferred is in the same part of the United Kingdom as the court to which it is to be transferred. (7 ) Where a weekly payment is payable under this act to a person under any legal disability, a county court may, on application being made in accord ance with rules of court, order that the weekly payment be paid during the disability into court, and the provisions of this schedule with respect to sums required by this schedule to be paid into court shall apply to sums paid into court in pursuance of any such order. (8 ) Any question as to who is a dependent shall, in default of agreement, be settled by arbitration under this act, or, if not so settled before payment into court under this schedule, shall be settled by the county court, and the amount payable to each dependent shall be settled by arbitration under this act, or, if not so settled before payment into court under this schedule, by the county court. Where there are both total and partial dependents nothing in this schedule shall be construed as preventing the compensation being allotted partly to the total and partly to the partial dependents. (9 ) Where, on application being made in accordance with rules of court, it appears to a county court that, on account of neglect of children on the part of a widow, or on account of the variation of the circumstances of the various dependents, or for any other sufficient cause, an order of the court or an award as to the apportionment amongst the several dependents of any sum paid as compensation, or as to the manner in which any sum payable to any such dependent is to be invested, applied, or otherwise dealt with, ought to be varied, the court may make such order for the variation of the former order or the award, as in the circumstances of the case the court may think just. (10) Any sum which under this schedule is ordered to be invested may be invested in whole or in part in the Post Office Savings Bank by the registrar of the county court in his name as registrar. (11) Any sum to be so invested may be invested in the purchase of an annuity from the national debt commissioners through the Tost Office Savings Bank, or be accepted by the postmaster-general as a deposit in the name of the registrar as such, and the provisions of any statute or regulations respecting the limits o f deposits in savings banks, and the declaration to be made by a depositor, shall not apply to such sums. (12) No part of any money invested in the name of the registrar of any county court in the Post Office Savings Bank under this act shall be paid out, except upon authority addressed to the postmaster-general by the treasury or, subject to regulations of the treasury, by the judge or registrar o f the county court. (13) Any person deriving any benefit from any moneys invested in a post office savings bank under the provisions of this act may, nevertheless, open an account in a post office savings bank or in any other savings bank in his own BRITISH WORKMEN’ S COMPENSATION ACT OP 1906. 649 name without being liable to any penalties imposed by any statute or regula tions in respect of the opening of accounts in two savings banks, or of two accounts in the same savings bank. (14) Any workman receiving weekly payments under this act shall, if so required by the employer, from time to time submit himself for examination by a duly qualified medical practitioner provided and paid by the employer. I f the workman refuses to submit himself to such examination, or in any way obstructs the same, his right to such weekly payments shall be suspended until such examination lias taken place. (15) A workman shall not be required to submit himself for examination by a medical practitioner under paragraph (4 ) or paragraph (14) of this schedule otherwise than in accordance with regulations made by the secretary of state, or at more frequent intervals than may be prescribed by those regulations. Where a workman has so submitted himself for examination by a medical practitioner, or has been examined by a medical practitioner selected by himself, and the employer or the workman, as the case may be, has within six days after such examination furnished the other with a copy of the report of that practitioner as to the workman's condition, then, in the event of no agreement being come to between the employer and the workman as to the workman’s condition or fitness for employment, the registrar of a county court, on applica tion being made to the court by both parties, may, on payment by the applicants of such fee not exceeding one pound [.$4.87] as may be prescribed, refer the matter to a medical referee. The medical referee to whom the matter is so referred shall, in accordance with regulations made by the secretary of state, give a certificate as to the condition of the workman and his fitness for employment, specifying, where necessary, the kind of employment for winch he is fit, and that certificate shall be conclusive evidence as to the matters so certified. Where no agreement can be come to betwreen the employer and the workman as to whether or to w hat extent the incapacity of the workman is due to the accident, the provisions of this paragraph shall, subject to any regulations made by the secretary of state, apply as if the question wTere a question as to the condition of the workman. I f a workman, on being required so to do, refuses to submit himself for examination by a medical referee to whom the matter has been so referred as aforesaid, or in any way obstructs the same, his right to compensation and to take or prosecute any proceeding under this act in relation to compensation, or, in the case of a workman in receipt of a weekly payment, his right to that weekly payment, shall be suspended until such examination has taken place. Rules of court may be made for prescribing the manner in which documents are to be furnished or served and applications made under this paragraph and the forms to be used for those purposes and, subject to the consent of the treasury,*as to the fee to be paid under this paragraph. (16) Any weekly payment may be reviewed at the request either of the employer or of the workman, and on such review may be ended, diminished, or increased, subject to the maximum above provided, and the amount of pay ment shall, in default of agreement, be settled by arbitration under this a c t : Provided that wrliere the workman was at the date of the accident under twTenty-one years of age and the review takes place more than twelve months after the accident, the amount of the w eekly payment may be increased to any amount not exceeding fifty per cent, of the weekly sum which the workman would probably have been earning at the date of the review7 if he had remained uninjured, but not in any case exceeding one pound [$4.87]. (17) Where any weekly payment has been continued for not less than six months, the liability therefor may, on application by or on behalf of the em ployer, be redeemed by the payment of a lump sum of such an amount as, where the incapacity is permanent, would, if invested in the purchase of an immediate life annuity from the national debt commissioners through the Post Ofiice Sayings Bank, purchase an annuity for the workman equal to seventyfive per cent, of the annual value of the w7eekly payment, and as in any other case may be settled by arbitration under this act, and such lump sum may be ordered by the committee or arbitrator or judge o f the county court to be invested or otherwise applied for the benefit of the person entitled thereto: Provided that nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as preventing agree ments being made for the redemption of a weekly payment by a lump sum. (18) I f a workman receiving a weekly payment ceases to reside in the United Kingdom, he shall thereupon cease to be entitled to receive any wreekly pay ment, unless the medical referee certifies that the incapacity resulting from the 650 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, injury is likely to be of a permanent nature. I f the medical referee so certifies, the workman shall be entitled to receive quarterly the amount of the weekly payments accruing due during the preceding quarter so long as he proves, in such manner and at such intervals as may be prescribed by rules o f court, his identity and the continuance of the incapacity in respect of which the weekly payment is payable. (19) A weekly payment, or a sum paid by way o f redemption thereof, shall not be capable of being assigned, charged, or attached, and shall not pass to any other person by operation of law, nor shall any claim be set off against the same. (20) Where under this schedule a right to compensation is suspended no compensation shall be payable in respect of the period of suspension. (2 1) W here a scheme certified under this act provides for payment of com pensation by a friendly society, the provisions of the proviso to the first sub section of section eight, section sixteen, and section forty-one o f the Friendly Societies Act, 1896, shall not apply to such society in respect o f such scheme. (22) In the application of this act to Ireland the provisions of the County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877, with respect to money deposited in the Post Office Savings Bank under that act shall apply to money invested in the Post Office Savings Bank under this act. S econd Schedule. ARBITRATION, &C. (1) For the purpose of settling any matter which under this act is to be settled by arbitration, if any committee, representative o f any employer and his workmen, exists with power to settle matters under this act in the case of the employer and workmen, the matter shall, unless either party objects by notice in writing sent to the other party before the committee meet to consider the matter, be settled by the arbitration of such committee, or be referred by them in their discretion to arbitration as hereinafter provided. (2 ) I f either party so objects, or there is no such committee, or the committee so refers the matter or fails to settle the matter within six months from the date o f the claim, the matter shall be settled by a single arbitrator agreed on by the parties, or in the absence of agreement by the judge of the county court, according to the procedure prescribed by rules o f court. (3 ) In England the matter, instead o f being settled by the judge of the county court, may, if the lord chancellor so authorizes, be settled according to the like procedure, by a single arbitrator appointed by that judge, and the arbitrator so appointed shall, for the purposes of this act, have all the powers of that judge. (4 ) The Arbitration Act, 1889, shall not apply to any arbitration under this a c t ; but a committee or an arbitrator may, if they or he think fit, submit any question o f law for the decision o f the judge o f the county court, and the decision of the judge on any question o f law, either on such submission, or in any ease where he himself settles the matter under this act, or where he gives any decision or makes any order under this act, shall be final, unless within the time and in accordance with the conditions prescribed by rules of the Supreme Court either party appeals to the court o f appeal; and the judge of the county court, or the arbitrator appointed by him, shall, for the purpose of proceedings under this act, have the same powers of procuring the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents as if the proceedings were an action in the county court. (5 ) A judge o f county courts may, if he thinks fit, summon a medical referee to sit with him as an assessor. (G) Rules of court may make provision for the appearance in any arbitration under this act o f any party by some other person. (7 ) The costs o f and incidental to the arbitration and proceedings connected therewith shall be in the discretion o f the committee, arbitrator, or judge of the county court, subject as respects such judge and an arbitrator appointed by him to rules of court. The costs, whether before a committee or an arbi trator or in the county court, shall not exceed the limit prescribed by rules of court, and shall be taxed in manner prescribed by those rules and such taxation may be reviewed by the judge o f the county court. (8 ) In the case o f the death, or refusal or inability to act, of an arbirtator, the judge of the county court may, on the application of any party, appoint a new arbitrator. (9 ) W here the amount of compensation under this act has been ascertained, or any weekly payment varied, o f any other matter decided under this act, either by a committee or by an arbitrator or by agreement, a memorandum BRITISH W O R K M E N S COMPENSATION ACT OF ,1906. 651 thereof shall be sent, in manner prescribed by rules of court, by the committee or arbitrator, or by any party interested, to the registrar o f the county court who shall, subject to such rules, on being satisfied as to its genuineness, record such memorandum in a special register without fee, and thereupon the memo randum shall for all purposes be enforceable as a county court judgment. Provided that— (a ) no such memorandum shall be recorded before seven days after the despatch by the registrar of notice to the parties interested; and (b) where a workman seeks to record a memorandum of agreement between his employer and himself for the payment of compensation under this act and the employer, in accordance with rules of court, proves that the workman has in fact returned to work and is earning the same wages as he did before the accident, and objects to the recording of such memorandum, the memorandum shall only be recorded, if at all, on such terms as the judge of the county court, under the circumstances, may think ju s t ; and (c) the judge of the county court may at any time rectify the register; and (d ) where it appears to the registrar of the county court, on any informa tion which he considers sufficient, that an agreement as to the redemption of a weekly payment by a lump sum, or an agreement as to the amount of com pensation payable to a person under any legal disability, or to dependents, ought not to be registered by reason of the inadequacy of the sum or amount, or by reason of the agreement having been obtained by fraud or undue influence, or other improper means, he may refuse to record the memorandum of the agreement sent to him for registration, and refer the matter to the judge who shall, in accordance with rules of court, make such order (including an order as to any sum already paid under the agreement) as under the circumstances he may think ju s t ; and (e) The judge may, within six months after a memorandum of an agreement as to the redemption o f a weekly payment by a lump sum, or of an agreement as to the amount o f compensation payable to a person under any legal disability, or to dependents, has been recorded in the register, order that the record be removed from the register on proof to his satisfaction that the agreement was obtained by fraud or undue influence or other improper means, and may make such order (including an order as to any sum already paid under the agree ment) as under the circumstances he may think just. (1 0) An agreement as to the redemption of a weekly payment by a lump sum if not registered in accordance with this act shall not, nor shall the pay ment of the sum payable under the agreement, exempt the person by whom the weekly payment is payable from liability to continue to make that weekly pay ment, and an agreement as to the amount of compensation to be paid to a person under a legal disability or to dependents, if not so registered, shall not, nor shall the payment of the sum payable under the agreement, exempt the person by whom the compensation is payable from liability to pay compensa tion, unless, in either case, he proves'that the failure to register was not due to any neglect or default on his part. (11) Where any matter under this act is to be done in a county court, or by, to, or before the judge or registrar of a county court, then, unless the contrary intention appear, the same shall, subject to rules of court, be done in, or by, to, or before the judge or registrar of, the county court of the district in which all the parties concerned reside, or if they reside in different districts the district prescribed by rules of court, without prejudice to any transfer in manner pro vided by rules of court. (12) The duty of a judge of county courts under this act, or in England of an arbitrator appointed by him, shall, subject to rules of court, be part of the duties o f the county court, and the officers of the court shall act accordingly, and rules of court may be made both for any purpose for which this act author izes rules of court to be made, and also generally for carrying into effect this act so far as it affects the county court, or an arbitrator appointed by the judge o f the county court, and proceedings in the county court or before any such arbitrator, and such rules may, in England, be made by the five judges of county courts appointed for the making of rules under section one hundred and sixty-four of the County Courts Act, 1888, and when allowed by the lord chan cellor, as provided by that section, shall have full effect without any further consent. (1 3) No court fee, except such as may be prescribed under paragraph (15) o f the first schedule to this act, shall be payable by any party in respect of any proceedings by or against a workman under this act in the court prior to the award. 652 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. (14) Any sum awarded as compensation shall, unless paid into court under this act, be paid on the receipt of the person to whom it is payable under any agreement or award, and the solicitor or agent of a person claiming compensa tion under this act shall not be entitled to recover from him any costs in respect of any proceedings in an arbitration under this act, or to claim a lien in respect of such costs on, or deduct such costs from, the sum awarded or agreed as compensation, except such sum as may be awarded by the committee, the arbitrator, or the judge of the county court, on an application made either by the person claiming compensation, or by his solicitor or agent, to determine the amount of costs to be paid to the solicitor or agent, such sum to be awarded subject to taxation and to the scale of costs prescribed by rules of court. (15) Any committee, arbitrator, or judge may, subject to regulations made by the secretary of state and the treasury, submit to a medical referee for report any matter which seems material to any question arising in the arbitration. (16) The secretary of state may, by order, either unconditionally or subject to such conditions or modifications as he may think fit, confer on any com mittee representative of an employer and his workmen, as respects any matter in which the committee act as arbitrators, or which is settled by agreement submitted to and approved by the committee, all or any of the powers conferred by this act exclusively on county courts or judges of county courts, and may by the order provide how and to whom the compensation money is to be paid in cases where, but for the order, the money would be required to be paid into court, and the order may exclude from the operation of-provisos (cl) and (e )o f paragraph (9 ) of this schedule agreements submitted to and approved by the committee, and may contain such incidental, consequential, or sup plemental provisions as may appear to the secretary of state to be necessary or proper for the purposes of the order. (17) In the application of this schedule to Scotland— (a ) “ County court judgm ent” as used in paragraph (9 ) of this schedule means a recorded decree arbitral : (&) Any application to the sheriff as arbitrator shall be heard, tried, and determined summarily in the manner provided by section fifty-two of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act, 1876, save only that parties may be represented by any person authorized in writing to appear for them and subject to the declaration that it shall be competent to either party within the time and in accordance with the conditions prescribed by act of sederunt to require the sheriff to state a case on any question of law determined by him, and his decision thereon in such case may be submitted to either division of the court of session, who may hear and determine the same and remit to the sheriff with instruc tion as to the judgment to be pronounced, and an appeal shall lie from either of such divisions to the House of Lords. (c) Paragraphs ( 3 ), (4 ), and (8 ) shall not apply. (18) In the application of this schedule to Ireland the expression “ judge of the county cou rt” shall include the recorder of any city or town, and an appeal shall lie from the court of appeal to the House of Lords. T h ir d S c h e d u l e . Description of disease. Description of process. Anthrfnr ............................................... Handling of wool, hair, bristles, hides, and skins. T,p^d pnis.m iiTig- or its sequela*.............. Any process involving the use of lead or its preparations or compounds. Mercury poisoning or its sequelae....... Any process involving the use of mercury or its preparations or compounds. Phosphorus poisoning or its sequelae.. Any process involving the use of phosphorus or its prepara tions or compounds. Arsenic poisoning or its sequehe......... Any process involving the use of arsenic or its preparations or compounds. Ankylostomiasis..................................... Mining. Where regulations or special rules made under any act of Parliament for the protection of persons employed in any industry against the risk of con tracting lead poisoning require some or all of the persons employed in certain processes specified in the regulations or special rules to be periodically exam ined by a certifying or other surgeon, then, in the application of this schedule to that industry, the expression “ process ” shall, unless the secretary of state otherwise directs, include only the processes so specified. RECENT REPORTS OP STATE BUREAUS OP LABOR STATISTICS. NEW YO RK . Fifth Annual Report o f the Department o f Labor, fo r the twelve months ended September 30, 1905 . Transmitted to the legislature January 2, 1906. P. Tecumseh Sherman, Commissioner. Part I, 216 pp.; Part II, 301 pp.; Part III, 423 pp.; Part IY, clxxxix, 810 pp. Part I consists of the annual report of the commissioner of labor relative to the operation of the department of labor, withrecom'mendations on labor questions; preliminary reports of the bureau of factory inspection, the bureau of mediation and arbitration, and the free employment bureau in New York City; legislation and decisions of courts on questions affecting the interest of working people, and labor laws in force in the State January 1, 1906; Part II, Twentieth annual report of the bureau of factory inspection; Part III, Nineteenth annual report of the bureau of mediation and arbitration; Part IY, Twenty-third annual report of the bureau of labor statistics. F r e e P u b l i c E m p l o y m e n t B u r e a u .— During the year 1905 there were 6,032 applicants (3,530 males and 2,502 females) for positions, and 4,072 applications (784 for males and 3,288 for females) for help. The number of situations filled was 4,384, of which 858 were filled by males and 3,526 by females. Twenty-third Annual Report o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics, fo r the year ending September 30, 1905 . This part embraces the following subjects: Protection of labor employed on public work, 112 pages; economic conditions of labor, 43 pages; trade unions in 1905,19 pages; appendix (statistical tables), 795 pages. P r o t e c t io n o f L a b o r E m ployed on P u b l ic W o r k .— This chapter is a history of legislation in the leading European countries, in the United States, and the several States regarding the protection of labor employed on public work, together with a reproduction of Federal and State laws and-constitutional provisions in force on this subject. The discussion relates to the fixing of wages, salaries, hours of work, and provisions for the protection, welfare, and safety of persons employed by the State, municipality, or by any contractor performing work for either. T h e S t a t e o f E m p l o y m e n t .— This chapter presents a continuous record, showing the number and percentage of members of labor 653 654 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. unions unemployed in 1905, causes of and duration of idleness as reported by approximately one-fourth of the total number of mem bers of trade unions in the State, and comparative statistics for preceding years. The smallest number of unions reporting for any month in 1905 was 191 and the largest number w;as 199, and the work people embraced by these monthly reports varied from 91,088 to 97,345. From the returns it appears that the state of employ ment was more favorable in 1905 than in either 1902, 1903, or 1904. The percentage of unemployment for those reporting for the four years being as follows: 1902, 14.8; 1903, 17.5; 1904, 16.9, and 1905, 11.2. The percentage of unemployment in the building trades was higher in January, February, April, May, and June, in 1905, than for the same months of 1904, but from July to December, 1905, the per centage showed a marked decline from the earlier months and from the corresponding months of 1904. The mean percentage of unem ployment for 1905 was 15.3, as compared with 21.4 in 1904. In printing, binding, etc., the percentage of unemployment was lower in 1905 than in 1904, for the first five months and for July and August. The percentage of unemployment was higher during the remainder of the year, but for the entire year the average percentage of unem ployment was 9.9 as compared with 11.2 in 1904. The average per centage of unemployment excepting in the metals, machinery, and shipbuilding trades; theaters and music; tobacco; restaurants and retail trade, and public employment, was lower in 1905 than in 1902. In one industry only was it higher than in 1903, and in every industry the percentage of unemployment in 1905 fell below that of 1904. The following table shows the number and percentage of unionists idle at the end of March and September, 1904 and 1905, by causes: NUM BER AND PE R CENT OF MEMBERS OF LABO R UNIONS IDLE A T THE END OF MARCH AND SEPTEM BER, 1904 AND 1905, B Y CAUSES. End of March, 1904. Cause. Number idle. Per cent. End of Septem ber, 1904. Number idle. Per cent. End of March, 1905. Number idle. Per cent. End of Septem ber, 1905. Number idle. Per cent. Lack of work.......................... Lack of material.................... The weather........................... Labor disputes....................... Disability............................... Other causes.......................... Reason not stated................. 34,685 1,213 36,600 25,723 3,898 1,573 303 33.3 1.2 35.2 24.7 3.8 1.5 .3 21,718 952 966 10,593 1,873 1,140 136 58.0 2.5 2.6 28.4 5.0 3.1 .4 28,759 1,343 16,005 4,814 2,942 794 259 52.4 2.4 29.1 8.8 5.4 1.4 .5 11,525 655 739 2,403 2,577 438 93 62.5 3.6 4.0 13.0 14.0 2.4 .5 T otal............................. 103,995 100.0 37,380 100.0 54,916 100.0 18,430 100.0 Of the 54,916 unionists idle at the end of March, 1905, 26,407 were in the building trades, 9,240 were in transportation trades, and 6,055 in clothing and textile trades. Of the 18,430 unionists idle in Sep tember, 1905, 3,341 were reported by the building trades, 5,217 by the clothing and textile trades, and 1,998 b y the transportation trades. REPORTS OF STATE BUREAUS OF LABOR---- N E W YORK. 655 W a g e s a n d E a r n i n g s . — Returns received from trade unions for the year 1905 show that an average weekly increase of $1.82 in wages was obtained by 34,711 males, and that 55 females obtained an average weekly increase of $1.60, while 286 males suffered an average weekly decrease of $3.96 in wages. The average net weekly increase for the 34,997 males for whom changes in wages were reported was $1.77. The following table shows the average earnings for the first and third quarters and for six months, as reported by trade unions in 1905. NUMBER AND AVERAG E EARNINGS OF ORGANIZED W ORKIN G PEOPLE R EPO RTIN G FOR THE FIR ST AND TH IR D QUARTERS OF 1905, B Y SEX AND GROUPS OF INDUS TRIES. Females. Males. Industry group. Number report ing. First quar ter. Building, stone work ing, etc..................... Transportation.......... Clothing and textiles. Metals, machinery, and shipbuilding. . . Printing, binding, etc. W ood working and furniture.................. Food and liquors....... Theaters and m usic. . Tobacco....................... Restaurants and re tail trade................. Public employment-.. Stationary enginemen .......................... Miscellaneous............. Third quar ter. Average earnings. First quar ter. Number re porting. Third First Third Six quar quar quar months ter. ter. ter. Average earnings. First quar ter. Third Six quar ter. months 121,581 132,069 $170.50 $245.72 $416.22 63,072 62,132 205.16 210.36 415.52 26,588 27,695 143.61 154.51 298.12 90 5,638 144 $138.86 $121.35 5,524 77.48 82.83 57' 61.13 1,215 113.21 $260.21 160.31 33,429 24,717 33,896 24,902 205.63 223.43 213.62 225.92 419.25 449.35 49 1,192 11,764 13,676 9,579 9,086 10,709 13,576 10,115 9,187 171.93 177.04 363.57 140.80 197.21 186.75 299.97 144.72 369.14 363.79 663.54 285.52 54 45 574 2,650 604 2,707 9,369 9,054 9,715 9,130 178.38 210.37 179.86 218.36 358.24 428.73 279 130 406 93 84.06 122.80 11,963 9,837 11,995 9,622 219.45 170.53 239.27 177.22 458.72 347.75 173 169 75.05 89.48 155.53 T otal................. 353,715 364,743 187.29 218.79 406.08 10,829 10,964 112.01 113.43 225.44 69.50 106.86 130.63 220.07 96.74 109.48 206.22 428.48 129.64 382.43 132.69 810.91 262.33 71.23 124.69 155.29 247.49 T r e n d o f R e a l W a g e s .— Under this title the value of wages rela tive to their real purchasing power is discussed. A table is presented for the year 1897 and the years 1902 to 1905, showing the average daily wages of trade unionists in the several occupations. The aver age yearly earnings, based on the average daily earnings in connection with the average days of work per year, were $581 in 1897, and in 1905, $794, an increase of 37 per cent. H o u r s o f L a b o r . — The reduction in weekly working hours con tinued in 1905. Of the 857,000 operatives employed in factories visited during the year, 53 per cent were working less than 58 hours per week. In 1901 the percentage of such employees working less than 58 hours per week was 38. Returns from workingmen’s asso ciations show that during the year 1905, 5,959 working people had their hours of labor reduced, while for 722 working people the hours of labor were increased. The number of persons benefited by reduc tion of hours in 1905 was less than for any other year of the 5-year period, 1901 to 1905. The number of persons affected by decrease of 656 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. hours of labor for each of the preceding years of the period was in 1901, 26,147; in 1902, 61,853; in 1903, 21,636, and in 1904, 6,896. The number of working people affected by an increase in the weekly schedule of hours of labor in 1905 was exceeded in but one other year of the period. The number affected by increase of hours of labor for each of the four years preceding 1905 was 319 in 1901, 5,234 in 1902, 342 in 1903, and 66 in 1904. The following table shows, by industries, the changes in hours of labor per week and the number of organized workers affected: CHANGES IN W E E K L Y HOURS OF LABO R OF MEMBERS OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, AND MEMBERS AFFECTED, AS R E PO RT E D B Y LABO R UNIONS FOR THE Y E A R ENDING SEPTEM BER SO, 1905. j Industry. Mem- Total 1,-ers af hours. fected. j Increase. Decrease. ! Aver Mem Total age hours bers af hours. per fected. week. Building, etc.......................... Transportation..................... Clothing and textiles........... Metals, machinery, etc......... Printing................................. Wood working...................... Food and liquors......... : ----Stationary enginemen........... Miscellaneous........................ 861 1,854 125 461 1,198 172 274 84 930 6,588 11,684 530 2,350 4,638 1,065 2,730 1,386 3,191 7.7 6.3 4.2 5.1 3.9 6.2 10.0 16.5 3.4 T otal............................ 5,959 34,162 5.7 Net decrease. Aver Total age mem Total hours bers af hours. per fected. week. 558 31 2,133 217 3.8 7.0 50 125 2.5 9 26 54 364 6.0 14.0 48 816 722 | 3,709 Aver age hours per week. 17.0 1,419 1,885 125 511 1,198 181 300 84 978 4,455 11,467 530 2,225 4,638 1.011 2 ,366 1,386 2,375 3.1 6.1 4.2 4.4 3.9 5.6 7.9 16.5 2.4 5.1 6,681 30,453 4.6 Of the 1,069 working people who obtained an 8 -hour day, 547 were in the building trades, 300 in the printing trades, 14 in the wood working trades, 106 were stationary engineers and firemen, and 102 were paper makers. T r a d e U n i o n s .— The decline in the number of unions and in mem bership shown in 1904 continued during 1905. On September 30, 1905, there were in the State 2,402 organizations having a member ship of 383,236. The following table shows the number of unions, and the number of members by sex, in each year from 1894 to 1905: NUMBER OF TRADE UNIONS AND MEMBERSHIP, B Y SE X, 1894 TO 1905. Date. July 1, 1894............ July 1, 1895............ October 31, 1896... September 30,1897. September 30,1898. September 30, 1899. September 30,1900. September 30,1801. September 30, 1902. September 30,1903. September 30,1904. September 30,1905. Membership. Number ,of unions. ! 1 ! i i i Males. 860 927 962 1,009 1,087 1,320 1,635 1,871 2,229 2,583 2,504 2,402 ! i a Not separately reported. 149,709 170,129 («) 162,690 163,562 200,932 233,553 261,523 313,592 380,845 378,859 370,971 Females. 7,488 10,102 («) 5,764 7,505 8,088 11,828 14,618 15; 509 14,753 12,817 12,265 Total. 157,197 180,231 170,296 168,454 171,067 209,020 245,381 276,141 329,101 395,598 391,676 383,236 REPORTS OF STATE BUREAUS OF LABOR---- N E W YORK. 657 The above figures show that there was a falling off of 102 organiza tions and 8,440 members; but owing to the fact that previous to 1905 three unions in the marine trades had reported their entire member ship, while in that year they returned their New York City membership alone and in one case failed to report, the actual falling off in member ship was only about 2,840. The decline in total membership was confined to the latter part of 1904 and the earlier months of 1905. In the spring of 1905 an increase of membership was noticed and continued through the balance of the year, increasing 8,705 in the six months from April 1 to September 30. Of the 2,402 unions, with a total membership of 383,236 on Sep tember 30, 1905, 667 unions having a membership of 251,277 were located in New York City. There were 18 unions with a membership of 3,764 composed entirely of women, and in the unions composed of both males and females there were 8,501 female unionists, making a total of 12,265 female members of trade unions, of whom 6,653 were in the clothing and textile industries, 2,729 in the tobacco industries, 1,217 in the printing, binding, etc., industries, and 732 in the theaters and music industries. The following table gives the membership of trade unions, by industries, on July 1 for the years 1894 and 1895, October 31, 1896, and September 30, for the years from 1897 to 1905. MEMBERSHIP OF TRAD E UNIONS, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1894 TO 1905.(«) 1894. 1395. Building, stone working, etc..................... Clothing and textiles.................................. Metals, machinery, and shipbuilding....... Transportation............................................ Printing, binding, etc................................. Tobacco........................................................ Food and liquors........................................ Theaters and m usic.................................... Wood working and furniture.................... Restaurants and retail trade.................... Public employment..................................... Stationary enginemen............................... Miscellaneous............................................... 49,131 39,162 8,309 18,773 11,059 8,722 5.340 5,688 5,169 1,564 1,964 975 1.341 53,683 51,921 9,328 19,134 11,998 9,089 6,210 7,327 4,477 1,860 1,964 1,105 2,135 T otal................................................... 157,197 Industry. | 1896. I 1897. 1898. 56,363 30,093 11,333 23,469 13,948 9,799 7,153 7,306 4,059 2,437 993 1,239 2,104 53,303 32,147 10,124 23,933 13,413 9,097 6,621 6,920 3,975 2,217 1,667 2,948 2,089 59,676 26,444 11,621 19,065 15,090 8,889 6,469 9,346 4,468 2,419 1,880 3,738 1,962 70,031 29,644 17,779 25,981 16,051 8,886 7,935 9,518 6,571 3,551 3,797 5,204 4,072 180,231 | 170,296 168,454 171,067 209,020 1899. 1900. 1901. 1C02. ' 1903. 1904. Building, stone working, etc..................... Clothing and textiles.................................. Metals, machinery, and shipbuilding....... Transportation............................................ Printing, binding, etc................................. T obacco........................................................ Food and liquors........................................ Theaters and music.................................... W ood working and furniture.................... Restaurants and retail trade.................... Public employment..................................... Stationary enginemen............................... Miscellaneous............................................... 79,705 28,783 24,153 32,979 17,145 12,349 8,987 9,698 8,037 5,156 7,148 5,666 5,575 84,732 41,843 25,616 37,923 18,061 10,210 8,729 11,688 8,113 6.394 8,142 7,566 7,124 90,817 46,954 38,201 42,824 21,170 11,049 12,528 11,588 12,247 8,810 9,160 8,111 15,642 110,173 40,981 48,230 63,791 23.915 12,435 15,757 11,674 16.916 12,389 9,753 11,166 18,418 118,879 36,090 36,971 72,965 25,348 12,354 15,394 13,614 12,771 12,764 9,538 12,702 12,276 133,698 34,406 34,163 62,871 26,192 12,115 13,603 13,224 11,179 10,307 9,346 12,037 10,095 T otal................................................... 245,381 276,141 329,101 395,598 6 391,676 383,236 Industry. 1905. i a The detailed figures in this table do not in all cases agree with figures presented in reports for earlier years; no explanation is given. 6 This is not the correct total of the items shown, but is the total given in the original report. 658 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. The number and m e m b e r s h i p of trade unions in New York City and for the State exclusive of New York City for the years ending September 30, 1898 to 1905, are shown in the following table: NUMBER AND MEMBERSHIP OF TR AD E UNIONS IN NEW Y O R K C IT Y AND OTHER LOCALITIES IN THE STATE, Y EA R S ENDING SEPTEM BER £0,1898 TO 1905. Number of unions in— Year ending September 30— 1898................................................................ 1899................................................................ 1900................................................................ 1901................................................................ 1902................................................................ 1903................................................................ 1904................................................................ 1905................................................................ New Y ork City. 440 477 502 515 579 653 670 667 Other localities. 647 843 1,133 1,356 1,650 1,930 1,834 1,735 The State. 1,087 1,320 1,635 1,871 2,229 2,583 2,504 2,402 Membership of unions in— New Y ork City. 125,429 141,687 154,504 174,022 198,055 244,212 254,719 251,277 Other localities. 45,638 67,333 90,877 102,119 131,046 151,386 136,957 131,959 The State. 171,067 209,020 245, £81 276,141 329,101 395,598 391,676 383,236 OHIO. Twenty-ninth Annual Report o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics o f the State o f Ohio, for the year 1905 . M. D. Ratchford, Commissioner. 620 pp. The subjects presented in this report are: Laws governing the labor bureau, and recent court decisions relating to labor, 25 pages; manufactures, 326 pages; prison labor, 5 pages; coal mining, 213 pages; free public employment offices, 17 pages; list of bureaus of labor in the United States, 3 pages. M a n u f a c t u r e s .— Tables are given for 1904, showing, by industries for each of the five principal cities, the remaining cities and villages, and totals for the State, the number of establishments reported, cap ital invested, value of goods manufactured, amount paid for rent, taxes, and insurance; amount of wages paid, number of employees and of salaried office help; number of males and females employed; number of persons employed, b y occupations; average number of days worked, average daily wages, average yearly earnings, and hours of labor. Other tables show, by industries, the number in each occu pation affected by a change of wages during the year. The 7,761 establishments from which returns were received for 1904 reported an invested capital of $405,832,627; goods produced or manufactured to the value of $720,662,642.75. Wages paid 268,716 males and 53,562 females, or a total of 322,278 employees, aggregated $164,316,934.90, and salaries aggregating $35,179,399.20 were paid to 32,498 employed as office helpers, etc. During the year 22,368 per sons received an average increase in wages of 0.5 per cent, and 21,322 persons suffered an average reduction in wages of 1.8 per cent. The number of establishments reporting in 1904 was 200 less than in 1903; the value of manufactured products was $38,376,916.50 below that of 1903, and the amount paid in wages decreased $8,168,342.79. REPORTS OF STATE BUREAUS OF LABOR---- OHIO. 659 The aggregate invested capital exceeded that reported for 1903 by $19,937,302, and the salaries paid superintendents, office help, etc., showed an increase of $1,335,203.88. P r i s o n L a b o r . — In the twelve penal and reformatory institutions investigated there were found 5,151 prisoners, of whom 2,220 were employed in productive labor, 2,733 in unproductive labor, and 198 were idle. Tables are given showing the class of goods or wares manufactured, systems of labor, and number o f prisoners engaged in each trade compared with the number of free laborers engaged in like industries in the State. C o a l M i n i n g .— Tables are given b y counties showing mines report ing, average employees, capital invested, rent, taxes and insurance paid, wages and salaries paid, value of output, etc. The following comparative table presents a summary of these sta tistics for the years 1903 and 1904: STATISTICS OF COAL MINING IN OHIO, 1903 AND 1904. Items. 1904. 1903. 575 Number ol mines reporting............................................. Average number of employees (m onthly)..................... 36,460 901 Average number of salaried employees (m onthly)....... Invested capital................................................................. $32,854,018.00 Value of production.......................................................... $28,135,893.33 Amount paid for rent, taxes, and insurance................. $888,580.30 Amount of wages paid...................................................... $19,113,466.75 $900,286.92 Amount of salaries paid................................................... Average days worked per employee................................ 191 $2.60 Average daily wages per employee................................. Average yearly earnings per employee........................... $496.60 8 Average hours of daily w ork..........„ ............................... Number affected by advance in wages........................... 26,950 Number affected by reduction in wages......................... 12.5 Average per cent advance in wages................................ Average per cent reduction in w ages.................................... Increase + , decrease —. 596 + 21 37,004 + 544 1,014 4* 113 $36,661,245.00 +$3,807,227.00 $24,703,137.47 -$3,432,755.86 $778,159.40 - $110,420.90 $18,718,249.43 - $395,217.32 $984,220.56 + $83,933.64 173 18 $2.46 v $0.14 $71.02 $425.58 8 64 26,886 29,343 + 29,343 9.4 3.1 5.6 + 5.6 F r e e P u b l i c E m p l o y m e n t O f f i c e s .— In addition to an itemized statement of the expense of each office for the year ending October 31, 1905, and text reports from each of the five offices, tables are given showing by years the results of the operation of each office from its organization, and for each week of the year ending October 26, 1905. The following table shows the operations of the five free public employment offices of the State for the year ending October 26, 1905: OPERATIONS OF FREE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT OFFICES, Y E A R ENDING OCTOBER 26, 1905. Situations wanted. | City. Males. Females. Help wanted. Males. Females. Positions secured. Males. Females. Cleveland....... - ............................................. Columbus..................................................... Cincinnati..................................................... D ayton......................................................... Toledo........................................................... 2,078 1,943 3,071 3,292 2,832 2,565 2,561 1,993 2,005 1,256 2,306 2,230 2,684 3,416 2,971 3,076 3,751 2,387 5,275 1,629 1,629 1,808 2,665 3,014 1,223 2,299 2,341 1,714 1,937 1,020 T otal................................................... 13,216 10,380 13,607 16,118 10,339 9,311 660 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. Since the organization in 1890 of the five free public employment offices there has been a total of 406,920 applications for situations wanted, 355,753 applications for help wanted, and 240,865 positions secured. Of applications for situations 59.20 per cent were filled, and of applications for help 67.75 per cent were filled. The expenses of the five offices for the year ending October 31, 1905 (excluding salaries), were $2,250.89; of which the expenses of the Cleveland office were $407.52; the Columbus office, $416.05; the Cincinnati office, $515.77; the Dayton office, $454.99; and the Toledo office, $456.56. PENNSYLVANIA. Annual Report o f the Secretary o f Internal Affairs o f the Commonwealth o f Pennsylvania . Vol. X X X I I I , 1905. Part III, Industrial Statis tics. Robert C. Bair, Chief of Bureau. 622 pp. The following subjects are presented in this report: New legislation, 22 pages; comparative statistics of manufactures, 400 pages; statis tics of iron, steel, and tin-plate production, 24 pages; statistics of coal mining, 37 pages; strikes and lockouts, causes given for days lost in manufacturing industries, and comments on trade conditions in 1905, 20 pages; labor statistics, 43 pages; textile industries, 36 pages; collated summaries, 1896-1905, 27 pages. N e w L e g i s l a t i o n . — The text of a law regulating the employment of minors in anthracite coal mines or collieries, and also one regulating the employment, in all kinds of industrial establishments, of women and children emploj^ed at w^ages or salary, and to provide for the safety of all employees in certain nonindustrial buildings, etc., passed by the legislature in 1905, are reproduced. C o m p a r a t i v e S t a t i s t i c s o f M a n u f a c t u r e s .— In this chapter a series of tables is given showing for each of 84 manufacturing indus tries, capital invested, cost of basic materials, days in operation, persons employed, aggregate wrages, value of product, and other data for each year from 1896 to 1905, as reported by 710 identical establish ments. The following summary shoves the more important items: COM PARATIVE STATISTICS OF 710 IDEN TICAL MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS, 1896 TO 1905. Year. Capital in vested in plants and working capital. 1896................................................ $170,169,195 1897................................................ 173,405,857 178,588,674 1898..:.......................................... 1899................................................ 209,542,208 1900................................................ 225,955,539 1901................................................ 233,312,008 1902................................................ 237.915,740 1903................................................ 266,387,285 1904................................................ 306,507,455 1905................................................ 286,552,433 Per cent of Cost of basic Market value cost of basic Average days material of in operation. material. of product. value of product. $81,679,955 88,837,529 101,497,555 142,864,640 163,347,771 167,294,827 194,788,437 197,556,575 165,441,999 208,193,788 $169,806,501 182,572,176 217,514,078 287,635,100 325,161,818 339,027,496 388,806,566 390,224,148 334,343,735 400,311,210 48.1 48.7 47.1 49.6 50.2 49.3 50.0 50.6 49.5 52.0 267 286 286 289 289 292 293 290 286 296 REPORTS OF STATE BUREAUS OF LABOR---- PENNSYLVANIA. 661 COM PARATIVE STATISTICS OF 710 IDEN TICAL M ANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS, 1896 TO 1905—Concluded. Persons employed. Year. 122,138 127,461 141,819 163,683 175,501 183.183 194,945 203,838 183,833 202,401 1896........................ 1897........................ 1898........................ 1899........................ 1900........................ 1901........................ 1902........................ 1903........................ 1904........................ Average yearly earnings. Aggregate wages paid. $46,736,124 47,852,604 57,312,659 70,944,181 76,838,628 82,160,337 93,947,766 98,259,805 84,483,863 97,463,104 Average daily wages. Value of product per employee. $1.43 1.32 1.41 1.50 1.52 1.53 1.64 1.66 1.60 1.63 $1,390.28 1,432.37 1,533.74 1,754.05 1,852.76 1,850.76 1,994.44 1,914.38 1,818.74 1,977.81 $382.65 375.43 404.12 433.42 437.82 448.52 481.92 482.04 459.57 481.54 Per cent of wages of value of product. 27.5 26.2 26.4 24.7 23.8 24.3 24.1 25.2 25.3 24.3 i Other tables show the‘increase or decrease in the principal items for each year as compared with the next preceding year, and for 1905 compared with 1896; average yearly earnings, 1896 and 1905, and the difference in earnings in 77 industries in which an increase was reported and in 7 industries in which a decrease was reported; aver age yearly and daily earnings of males, females, and minors in 1905, by industries. I r o n , S t e e l , a n d T i n - P l a t e P r o d u c t i o n .— The following sum mary statements show the more important items for the year 1905 relating to the production of pig iron, steel, rolled iron and steel, and tin plate: PIG IRON. Capital invested........................................................................................................... $133,136,135 Gross tons of production............................................................................................ 10, 570, 803 Realized value............................................................................................................. $162, 716,176 Value of basic material.............................................................................................. $81,370,127 Average days in operation........................................................................................ 330 Total employees........................................................................................................... 16,747 Aggregate wages paid................................................................................................. $10, 502, 928 Average yearly earnings............................................................................................ $628. 94 Average daily wages....................... ................. ......................................................... $1. 91 Cost of labor per ton................................................................................................... $1.00 Tonnage per man per day........................................................................................ 1. 91 STEEL. Gross tons of production: Bessemer............................................................................................................ Open-hearth, acid process........................................................................... Open-hearth, basic process.......................................................................... Crucible and other processes...................................................................... 4,494,268 778,434 5, 323,182 82, 951 Total................................................................................................................ 10, 678, 835 ROLLED IRON AND STEEL. Capital invested.......................................................................................................... $275,728,193 Gross tons of production: Rails.................. Iron and steel structural shapes................................................................ 304b — N o. 70— 07------ 13 1,113,841 1,389,709 662 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Gross tons of production— Continued. Plates and sheets (« )....................................................................................... Cut nails and spikes............................. ......................................................... Other rolled products.................................................................................... 2,310,478 34,212 4,361,820 Total................................................................................................................ 9,210,060 Value of product (not including the tin-plate works).................................... $285, 248,007 Adult male employees (not including those in tin-plate works)................ I l l , 983 Total employees (not including those in tin-plate works)............................ 113,295 Aggregate wages paid adult male employees..................................................... $70, 612,050 Aggregate wages paid all employees.................................................................... $70,943, 628 Average days in operation.....................................................................1................. 297 Average yearly earnings of adult male employees.......................................... $630.58 Average yearly earnings of all employees.......................................................... $626.19 Average daily wages of adult male employees.................................................. $2.12 Average daily wages of all employees.................................................................. $2.11 Average value per to m ............................................................................................. $30.97 Cost of labor per ton................................................................................................... $7.70 TIN PLATE (BLACK-PLATE W O R K S ). Capital invested (19 plants)..................................................................................... $8,734,180 Pounds of production of black plate: Tinned................................................................................................................ Not tinned............................................... : ....................................................... 599,281,700 28,838, 659 Total................................................................................................................ 628,120,359 Value of product.......................................................................................................... Adult male employees............................................................................................... Total employees.......................................................................................................... Aggregate wages paid adult male employees..................................................... Aggregate wages paid all employees.................................................................... Average days in operation........................................................................................ Average yearly earnings of adult male employees.......................................... Average yearly earnings of all employees.......................................................... Average daily wages of adult male employees.................................................. Average daily wages of all employees.................................................................. $19, 966, 608 7,967 8,280 $5', 166, 395 $5,269,152 269 $648.47 $636.37 $2.41 $2.36 TIN PLATE (DIPPING W O R K S ). Capital invested (3 plants)....................................................................................... Pounds of production of tin and terne plate..................................................... Value of product...................................................................... *.................................. Male employees............................................................................................................ Total employees........................................................................................................... Aggregate wages paid male employees................................................................. Aggregate wages paid all employees.................................................................... Average days in operation........................................................................................ Average yearly earnings of male employees...................................................... Average yearly earnings of all employees.......................................................... Average daily wages of male employees.............................................................. Average daily wages of all employees.................................................................. a Including 294,172 tons $1, 309,080 33,068,950 $1,560,582 204 247 $114,181 $126,912 288 $559.75 $517.86 $1.94 $1.80 of black plate and other sheets made by the tin-plate works. REPORTS OF STATE BUREAUS OF LABOR---- PENNSYLVANIA. 663 S t a t i s t i c s o f C o a l M i n i n g . — The following tables give a statis tical summary of the operations of the anthracite and bituminous coal mines in the State for 1905: AN TH RACITE AND BITUMINOUS COAL OPERATIONS, 1905. Items. Number of mines in operation............................................................................ Anthracite coal. 291 I 40,186 Inside w orkm en.................................................................................................. 72,536 Outside w orkm en............................................................................................... 54,744 Aggregate wages paid to miners....................................................................... $27,742,023 Aggregate wages paid to inside workmen........................................................ $35,964,046 Aggregate wages paid to outside workmen.................................................... $23,472,188 Average days in operation................................................................................. 232 $520.57 Average yearly earnings (all em ployees)........................................................ 11 Average yearly earnings (miners o n ly )........................................................... $690.34 $2.24 Average daily wages (all em ployees)............................................................... $2.97 Average daily wages (miners o n ly ).................................................................. 61,634,226 Number of tons mined and marketed............................................................... Market value of product on board cars............................................................. $143,048,605 Market value of product at mines..................................................................... (») 1,533.72 Average tons mined per miner per year........................................................... 6.61 Average tons mined per miner per clay............................................................. Number of coke ovens......................................................................................... Tons of coked coal................................................................................................ M i n e r s .............................................................................................................................................................................................. ! « Average number of days coke workers were employed was 261. Bituminous coal. 1,166 102,216 23,743 16,148 $50,387,074 $12,220,620 $8,411,296 a 225 $502.58 $491.29 $2.21 $2.18 116,263,504 $104,231,121 1,137 5 38,959 27,041,826 &Not reported. In addition to the above coal-mining operations, there were 53 plants employing 1,490 persons, engaged in washing coal from culm banks at the mines. The plants washed 2,904,900 tons of coal, which had a market value of $1,818,062. Wages paid in this industry aggregated $574,329, making the average yearly earnings per employee $397. There were also 48 plants engaged in dredging coal from the Susquehanna and Schuylkill rivers, giving an average employment of 200 days to 174 men, to whom wages amounting to $33,320 were paid. There were 84,924 tons of coal raised, having a market value of $73,849. S t r i k e s a n d L o c k o u t s . — Data relative to strikes and lockouts are reported for several industries. The information given showTs for each strike reported the time lost, cause of dispute, method of settle ment, result, and number of persons involved. L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s . — Statistics are presented for the different industries, showing the number of establishments making returns and data relative to employees as follows: Number, number owning their own homes, average rent paid by those renting, hours of daily work, and nationality. Returns from 47 pig-iron companies showed that 429 working people owned their homes, that the average annual rental for those paying rent was $75, and that the average hours the furnaces were in blast were 148 per w^eek; that of the 8,665 persons for whom nationality was reported 3,373 were Americans. Returns from 156 iron and steel companies showed that 3,393 working people owned their homes, that the average annual rental for those renting was $127, that the average hours of work per week were 65, and that of 664 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. the 42,004 employees for whom nationality was reported 23,468 were Americans. Returns from 116 anthracite coal companies reporting showed that 5,401 working people owned their homes, that the average annual rental for those renting was $78, that the average weekly working hours were 53, and that of the 92,485 employees for whom nationality was reported 25,905 were Americans. In the bituminous coal mining 479 companies, employing 74,461 persons over 16 years of age, report 6,802 men as owning their homes, and 469 companies repqrt that the average annual rental for those paying rent was $65. The average working hours per week, as reported by 429 companies, were 49. Of the 55,583 persons for whom nation ality was reported 17,347 were Americans. T e x t i l e I n d u s t r i e s .— Returns made in 1905 b y 487 establish ments engaged in the textile industries in Philadelphia showed the average number of employees to be 54,834 (22,583 males, 26,733 females, and 5,518 children), to whom were paid an aggregate of $22,571,872 in wages. The average yearly earnings were as follows: Of all employees, $411.64; males, $5 5 5 .0 2 ; females, $339.60, and of children, $173.84. The establishments were in operation during the year an average of 281 days, the average hours of labor per week were 58, and the total value of product (not including 40 dyeing, bleaching, and finishing plants not reporting value of product) was $99,671,003. Of the 24,244 persons employed in these industries for whom nation ality was reported 16,375 were Americans. RECENT FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS. AUSTRIA. Die Arbeitseinstellungen und Aussperrungen in Osterreich wahrend des Jahres 1904- Die Arbeitseinstellungen und Aussperrungen in Osterreich wahrend des Jahres 1905 . Herausgegeben vom k. k. Arbeitsstatistischen 564 pp. Amte im Handelsministerium. 394 p p .; These are the eleventh and twelfth annual reports of the Austrian Government on strikes and lockouts. The information, which is compiled by the Austrian bureau of labor statistics, is given in the form of an analysis and six tables, showing for the years 1904 and 1905, respectively: ( 1) Strikes according to geographical distribu tion; (2 ) strikes according to industries; (3) general summary of strikes; (4) comparative summary of strikes for the ten-year period ending with the yeai covered by the report; (5) details for each strike in the year covered b^ the report; (6 ) details for each lockout in the year covered by the report. An appendix to each volume gives a brief review of industrial and labor conditions in Austria, statistics of trade unions, and notes concerning the strikes and lockouts reported in the preceding pages of the report. S t r i k e s i n 1904.— The number of strikes, the number of estab lishments affected, and the number of strikers in 1904 were consid erably above the average for the eleven-year period beginning with 1894. There were 606,629 days lost by the persons directly affected in 1904 on account of strikes, or 21.2 per cent more than in the pre ceding year. During the year there were 414 strikes, which affected 2,704 establishments. Of a total of 99,828 employees in the estab lishments affected, 64,227 participated in the strikes and 9,301 others were thrown out of employment on account of them, the strikers representing 64.3 per cent of the total number of employees in the establishments affected. The average number of strikers in each strike was 155. Of the total strikers, 90.9 per cent were males and 9.1 per cent were females. After the strikes 58,907 strikers were reemployed and 2,817 new employees took the places formerly occu pied by strikers. 665 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, 666 The following table shows, by industries, the number of strikes, establishments affected, strikers and others thrown out of employ ment, etc., during the year 190*4: STRIK ES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1904. Strikers. Industry. Mining and metallurgical. . . Quarrying, products of * stone, clay, glass, etc......... Metal working........................ Machinery, instruments, ap paratus, etc......................... W ood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, etc......... Leather, hides, hair, feath ers, etc................................. Textiles................................... Upholstering and paper hanging................................ Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc......................................... Paper...................................... Foods and drinks (including tobacco) ............................. Chemical products............... Building trades...................... Printing.................................. Commerce............................... Transportation...................... Other....................................... Total............................. Estab Total Strikes. em lish ments. ployees. Num ber. Percent of total em ployees. Others thrown Strikers New employ out of ees reem em ployed. after ploy strikes. ment. 36 192 30,091 19,614 65.2 777 18,952 243 38 -44 122 74 7,923 6,672 .4,788 4,211 60.4 63.1 339 554 4,381 3,873 325 137 27 27 4,447 1,400 31.5 145 1,260 77 41 177 2,207 1,756 79.6 13 1,514 110 8 37 10 48 431 6,994 363 3,483 84.2 49.8 16 329 332 3,270 13 77 1 3 20 20 100.0 35 10 210 33 3,595 1,166 2,582 909 71.8 78.0 226 74 2,444 891 69 14 31 4 80 8 6 7 1 359 4 457 10 81 896 1 2,131 929 25,896 296 2,144 4,816 70 1,408 912 15,947 108 2.014 120 4,700 12 66.1 98.2 61.6 36.5 93.9 97.6 17.1 6,614 10 50 25 9 1,116 894 13,169 98 1,994 4,688 11 231 12 1,477 5 12 15 414 2,704 99,828 64,227 64.3 9,301 58,907 2,817 20 The building trades had the largest number of strikes (80) in 1904, while the largest number of strikers (19,614) was in the mining and metallurgical group of industries. Next in importance with regard to the number of strikers involved was the group of building trades with 15,947 persons. Of all the strikers during the year, 55.4 per cent were engaged in these two groups of industries. 667 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----AUSTRIA. The following table shows the causes of the strikes for 1904, by industries: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES AND CAUSES, 1904. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the industry totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for the preceding table.] For Against dis For For charge Against dis Against Against For change in reduc obnox reduc in obnox Other of fore-| ious charge of tion of crease method tion men, ious causes. of of em wages. wages. of pay hours. work treat rules. ploy ment. men, ment. ees. etc. Industry. Mining and metallurgical........ Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc....................... Metal working.......................... Machinery, instruments, ap paratus, etc........................... W ood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, etc. . ....... Leather, hides, hair, feathers, etc........................................... Textiles..................................... Upholstering and paper hang ing........................................... Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc. Paper......................................... Foods and drinks (including tob a cco )................................ Chemical products................... Building trades........................ P rinting................................... Commerce.................................. Transportation........................ Other......................................... Total................................ 2 15 1 2 3 1 16 23 3 1 14 1 1 6 10 3 2 15 17 6 1 4 4 19 2 2 1 1 1 26 5 1 6 3 1 2 22 1 16 3 51 3 3 3 213 3 5 10 4 7 5 3 6 3 7 1 2 6 4 4 1 1 2 5 2 6 2 1 4 2 1 7 25 1 3 3 1 5 91 2 4 1 1 1 I i 1 20 6 3 5 1 18 2 1 3 5 5 2 2 4 70 30 1 43 As in previous years, the most frequent causes of strikes were the demands for increased wages and for reduction of hours. The de mand for increased wages alone or in conjunction ^ith other demands figured in 213 strikes, and that for reduction of hours in 91 strikes. The following table shows the results of strikes, by industries: STRIKES, BY INDUSTRIES AND RESULTS, 1904. Strikes. Industry. Mining and metallurgical.................. Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc........................................... Metal working..................................... Machinery, instruments, appara tus, etc.............................................. Wood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, etc................................... Leather, hides, hair, feathers, e tc ... Textiles................................................ Upholstering and paper hanging___ Wearing apparel, cleaning, e tc......... Paper....................................... ............. Foods and drinks (including tobacco) Chemical products.............................. Building trades.................................... Printing .............................................. Commerce............................................ Transportation.................................... Other.................................................... T otal........................................... Strikers. Suc Suc Suc ceeded Suc ceeded Failed. Total. Failed'. Total. ceeded. ceeded. partly. partly. 2 12 22 36 586 3,171 15,857 19,614 16 16 14 17 8 11 38 44 2,553 351 1,629 2,647 606 1,213 4,788 4,211 1 17 9 27 44 1,125 231 1,400 1,158 316 1,948 20 1,729 -410 1,242 70 8,909 32 2,009 136 12 251 23 944 349 274 64 798 5,102 1,756 363 3,483 20 2,582 909 1,408 912 15; 947 108 2,014 4,700 12 26,563 25,739 11 1 7 12 5 8 1 15 4 2 101 17 5 18 1 17 1 12 1 39 4 5 3 1 184 13 2 12 6 4 11 2 m 1 2 129 41 8 37 1 35 10 31 4 80 8 6 7 1 414 347 24 591 504 225 102 44 1,936 76 4,542 11,925 5 22 64,227 668 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Of the total number of strikes in 1904, 24.4 per cent succeeded, 44.4 per cent succeeded partly, and 31.2 per cent failed. Of the total number of strikers, 18.6 per cent were engaged in strikes which succeeded, 41.3 per cent in strikes which succeeded partly, and 40.1 per cent in strikes which failed. The following table shows the results of the strikes in 1904, accord ing to their duration: STRIKES, B Y DU RATIO N AND RESULTS, 1904. Strikes. Days of duration. 1 to 5 .................................................... 6 to 10................................................... 11 to 15.................................................. 16 to 20.................................................. 21 to 25.................................................. 26 to 30.................................................. 31 to 40................................................. 41 to 50 ................................................ 51 to 100................................................ 63 21 9 2 5 1 101 nr over .............. .................................... T otal.......................................... Strikers. Suc Suc Suc ceeded Suc ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. Failed. Total. ceeded. partly. partly. 101 85 39 19 9 5 5 7 3 4 8 70 17 13 6 6 5 4 1 5 2 218 77 41 17 16 10 11 4 10 10 8,915 2,501 165 30 252 184 129 414 11,925 62 8,144 10,785 1,629 1,640 446 846 354 198 1,144 1,377 4,888 8,403 4,302 423 1,991 853 4,500 11 340 28 21,947 21,689 6,096 2,093 2,689 1,699 4,854 209 1,546 1,405 26,563 25,739 64,227 S t r i k e s i n 1905.— The number of strikes, the number of estab lishments affected, and the number of strikers in 1905 were not only considerably above the average for the twelve-year period beginning with 1894, but also showed a marke'd increase over the preceding year. There were 1,151,310 days lost by the persons directly affected in 1905 on account of strikes, or 89.8 per cent more than in the year 1904. During the year there were 686 strikes, which affected 3,803 establish ments. Of a total of 156,596 employees in the establishments affected, 99,591 participated in the strikes and 11,340 others were thrown out of employment on account of them, the strikers rep resenting 63.6 per cent of the total number of employees in the estab lishments affected. The average number of strikers in each strike was 145. Of the total strikers, 84.4 per cent were males and 15.6 per cent were females. After the strikes, 92,922 strikers were reem ployed and 3,276 new employees took the places formerly occupied b y strikers. FOREIGN 669 STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS— AUSTRIA, The following table shows, by industries, the number of strikes, establishments affected, strikers and others thrown out of employ ment, etc., during the year 1905: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1905. Strikers. Industry. Strikes. Estab Total lish em ments. ployees. Num ber. Others New Strikers employ Per cent j thrown reem ees after out of of total employ ployed. strikes. em ployees. ment. 43 45 25,031 10,100 40.3 911 9,738 96 76 65 235 419 13,692 12,773 9,832 7,406 71.8 58.0 466 597 9,168 6,595 313 391 Mining and metallurgical___ Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc......... Metal working....................... Machinery, instruments, ap paratus, etc........................ W ood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, etc......... Leather, hides, hair, feath ers, etc................................. Textiles................................... Upholstering and paper hanging................................ Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc......................................... Paper....................................... Foods and drinks (including tobacco) ............................. Chemical products............... Building trades...................... Printing............................. *... Commerce............................. . Transportation...................... Other....................................... 4 49 46 13 589 114 30 10 188 12 10 21 1 215 10 .810 19 92 685 1 T o ta l..»........................ 686 3,803 45 45 9,648 4,660 48.3 197 4,481 78 53 404 4,083 67.0 237 2,218 340 15 54 17 54 782 11,263 2,736 1 1 397 ! 5,866 50.8 52.1 18 1,730 269 5,603 115 130 131 99 75.6 95 4 9,490 5,819 7,525 4,502 79.3 77.4 76 54 7,209 4,108 171 120 7,347 1,361 48,730 625 1,228 4,578 15 4,442 1,211 35,024 426 994 4,359 12 60.5 89.0 71.9 68.2 80.9 95.2 80.0 15 38 6,994 4,292 1,164 32,732 337 684 4,217 12 129 49 1,085 54 160 41 156,596 99,591 63.6 11,340 92,922 3,276 4 3 The group of building trades had the largest number of strikes, strikers, and establishments affected; of the total strikers during 1905, 35,024, or 35.2 per cent, were persons engaged in this industry. Next in importance with regard to the number of strikers involved was the group of mining and metallurgical industries, with 10,100 persons. Of all the strikers during the year, 45.3 per cent were engaged in these two groups of industries. 670 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, The following table shows the causes of the strikes for 1905, by industries: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES AND CAUSES, 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the industry totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for the preceding table.] Against For reduc in tion crease of of wages. wages. Industry. Mining and metallurgical........ Quarrying, products of stone, clav, glass, etc....................... Metal working.......................... Machinery, instruments, ap paratus, etc........................... W ood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, etc........... Leather, hides, hair, feathers, etc........................................... Textiles...................................... Upholstering and paper hang ing........................................... Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc. Paper......................................... Foods and drinks (including tobacco) ................................ Chemical products................... Building trades........................ Printing..................................... Commerce.................................. Transportation........................ Other......................................... T otal................................ For 1 change, For in reduc meth tion od of of pay hours. ment. For dis charge Against of fore obnox ious men, treat work ment. men, etc. Against dis Against charge obnox Other ious causes. of em ploy rules. ees. 1 22 1 1 1 6 3 9 7 2 46 35 1 8 31 5 1 12 15 4 4 1 3 26 21 2 1 8 2 2 36 18 4 1 7 6 2 2 g 28 4 6 1 2 3 13 3 2 7 1 1 2 30 6 3 7 4 4 5 1 3 2 2 45 3 1 6 2 9 1 1 1 16 52 1 1 1 2 24 18 7 115 3 6 13 1 402 1 7 2 29 7 3 3 151 1 7 1______ 1 ! ! 1 i............ 16 •i 4 1 ! 1 ! 46 1 i 5 3 ! 130 1 As in previous years, the most frequent causes of strikes were the demands for increased wages and for reduction of hours. The demand for increased wages alone or in conjunction with other demands figured in 402 strikes, and that for reduction of hours in 151 strikes. The following table shows the results of strikes, by industries: STRIK ES, B Y IN DU STRIES AND RESULTS, 1905. Strikers. Strikes. Industry. Mining and metallurgical.................. Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc................ .......................... Metal working..................................... Machinery, instruments, apparatus, etc...................................................... W ood working, caoutchouc, carved materials, e t c .................................. Leather, hides, hair, feathers, etc___ Textiles................................................ Upholstering and paper hanging___ Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc.......... Paper.................................................... Foods and drinks (including tobacco) Chemical prod ucts............................. Building trades.................................... Printing.............................................. Commerce............................................ Transportation.................................... Other.................................................... Total Suc Suc Suc Suc ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. partly. partly. 2 28 13 43 769 7,736 1,595 10,100 18 15 40 35 18 15 76 65 897 1,397 7,830 4,495 1,105 1,514 9,832 7,406 5 32 8 45 436 3,777 447 4,660 53 15 54 4 46 13 30 10 188 12 10 21 1 281 68 722 32 707 60 1,551 2,013 164 4,083 67 5,316 4,278 2,750 1,211 24,243 87 859 2,361 12 442* 165 1,061 2,736 397 5,866 99 7,525 4,502 4,442 1,211 35,024 426 994 4,359 12 13 3 12 2 8 1 5 53 1 ~ 4 8 150 i 28 4 30 2 24 10 16 10 76 3 4 8 1 351 12 8 12 14 2 9 59 8 2 5 185 686 5,252 57 131 1,631 13,991 71,282 1,502 164 141 5,529 282 4 367 14,318 99,591 671 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS---- AUSTRIA. Of the total number of strikes in 1905, 21.8 per cent succeeded, 51.2 per cent succeeded partly, and 27 per cent failed. Of the total number of strikers, 14 per cent were engaged in strikes which suc ceeded, 71.6 per cent in strikes which succeeded partly, and 14.4 per cent in strikes which failed. The following table shows the results of the strikes in 1905, accord ing to their duration: STRIKES, B Y DU RATIO N AND RESULTS, 1905. Strikes. Strikers. SucSuc Suc eeeded Suc ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. Failed. Total. ceeded. 1partly. partly. Days of duration. 1 to 5..................................................... 6 to 10................................................... 11 to 15................................................. 16 to 20................................................. 21 to 25................................................. 26 to 30................................................. 31 to 40.................................................. 41 to 50.................................................. 51 to 100................................................ 101 or over............................................ T otal...... .................................... 95 28 9 5 2 1 5 2 2 1 157 64 33 22 19 9 14 8 19 6 114 25 10 10 7 5 3 4 4 3 366 117 52 37 28 15 22 14 25 10 8,724 1,476 1,029 1,297 78 14 1,315 28 27 3 24,286 8,840 10,017 5,163 9,156 1,142 1,862 1,481 5,984 3,351 8,004 2,273 789 1,629 451 99 135 192 * 643 103 41,014 12,589 11,835 8,089 9,685 1,255 3,312 1,701 6,654 3,457 150 1 1 351 185 686 13,991 71,282 14,318 99,591 S t r i k e s d u r i n g T w e l v e Y e a r s . — The summaries for the years 1894 to 1905 were compiled partly from the report for 1905 and partly from previous reports. The following table shows the number and extent of the strikes in Austria for the period during which the minis try of commerce has published reports on strikes: STRIKES, B Y YEARS, 1894 TO 1905. Year. 1894................................................................................ 1895................................................................................ 1896................................................................................ 1897................................................................................ 1898................................................................................ 1899................................................................................ 1900................................................................................ 1901............................................................................... 1902............................................................................... 1903................................................................................ 1904................................................................................ 1905................................................................................ Strikes. Estab lish ments Strikers. affected. 172 209 305 246 255 1 [ 311 303 270 264 324 414 | 686 2,542 874 1,499 851 885 1,330 1,003 719 1,184 1,731 2,704 3,803 67,061 28,652 66,234 38,467 39,658 54,763 105,128 24,870 37,471 46.215 64; 227 99,591 Per cent of strikers Days lost. of total em ployees. 69.5 59.9 65.7 59.0 59.9 60.2 67.3 38.5 44.0 60.5 64.3 63.6 795,416 300,348 899,939 368,098 323,619 1,029,937 3,483,963 157,744 284,046 500,567 606,629 1,151,310 The number of strikes and the number of strikers for each year for the twelve-year period are shown by industries in the following two tables: 672 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1S94 TO 1905. QuarryMa- | ing, chinery, , Wood, Mining products caout instru1 chouc, and Metal stone, working. ments, j carved metal ofclay, appaj lurgical. materi glass, ratus, i als, etc. etc. etc. j Year. 1894 .............. 1895.............. 1896.............. 1897.............. 1898.............. 1899.............. 1900.............. 1901.............. 1902.............. 1903.............. 1904.............. 1905.............. ! Total___ ! : 23 37 | 33 , 26 26 32 26 22 18 ! 34 44 !i 22 29 29 27 27 21 19 29 24 18 38 76 | ! 13 4 11 25 29 26 40 40 63 40 36 43 370 | 359 :; w j 6 14 20 13 24 13 15 15 13 27 45 6 5 1 386 1 ! 212 Textiles. Building trades. 1 i j 23 38 55 28 28 35 34 27 20 48 41 53 34 29 43 28 28 84 56 28 34 44 37 54 : 430 i 499 ! i i I | i 1 i i 1 Other. 1 Total. 1 ! ii ! ! 11 24 42 34 49 33 23 24 22 37 80 188 39 42 78 58 55 56 92 85 68 90 111 162 567 938 | ! 1 ! i j I 1 ' 172 209 305 246 255 311 303 270 264 324 414 686 3,759 STRIK ERS, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1S94 TO 1P05. Year. i i 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 Quarry ing, Mining products Metal and stone, working. metal- ofclay, lurgical. glass, etc. 1 Ma I ood, chinery, l| W caoutinstru i chouc, ments, carved appa ! materiratus, ]j als, etc. etc. ! i i i Textiles. ,; Building trades. i Other. .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 22,986 626 30,120 3,632 7,046 3,477 78,791 7,496 13,573 12,341 19,614 10,100 6,415 9,943 3,217 3,053 4,491 2,112 574 1,698 1,819 2,740 4,788 9,832 2,752 3,694 2,973 1,568 991 2,459 1,977 1,393 741 2,936 4,211 7,406 194 253 2,058 4,689 2,471 1,356 519 889 1,013 705 1,400 4,660 9,793 2,336 5,972 1,382 1,318 3,198 1,391 2,925 1,312 2,846 1,756 2,736 6,317 4,085 9,791 11,275 3,171 30,249 12,010 2,675 2,599 5,220 3,483 5,866 Total___ 209,802 50,682 33,101 20,207 36,965 96,741 14,975 5,361 5,434 4,995 13,961 7,842 4,849 3,214 10,476 9,645 15,947 35,024 1 131,72a Total. 67,061 28,652 66,234 38,467 39,658 54,763 105,128 24,870 37,471 46,215 64,227 99,591 3,629 2,354 6,669 7,873 6,209 4,070 5,017 4,580 5,938 9,782 13,028 23,967 93,116 672,337 i The causes of strikes for the twelve-year period are shown in the following table, the cause and not the strike being made the unit: STRIKES, B Y CAUSES, 1894 TO 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the yearly totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for the preceding tables.] Year. For change Against For in reduc increase tion of of wages. method wages. of pay ment. For reduc tion of hours. For dis charge of foremen, work men, etc. 1894........... 1895........... 1896........... 1897........... 1898........... 1899........... 1900........... 1901........... 1902........... 1603........... 1604........... 1905........... 23 19 28 26 33 29 26 28 28 30 22 24 53 89 140 116 124 143 152 116 127 151 213 402 5 6 8 7 8 5 6 7 7 6 5 3 151 !| 12 22 32 26 29 17 13 28 9 36 20 46 Total.. 316 1,826 73 761 | 290 19 31 67 47 54 73 69 46 | 52 | i 61 91 Against obnox ious treat ment. !1 Against i dis| charge ; of em: ployees. 5 2 5 13 9 5 10 4 2 ! 26 i!; 3 1 ; 35 :1 40 32 36 40 36 36 37 5i 70 130 66 574 Against i obnox j Other ious | causes. rules. 16 8 12 18 20 18 14 15 25 15 30 16 ' I 1 ; 207 | 31 37 34 45 39 40 53 33 36 33 43 52 476 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS— AUSTRIA. 6 73 The following table shows, for both strikes and strikers, during each year of the period, the results expressed in percentages: STRIKES, B Y RESULTS, 1894 TO 1905. Strikes. Year. Strikers. cent cent Per cent Per cent Per suc Per cent Number. Per suc Per cent Number. suc suc failed. ceeded failed. ceeded ceeded. ceeded. partly. partly. 1894............................. 1895............................. 1896............................. 1897............................. 1898............................. 1899............................. 1900............................. 1901............................. 1902............................. 1903............................. 1904............................. 1905............................. 172 209 305 246 255 311 303 270 264 324 414 686 25.0 26.8 21.0 17.5 18.8 15.4 20.2 20.7 19.7 17.3 24.4 21.8 27.9 24.9 36.4 37.0 41.2 45.0 44.9 36.3 39.0 43.5 44.4 51.2 47.1 48.3 42.6 45.5 40.0 39.6 34.9 43.0 41.3 39.2 31.2 27.0 67,061 28,652 66,234 38,467 39,658 54,763 105,128 24,870 37,471 46,215 64,227 99,591 9.2 12.8 4.6 15.7 8.4 10.2 4.7 20.1 13.8 10.0 18.6 14.0 37.3 60.7 62.8 47.8 66.4 72.0 85.5 47.8 52.7 68.0 41.3 71.6 53.5 26.5 32.6 36.5 25.2 17.8 9.8 32.1 33.5 22.0 40.1 14.4 Total.................... 3,759 20.7 41.7 37.6 672,337 10.9 62.3 26.8 L o c k o u t s . — There were 6 lockouts reported in 1904, 1 each being due to the attempts of employees to form a union, to the demand of employees for the abolition of piecework and for a nine-hour day, and to the demand for reduction of hours, while 3 were undertaken to force strikers in other departments to resume wrork. In 1905 there were 17 lockouts, of which 8 were undertaken to compel strikers to return to work, 3 were against unionism, 4 against demands of employees for increase of wages, and in 2 cases the lock outs were caused by cessation of work by the employees, without obtaining the permission of the employers. The summary relating to lockouts wras compiled from the reports of 1904 and 1905. The following table contains statistics of lockouts for the period 1894 to 1905: LOCKOUTS, B Y YEARS, 1894 TO 1905. Year. 1894................................................................................. 1895 .................................................................... 1896 .................................................................... 1897 .................................................................... 1898 .................................................................... 1899................................................................................. 1900................................................................................. 1901................................................................................. 1902................................................................................. 1903................................................................................. 1904................................................................................. 1905................................................................................. Lock outs. Estab Persons lishments locked involved. out. Per cent of per sons locked out of total em ployees. Persons locked out and reem ployed. 8 10 11 17 211 12 2,317 5,445 1,712 51.2 79.5 54.4 2,183 4,589 1,647 5 10 3 8 8 6 17 38 58 3 9 71 605 448 3,457 4,036 302 1,050 1,334 23,742 11,197 60.9 75.8 70.4 49.9 51.8 99.2 75.2 3,448 3,703 302 1,003 905 23,717 9,614 674 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. FRANCE. Statistique des Greves^et des Recours d la Concilation et d VArbitrage Survenus Pendant VAnnee 1905 . Direction du Travail, Ministere du Commerce, de lTndustrie et du Travail, xix, 684 pp. The present volume is the fifteenth of a series of annual reports on strikes and conciliation and arbitration issued by the French labor bureau. The information is presented in the same form as in previous reports. S t r i k e s . — During the year 1905 there were 830 strikes, involving 5,302 establishments, 177,666 strikers, and 18,146 other persons thrown out of work on account of strikes. Of the strikers, 144,127 were men, 26,606 were women, and 6,933 were children. The strikes caused a total loss of 2,522,030 working-days by strikers and 224,654 by other employees thrown out of work, or a total of 2,746,684 working-days. In 1904 there were 1,026 strikes, in which 271,097 strikers were involved and 37,943 other employees were thrown out of work, caus ing an aggregate loss of 3,934,884 working-days. The average number of days lost per striker in 1905 was 14, as compared with 12 in 1904. Of the 830 strikes in 1905, 604 involved but 1 establishment each, 86 involved from 2 to 5 establishments, 37 from 6 to 10 establishments, 50 from 11 to 25 establishments, 33 from 26 to 50 establishments, and 9 from 51 to 100 establishments. Of the remaining strikes, 10 involved over 100 establishments each, while for 1 strike the number of establishments could not be ascertained. In 677 strikes, all or a part of the striking employees were organized. The employers were organized in 337 strikes. Thirty-four workingmen’s unions and 9 employers’ associations were organized during the progress of or immediately following strikes. In 56 strikes regular aid was given by labor organizations to their striking members, and in some cases to strikers not members. Of the 830 strikes, 184, or 22.2 per cent,-involving 22,872 strikers, succeeded; 361 strikes, or 43.5 per cent, involving 125,016 strikers, succeeded partly, and 285 strikes, or 34.3 per cent, involving 29,778 strikers, failed. The percentage of strikers involved in the three classes of strikes was 12.9 per cent, 70.4 per cent, and 16.7 per cent, respectively. In 343 strikes, the striking employees were time workers, while in 209 they worked by the piece, and in the remaining 278, by both time and piece. The two tables following show, by groups of industries, the number of strikes, strikers, and establishments involved, according to the 6 75 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS---- FRANCE, results of strikes; also tlie days of work lost by all employees, and the number of strikers per 1,000 working people in each group o f ' industries: STRIKES AND ESTABLISHMENTS INVOLVED, B Y INDUSTRIES AND RESULTS, 1905. Succeeded partly. Succeeded. Industry. Strikes. Agriculture, forestry, and fish eries............................................ M i n i n g ....................................................................... Quarrying..................................... Foods and drinks......................... Chemical products (including t o b a c c o )................................... Paper and printing...................... Leather and hides........................ Textiles......................................... Wearing apparel,cleaning,etc... W ood working, carved mate rials, etc..................................... Building trades (woodwork)___ Metallurgical................................. Metal working, machinery, in struments, apparatus, etc....... Jewelry, gold and silver working. Stonecutting, products of stone, clay, glass, etc........................... Building trades (stone and earth w ork )............................... Transportation, commerce, e tc .. Total.................................... Failed. Total. Estab Estab Estab EstabIish- Strikes. lish Strikes. lish Strikes. lish ments. ments. ments. ments. 4 6 3 2 3 83 3 2 48 15 8 9 13 510 12 34 325 9 6 9 12 97 6 12 55 30 17 20 28 690 21 48 428 8 7 34 33 5 38 7 141 33 5 13 12 35 54 7 15 76 106 190 123 13 13 25 43 16 -13 13 30 64 32 34 32 94 130 28 66 96 277 287 160 6 6 3 13 80 3 23 6 : 7 284 74 16 17 6 4 19 16 7 46 18 14 316 170 26 17 1 26 1 49 1 132 1 46 2 170 2 112 4 328 4 4 9 22 114 7 7 33 130 22 24 369 73 54 33 1,071 516 27 30 50 176 103 87 1,400 765 184 934 361 | 3,599 285 769 830 5,302 STRIK ER S AND DAYS OF W O R K LOST B Y A L L EMPLOYEES THROW N OUT OF W O R K B Y STRIK ES IN 1905, B Y INDUSTRIES. Strikers in strikes which— Industry. Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries...................... Mining................................................................... . Quarrying................................................................ Foods and. drinks.................................................... Chemical products (including t o b a c c o )............ Paper and printing................................................. Leather and hides................................................... Textiles..... ............................................................. Wearing apparel, cleaning, e t c ............................ W ood working, carved materials, e t c ................. Building trades (woodwork)................................ Metallurgical........................................................... Metal working, machinery, instruments, appa ratus, etc.............................................................. Jewelry, gold and silver working......................... Stonecutting, products of stone, clay, glass, etc. Building trades (stone and earth w o r k )............. Transportation, commerce, etc............................ Strikers per 1,000 Total working strikers. people Suc Suc ceeded in each Failed. ceeded. partly. indus try, (a) Days of work lost by all em ployees thrown out of work. 527 239 1,568 135 1,725 1,270 4,377 2,816 322 206 604 836 2,127 3,878 1.179 1,677 3,549 1,107 8,559 18,722 1,132 14,050 366 2.179 995 1,048 1,979 1,080 1,419 514 3,2983,908 579 662 237 2,536 3,649 5,165 4,726 2,892 6,693 2,891 16,234 25,446 2,033 14,918 1,297 5,551 1.10 33.20 85.01 4.81 63.08 23.94 96.07 39.92 4.66 66.36 (*>) . 99.63 34,722 89,658 84,102 13,989 50,215 21,609 246,515 647,894 17,498 462,262 16,626 52,007 3,173 10 415 3,014 1,545 19,839 *3,528 55 25 12,392 293 2,436 25,605 5,241 8,600 26,540 90 13,100 31,055 15,386 63.90 4.41 89.90 C62.20 24.62 237,096 2,760 201,752 473,011 94,968 177,666 d 41.43 2,746,684 Total............................................................... 22,872 125,016 29,778 a Based on the census of 1896. &Included in building trades (stone, and earth work), c Including building trades (woodwork). d Based on the total number of Industrial working people in France. Of the 17 groups of industries above shown, 3, namely, textiles, metal working, etc., and building trades (stone and earth work), 676 BULXiETTK OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, together furnished 41.6 per cent of the total number of strikes dur ing the year. With regard to the number of strikers, these 3 groups furnished 46.7 per cent. The principal data as to strikes are shown by causes in the two tables following: STRIKES, BY CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for preceding tables.] Succeeded partly. Succeeded. Cause or object. Strikes. For increase of wages................ Against reduction of w ages___ For reduction of hours with present or increased wages. . . Relating to time, method, etc., of wage payments................... For or against modification of conditions of work.................. Against piecework...................... For or against modification of shop rules................................. For abolition or reduction of fines........................................... Against discharge or for rein statement of workmen, fore men, or superintendents......... For discharge of workmen, fore men, or superintendents......... For limitation of number of ap prentices................................... Relating to deductions from wages for support of insur ance and aid funds.................. Other causes................................ Failed. Total. EstabEstab Estab Estab lish- Strikes. lish Strikes. lish Strikes. lish ments. ments. ments. ments. 113 17 791 110 225 11 2,997 18 133 13 48 01 1,018 47 1,207 38 490 26 278 46 19 21 85 621 13 13 125 284 24 33 84 181 26 405 7 92 34 10 166 9 14 7 33 51 23 50 32 42 23 52 2 136 10 12 334 124 3 11 311 15 471 41 4,099 143 443 133 2,668 179 133 947 56 67 294 1,086 80 67 577 11 26 191 86 333 142 434 74 179 129 273 5 141 7 277 3 35 3 403 16 58 342 627 5 100 ST RIK ER S AND DAYS OF W O R K LOST B Y A L L EM PLOYEES TH ROW N OUT OF W O R K ON ACCOUNT OF STRIKES IN 1905, B Y CAUSES. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for preceding tables.] Strikers in strikes which— Cause or object. For increase of wages............................................................. Against reduction of wages................................................... For reduction of hours of labor with present or increased wages.................................................................................... Relating to timd, method, etc., of wage p aym ents.......... For or against modification of conditions of w o r k ........... Against piecework.................................................................. For or against modification of shop rules........................... For abolition or reduction of fines....................................... Against discharge or for reinstatement of workmen, fore men, or superintendents.................................................... For discharge of workmen, foremen, or superintendents . For limitation of number of apprentices............................. Relating to deductions from wages for support of insur ance and aid funds............................................................... Other causes............................................................................ Days of work lost by Total all em Suc strikers. ployees Suc ceeded Failed. thrown ceeded. partly. out of work. 13,941 2,011 92,502 1,305 17,529 2,080 123,972 5,396 2,025,595 97,333 20,947 11,749 2,459 22,421 16,999 15,334 27,019 6,515 9,254 3,923 8,917 3,341 4,952 13,457 2,960 8,038 7,733 2,566 52,918 31,721 14,673 34,382 33,649 21,241 1,137,040 549,961 500,208 695,175 929,297 553,443 4,392 11,145 4,544 5,487 12,848 30,458 29,629 6,417 40,337 53,622 10,961 490,188 479,820 145,567 4,355 7,806 767 16,570 499 10,603 5,621 34,979 90,605 458,968 The most frequent causes of strikes during the year were wage disputes, the demands for increased wages, alone or in conjunction 677 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----FRAN C E. with other demands, having figured in 471 strikes (56.7 per cent of the total number of strikes for the year), involving 123,972 strikers (69.8 per cent of the total number of strikers) and causing a loss of 2,025,595 working days, which includes days lost by persons other than strikers who were thrown out of employment on account of strikes. Of these demands, 113 were successful for 13,941 strikers, 225 partly successful for 92,502 strikers, and 133, involving 17,529 strikers, failed. The next two tables show, respectively, the results of strikes by duration and the duration and results of strikes by number of strikers involved. STRIKES, B Y DU RATIO N AND RESULTS, 1905. Strikes. Days of duration. Strikers. Suc Suc ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. partly. Suc ceeded. Suc ceeded partly. Failed. Total. 7 or under................................. 8 to 15........................................ 16 to 30...................................... 31 to 100.................................... 101 or over............................... 142 23 8 11 173 79 56 48 5 171 57 30 24 3 486 159 94 83 8 16,879 1,623 2,632 1,738 42,809 21,055 25,851 34,554 747 9,448 8,083 2,907 8,666 674 69,136 30,761 31,390 44,958 1,421 T otal............................... 184 361 285 830 22,872- 125,016 29,778 177,606 STRIKES IN WHICH EACH CLASSIFIED NUMBER OF STRIK ERS W ERE INVOLVED, B Y RESULTS AND DU RATION , 1905. Strikes Strikers involved in each strike. Strikes which lasted— Suc Suc ceeded Failed. Total. ceeded. partly. 7 days 8 to 15 16 to 30 31 to or un days. days. 100 der. days. 101 days or over. 25 or under............................ 26 to 50................................... 51 to 100................................. 101 to 200................................ 201 to 500................................ 501 to 1,000............................. 1,001 or over.......................... 45 40 45 23 22 8 1 65 70 77 49 61 * 16 23 I ll 67 41 35 20 7 4 221 177 163 107 103 31 28 162 107 100 53 45 13 6 34 41 26 20 26 5 7 17 14 20 17 16 4 6 8 14 15 15 14 8 9 1 2 2 2 1 T otal............................ 184 361 285 830 486 159 94 83 8 Considered by their duration, the largest percentage of successful strikes was found in strikes which las'ted 7 days or under. In strikes of this class 29.22 per cent were successful, while of those which continued for more than 7 days only 12.21 per cent terminated favorably to the strikers. In the classes 8 to 15 days and 16 to 30 days, the percentages of successful strikes were 14.47 and 8.51, respectively. Of strikes lasting more than 30 days, 12.09 per cent were successful. The following table gives a summary of the most important strike statistics for each of the years 1894 to 1905. The figures for the years 1894 to 1904 have been compiled from previous reports and those for 1905 from the present report. 304 b — No. 70— 07------ 14 678 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. STRIKES, B Y Y EA R S, 1894 TO 1905. Year. Strikes. 1894.......... 1895.......... 1896.......... 1897.......... 1898.......... 1899.......... 1900.......... 1901.......... 1902.......... 1903.......... 1904.......... 1905.......... Estab lish ments. 391 1,731 1,298 405 476 2,178 356 2,568 368 1,967 4,288 739 902 10,253 523 6,970 512 | 1,820 3,246 567 1i 1,026 17,250 5,302 830 1 Strikers in strikes Aggregate Strikes which— which— days of work lost Strikers. by employ Suc Suc ees thrown Suc Suc ceeded ceeded Failed. ceeded. Failed. out of ceeded. partly. partly. work. 54,576 45,801 49,851 68,875 82,065 176,772 222,714 111,414 212,704 123,151 271,097 177,666 1,062,480 617,469 644,168 780,944 1,216,306 3,550,734 3,760,577 1,862,050 4,675,081 2,441,944 3,934,884 2,746,684 84 100 117 68 75 180 205 114 111 122 297 184 129 117 122 122 123 282 360 195 184 222 394 361 178 188 237 166 170 277 337 214 217 223 335 285 12,897 8,565 11,579 19,838 10,594 21,131 24,216 9,364 23,533 12,526 53,555 22,872 24,784 20,672 17,057 28,767 32,546 124,767 140,358 44,386 160,820 89,736 168,034 125,016 16,895 16,564 21,215 20,270 38,925 30,874 58,140 57,664 28,351 20,889 49,508 29,778 C o n c i l i a t i o n a n d A r b i t r a t i o n .— During the year recourse to the law of December 27, 1892, relating to the conciliation and arbitra tion (°) of labor disputes, was had in 246 disputes. In 16 cases recourse was had to the law before entire cessation of work had occurred, in 3 of which the demands of the employees were acceded to, in 3 cases a compromise was effected, and in 4 cases the employees receded from their demands. In 2 cases, upon the refusal of the employers to present themselves, strikes were declared,, resulting in 1 compromise and 1 failure. In the remaining 4 cases committees of conciliation were formed, but in none of these was a strike averted. The number of disputes in which the application of the law was requested in 1905 is equal to 29.64 per cent of the number of strikes that actu ally occurred during the year. During the preceding twelve-year period such recourse was had in a number of disputes, equal to 23.97 per cent o f the total strikes for the period. Requests for the applica tion of the law during 1905 were made by employees in 88 disputes, by employers in 4 disputes, and by employees and employers united in 6 disputes. In the 148 other disputes in which recourse was had to the law the initiative was taken by justices of the peace. As for results, it was found that 7 strikes had terminated by agree ment between employers and employees before committees of con ciliation were formed. The offer of conciliation was rejected in 68 of the 239 remaining disputes, the rejection coming from employers in 51 cases, from the employees in 8 cases, and from both employers and employees in 9 cases. In 10 of the 68 eases in which conciliation was rejected the dispute was terminated by the employees withdrawing their demands or accepting concessions previously offered, while in the 58 other cases strikes were declared or continued. Committees of conciliation were constituted for the settlement of the remaining 171 disputes. Ninety-six of these disputes were a For the provisions of this law see Bulletin of the Department of Labor, No. 25, pp. 854-856. 679 FOREIGN* STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----FRAN CE. settled directly by such committees, and of the 75 disputes remain ing 7 were settled by arbitration and 14 were settled by the parties themselves, after having appeared without success before commit tees of conciliation. Strikes were declared or continued after the failure of conciliation and arbitration in the 54 remaining disputes. The following is a summary statement in regard to (Jisputes in which recourse was had to the law concerning conciliation and arbi tration during 1905 and for the preceding twelve years, taken collectively: SUMMARY OF CASES IN WHICH RECOURSE WAS HAD TO THE LAW CONCERNING CONCILIATION AND A R B ITR A T IO N , 1893 TO 1904 AND 1905. 1893 to 1904. Item. 1905. Total number of strikes.................................................................................................... Disputes in which recourse was had to the law of 1892................................................ 6,893 1,652 830 246 Disputes settled: Before the creation of committees of conciliation............................................... After refusal of request for conciliation............................................................... Directly by committees of conciliation...................... ......................................... By arbitration......................................................................................................... Directly by the parties, after having had recourse to conciliation.................. 90 82 462 62 41 7 10 96 7 14 Total cases settled through the application of the law .................................. 737 134 Strikes resulting or continuing: After refusal of request for conciliation............................................................... After failure of recourse to conciliation and arbitration................................... 533 382 58 54 Total cases of failure after application of the law........................................... 915 112 The above summary shows that of 246 disputes considered in 1905, 134 were settled directly or indirectly through the application of the law of 1892, and in the case of 112 the recourse to the law proved fruitless. Of the 134 disputes settled, 19 were favorable to the demands of the employees, 97 resulted in a compromise, and 18 were unfavorable to the employees. In the 112 disputes which continued after the failure of attempts at conciliation and arbitration the employees succeeded in 9, partly succeeded in 60, and failed in 43 cases. GERMANY. Streiks und Aussperrungen im Jdhre 1905. lichen Statistischen Amt. Rearbeitet im Kaiser- 558 pp. This is the seventh annual report on strikes and lockouts issued by the German imperial statistical bureau. The report contains analyses and summaries of the strikes and lockouts in 1905, copies of schedules of inquiry, an outline of the methods pursued by the bureau in the collection and compilation of strike and lockout data, a descrip tive account of the principal disputes in 1905, and tables showing in detail, by locality and industry for each dispute, the duration, num ber of establishments affected, total number of employees, strikers, and others thrown out of employment, causes, results, manner of settlement, etc. .The data relate to disputes ending in 1905. 680 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, S t r i k e s . — During 1905 there were 2,403 strikes reported, affecting 14,481 establishments. Operations were completely suspended in 3,665 establishments. Of a total of 776,984 employees in the estab lishments affected, 408,145 participated in the strikes and 12,015 others were thrown out of employment. The following table shows the results of the strikes in 1905: STRIKES, B Y RESULTS, 1905. fThe column headed "Strikers” shows the maximum number of strikers at any time during strike.] Total em Establish ployees in ments establish affected. ments affected. Strikes. Result. Strikers. Others thrown out of work. Succeeded...................................................... Succeeded partly.......................................... Failed............................................................. 528 971 904 1,704 9,076 3,701 58,771 306,149 412,064 ‘ 25,034 122,351 260,760 2,185 6,870 2,960 T otal.................................................... 2,403 14,481 776,984 408,145 12,015 The number of strikes that failed was 37.6 per cent of the total, while the proportion of persons participating in unsuccessful strikes was 63.9 per cent of the total number of strikers. Only 6.1 per cent of the strikers, representing 11.8 per cent of the establishments affected, . were engaged in successful strikes. The following table shows, by principal groups of industries, the number and results of strikes, the number of establishments and strikers involved, and the number of other employees thrown out of work on account of strikes during the year 1905: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1905. [The column headed “ Strikers” shows the maximum number of strikers at any time during strike.] Striikes whi<;h— Industry. Total strikes. .................... 9 44 121 187 160 9 9 86 27 76 372 54 171 865 39 4 73 92 2 3 Total........................................................ 2,403 Gardening, florist, and nursery trades.......... Mining, metallurgical, salt, etc....................... Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc. Metal working................................................... Machinery, instruments, apparatus, e tc....... Chemical products............................................ Oil, fat, soap, gas, etc...................................... Textiles.............................................................. Paper.................................................................. Leather............................................................... W ood working, carved materials, etc............ Foods and drinks (including tobacco).......... Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc........................ Building trades................................................. Printing.............................................................. Ai*t trades . ................. ^..... ................ Commerce.......................................................... Transportation................................................. Hotels etc____________ _______ other Testa.nrs.rits, Other em Estab Strik ployees Suc lish ers. thrown Suc ceeded ceeded. partly. Failed. ments. out of work. 1 6 32 32 29 16 4 15 75 7 29 228 11 20 22 . 5 23 43 67 72 3 4 36 9 39 163 18 98 316 13 2 24 35 1 3 15 46 88 59 6 5 34 14 22 134 29 44 321 15 2 29 35 1 2 125 370 282 231,453 346 5,751 1,607 12,159 331 19,502 541 19 11 438 158 12,526 67 1,449 838 4,674 2,122 17,939 574 5,380 1,928 25,195 5,408 59,893 47 1,332 41 10 330 5,575 271 3,819 2 49 5 59 56 546 81 85 318 42 758 6,612 58 971 904 14,481 408,145 12,015 1 528 972 873 908 368 208 116 14 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----GERM ANY, 681 The group of building trades, as in previous years, had the largest number of strikes and establishments affected, 865, or 36 per cent of all the strikes, and 5,408, or 37.3 per cent of all the establishments, being in this industry. Of the strikes in the building trades, 37.1 per cent were failures. The largest number of strikers are found in the group of mining, .metallurgical, salt, etc., industries, 231,453, or 56.7 per cent of the total strikers during 1905, being persons engaged in these industries. The number of strikers in these two groups of industries constituted 71.4 per cent of the total. The next two tables show, respectively, the results of strikes accord ing to their duration and according to the number of strikers involved: STRIKES, B Y DU RATIO N 1905. [The column headed 4‘ Strikers ” shows the maximum number of strikers at any time during strike.] Strikes which— Days of duration. Total strikes. Suc ceeded. Suc ceeded partly. Failed. Estab lish ments. Strikers. Other em ployees thrown out of work. Less than 1................................. 1 to 5............................................ 6 to 10.......................................... 11 to 20........................................ 21 to 30........................................ 31 to 50....................................... 51 to 100...................................... 101 or over.................................. 169 879 392 327 199 190 171 76 60 258 89 59 27 13 18 4 30 319 182 146 98 91 76 29 79 302 121 122 74 86 77 43 223 3,340 2,038 2,185 1,490 2,201 1,378 1,626. 4,796 54,314 23,591 25,660 28,419 229,808 24,396 17,161 262 4,395 1,507 1,229 1,419 1,830 521 852 T otal................................. 2,403 528 971 904 14,481 408,145 12,015 STRIKES, B Y NUMBER OF STRIK ERS INVOLVED, 1905. [The column headed “ Strikers” shows the maximum number of strikers at any time during strike.] Strikes which— Total Strikers involved in each strike. strikes. Suc ceeded. Suc ceeded partly. Failed. Estab lish ments. Strikers. Other em ployees thrown out of work. 2 to 5........................................... 6 to 10.......................................... 11 to 20........................................ 21 to 30........................................ 31 to 50........................................ 51 to 100...................................... 101 to 200..................................... 201 to 500..................................... 501 or over.................................. 167 357 466 352 319 361 207 106 68 35 91 110 85 72 80 32 20 3 40 76 173 130 149 177 119 57 50 92 190 183 137 98 104 56 29 15 189 438 738 887 961 1,954 1,809 3,512 3,993 633 2,841 7,107 8,875 12,482 25,770 28,298 31,851 290,288 194 416 818 683 1,022 2,108 1,845 1,994 2,935 Total................................. 2,403 528 971 904 14,481 408,145 J2,015 6 82 BULLETIN OE TH E BUBEAU OF LABOR, The foDowing table shows the results of strikes in 1905, by causes: STRIKES, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for the preceding tables.] Strikes which Total strikes. Cause or object. Against reduction of wages............................................................ For iAcrease of wages...................................................................... For extra rate for overtime........................................................... For extra pay for secondary work................................................ Other cause® affecting wages......................................................... Against increase of hours............................................................... For reduction of hours.................................................................... For abolition or limitation of overtime work.............................. For reduction of hours on Saturday............................................. Against introduction of overtime work....................................... For regular hours............................................................................ Other causes affecting hours of labor........................................... For change in method of payment................................................ Against change in method of payment......................................... For reinstatement of discharged employees................................ For discharge or against employment of certain persons......... For discharge of foremen, etc........................................................ Against being compelled to work on holidays............................. For better sanitary conditions, e tc............................................... Against use of material from establishment in which strike was pending.............................. ......................................................... F or better treatment.... ................................................................. For recognition of committee of employees................................. F or adoption, retention, or change of wage scale........................ Other causes...................................... «............................................. Suc ceeded. 91 1,558 328 157 317 •11 482 77 109 4 54 112 92 13 331 105 55 18 82 30 291 45 24 60 7 51 8 11 33 48 170 356 441 Suc ceeded ' Failed. partly, j 16 30 794 210 97 172 1 289 47 73 3 28 65 47 8 79 15 18 12 32 31 473 73 36 85 3 142 22 25 1 15 33 30 3 194 71 33 6 34 7 8 22 79 67 9 20 90 188 233 17 20 58 89 141 11 14 15 2 58 19 4 The results of strikes for the seven-year period 1899 to 1905 are shown in the following table: STRIKES, B Y RESULTS, 1899 TO 1905. Strikes which— Year. 1899....... 1900....... 1901....... 1902....... 1903....... 1904....... 1905....... Total strikes. 1,288 1,433 1,056 1,060 1,374 1,870 2,403 Succeeded, j Succeeded partly. cent | NumNum Per of total j! ber. ber. strikes, j 331 275 200 228 300 449 528 25.7 19.2 18.9 21.5 21.8 24.0 22.0 429 505 285 235 444 688 971 Total em Estab ployees lish in estab Strikers. ments lish Per cent affected. ments of total affected. strikes. Failed. Per cent of total strikes. Num ber. 33.3 35.2 27.0 22.2 32.3 36.8 40.4 528 653 571 597 630 733 904 41.0 45.6 54.1 56.3 45.9 39.2 37.6 7,121 7,740 4,56i 3,437 7,000 10,321 14,481 256,858 298,819 141.220 131,086 198,636 273,364 776,984 99,338 122,803 55,262 53,912 85,603 113,480 408,145 L o c k o u t s . — During 1905 there were 254 lockouts reported, affect ing 8,859 establishments. Of a total of 188,526 employees in the establishments affected, 118,665 were locked out and 3,739 others were thrown out of employment on account of the lockouts. FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G E R M A N Y . 683 The following table shows the results of the lockouts in 1905: LOCKOUTS, B Y RESULTS, 1905. [The column headed “ Persons locked o u t” shows the maximum number of persons locked out at any time during lockout.] Lockouts. Result. Total em- ;1 Others Establish |ployees in Persons thrown ments establish locked out out. of work. ments affected. ! affected. Succeeded...................................................... Succeeded p artly.......................................... Failed............................................................ 65 147 42 622 2,597 640 42,548 136,847 9,131 T otal................................................... 254 3,859 | I 188,526 i | 23,533 91,515 3,617 646 3,053 40 118,665 3,739 Of the lockouts in 1905, 25.6 per cent were successful from the standpoint of the .employers, 57.9 per cent were partly successful, and 16.5 per cent were complete failures. The following table shows, by principal groups of industries, the number and results of lockouts, the number of establishments and persons involved in lockouts, and the number of other employees throwm out of work on account of lockouts during the year 1905: LOCKOUTS, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1905. [The column headed “ Persons locked ou t” shows the maximum number of persons locked out at any time during lockout.] Industry. Loci :outs wh ich— Other em Total Estab Persons ployees lish lock Suc locked thrown Suc outs. ceeded. ceeded Failed. ments. out. out of partly. work. Quarrying, products of stone, clay, glass, etc................................................................. Metal working................................................ Machinery, instruments, apparatus, etc---Textiles........................................................... Leather.................................. ........................ Wood working, carved materials, e t c ......... Foods and drinks (including tobacco)....... Wearing apparel, cleaning, etc.................... Building trades.............................................. Printing.......................................................... Commerce....................................................... 12 11 19 38 3 21 37 20 89 1 3 7 5 10 8 1 4 11 1 16 2 2 6 8 29 1 10 3 19 67 1 1 Total..................................................... 254 65 147 3 i 1 1 7 23 6 42 72 233 62 221 20 1,159 133 496 1,451 1 11 1,547 7,400 54,197 24,187 794 5,424 1,157 4,546 18,883 18 512 3,859 118,665 591 1,128 1 2,019 3,739 The group of building trades had the largest number of lockouts and establishments affected, 35 per cent of all the lockouts and 37.6 per cent of all the establishments affected belonging to this industry. Of the lockouts in this group of trades, 18 per cent were successful, 75.3 per cent were partly successful, and 6.7 per cent were complete failures. The largest number of persons locked out are found in the group of machinery, instruments, apparatus, etc., industries, 54,197, or 45.7 per cent of the total number of persons locked out, being engaged in these industries. Next in importance with regard to the •number of persons involved are the groups of textiles and the building trades. Of all the persons locked out, 82 per cent belonged to these three groups of industries. 684 ' BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, The next two tables show, respectively, the results of lockouts according to their duration and according to the number of persons locked out: LOCKOUTS, B Y DURATION, 1905. [The column headed “ Persons locked ou t” shows the maximum number of persons locked out at any time during lockout.] Loci routs which— Total lock outs. Days of duration. Other em Estab Persons ployees lish Suc locked thrown Suc ceeded out. ceeded. partly. Failed. ments. out of work. Less than 1 ..................................................... 1 t o 5 ..1 ........................................................... 6 to 10............................................................... 11 to 20..........................- ................................. 21 to 30............................................................. 31 to 50............................................................. 51 to 100..................................... t.................... 101 or over....................................... •.............. 6 22 23 51 25 29 71 27 3 11 8 10 7 5 6 15 5 13 40 17 22 43 7 3 6 2 1 1 2 22* 5 35 93 145 607 776 410 688 1,105 148 3,589 8,916 25,694 45,989 13,095 8,307 12,927 15 631 148 186 70 977 1,712 Total...................................................... 254 65 147 42 3,859 118,665 3,739 LOCKOUTS, B Y NUMBER OF PERSONS LOCKED OUT, 1905. [The column headed “ Persons locked ou t” shows the maximum number of persons locked out at any time during lockout.] Persons locked out in each lockout. Lockouts which— Other em Total Estab Persons ployees lock Suc lish locked thrown Suc outs. ceeded. ceeded Failed. ments. out. out of partly.work. 2 to 5................................................................ 6 to 10............................................................... 11 to 20............................................................. 21 to 30............................................................. 31 to 50............................................................ 51 to 100........................................................... 101 to 200.......................................................... 201 to 500.......................................................... 501 or over...................................................... 16 18 25 16 20 37 44 32 46 6 3 9 4 10 2 11 10 10 1 8 10 10 6 29 28 21 34 9 7 6 2 4 6 5 1 2 17 25 50 34 99 302 519 603 2,210 44 139 385 409 797 2,648 6,296 10,217 97,730 24 4 55 41 343 528 2,744 Total...................................................... 254 65 147 42 3,859 118,665 3,739 The following table shows the causes and results of lockouts in 1905, the cause and not the lockout being taken as a unit: LOCKOUTS, B Y CAUSES, 1905. [Lockouts due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence totals for this table, if computed, would not agree with those for the preceding tables.] Lockouts which— Cause or object. Against increase of wages............................................................. For reduction of wages.................................................................. Other causes affecting wages............................. .......................... Against reduction of hours........................................................... For increase of hours..................................................................... For retention of overtime w ork................................................... For introduction of contract w ork............................................. T o compel employees to leave union........................................... To force settlement of strikes....................................................... Other causes.................................................................................... Total lockouts. 18 2 10 10 1 2 3 22 193 43 Suc ceeded. Suc ceeded partly. 3 1 3 3 1 1 13 1 2 9 124 24 6 42 9 Failed. 2 1 7 7 1 7 V 10 FOREIGN 685 STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G E R M A N Y . The results of lockouts for the seven-year period 1899 to 1905 are shown in the table following: LOCKOUTS, B Y KESULTS, 1899 TO 1905. Lockouts which— Year. 1899....... 1900....... 1901....... 1902....... 1903....... 1904....... 1905....... Total lock outs. 23 35 35 46 70 120 254 Succeeded. Succeeded partly. Total Estab employ ees in Persons lish estab locked ments lish out. Per cent affected. ments of total affected. lock outs. Failed. Num ber. Per cent of total lock outs. Num ber. Per cent of total lock outs. Num ber. 6 13 16 30 36 44 65 26.1 37.1 45.7 65.2 51.4 36.7 25.6 9 17 8 7 15 33 147 39.1 48.6 22.9 15.2 21.4 27.5 57.9 8 5 11 9 19 43 42 34.8 14.3 31.4 19.6 27.2 35.8 16.5 427 607 238 948 1,714 1,115 3,859 8,290 22,462 7,980 18,705 52,541 36,312 188,526 5,298 9,085 5,414 10,305 35,273 23,760 118,665 GREAT BRITAIN . Report on Strikes and Lockouts and on Conciliation and Arbitration Boards in the United Kingdom in 1905 . 1906. 152 pp. (Pub lished by the Labor Department of the British Board of Trade.) This report is the eighteenth of a series of annual reports, begun in 1888, on strikes and lockouts. It presents statistics for strikes and lockouts beginning in 1905, and of trade disputes settled by con ciliation or arbitration boards. Summary tables are also given making general comparison of results in 1905 with the results of each of the four previous years, 1901 to 1904. Figures are given showing by industries, causes, and results the number of strikes and lockouts, persons directly and indirectly involved, and days lost. A list of trade disputes (involving cessation of work) settled in 1905 by conciliation or arbitration is given and tables are presented summarizing, by industries, the work of the per manent and district conciliation and arbitration boards. Strikes and lockouts in which the number of persons involved was less than 10 , or which lasted less than one day, unless the aggregate days lost exceeded 100 days, are not included in the report. Appendixes show the method used in classifying causes of trade disputes, rules of conciliation boards formed in 1905, trade dispute statistics for each year of the period 1893 to 1905, great labor disputes 1888 to 1904, etc. S t r i k e s a n d L o c k o u t s i n 1905.— The number of strikes and lock outs and the number of work people affected by them in 1905 were slightly in excess of those for the year 1904, but were less than for any year during the period 1893 to 1903. The aggregate days lost in 1905 by reason of strikes and lockouts exceeded the number for 1903 and 1904, but was less than in any year during the period from 1893 to 1902. 686 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. During the year there were 358 strikes and lockouts recorded, affecting 93,503 persons, and entailing an aggregate loss of 2,470,189 working days. These items are considerably below the averages for the five-year period, 1900 to 1904. The following tables show the number of strikes and lockouts, the number of strikers and persons locked out and of other persons thrown out of work by reason of strikes and lockouts in 1905, and the number of working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work, classified according to principal causes and results: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, AND W ORKIN G-DAYS LOST, 1905. [“ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” includes the aggregate duration in 1905 of disputes which began in previous years, and excludes the duration in 1906 of disputes which began in 1905.] Strikes and lockouts, the results of which were— Principal cause or object. Aggregate Total workingstrikes days lost In In Indefi and by all em favor favor Com or lock ployees pro nite of em of em mised. unset outs. thrown out ployees. ployers. tled. of work. Wages......................................................................... Hours of labor........................................................... Employment of particular classes or persons___ Working arrangements, rules, and discipline....... Trade unionism......................................................... Other causes.............................................................. Total 44 3 9 5 9 105 5 26 17 10 3 70 166 84 2 6 ............ 10 2 15 .......... . 2 ............ 1 ............ 118 4 235 14 47 37 4 2,063,404 38,368 89,780 162,412 105,080 11,145 358 2,470,189 21 STRIK ERS AND EM PLOYEES LOCKED OUT, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1905. Strikers and employees locked out in disputes, the results of which were— Total strikers and em In In Indefi ployees favor favor Com nite or locked pro of em of em mised. unset out. ployees. ployers. tled. 1 Principal cause or object. Other em ployees thrown out of work. Wages......................................................................... Hours of labor.......................................................... Employment of particular classes or persons----Working arrangements, rules, and discipline....... Trade u n i o n i s m .............................................. Other causes.............................................................. 6,155 1,307 1,052 319 7,869 11,137 629 2,553 3,026 1,358 4,240 20,958 1,209 2,746 2,201 150 200 487 57 38,737 3,145 6,408 5,546 9,377 4,440 17,086 2,882 3,347 2,455 80 T otal................................................................ 16,702 22,943 27,464 544 67,653 25,850 As in previous years, disputes .relative to wages were the most numerous, forming 65.6 per cent of all disputes for the year and involv ing 57.3 per cent of all striking and locked-out employees. Of this class of disputes 18.7 per cent resulted in favor of employees, 44.7 per cent in favor of employers, 35.7 per cent were compromised, and in 2 cases, or 0.9 per cent, the results were indefinite. Of the total employees engaged in wages disputes 15.9 per cent were in disputes settled in favor of the employees, 28.8 per cent in those settled in favor of the employers, and 54.1 per cent in those that were compro mised. Of disputes relative to hours of labor, 2 1 .4 per cent were settled FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G R EAT B R IT A IN . 687 in favor of the employees, 35.7 per cent in favor of the employers, and 42.9 per cent were compromised. Of the disputes relative to trade unionism and employment of particular classes or persons, 26.5 per cent were settled in favor of employees, 52.9 per cent in favor of employ ers, 17.7 per cent were compromised, and 2.9 per cent were indefinite or unsettled; while 56.5 per cent of the employees involved were in disputes settled in favor of the employees, 24.8 per cent in those set tled in favor of the employers, and 18.3 per cent in those that were compromised, indicating that the disputes in which the employees were successful were conducted by unions having a large member ship. Considering all disputes, 19.5 per cent were settled in favor of the employees, 46.4 per cent in favor of employers, 33 per cent were compromised, and 1.1 per cent were indefinite or unsettled. Of all employees directly affected by labor disputes 24.7 per cent were involved in disputes settled in favor of the employees, 33.9 per cent in those settled in favor of the employers, 40.6 per cent in those that were compromised, and 0.8 per cent in those the results of which were indefinite or unsettled. The following table shows the number of strikes and lockouts, employees thrown out of work, and working-days lost, according to classified groups of employees thrown out of work: STRIK ES AND LOCKOUTS, CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THROW N OUT OF W ORK, 1905. [“ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” refers exclusively to disputes which began in 1905, and includes working-days lost in 1906 due to disputes which extended beyond 1905.] Groups of employees thrown out of work. Strikes and lockouts. Aggregate workingEmployees thrown days lost by all em out of work. ployees thrown out of work. Number. Percent. Number. Percent. 2,500 or under 5,000.................................................... 1,000 or under 2,500.................................................... 500 or under 1,000....................................................... 250 or under 500......................................................... 100 or under 250......................................................... 50 or under 100........................................................... 25 or under 50............................................................. Under 25 (« )................................................................ 4 14 38 36 92 47 62 65 14,100 19,696 26,057 12,381 14,677 3,341 2,212 1,039 15.1 21.0 27.9 13.2 15.7 3.6 2.4 1.1 115,700 1,147,142 637,194 245,515 393,482 83,306 58,697 22,415 4.3 42.4 23.6 9.1 14.5 3.1 2.2 .8 T otal................................................................. 358 93,503 100.0 2,703,451 100.0 a Disputes involving fewer than 10 work people and those which lasted less than one day have been omitted, except when the aggregate duration exceeded 100 working-days. In 1904 there were 2 disputes in each of which the number of employees involved exceeded 5,000; in 1905 there was no dispute of such magnitude. Most of the disputes affected a comparatively small number of employees. The disputes affecting fewer than 250 persons formed 74.3 per cent of all disputes, and the number of employees affected by this class of disputes formed but 22.7 per cent of all per sons affected b y disputes. 688 BULLETIN of the bureau of labor, In the following table are given the number of strikes and lockouts, employees thrown out of work, and working-days lost, classified , according to duration of the disputes: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, EM PLOYEES THROW N OUT OF W ORK, AND AGGREGATE W ORKIN G-DAYS LOST, B Y DURATION, 1905. [ “ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” refers exclusively to disputes which began in 1905, and includes working-days lost in 1906 due to disputes which extended beyond 1905.] Aggregate Number Employees workingthrown out days lost of disputes. of work. by all employees. Duration of strikes or lockouts. Under 1 week............................................................................................. 1 week or under 2 weeks........................................................................... 2 weeks or under 4 weeks......................................................................... 4 weeks or under 6 weeks......................................................................... 6 weeks or under 8 weeks......................................................................... 8 weeks or under 10 weeks....................................................................... 10 weeks or under 15 weeks...................................................................... 15 weeks or under 20 weeks.......................................................... *.......... 20 weeks or under 25 weeks...................................................................... 25 weeks or over........................................................................................ 124 60 47 17 16 18 38 14 8 16 37,243 13,927 8,043 3,312 5,590 3,822 7,672 4,102 1,966 7,826 87,903 103,095 130,759 83,038 167,674 158,641 429,964 273,175 204,630 1,064,572 Total................................................................................................. 358 93,503. 2,703,451 The number of strikes and lockouts which lasted less than two weeks^ formed 51.4 per cent of all disputes, and the number of persons thrown out of work in these groups formed 54.7 per cent of all persons thrown out of work by strikes and lockouts. There were but 16 dis putes, or 4.5 per cent of all disputes, which had a duration of 25 weeks or more. While the number of employees involved in disputes in this group formed but 8.4 per cent of all employees affected by strikes and lockouts, yet the aggregate days lost by strikers and locked-out employees was 39.4 per cent of the aggregate working-days lost by all employees engaged in the disputes of the year. The following tables, in which the disputes are classified by results, show the number of disputes and of persons affected in each group of industries: STRIK ES AND LOCKOUTS, B Y INDUSTRIES AND RESULTS, AND W OR KIN G-DA YS LOST, 1905. [“ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” includes the aggregate duration in 1905 of disputes which began in previous years, and excludes the duration in 1906 of disputes which began in 1905.] Strikes and lockouts the results of which were— Industry. Building trades......................................................... Mining and quarrying........................... ................. Metal, engineering, and shipbuilding..................... Textile trades............................................................ Clothing trados ___ •.......................................... Transportation......................................................... Miscellaneous trades................................................ Employees of public authorities............................ T otal................................................................ Aggregate Total workingstrikes days lost and by all em In In Indefi ployees favor favor Com nite or lock pro unset outs. thrown out of em of em mised. of work. ployees.! ployers. tled. 6 18 15 12 7 2 8 2 12 37 38 37 14 7 20 1 13 50 16 17 8 2 10 2 '7 0 | 166 118 1 1 1 1 4 31 106 70 67 29 11 39 5 412,633 1,255,514 467,571 126,483 71,435 67,089 64,290 5,174 358 2,470,189 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS---- GREAT BRITAIN. 689 STRIK ER S AND EMPLOYEES LOCKED OUT, B Y INDUSTRIES AND RESULTS, 1905. Strikers and employees locked out in disputes, the results of which were— Total strikers and em Indefi ployees In | In favor 1 favor Com or locked pro nite of em- |of em mised. unset out. ployees. ployers. tled. Industry. Building trades......................................................... Mining and quarrying............ ................................. Metal, engineering, and shipbuilding.................... Textile trades........................................................... Clothing trades......................................................... Transportation......................................................... Miscellaneous trades................................................ Employees of public authorities............................. 805 9,938 1,409 1,881 1,156 200 768 545 1,446 10,389 4,120 3,280 722 1,607 1,355 24 3,810 13,685 1,901 4,814 1,112 305 1,765 72 Total................................................................ 16,702 22,943 27,464 57 28 430 29 544 Other employ ees thrown out of work. 6,061 34,069 7,458 10,405 2,990 2,112 3,917 641 576 10,722 5,295 5,381 550 67,653 25,850 3,242 84 The number of disputes, persons directly affected, persons indirectly affected, and aggregate working-days lost in the mining and quarry ing group of industries exceed similar items in every other group of industries. The four items formed, respectively, 29.6 per cent, 50.4 per cent, 41.5 per cent, and 50.8 per cent of the corresponding totals. In each group of industries, excepting employees of public authorities, the number of disputes resulting in favor of the employers, was much larger than the number resulting in favor of the employees, and in only 2 groups, clothing trades and employees of public authorities, did the number of employees affected by disputes resulting in favor of employees equal the number affected by disputes resulting in favor o£ employers. S t r i k e s a n d L o c k o u t s d u r i n g F i v e Y e a r s . — During the five-year period, 1901 to 1905, there was a yearly average of 437 disputes, affect ing an average of 146,765 employees yearly, and entailing an average yearly loss of 2,782,924 working-days. The following table shows the number of strikes and lockouts, employees thrown out of work, and working-days lost in each year of the period named: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, EMPLOYEES THROW N OUT OF W ORK, AND W ORKIN G-DAYS LOST, 1901 TO 1905. [ “ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” includes the aggregate dura tion in each year of disputes which began m previous years and extended beyond the year in which they began, and excludes the duration in 1906 of disputes which began in 1905.] Year. 1901.................................................................... 1902.................................................................... 1903.................................................................... 1904.................................................................... 1905.................................................................... Aggregate workingOther Total Strikers employees days lost Strikes employees and em by all em and thrown thrown ployees ployees lockouts. locked out of out of out. thrown work. work. out of work. 642 442 387 ' 355 358 111,437 116,824 93,515 56,380 67,653 68,109 139,843 23,386 30,828 25,850 179,546 256,667 116,901 87,208 93,503 4,142,287 3,479,255 2,338,668 1,484,220 2,470,189 690 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. The number of strikes and lockouts, and employees thrown out of work in each year from 1901 to 1905 are shown in the following table, by industries: STRIK ES AND LOCKOUTS AND EMPLOYEES THROW N OUT OF W ORK, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1901 TO 1905. Strikes and lockouts. Industry. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. Employees thrown out of work. 1901. .1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. Building trades................................. 104 Mining and quarrying...................... 210 Metal,engineering,and shipbuilding 103 Textile trades................................ 96 Clothing tra d e s................................ 39 Transportation................................. 20 Miscellaneous trades......................... 65 Employees of public authorities___ 5 39 168 71 82 23 14 41 4 44 125 87 55 25 15 32 4 37 113 75 52 26 10 41 1 9,797 5,356 31 106 112,981 208,520 70 22,489 15,914 67 16,609 16,706 4,135 2,790 29 2,682 1,590 11 3,679 39 10,489 364 2,106 5 3,663 63,578 32,380 9,458 2,476 2,172 2,463 711 8,697 46,287 12,130 13,048 1,448 1,759 3,794 45 6,637 44,791 12,753 15,786 3,540 2,112 7,159 725 T otal......................................... 642 442 387 355 358 1179,546 256,667 116,901 1 87,208 93,503 The following table shows, by groups of industries, the aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work for the period 1901 to 1905: AGGREGATE DU RATIO N IN W ORKIN G-DAYS OF STRIK ES AND LOCKOUTS, B Y INDUS TRIES, 1901 TO 1905. [“ Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work” includes the aggregate duration in each year of disputes which began in previous years and extended beyond the year in which they began, and excludes the duration in 1906 of disputes which began in 1905.] Industry. Aggregate working-days lost by all employees thrown out of work. Building trades.................................... Mining and quarrying........................ Metal, engineering, and shipbuilding. Textile trades...................................... Clothing trades.................................... Transportation.................................... Miscellaneous trades........................... Employees of public authorities....... T otal........................................... 1902. 1904. 1905. 345,513 657,285 185,429 121,554 13,202 42,343 118,804 90 412,633 1,255,514 467,571 126,483 71,435 67,089 64,290 5,174 4,142,287 3,479,255 j2,338,668 1,484,220 2,470,189 1901. 1903. 115,860 114,371 574,848 2,086,113 2,550,047 1,397,898 420,362 481,016 601,553 238,380 276,363 117,038 87,384 54,044 136,182 38,312 10,027 26,779 64,892 84,133 460,903 6,402 492 7,811 With the exception of 1905, each year, as compared with the pre vious year of this period, shows a decrease in the number of strikes and lockouts. The last year shows but slight increase over 1904 in the number of disputes and work people affected, yet the number of days lost shows an increase of 66.4 per cent, indicating that the dis putes were more protracted. The number of disputes in the mining and quarrying group continues to be larger than in any other group. With the exception of 1904 the number of persons affected by dis putes in this group of industries exceeded 50 per cent of all employees affected by all disputes. Since 1901 there has been a noticeable decrease in the number of disputes and number of persons affected in the building trades, but while the years 1902 and 1903 show a large decrease in days lost there was a considerable increase in the last two years of the period. While the number of disputes and of strikers FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G B EAT B R IT A IN . 691 and employees locked out in the metal, engineering, and shipbuilding trades during 1905 show a material decrease, the aggregate days lost was much greater than in 1904. The aggregate working-days lost in all trades in 1901 was 4,142,287. The number for each of the three next succeeding years shows a marked decrease, in 1904 falling to 1,484,220, but in 1905 an increase is shown over the years 1903 and 1904. The number of strikes and lockouts and the number of strikers and employees locked out during the period 1901 to 1905 are shown in the next table, by principal causes: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS AND STRIK ERS AND EM PLOYEES LOCKED OUT, B Y PR IN CIPAL CAUSES, 1901 TO 1905. Strikes and lockouts. Principal causes or objects. Strikers and employees locked out. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. 267 20 232 17 58,865 4,198 56,733 3,044 49,557 4,108 32,783 1,970 38,737 3,145 58 54 46 47 10,524 U,436 7,822 6,081 6,408 64 29 1 3 56 25 47 15 1 37 21 2 2 23,185 11,531 1,890 1,244 19,849 25,489 14 259 13,609 17,602 7,601 7,925 20 5,546 9,377 243 4,197 Total......................................... 642* 442 387 358 111,437 116,824 93,515 56,380 67,653 Wages................................................. 402 Hours of labor................................... 29 Employment of particular classes or persons....................................... 84 Working arrangements, rules, and discipline......................................... 79 Trade unionism................................. 38 Sympathetic disputes...................... 6 Other causes...................................... 4 3 233 13 355 235 14 817 While the number of disputes relative to wages remained com paratively the same during the years 1903 to 1905, there was a material decrease as compared with 1901, and while the number of strikers and employees locked out was somewhat greater in 1905 than in 1904, there was a decrease, year by year, for the rest of the period. Disputes on account of trade unionism and the closely related question of employment of particular classes or persons, con sidered together, showed a decrease in number of disputes from year to year up to' 1904 and a small increase in 1905, and for the years 1903 to 1905 a considerable decrease in the number of employees involved. The following table shows, by results, the number of strikes and lockouts and employees directly affected during each year, 1901 to 1905: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS AND STRIK ER S AND EM PLOYEES RESULTS, 190KTO 1905. LOCKED OUT, BY [The figures for years previous to 1905 have been revised to include the results of disputes terminated after the reports o f those years were published.] Strikes and lockouts. Result. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. In favor of employees....................... 163 In favor of employers....................... 284 Compromised..................................... 193 Indefinite or unsettled..................... 2 T otal......................................... 642 Strikers and employees locked out. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. 30,591 38,701 41,575 570 108' 90 206 185 125 111 1 3 62 180 112 1 70 166 118 4 37.187 37.187 42,141 309 29,167 44,956 19,370 22 15,413 23,500 17,441 26 16,702 22,943 27,464 544 442 355 358 111,437 116,824 93,515 56,380 67,653 387 692 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. This table shows that for each year during the period the number of disputes resulting in favor of the employees was less than the number in which the employers were successful. The number compromised also exceeds the number which were settled in favor of the employees, but is less in each year than the number settled in favor of the employ ers. The total number of disputes during the five-year period was 2,184, of which 493 or 22.6 per cent were settled in favor of the employ ees, 1,021 or 46.7 per cent in favor' of the employers, 659 or 30.2 per cent were compromised, and 11 or 0.5 per cent were indefinite or unsettled. In 1905,19.5 per cent were favorable to the employees and 46.4 per cent to the employers, 33.0 per cent were compromised, and 1.1 per cent were indefinite or unsettled at the end of the year. During the five-year period there were in the aggregate 445,809 employees directly affected by strikes and lockouts. Of this number 129,060 employees, or 29.0 per cent of all employees directly affected, were involved in disputes in which employees were successful, 167,287 or 37.5 per cent in disputes in which the employers were suc cessful, 147,991 or 33.2 per cent in disputes which were compromised, and 1,471 or 0.3 per cent in those of which the settlement was indefi nite, or which were unsettled. The corresponding percentages for 1905 were 24.7, 33.9, 40.6, and 0.8, respectively. In the following table the number of strikes and lockouts, and the number of strikers and employees locked out, are shown b y methods of settlement for each year of the period, 1901 to 1905: S T R IK E S AND LOCKOUTS AND STRIK ER S AND EM PLOYEES LOCKED OUT, B Y METHOD OF SETTLEMENT, 1901 TO 1905. {The figures lor the years previous to 1905 have been revised to include the results of disputes termi nated after the reports for these years were published.] Strikes and lockouts. Method of settlement. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. Strikers and employees locked out. 1901. 1902. 1903. 1904. 1905. Arbitration........................................ 25 Conciliation........................................ 18 Direct arrangement or negotiation between parties or their repre sentatives ...................................... 456 Submission of employees................. 45 Replacement ot employees............... 92 Closing of works................................ 5 Indefinite or unsettled...................... 1 16 13 18 8 15 12 9 21 7,609 7,851 2,418 2,641 18,047 1,401 1,832 3,179 2,224 8,322 319 40 50 3 1 270 36 50 5 227 27 67 6 1 220 47 53 3 5 85,087 4,492 4,765 1,093 540 98,270 9,310 3,928 228 29 64,459 6,989 2,378 241 43,589 4,495 2,587 672 26 48,155 5,550 2,126 714 562 T otal......................................... 642 442 387 355 358 111,437 116,824 93,515 56,380 67,653 In each year most of the disputes were settled by direct arrange ment or negotiation, the percentage of disputes settled b y this method being 71.0, 72.2, 69.8, 63.9, and 61.5 per cent of all disputes for the respective years 1901 to 1905. The number of disputes settled by submission of employees was larger in 1905 than in any previous year of the period, and the number settled by submission of employees, by replacement of employees, and by closing of works in 1905 was larger FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G REAT B R IT A IN . 693 than in any other year, excepting 1901, when the number of disputes was much larger than in subsequent years. Disputes settled by these three methods formed 22.1, 21.0, 23.5, 28.2, and 28.8 per cent of all strikes for the respective years. Only 30 disputes, involving 15.6 per cent of all persons directly affected, were settled by arbitra tion and conciliation in 1905, a number smaller than the number settled by any one method, excepting that of closing the works. Report o f the Royal Commission on Trade Disputes and Trade Com binations. 1906. IV, 132; X II, 350; V II, 93. This volume contains a report of a special commission of five mem bers appointed by the Crown “ to inquire into the subject of trade disputes and trade combinations and as to the law affecting them, and to report on the law applicable to the same and the effect o f any modifications thereof.” Circular letters, inviting evidence, were sent to 317 representatives of employers, leading representatives of trade unions, and other persons desiring to be heard, or who had expert knowledge on certain specific points upon which the commission decided to center its investigation. The scope of the inquiry was limited to the following points: 1. As to the consequences of the judicial decisions which bear on the subject of trade combinations and the conduct of trade disputes, and the status and liability of trade unions, particularly with reference to cases relative to the Trade Union Acts, 1871 and 1876, and the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, and the common law of conspiracy. 2. As to facts of importance in connection with trade disputes and trade combinations which have occurred since the Royal Commission on Labor issued their report in 1894. Certain decisions of the courts, and especially of the House of Lords, were alleged to have created hardship, and various proposals for alterations of the law so as to nullify or modify the effects of these decisions had been proposed. In order to decide whether any amend ment to the existing law, civil or criminal, relating to the subjects under consideration, was desirable, and if so what, an opportunity to be heard was given to both the advocates and opponents of such proposals. Of the 58 witnesses examined during the course of the investiga tion the great majority were representatives of employers, because the trade unions, by representatives in their congress, resolved to give to the commission no information on the subjects of the inquiry. The objections and proposals of the unions were before the commis sion, however, as they had been stated in various speeches by their members and in the bills introduced in Parliament in their behalf. 304 b — No. 70— 07------15 694 BULLETIN OE TH E BUREAU OE LABOR, In regard to the first and main proposition under investigation the inquiry was divided into three branches, as follows: (1) The liability of trade union funds to be taken in execution for the wrongful acts of agents of the union; (2) the statute law relating to picketing and other incidents of strikes; (3) the law of conspiracy as affecting trade unions. In the discussion of the liability of trade unions a historical resume of trade-union legislation and numerous decisions of various courts are presented, showing the status of registered trade unions. The opinion is expressed that the funds of nonregistered trade unions, like those of registered unions, can be made liable in actions of tort by means of a representative action, provided the two conditions fol lowing are satisfied: “ (1) Such agents must be persons who can properly be considered to be the agents of all the members and must be acting within the scope of their agency; (2) the funds must be property which would have been taken in execution or attached in an action in which all the members had been made defendants.” * Evidence as to the effect of the decision of the courts, holding a union T responsible for the acts of its agents, was proffered by employers only and was practically unanimous in asserting that it had made trade unions more careful than heretofore in seeking not to infringe the \a>w; strikes have been less frequent and accompanied wdth less vio lence and intimidation, and disputes have been easier to settle. Trade unions, whether of employers or employees, are at common law illegal associations and are enfranchised only so far as the words of the statute go. While the Trade Union Act of 1871 provides that: “ The purposes of any trade union shall not, by reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, be unlawful so as to render void or voidable any agreement or trust,” yet this provision is qualified by a subsequent section specifically forbidding any court to entertain any legal proceeding instituted with the object of directly enforcing or recovering damages for the breach of “ any agreement made between one trade union and another.” A good deal of evidence was submit ted from parties well disposed to trade unions to the effect that it would be of great advantage that trade unions should be able to enter into binding agreements with associations of employers and with their owTn members to enable them to carry out their agreements. The commission recommended the passage of an act embodying the following provisions: (1) To declare trade unions legal associations. (2) To declare strikes from whatever motive or for whatever pur poses (including sympathetic or secondary strikes), apart from crime or breach of contract, legal and to make the act of 1875 to extend to sympathetic or secondary strikes. (3) To declare that to persuade to strike— i. e., to desist from working— apart from procuring breach of contract, is not illegal. FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----G REAT B R IT A IN . 69& (4) To declare that an individual shall not be liable for doing any act not in itself an actionable tort only on the ground that it is an interference with another person’s trade, business, or employment. (5) To provide for the facultative separation of the proper benefit funds of trade unions, such separation, if effected, to carry immunity from these funds being taken in execution. (6) To provide means whereby the central authorities of a union may protect themselves against the unauthorized and immediately disavowed acts of branch agents. (7) To provide that facultative powers be given to trade unions, either (a) to become incorporated subject to proper conditions or (&) to exclude the operation or section 4 of the Trade Union Act of 1871 [prohibiting the court from entertaining legal proceedings to enforce certain agreements] or of some one or more of its subsections, so as to allow trade unions to enter into enforceable agreements with other persons and with their own members. (8) To alter the seventh section of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, by repealing subsection 4 and the proviso [mak ing it a criminal offense for a person to watch or beset the house or ther place where another person resides, or works, or carries on busi ness or happens to be, or the approach to such house or place, with a view to compel such person to abstain from doing any work which such person has a legal right to do], and in lieu thereof enacting as a new subsection (which would also supersede subsection 1) [relating to intimidation, etc.]: “ Acts in such a manner as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of any person that violence will be used to him or his family, or damage be done to his property.” (9) To enact to the effect that an agreement or combination by two or more persons to do or procure to be done any act in contempla tion or furtherance of a trade dispute shall not be the ground of a civil action, unless the agreement or combination is indictable as a con spiracy notwithstanding the terms of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. Several memoranda and minority reports by different members follow the majority report. In one of these the member,, after dis cussing the injurious effects of industrial disputes, refers to the appar ent advantages of the various conciliation and arbitration laws of New Zealand and Australia which appear “ to offer, to the general satisfaction of employers and employed, both a guarantee against conditions of employment that are demonstrably injurious to the community as a whole, and an effective remedy for industrial war.” Another memorandum by four of the five members consists of a discussion of the question of the civil action of conspiracy. It is argued that “ conspiracy can not be the foundation of a civil action unless it be a criminal conspiracy.” Several cases before the courts are* cited in support of this view. It is further argued that because the common law relating to criminal conspiracy was “ indirect and deluding,” the legislature passed the act of 1875 with a view to pre vent its application to disputes between workmen and employers, and for the same reason the legislature should exclude the action for civil liability in such cases. 696 BULLETIN OF TH E BUKEAU OF LABOB. As appendixes to the majority report, the acts of Parliament relat ing to the subject under investigation are reproduced, together with a record of cases referred to in the report. Part 2 of the report consists of the minutes of evidence taken before the commission; index of evidence adduced before the commission, and of appendixes showing statements handed in by witnesses during the investigation. These statements show the membership of trade unions, 1902, and membership and accounts of 100 principal unions, 1892-1902; statistics relating to strikes and lockouts in the United Kingdom, 1893-1902, and statistics of employers' associations. Copies of proposed legislation relating to trade unions and statements of the attitude of trade unions with regard to existing law are repro duced, as Veil as much other matter relating to the questions under discussion. ITALY. Statistica degli Scioperi A w enuti nelV Industria e nelV Agricoltura duranti gli anni 1902 e 1903 . Ministero di Agricoltura, Industria e Commercio, Direzione Generale della Statistica. , 510 pp. 1906. Ixxvi, This is the eleventh of a series of reports on strikes and lockouts published by the bureau of statistics of the Italian department of agriculture, industry, and commerce. The report presents in detailed tables and text statements the most important facts in reference to each strike or lockout that occurred during the years 1902 and 1903, the strikes being separated into two categories: (1) Those occurring in industries other than agriculture, and (2) those taking place in agri cultural industries alone. The report also contains summary tables of strikes for 1902'and 1903 and for a period of more than two previ ous decades. S t r i k e s a n d L o c k o u t s i n 1902.— During the year 1902 there were 1,031 strikes, of which 221 were agricultural and 810 occurred in other industries. The 221 strikes among agricultural workers involved a total of 146,592 strikers and caused a loss of 2,024,833 working days. Of the strikers, 70.79 per cent were men, 19.89 per cent were women, and 9.32 per cent were children. The 810 strikes in other industries involved 197,514 strikers, of whom 71.13 per cent were men, 18.34 per cent were women, and 10.53 per cent were children. The, aggre gate time lost by these strikers was 2,539,331 days. The largest strike of the year occurred among agricultural workers in the province of Rovigo, involving 18,317 strikers and causing a loss of 451,299 working days. This strike was for increased wages and more liberal terms of employment and was partly successful. A 697 FO REIG N STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----IT A L Y strike of silk weavers in Como and vicinity involved 14,955 persons and lasted 28 days. Increase of wages and reduction of hours of labor were the demands made. The strike was partly successful. In eleven other strikes the number of persons involved was 5,000 or more. The following table shows, for the year 1902, the number of strikes, strikers, and working-days lost, by industries: STRIKES, BY INDUSTRIES, 1902. Strikers. Industry. Adults. Strikes. Males. Agriculture.............................................................. Mining and quarrying............................................ Foundry products, machinery, and car and ship building................................................................. Stone, clay, glass, and building trades.................. Chemical products.................................................. W ood-working........................................................ Paper........................................................................ Printing................................................................... Textiles.................................................................... Leather and hides................................................... Dyeing (skins and textiles)................................... Clothing................................................................... Foods....................................................................... Transportation....................................................... Miscellaneous........................................................... Total.............................................................. Chil dren of Fe both males. sexes. Work ingdays lost. Total. 221 52 103,772 13,295 29,163 13,657 1,604 146,592 14,899 2,024,833 174,544 77 220 13 27 9 21 160 19 8 44 60 49 51 15,842 39,196 578 1,731 602 732 12,788 1,858 898 4,032 5,242 15,836 27,857 219 87 694 228 129 320 23,162 32 139 695 2,500 879 2,199 23 288 47 124 5,177 51 43 1,054 601 8,013 8,719 16,940 41,482 1,295 2,247 778 1,176 41,127 1,941 1,080 5,781 8.343 15,836 44,589 265,524 647,233 12,424 30,560 4.312 26; 464 702,339 35,966 9,210 77,601 98,929 247,716 206,509 1,031 244,259 65,381 34,466 344,106 4,564,164 The strikes were mostly among agricultural workers and employees in the groups of stone, clay, glass, and building trades, and in textiles, over 58 per cent of all the strikes and 66 per cent of the strikers belong ing to these three groups. The following table shows for the agricultural and for the other industries, separately, the number and per cent of strikes and strikers, by principal causes: STRIKES, B Y CAUSES, 1902. Agricultural occupations. Cause or object. Strikes. Strikers. Num ber. Per cent. Num | Per ber. cent. For increase of wages..................... Against reduction of wages........... For reduction of hours................... Against increase of hours............... Other causes.................................... 166 2 11 75.11 .91 4.98 128,662 54 738 42 19.00 17,138 T otal....................................... 221 100.00 146,592 Other industries. Strikes. Strikers. Num ber. Per cent. Num ber. 11.69 469 30 39 8 264 57.90 3.70 4.82 .99 32.59 123,397 4,607 7,115 1,684 60,711 62.48 2.33 3.60 .85 30.74 100.00 810 100.00 197,514 100.00 87.77 .04 .50 Per cent. 698 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OE LABOR, The next two tables show, for the agricultural and for the other industries, respectively, the results of strikes, arranged according to causes: STRIK ES IN AGRICU LTU RAL OCCUPATIONS, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1902. Succeeded. Strikes. Cause or object. Failed. Succeeded partly. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. For increase of wages........... Against reduction of wages For reduction of hours......... Other causes (<*)..................... 29 Total ( a ) ....................... 37 8 18 24,552 19 2,086 13 92 2 3 9 17 26,638 18 96 22 49 100 27 24 76,551 54 290 1,913 60 100 39 12 55 33 27,559 21 8 20 73 448 54 12,251 61 75 45 78,808 54 83 38 40,258 28 a Results of 5 strikes, involving 888 strikers, not reported. STRIKES IN IN DU STRIES OTHER THAN AGRICU LTU RE, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS 1902. Succeeded partly. Succeeded. Cause or object. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Failed. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. For increase of wages........... Against reduction of wages.. For reduction of hours......... Against increase of hours ... Other causes ( « ) ....... *............ 88 5 13 1 58 18 15,434 187 17 33 1,087 121 70 23 7,425 13 4 15 4* 12 250 15 11 4 83 54 50 28 50 33 76,524 3,732 2,471 144 23,574 62 81 35 9 40 131 10 15 3 112 28 31,439 33 688 39 3,557 37| 1,470 44 28,613 25 15 50 87 48 Total (o ) ....................... 165 21 24,203 12 363 45 106,445 54 271 34 65,767 34 a Results of 11 strikes, involving 1,099 strikers, not reported. In 23 instances in 1902 employers closed their establishments for the purpose of accomplishing certain objects, sometimes of a political and sometimes of a business nature. Of these shut downs, only 3 were directed against employees and can be properly classed as lock outs. These 3 lockouts affected 823 employees and caused a loss of 7,940 working days. 699 FO REIG N STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----IT A L Y . The following table shows the method of settlement of the strikes and lockouts, arranged according to results: STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, B Y METHOD OE SETTLEMENT, 1902. Strikes and lockouts settled— By intervention of— Result. Public Trade Councils Ecclesias Private authori associa of prud- tical au parties. ties. tions. hommes. thorities. Strikes in trades and industries which— Succeeded............................ Succeeded partly................. Failed................................... 43 120 57 22 58 19 2 4 6 1 1 7 15 11 91 165 183 165 363 271 2 33 439 o799 1 1 13 51 59 37 96 83 2 123 &216 1 1 2 3 5 5 6 12 2 10 23 T otal................................. 220 99 Strikes in agricultural occupa tions which— Succeeded............................ Succeeded partly................. Failed................................... 17 40 17 5 5 6 1 1 T otal................................. 74 16 Lockouts which— Succeeded............................. Succeeded partly................. Failed................................... 2 1 5 1 2 Total Without strikes and outside lockouts. inter vention. Total ( c ) ........................... 8 3 Strikes and lockouts which— Succeeded............................. Succeeded p artlv................ Failed.... ..........*.................. 62 161 79 27 64 27 2 4 1 1 1 9 16 12 106 219 247 207 465 366 Total ( c ) ........................... 302 118 6 3 37 572 d 1,038 a Results not reported in 11 strikes. &Results not reported in 5 strikes. c Of the disputes classed as lockouts only 3 were lockouts proper; directed against employees. d Not including 16 strikes for which results were not reported. the others were shut downs not S t r i k e s a n d L o c k o u t s i n 1903.— The number of strikes occurring in 1903 was 596, of which 47 were in agricultural pursuits and 549 were in other industries. The 47 strikes among agricultural workers were participated in by 22,507 persons and caused a loss of 341,847 working-days. Of the strikers, 66.54 per cent were men, 23.18 per cent were women, and 10.28 per cent were children. In the 549 strikes occurring in industries other than agriculture there were involyed 109,327 strikers, of whom 73.30 per cent were men, 17.16 per cent were women, and 9.54 per cent were children. The aggre gate time lost by these strikers amounted to 1,539,298 working-days. The most important strike of the year occurred in the shoe industry o f Milan, involving 8,240 persons and causing a loss of 222,480 workingdays. The demands of the strikers for increase of wages and reduc tion of hours of labor were acceded to in part by the employers. A strike of employees of the Government arsenal at Spezia involved 7,800 persons and entailed a loss of 23,400 working-days. Modifica tion of the contract of employment was demanded by the strikers. 700 BULLETIN OF TH E BUBEAU OF LABOR, The strike was a failure. A general strike in the city of Rome, fol lowing a strike of employees in the printing trades, involved more than 5,000 persons. The number of strikes, strikers, and working-days lost in 1903, arranged by industries, are shown in the following table: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1903. Strikers. Industry. Strikes. Work Chil ing-days dren of lost. Total. Fe both Males. males. sexes. Adults. Agriculture................................................................... Mining and quarrying................................................. Foundry products, machinery, and car and ship bu ildin g................. ...... Stone, clay, glass, and building trades..................... Chemical products....................................................... W ood working............................................................. Paper............................................................................. Printing........................................................................ Textiles......................................................................... Leather and hides........................................................ Dyeing (skins and textiles)........................................ Varnishing and gilding............................................... Clothing......................................................................... Foods............................................................................. Transportation............................................................ Miscellaneous................................................................ 47 58 14,977 14,606 5,217 81 2,313 3,207 22,507 17,894 341,847 363,234 46 125 4 22 4 21 117 16 4 3 22 43 28 36 13,486 25,940 327 1,137 50 1,349 2,811 884 121 48 5,561 3,565 5,135 5,118 100 152 404 1,637 10 72 31 167 2,497 95 3 6 379 459 13,990 27,729 337 1,301 132 1,783 14,347 1,044 146 54 10,220 6,026 5,295 9,029 104,572 371,568 5,279 11,812 852 63,870 144,981 29,953 356 898 243.326 63,313 49,923 85,361 T otal.................................................................... 596 95,115 92 51 267 9,039 65 22 4,280 2,002 160 2,448 j 1 23,976 1,463 12,743 131,834 1,881,145 The strikes were most numerous in 1903 among the employees in the groups of stone, clay, glass, and building trades, textiles, and mining and quarrying, 300 strikes, or slightly more than 50 per cent of the total number reported for the year, being found in these three groups. The number of strikers belonging to the same groups constituted 45.55 per cent of the entire number reported. The number and per cent of strikes and strikers, by principal causes, are shown in the following table, the facts for the agricultural and for the other industries being presented separately: STRIKES, B Y CAUSES, 1903. Agricultural occupations. Cause or object. Strikes. Strikers. Other industries. Strikes. Num ber. Per cent. Num ber. Per cent. Num ber. For increase of wages......................... Against reduction of wages.............. For reduction of hours...................... Against increase of hours........- ........ Other causes........................................ 27 1 2 57.45 2.13 4.25 9,022 240 1,340 40.09 1.07 5.95 17 36.17 11,905 52.89 264 46 38 8 193 T otal.......................................... 47 100.00 22,507 100.00 549 Strikers. Per cent. Num ber. 4& 09 a38 a 92 1.46 35.15 55,995 4,602 4,836 644 43,250 51.22 4.21 4.42 .59 39.56 100.00 109,327 100.00 Per cent. FOREIGN 701 STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----ITA L Y, The next two tables show, for the agricultural and for the other industries, respectively, the results of strikes, arranged according to causes: STRIKES IN AGRICU LTU RAL OCCUPATIONS, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1903. j Cause or object. Succeeded. Succeeded partly. Strikers. i Strikes* Strikes. Failed. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. !Num-| Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per : ber. jcent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. For increase of wages........... 1 5 Against reduction of wages .1 1 For reduction of hours......... j......... Other causes(o).....................i 5 T otal(a)........................! ; 882 240 19 100 31 702 11 j 24 i 1,824 a Result of 1 strike, 13 48 7,117 79 9 33 1,023 11 6 2 7 100 44 1,340 10,340 100 87 4 25 850 7 8 22 18,797 84 13 28 1,873 8 10 100 48 involving 13 strikers, not reported. STRIKES IN INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN AGRICU LTU RE, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1903. Succeeded. Cause or object. Strikes. Succeeded partly. Strikers. Strikes. Failed. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber; eent. For increase of wages........... Against reduction of wages . For reduction of hours......... Against increase of h ours. . . Other causes(o).................... 53 8 11 1 33 20 9,025 459 18 29 2,142 22 121 18 4,239 16 10 44 3 11 116 19 8 1 51 44 33,573 1,960 41 1,106 21 36 12i 28 13,421 60 43 23 6 35 95 19 19 6 99 36 13,397 41 2,183 50 1,588 586 75 54 21,003 24 47 33 91 54 Total (o )........................ 106 20 15,887 15 195 36 50,096 48 238 44 38,757 37 a Results of 10 strikes, involving 4,587 strikers, not reported. During 1903 there were 20 instances of establishments being closed by employers. These shut downs were mostly of a political or busi ness nature, only 4 being directed against employees, and therefore capable of being properly classed as lockouts. These 4 lockouts affected 219 persons, of whom 140 were men, 57 were women, and 22 were children. The following table shows the method of settlement of the strikes and lockouts, arranged according to results: 702 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, B Y METHOD OF SETTLEMENT, 1903. Strikes and lockouts settled— Total ________ Without strikes and outside Trade Councils Ecclesias lockouts. Private inter associa of prud- tical au parties. vention. tions. hommcs. thorities. By intervention of-1- Result. Putlic authori ties. Strikes in trades and indus tries which— Succeeded........................... . Succeeded partly................ Failed................................... T otal............................... . Strikes in agricultural oecupapations which— Succeeded............................. Succeeded p a r tly ............... Failed................................... T otal............................... . Lockouts which— Succeeded........................... . Succeeded partly................ Failed................................. . T o ta l(c )......................... . Strikes and lockouts which— Succeeded............................. Succeeded partly. . . . . . . . . . Failed.................................. T o ta l(c )......................... . 40 75 46 12 15 18 161 45 2 2 ............... 1 2 4 11 5 50 92 168 106 194 239 3 20 310 a 539 2 2 7 9 10 22 26 &46 2 .............. 2 1 1 .............. 3 3 8 6 12 5 3 11 20 9 1 4 ............... 12 6 44 86 48 178 1 11 13 2 14 ............... 20 1 18 2 11 10 57 104 186 222 52 25 347 d 605 4 3 119 264 a Results not reported in 10 strikes. &Result not reported in 1 strike. c Of the disputes classed as lockouts only 4 were lockouts proper; the others were shut downs not directed against employees. d Not including 11 strikes for which results were not reported. S t r i k e s d u r i n g T w e n t y - f i y e Y e a r s . — The following two tables contain a summary of the more important facts in relation to strikes in agricultural occupations for the years 1881 to 1903, and in the other industries for the years 1879 to 1903, respectively: STRIKES IN AGRICU LTU RAL OCCUPATIONS, B Y Y EA R S, 1881 TO 1903. Year. Total strikes. Strikes for which strikers were reported. Strikers. Aggregate days of work lost. 1881...................................................................................... 1882...................................................................................... 1883...................................................................................... 1884...................................................................................... 1885...................................................................................... 1886...................................................................................... 1887...................................................................................... 1888...................................................................................... 1889...................................................................................... 1890...................................................................................... 1891...................................................................................... 1892...................................................................................... 1893...................................................................................... 1894...................................................................................... 1895...................................................................................... 1896...................................................................................... 1897...................................................................................... 1898...................................................................................... 1899...................................................................................... 1900...................................................................................... 1901...................................................................................... 1902...................................................................................... 1903...................................................................................... 1 2 3 10 62 17 9 5 4 8 24 10 18 8 7 1 12 36 9 27 629 221 47 1 2 3 2 36 16 8 5 4 7 24 9 18 8 6 1 12 36 9 26 629 221 47 100 2,200 262 245 8,857 3,846 2,275 1,366 a 1,087 1,950 7,795 3,504 12,390 4,748 1,765 100 24,135 8,495 1,895 12,517 222,985 146,592 22,507 200 4,400 1,812 245 53,761 9,623 3,785 1,366 2,880 8,420 33,877 7,123 1,718,370 43,058 20,565 100 322,020 82,833 7,475 72,057 2,931,766 2,024,833 341,847 T otal......................................................................... 1,170 1,130 a 491,616 7,692,416 a In one strike the number of families taking part was reported. FOREIGN 703 STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----IT A L Y STRIKES IN INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN AGRICULTURE, B Y YEARS, 1879 TO 1903. Strikers. Strikes which— Year. Total Suc strikes. ceed ed. Suc ceed ed part ly. Strikes for which strikers Fail were ed. re ported. 1879.... a 32 1880 . . . . c27 1881.... <*44 1882.... e 47 1883.... / 73 1884.... .<781 1885 . . . . * 89 1886.... *96 1887.... *69 1888.... J101 1889.... /126 1890.... *139 * 132 1891.... 1892.... o ll9 1893.... *131 1894.... 3 109 1895.... 126 1898.... 210 1897.... 217 256 1898.... 1899.... 259 383 1900.... 1901.... ml; 042 1902.... *810 1903.... *549 2 4 4 5 10 16 22 14 9 22 12 23 15 24 34 35 41 79 70 70 80 112 294 165 106 10 9 11 16 29 34 32 39 29 40 63 58 51 33 46 29 39 51 60 68 69 143 428 363 194 15 13 22 24 26 27 25 41 28 33 43 47 57 57 41 39 46 80 87 118 110 128 295 271 239 T o ta l.. «5,267 1,268 1,944 1,912 Men. Women. Chil dren. ' (&) (*>) (*) (*) (*) (*>) (*>) (6) (») <*) <*) <*) (*) (*) (*> 19,766 11,788 39,955 21,809 22,112 28,228 59,750 137,389 140,487 80,138 (&) <*) (*) (*) (6) (*>) (>) (*) (*) (6) <*) <*) <*) (6) (6) 3,890 5,192 34,264 38,435 9,571 11,280 16,292 40,683 36,218 18,759 (6) (*) (&) Total. Strikes for which Aggre gate days days of lost work were lost. re ported. 4,011 5,900 8,272 5,854 12,900 23,967 34,166 16,951 25,027 28,974 23,322 38,402 34,733 30,800 32,109 27,595 19,307 96,051 76,570 35,705 43,194 80,858 196,540 197,514 109,327 28 21,896 26 91,899 95,578 38 45 25,119 65 111,697 149,215 78 82 244,393 56,772 95 218,612 66 191,204 95 123 215,880 167,657 129 123 258,059 114 216,907 234,323 122 103 323,261 125,968 126 210 1,152,503 217 1,113.535 256 239; 292 259 231,590 493,093 383 1,042 2,146,184 810 2,539,331 549 1,539,298 <>5,220 P561,422 P214,584 Pl06,655 1,208,049 5,184 12,203,260 28 26 39 45 67 81 86 96 68 99 125 133 128 117 127 103 126 210 217 256 259 383 1,042 810 549 (P) (&) (*) (*>) (*) <*) (*>) (P) (&) (*> (&) (f>) 3,939 2,327 21,832 16,326 4,022 3,686 4,816 18,468 20,809 10,430 a Including 5 strikes the results of which were not reported. * N ot reported. c Including-1 strike the result of which was not reported. A Including 7 strikes the results of which were not reported. « Including 2 strikes the results of which were not reported. / Including 8 strikes the results of which were not reported. g Including 4 strikes the results of which were not reported. * Including 10 strikes the results of which were not reported. * Including 3 strikes the results of which were not reported. i Including 6 strikes the results of which were not reported. * Including 11 strikes the results of which were not reported. i Including 9 strikes the results of which were not reported. m Including. 25 strikes the results o f which were not reported. n Including 143 strikes the results of which were not reported. o This total does.not agree with the totals in the tables showing strikes by duration and by number of strikers involved, page 704; the computation is made, however, from figures in the original reports. V Not including figures for 1879 to 1893. The other data concerning strikes for a series of years are shown only for the industries other than agriculture. The following table shows the number and result of strikes and the number of strikers, by industries, for the period 1892 to 1903: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, FOR THE PE RIO D , 1892 TO 1903. Industry. Mining and quarrying.................................... Foundry products, machinery, car and ship building......................................................... Stone clay, glass, and building trades......... W ood working;............................................... P rinting........................................................... Textiles............................................................. Leather and hides........................................... Dyeing (skins and textiles), varnishing and gilding............................................................ Clothing............................................................ Foods................................................................ Transportation............................................... Miscellaneous................................................... T otal.............................. ......................... Strikes which.— Strikes for Total which Suc strikes. results Suc ceeded Failed. were re ceeded. partly. ported. Strikes for which Total strikers strikers. were re ported. 403 392 151 109 132 397 132,770 346 965 120 108 1,040 113 340 958 119 107 1,021 111 70 274 32 28 257 29 107 376 61 28 375 39 163 308 26 51 389 43 346 962 120 108 1,040 113 66,642 168,935 10,240 7,293 198,301 7,958 46 209 221 275 365 45 209 217 270 355 8 52 54 77 78 15 80 81 119 134 22 77' 82 74 143 46 209 221 274 364 6,393 116,730 32,075 77,446 120,787 4,211 4,144 1,110 1,524 4,200 945,570 1,510 704 BULLETIN OE THE BUREAU OE LABOR, The next table shows the causes of strikes, by years, from 1879-1891 to 1903: STRIK ES IN INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN AGRICU LTU RE, B Y CAUSES, 1879-1891 TO 1903. For increase of wages. Year. Against reduction of wages. For reduction of hours. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. 1879-1891(0) ....................................................... 1892(6) ............................................................... 1893(c)............................................................... 1894(d) ............................................................... 1895..................................................................... 1896..................................................................... 1897..................................................................... 1898..................................................................... 1899..................................................................... 1900..................................................................... 1901.............................................................. . 1902..................................................................... 1903.................................................................... 516 39 51 46 45 111 106 113 113 181 657 469 264 151,678 6,642 13,386 17,685 8,513 78,722 60,559 16,779 19,539 26,370 117,492 123,397 55,995 Against increase of hours. Year. 22,992 7,551 3,931 1,498 3,093 5,723 4,426 6,902 4,325 2,998 3,824 4,607 4,602 106 23 22 12 22 26 27 44 28 29 27 30 46 68 4 11 12 9 6 16 12 17 31 67 39 38 Other causes. 9,884 1,790 1,519 2,539 1,239 980 3,551 891 3,631 3,516 13,158 7,115 4,836 Total. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. Strikes. Strikers. 1879-1891(0)...................................................... 1892(6) ............................................................... 1893(c)............................................................... 1894(d) ............................................................... 1895..................................................................... 1896..................................................................... 1897..................................................................... 1898..................................................................... 1899..................................................................... 1900..................................................................... 1901..................................................................... 1902..................................... : .............................. 1903..................................................................... a The causes were not 6 The causes were not c The causes were not 20 4 1 2 5,646 630 300 330 2 1 7 5 6 4 8 8 267 230 908 2,384 694 475 1,684 644 reported reported reported d The causes were not reported in the case in the case in the case in the case 61,384 13,571 12,492 5,293 6,462 10,359 7,804 10,225 13,315 47,280 61,591 60,711 43,250 270 44 36 31 50 65 67 80 96 136 287 264 193 of of of of 980 114 121 103 126 210 217 256 259 383 1,042 810 549 251,584 30,184 31,628 27,345 19,307 96,051 76,570 35,705 43,194 80,858 196,540 197,514 109,327 76 strikes. 5 strikes. 10 strikes, 6 strikes. In the two following tables are shown the strikes for the period 1879 to 1891 and for each year 1892 to 1903, classified according to duration and the number of strikers involved, respectively: STRIK ES IN IN DU STRIES OTHER THAN AGRICULTURE, B Y DURATION, 1879-1891 TO 1903. Days of du ration. 18791891. 3 or u n der.. 4 to 10......... 11 to 30........ Over 30....... 633 256 112 16 1892. 1893. 1894. 1895.!11896. 1897. 1898. 1899. 1900. 1901. 1902. 1903. Total. I 104 161 52 153 208 60 67 61 91 481 325 219 2,615 44 56 57 70 70 105 330 36 39 33 255 169 1,520 177 12 42 33 55 167 19 37 23 19 119 11 826 54 2 7 13 15 42 1 8 19 5 63 7 252 T o t a l... «1,017 a 116 a 125 a 104 126 210 a 216 256 259 383 1,042 810 549 a 5,213 a This total does not agree with the figures given in the general table of strikes, page 703; the figures are reproduced, however, as shown in the original report. STRIK ES IN INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN AGRICU LTU RE, B Y NUMBER OF STRIK ERS INVOLVED, 1879-1891 TO 1903. Strikers in volved. 18791891. 1892. 1893. 1894. 1895. 1896. 1897. 1898. 1899. 1900. 1901. 1902. 1903. Total. ! 265 203 195 219 86 53 27 18 26 27 11 8 28 24 22 41 6 6 40 16 18 18 5 7 39 34 21 27 3 2 54 35 46 52 14 9 70 52 44 31 14 6 92 55 63 35 6 5 98 51 48 39 15 8 T o ta l... <*1,021 117 127 a 104 126 210 217 256 259 1 to 49......... 50 to 99........ 100 to 199... 200to 499... 500 to 999... 1,000 or over. a This total does not 406 214 176 157 55 34 319 162 148 114 37 30 223 104 97 82 19 24 383 1,042 810 549 a 5,221 116 95 88 62 13 9 1,777 1,063 992 904 284 201 agree with the figures given in the general table of strikes, page 703; the figures are reproduced, however, as shown in the original report. 705 FOREIGN STATISTICAL PUBLICATIONS-----N ETH E R LA N D S. NETHERLANDS. UitgeX I, 65 pp. WerTcstdkingen en Uitsluitingen in Nederland gedurende 1905. geven door het Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. This is the fifth annual report of the Central Bureau of Statistics of the Netherlands on strikes and lockouts. The information is given in the form of an analysis, with summary tables and a tabular statement, showing in detail the important facts concerning each strike and lock out. Comparative tables, giving the principal data for the years 1901 to 1905, are shown. S t r i k e s .— There were 126 strikes reported in 1905. The number of establishments involved and the number of strikers were not reported in the case of all of these strikes. In 124 strikes there were 318 estab lishments involved, while the number of strikers reported for 125 strikes was 4,657. The following table shows the number of strikes, establishments involved, strikers, and aggregate days lost by strikers and by other employees in each group of industries: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES, 1905. Industry. Strikes for Strikes for Strikes for which aggre which number Strikes for which aggre gate days lost of establish which number gate days lost by employees ments in of strikers was by strikers was other than volved was reported. Total reported. strikers was reported. i strikes. reported. Strikes. Products of stone, clay, glass, etc............................. Cutting of diamonds and other precious stones........ Printing................................. Building trades..................... Chemical products............... W ood working, cork, straw, etc........................................ Clothing, cleaning, etc......... Leather, oilcloth, rubber, etc....................................... Mining.................................... Machinery, instruments, etc. Car and snip building.......... Textiles.................................. Foods and drinks (includng tobacco)....................... Agriculture........................... Commerce.............................. Transportation..................... Total............................ Estab Days Days lish Strikes. Strik ers. Strikes. lost. Strikes. lost. ments. 8 i 3 4 35 1 8 8 8 384 3 4 34 1 3 4 107 1 3 4 34 1 68 44 1,467 5 1,326 7 3 172 3 101 33 24,902 1 60 6 3 4 32 1 426£ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22 81 2 2 1,264 2,914 2 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 8 1 3 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 8 8 60 40 30 211 1 1 1 1 7 292 17 1 1 1 1 8 70 20 2,559 478 37 2 2 18 37 2 2 17 37 101 2 37 37 2 2 18 479 460 38 1,260 37 2 2 18 9,603* 2,260 44 8 ,126£ 36 1,474* 126 124 318 125 4,657 120 53,439 2,479 80 2 18 39,24ij 119 44,471i From the foregoing table it will be observed that the greatest num ber of strikes in 1905 occurred in the manufacture of foods and drinks, while the building trades furnished the largest number of establish ments and persons affected. The greatest loss in working-days to all employees took place in the transportation industry. 706 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, The table which follows shows the results of strikes in 1905, arranged by industries: STRIKES, B Y INDUSTRIES AND RESULTS, 1905. Result. Succeeded partly. Succeeded. Industry. Failed. Not reported. Total. Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per Num Per ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. ber. cent. Products of stone, clay; glass, etc......... Cutting of diamonds and other precious stones..................................................... Printing.................................................... Building trades........................................ Chemical prod ucts.................................. W ood working, cork, straw, e t c ........... Clothing, cleaning, etc............................. Leather, oilcloth, rubber, etc................. Mining....................................................... Machinery, instruments, etc.................. Car and ship building.............................. Textiles..................................................... Foods and drinks (including tobacco).. Agriculture............................................... Commerce................................................. Transportation........................................ Total............................................... 5 14 1 50 4 50 4 50 8 100 2 1 15 67 25 43 1 3 12 1 1 2 1 1 1 50 100 100 100 100 33 75 34 100 4 15 50 41 3 4 35 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 8 37 2 2 18 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 126 100 3 9 3 2 j 7 1 18 50 8 45 1 6 50 33 1 4 15 1 1 4 22 18 54 43 47 100 50 41 50 50 22 37 In the following table are shown the number of strikes, establish ments involved, strikers, and aggregate days of duration of strikes, classified by causes. The apparent discrepancy in the totals for this table as compared with those previously shown is explained in the note which precedes the table. STRIKES, B Y CAUSES, 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the totals for this table do not agree with those for other tables.] Total strikes. Cause or object. Num ber. For increase of wages.................... Against reduction of wages.......... Other disputes concerning wages. Hours of labor............................... Trade unionism.............................. For reinstatement of employees.. Regulations governing w ork........ Other causes................................... Not reported.................................. Total..................................... Strikes for which number of establish ments involved was reported. Strikes for which number of strikers was reported. Per cent of total Strikes. Estab lish Strikes. report ments. ing cause. Strik ers. Strikes fpr which aggregate days of dura tion was. • reported. Aggre gate Strikes. days of dura tion. 65 8 25 7 6 23 22 40 2 32.83 4.04 12.63 3.53 3.03 11.62 11.11 20.20. 1.01 64 8 24 6 6 23 20 40 2 256 8 35 45 17 23 20 52 2 65 8 25 7 6 23 22 40 1 2,647 126 953 457 244 393 1,187 1,096 15 62 8 23 6 4 22 22 37 1 1,262 345 339* 145 210 477* 558* 838* 198 100.00 193 458 197 7,118 185 4,176& & The most frequent cause of strikes in 1905 was disagreement con cerning wages, more than 49 per cent of the strikes occurring during the year, involving 52 per cent of the total number of strikers, being due wholly or in part to wage disputes. 707 FOREIGN STA TISTIC A L PUBLICATIONS-----N E TH E R LA N D S. The results of strikes are shown in the following table: STRIK ES, B Y RESULTS, Total strikes. im . Strikes for Strikes for wnich aggre which aggre gate days lost gate days lost by employees by strikers other than strikers was was reported. reported. Strikes for Strikes for which number which number of establish of stiikers ments involved was reported. was reported. T > A M .f T X AvSSu.lt. Per cent Estab of Days Days Num total Strikes. lish Strikes. Strik ers. Strikes. lost. Strikes. lost. ber. report ments. ing result. 17.46 42.86 37.30 2.38 22 52 47 3 141 65 109 3. 22 54 47 2 979 2,274 1,348 56 126 100.00 124 318 125 4,657 22 54 47 3 Succeeded..................... Succeeded partly......... Failed............................ Not reported................ T otal................... 22 3,560 54 35,902| 42 13,940! 2 36 294 21 53 42,642 43 1,535| 2 119 44,471| 120 53,439 Of the 4,601 strikers who took part in the 123 strikes for which the results were reported, 21.28 per cent were in strikes which succeeded, 49.42 per cent wrere in strikes which succeeded partly, and 29.30 per cent were in strikes which failed. Strikes by causes and results are shown in the following table, the cause being taken as the basis for the tabulation: STRIKES, B Y CAUSES AND RESULTS, 1905. [Strikes due to two or more causes have been tabulated under each cause; hence the totals for this table do not agree with those for other tables.] Suc ceeded. Cause or object. For increase of wages................................................... Against reduction of wages......................................... Other disputes concerning wages............................... Hours of labor........................................._.................... Trade unionism............................................................. For .reinstatement of employees................................. Regulations governing work....................................... Other causes........................ .......................................... Not renorted____________________________________ Total_______________________ Suc ceeded partly. Failed. Not re ported. Total. 1 2 5 7 33 6 11 4 4 10 9 22 25 1 9 3 2 11 8 11 1 1 65 8 25 7 6 23 22 40 2 25 99 71 3 198 6 1 4 1 The next table shows the strikes in 1905 by duration and results: STRIK ES, B Y DU RATIO N AND RESULTS, 1905. Result. Succeeded................ Succeeded p a r tly .. . Failed....................... Not reported........... T otal.............. Over 8 to 14 15 to 28 29 to 42 43 to 91 91 days. days. days. days. days. Less than 1 day. 1 to 2 days. 3 to 7 days. 8 3 4 1 5 19 17 1 7 16 7 X 6 3 1 6. 2 4 1 7 5 2 3 16 33 30 10 9 5 12 5 . Dura tion not re Total. ported. 5 1 22 54 47 3 6 126 From the above table it will be seen that of strikes which succeeded, 90.91 per cent lasted seven days or less; of strikes which succeeded partly, 53.70 per cent lasted seven days or less, while of those which failed, 59.57 per cent lasted seven days or less. 7 08 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR, The following table shows the number of strikes and their results, also the number of strikers, classified according to method of settlement: STRIKES, B Y METHOD OF SETTLEMENT, 1905. [Where two or more methods of settlement have been employed, the data were reported in each case; hence the totals for this table do not agree with those for other tables.] Strikes. Strikes for which number of strikers was reported. Strikes w hich- Strikers. End Per ed cent of Suc Per with total Suc ceed cent of Num report Num ceed ed Failed. result total ber. not ber. Num ing ed. part re ber. report meth ing ly. port od. meth ed. od. Method of settlement. Direct negotiation between employer and employees....................................... Negotiation m which one or both parties were represented by their organiza tions ........................................................ Mediation of third parties....................... Arbitration. : . : ......................................... Employment of other workmen............. Disintegration of strike........................... Defeat of one of the parties without ne gotiation. .. 1.......................................... Other means.............................................. Not reported............................................. T otal................................................ 31 23.14 5 15 10 45 9 3 18 7 33.58 6.72 2.24 13.43 5.22 10 30 7 2 5 2 19 2 2 14.18 1.49 5 1 136 100.00 22 1 1 918 18.89 45 1,296 9 795 3 177 18 308 7 146 26.66 16.35 3.64 6.34 3.00 2 19 1,158 2 63 1 16 23.83 1.30 3 135 4,877 100.00 18 7 14 1 54 57 31 Negotiations in which one or both parties were represented by their trade organizations resulted in the greatest number of strike settle ments, direct negotiation between employer and employees being next in frequency. L o c k o u t s .— The number of lockouts reported in 1905 was 6, involving 2,707 persons. With regard to the number of persons affected, the most important lockout of the year occurred in the pot tery industry. This lockout involved 2,000 persons and lasted one day. A lockout of masons and plasterers involved 650 workmen and lasted forty days, causing an aggregate loss of 22,750 working days. In the table which follows is presented a summary of the principal lockout data for the years 1901 to 1905: SUMMARY OF LOCKOUTS, 1901 TO 1905. Year. 1901............. 1902............. 1903............. 1904........... 1905............. Total lock outs. Lockouts for Lockouts for which number which number of persons of establish ments involved locked out was reported. was reported. Lockouts for which aggre gate days of duration was reported. Lock outs. Estab lish ments in volved Lock outs. Per sons locked out. Lock outs. 5 14 13 17 5 5 15 24 74 5 6 14 14 16 6 361 2,381 1,021 6,754 2,707 6 12 11 14 6 7 14 14 17 6 a Including 1 lockout Lockouts which- Aggre Ended gate Suc with Suc ceeded days ceeded. Failed. result of du partly. not re ration. ported. 380 519 293| 355| 163£ 2 5 7 9 2 reported as indefinite or unsettled. 4 5 6 1 2 5 2 2 3 az DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. [Except in cases of special interest, the decisions here presented are restricted to those rendered by the Federal courts and the higher courts of the States and Territories. Only material portions of such decisions are reproduced, introductory and explanatory matter being given in the words of the editor. Decisions under statutory law are indexed under the proper headings in the cumulative index, page 783 et seq.]. DECISIONS UNDER STATUTORY LAW. B l a c k l is t in g — C o m b in in g to Prevent E m ploym ent— C o n s t i Joyce v. Great Northern Railway Company (two cases). Supreme Court o f Minnesota, 110 Northivestem Reporterr page 975 .— Thomas S. Joyce sued the railroad company on two sep t u t io n a l it y o f Statute— arate causes of action— one for injuries to his person, caused b y the alleged negligence of the company and its employees, and one for the wrongful and unlawful conduct of the company in preventing the said Joyce from obtaining employment with the Union Depot Company of St. Paul. Only the latter case presents matter of special interest. The Union Depot Company is a separate corporation, owning and operating a union station in the city of St. Paul, into which the trains of the Great Northern Railway run. Joyce's action was based on the act of 1895, chapter 174, which prohibits blacklisting or other combinations between employers to prevent workmen from obtain ing employment, but his case was dismissed in the district court o f Ramsey County, whereupon he appealed to the supreme court. Judge Brown, for the court, delivered an opinion sustaining the law and Joyce's right of action thereunder, and granting a new trial. A syllabus prepared by the court sets forth both the facts and the law in the case, and the paragraphs relating to this cause of action are reproduced herewith: 1. Rev. Laws 1905, sec. 5097, declaring it unlawful for two or more employers of labor to combine or confer together for the pur pose of preventing any person from procuring employment, con strued, and held a valid legislative enactment. 2. If one employer by conference with another employer preventsr without excuse or justification, a third person from procuring employment with such other employer, he is liable for damages under the statute to the person so interfered with. 3. A malicious motive or purpose is essential to give rise to a~ cause of action under the statute; not actual malice, but such as the law implies from the fact that the act complained of was unlawful and without justification. 304 b — No. 70— 07----- 16 709 710 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. 4. Plaintiff had been in the employ of the Union Depot Company as a track repairer. He was injured while engaged in the discharge of his duties by being struck by a switch engine of defendant, then being operated in the depot company’ s yards. On recovering from his injury, he sought reemployment of the depot company. Defend ant interfered, and by its act induced the depot company to refuse him further employment, except upon the condition that he release defendant from, all claim for damages on account of his injury. He declined to release his claim, and the depot company, in consequence of the interference of defendant and plaintiff’s refusal to release, refused to reemploy him. Held, That the act of defendant, on the evidence disclosed, was a violation of the statute, and constituted, unex plained by matters in justification, an actionable tort, and the question snould have been submitted to the jury under the second cause of action. B oycotts— C o m b in a t io n s in R e s t r a in t of I nterstate Com — Loewe v. Lawlor, United States Circuit Court, District o f Connecticut, 1/+8 Federal Reporter, page 924-— Lawlor and his asso ciates were members of a local branch of the United Hatters of North America, and had undertaken to compel the plaintiffs to unionize their factory. To this end they withdrew from employment in such factory and prevented, as far as they could, others from taking service therein. They also sought to curtail, and, if possible, to destroy the trade of plaintiffs in other States. The plaintiffs allege that these efforts have resulted in an interference with interstate commerce, in violation of the Sherman antitrust act, prohibiting combinations in restraint of such commerce, and entered a complaint based on this allegation. The complaint was demurred to on general grounds as well as in detail. It was on a consideration of the former, however, that it was dismissed for reasons that appear from the fol lowing quotation from the opinion of the court, which was delivered by Judge P latt: There is no allegation which suggests that the means of transporting plaintiff’s product, or the product itself while being transported, were touched, handled, obstructed, or in any manner actually interfered with. There is no allegation that the defendants are m a n y way* engaged in interstate commerce. The argument for the plaintiffs is that b y entering into a scheme to curtail the production at home, and the distribution by customers abroad, the defendants have formed a combination to limit and restrain plaintiffs’ trade between the two points, which is interstate trade, and that such restraint is the direct, positive, and inevitable result of the general scheme. The manufacture of the hats'before they leave the factory in Danbury is not interstate commerce, nor are the hats themselves up to that time the subject of interstate commerce. The distribution of the hats from the hands of the customers in other States to the ultimate consumer is not interstate commerce, nor are the hats themselves during such distribution the subject of interstate commerce. m erce 711 DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. The real question is whether a combination which undertakes to interfere simultaneously with both actions is one which directly affects the transportation of the hats from the place of manufacture to the place of sale. It is. not perceived that the Supreme Court has as yet so broadened the interpretation of the Sherman act (Act July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 [u. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200]), that it will fit such an order of facts as this complaint presents. E ig h t - H o u r L aw — C o n s t it u t io n a l it y — I n d e f in it e n e s s of L an guage— State v, Livingston Concrete Building and Manufacturing Com pany, Supreme Court o f Montana, 87 Pacific Reporter, page 980 .— This case was before the supreme court of Montana on an appeal from the district court of Park County. The defendant company had been accused of violating the so-called eight-hour law, and, on the claim that the law was unconstitutional, had obtained a ruling in its favor. The State appealed and secured a reversal of the judgment of the lower court, the statute being held constitutional by the supreme court. The following quotations from the opinion of Judge Holloway, who spoke for the court, present the principal grounds on which this con clusion was reached: The information states facts sufficient to constitute a public offense, if chapter 50 above is a valid legislative enactment capable of being enforced; but on behalf of respondent it is urged (1) that the act is so indefinite as to be incapable of enforcement, and (2) that, even if sufficiently definite, the act is unconstitutional and void.. The provisions of chapter 50, above, are as follows: “ S e c t i o n 1. A period of eight (8) hours shall constitute a day's work on all works or undertakings carried on or aided by any munici pal, county or State government, and on all contracts let by them, and in mills and smelters for the treatment of ores, and in under ground mines. ‘ 1Sec. 2. Every person, corporation, stock company or association of persons who violate any of the provisions of section one (1) of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than five hundred ($500) dollars or by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than thirty days nor more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment." 1. It is said that the statute is too indefinite to be enforceable, in that (1) it can not be determined whether it intends to impose the penalty prescribed upon the man who works less than eight hours in a day, or upon the man who works more than eight hours in a day, or upon botn; (2) it can not be determined whether it is intended to punish the employer, the employee, or both; and (3) it is so indefinite that, in fact, it can not be said to forbid the employment of a laborer for more than eight hours in a day. While it may be conceded that the intention of the lawmakers might have been expressed in plainer terms, we can not hold a solemn legislative enactment of no force or effect because o f the indefinite language in which it is couched, unless 712 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. we find ourselves unable to divine the purpose or intent of the legis lature. (Hochheimer, Criminal Law (2d Ed.) Sec. 28.) For, after all, the function of the court is to determine and make known, if pos sible, such purpose or intent; for the intention of the legislature is the essence of the law. In Edwards v. Morton, 92 Tex. 152, 46 S. W. 792, it is said: “ The intention of the legislature in enacting a law is the law itself, and must be enforced when ascertained.” In Man hattan Co. v . Kaldenberg, 165 N. Y . 1, 58 N. E. 790, it is said: “ In construing statutes the proper course is to start out and follow the true intent of the legislature, and to adopt that sense which harmo nizes best with the context, and promotes in the fullest manner the apparent policy and objects of the legislature.” (2 Lewis’ Sutherland on Statutory Construction (2d Ed.) Sec. 363.) (1) The history of labor legislation makes clear the evil to suppress which such statutes are enacted. It is the continuous employment of workingmen for such length of time as to imperil their lives or health that is sought to be avoided, and, in the interest of the general welfare of its citizens, the State undertakes to correct the evil as far as it may; or it may have been the purpose of the State to stamp with its approval the view now entertained h y many, that, all things considered, the general welfare of workingmen, upon whom rests a portion of the bur dens of government, will be best subserved if labor performed for eight hours continuously be taken as the measure of a full day’s work; that the restriction of a day’s work to that number of hours will so far promote the morality and improve the physical and intellectual con dition of workingmen as to enable them the better to discharge the duties of citizenship. With these objects in view, it can not be sup posed that the legislature intended to impose punishment upon every laborer engaged m any of the designated employments who fails to work for the full period of eight hours in every working-day. But, on the other hand, it is apparent that the object and purpose in view were to prevent the employment of a laborer in any of such employ ments for more than eight hours in a day; that number of hours of continuous labor beiiig fixed by the statute as the maximum for a day’s work. (2) As it is the purpose of the statute to conserve the health and promote the happiness of the workingman— not to curtail his capacity to earn money or to set bounds upon the greed of his employer— the statute is written in terms broad enough to include within its inhibi tion both the employer and the employee. The language is: “ Every person, ’corporation, stock company or association of persons who violates any of the provisions of section one of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,” etc. In Short v. Bullion-Beck & C. N. Co., 20 Utah 20, 57 Pac. 720, 45 L. R. A. 603 [Bulletin No. 24, p. 729], a similar statute of the State of Utah was considered, and it was there held that the statute applies both to the employer and employee, and that the protection which the State throws around the citizen b y the enactment of such a law can not be waived even by the employee, the person for whose benefit the statute is primarily enacted. We do not think that in this respect the statute is at all indefinite, but, on the contrary, the meaning of the language employed seems to be plain. (3) It is said that the statute does not m terms prohibit the work ingman from engaging in any of the designated employments for more than eight hours in a day, nor does it specifically prohibit the employer DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 713 from hiring him to do so, and that, in fact, at most, the statute does not do more than define a working day. But the courts have not had difficulty in reaching an altogether different conclusion. * * * The declared purpose of our statute is to impose a penalty upon every one who violates the provisions of section 1 of the act. And how may those provisions be violated? Manifestly in no other way than by "the employee working more than eight hours in a day in any of the designated employments, or by the employer causing him to do so. The information in this case charges that the defendant com pany did unlawfully and willfully cause, suffer, and permit its servants to work for a longer period than eight hours in a day, and, if this be true, there was a clear violation of the statute by the defendant com pany; and it was no less a crime that its servants might also be equally guilty of the same offense. In this connection it is said that the statute is exceedingly harsh and arbitrary, in that it limits the number of hours of labor, even though the employee is working by the hour and paid according to the number of hours he works. But, when the purpose of the law is kept in mind, we think this criticism can not be made. The object of the law is to conserve the health and promote the happiness of the workingmen by such reasonable regulations as will save them in the one instance from overwork, ana, in the other, afford them ample time for rest, recreation, and their physical and mental improve ment ; and therefore it is quite immaterial whether the labor is per formed by the day or by the hour. Its object is to limit the number of hours of labor in a day so far as the State may do so. The same criticism might be made of many other public statutes. Every law is a restraint upon some one, and the question of its harshness is only a relative one, depending largely upon the disposition of the person restrained, or the character or the business in which he is engaged. It is further urged that the statute is harsh, in that no provision is made for cases of emergency where life or property is in peril; and it may be conceded that the act would be more consonant with our ideas of a reasonable regulation if provisions had been made for such emergencies. But neither of these criticisms affects the validity of the act. If it was the legislative will that no exception be made to the rule announced, the courts can not say that a different policy should have been pursued. In fact, these objections only raise the uestion of legislative policy, with which the courts have nothing to o, unless it should be made to appear that in its operation the act would be so unreasonable that it could not be supposed that the legislature ever intended it to have such effect. (20 Enc. Law (2d Ed.) 599.) Whether this statute in its operation will in fact prove to be harsh can only be determined by experience, and a probability that it will do so is not sufficient to condemn the act in advance. We are not called upon in this connection to decide whether or not, in the event a workingman had practically completed his eight hours of work upon one of the designated employments, and some emergency should suddenly arise whereby life or property was placed in imminent danger, such employee might not prolong his labor beyond the allotted time without violating the spirit of the statute. That question is not presented in this case, and it is therefore not consid ered nor decided. a 714 E BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. ig h t - H o u r L aw — T e r r it o r ia l Ju r is d ic t io n — C o m m is s io n of P roof— United States v. Sheridan-Kirk Contract Company, United States District Court, South ern District o f Ohio, Western Division, 1/+9 Federal Reporter, page 809 .— O ffense— E x t r a o r d in a r y E m ergency— The company named above was indicted by the Federal grand jury for a violation of the Federal law of August 1,1892, which limits the hours of labor on public vjorks of the United States to eight per day, except in cases of extraordinary emergency, and provides a penalty for any contractor or subcontractor who shall intentionally violate said law b y requiring or permitting service in excess of such limit. The fact of employment for more than eight hours was admitted, and, on hearing, the company was found guilty. Various grounds for a new trial were submitted, but none were deemed valid by the court, and the motion for a new trial was overruled. Judge Thompson, who delivered the opinion of the court, spoke in part as follows: It was urged by counsel for the defendant: (1) That the court erred in its instruction to the jury upon the question whether the offense charged was committed within the terri torial jurisdiction o f the court, and in refusing to give to the jury a special instruction upon this question requested by the defendant. The defendant insists that, in order to warrant a conviction, it was not sufficient to show that the laborers and mechanics named in the indictment were required or permitted to work on dam No. 37 more than eight hours in a calendar day, but that it was necessary to show that at the instance of the defendant they worked more than eight hours in a calendar day on that part of the dam which is within the southern district of Ohio, and that the court should have so instructed the jury. If this be the true construction of the statute, then the con tractor may, at will, defeat its operation by limiting the hours of labor to less than eight hours on each side of the boundary line between the States of Ohio and Kentucky, and may with impunity require or permit laborers and mechanics to work seven hours in Omo and seven hours in Kentucky in any one calendar day. But what is the offense charged in the indictment ? It is that the defend ant on given days within the territorial jurisdiction of this court did unlawfully and intentionally require and permit certain named laborers and mechanics in the employ of the defendant to work upon a public work of the United States more than eight hours in a calendar day, and is the offense defined b y the statute of August 1, 1892. It is not the doing of the work which constitutes the offense. It is not an offense for the laborer or mechanic to work more than eight hours in a calendar day upon a public work of the United States, but it is an offense for the contractor to require or permit it to be done. In this case the work was done on a public work of the United States, and it is immaterial whether it was clone in Ohio or Kentucky, but, to justify a conviction, it was necessary for the Government to show that the act of the defendant in requiring or permitting it to be done was com mitted within the territorial jurisdiction of this court, and the jury was so instructed. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 715 ( 3) That the court erred in its instruction to the jury that the burden of proof was upon the defendant to show that the employment of the laborers and mechanics for more than eight hours in a calendar day was justified by an extraordinary emergency. The statute, appar ently in furtherance of a general policy sought to be established, limits and restricts the services of laborers and mechanics upon public works of the United States to eight hours in any one calendar day, and declares that it shall be unlawful for any contractor to require or per mit such laborers and mechanics to work more than that time, except in case of extraordinary emergency. The restriction is general and absolutely prohibitory, save in the single instance of an extraordinary emergency which threatens injury or destruction of property, or other loss and injury. The fact of such an emergency would be especially within the knowledge of, and should be shown by, the con tractor as a matter of defense. To require the Government to show that no emergency had arisen to excuse noncompliance with the stat ute would practically defeat its enforcement. It would compel the Government to anticipate and be prepared to prove the nonexistence of all probable or possible emergencies which might be suggested to the jury by the defendant. During the trial it was urged that a scarcity of labor, due to the prosperity of the country, presented an extraordinary emergency, which' as long as it continued, if for years, would suspend the operation of the statute for the benefit of the con tractor, and according to the contention of the defendant would require the Government to anticipate the defense and be prepared to prove the nonexistence of the emergency. The administration of justice would not be promoted, but hmdered, by such course of pro cedure. An examination of the decisions of the courts bearing upon the point, as a rule, will show that the burden is placed upon the party who, under the circumstances of the case, is best able to make the proof. (Nelson v. United States (C. C.), 30 Fed. 116, 117; Moody v . State of Ohio, 17 Ohio St. 110; United States v. Cook, 17 Wall. 173, 21 L. Ed. 538.) (4) That the court erred in its instruction to the jury explaining the meaning of the phrase “ extraordinary emergency/'’ as used in the statute. The claim of the defendant is, and was urged during the trial, that the phrase “ extraordinary emergency” should be con strued (1) to cover not only the time of its happening, but also the time spent in repairing the injuries to the work caused by it and in restoring the work to its former condition, and (2) to cover the entire time employed in constructing the dam in question. The words “ extraordinary” and “ emergency” are defined in the Century Dictionary as follows: “ Extraordinary: 1. Being beyond or out of the common order or rule; not of the usual, customary, or regular kind; not ordinary. 4. Exceeding the common degree or measure; hence, remarkable; uncommon; rare; wonderful. “ Emergency: 2. A sudden or unexpected happening; an unfore seen occurrence or condition; specifically, a perplexing contingency or complication of circumstances. 3. A sudden or unexpected occasion for action; exigency; pressing necessity.” The contract does not recognize the work of constructing dam No. 37 as a continuing extraordinary emergency, a work undertaken to meet 71(3 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. an unexpected happening, one out of the common order or rule, nor as presenting a sudden or unexpected occasion for action. It con templates and makes reasonable provision for the delay caused by the supervention of extraordinary and unforeseeable conditions, and excludes the assumption that the work itself is one of continuing extraordinary emergency which wholly suspends the operation of the eight-hour law. When confronted with an “ extraordinary emergency” within the meaning of the statute, the laborers and mechanics may be required or permitted to work overtime in protect ing property during the emergency, but not afterwards for the purpose of minimizing the losses of the contractor. The defendant, as bidder on the contract, was required to visit the locality of the work, and to make its own estimates of the facilities and difficulties attending the execution of the contract, including uncertainty of weather and all other contingencies, and, to assist it in doing so, it was invited to visit the United States engineer’s office at Cincinnati, where it could obtain valuable information respecting floods, high and low water periods, and other data concerning the general character of the river necessary for the preparation of intelli gent proposal,' before it entered into a contract. The contract required the defendant to complete the work within 350 fair working days, but in computing fair working days allowance was made for a total suspension of work from December 1st to June 1st, and for all other days when Yvork was stopped by ice, freshets, etc., including the necessary stoppage to protect or remove plant just before floods and to pump out and replace plant after floods. And the department had authority to waive, for a reasonable period, the time limit origi nally set for completion, and to remit the charges for expense of superintendence and inspection for so much time as in the judgment of the said engineer officer in charge may actually have been lost on account of unusual freshets, ice, rainfall, or other abnormal force or violence of the elements, or by epidemics, local or State quarantine restrictions, or other unforeseeable cause of delay arising through no fault of the contractor, etc. In short, reasonable provisions were made to meet and protect the defendant against the difficulties and hindrances incident to the work, which experience might be expected, but did not, as a remedy for these difficulties, contemplate or confer upon the defendant the privi lege of working the men overtime, but only an extension of the time limit and a remission of charges for inspection, etc. Nevertheless, the contract also recognized tne fact that extraordinary emergencies might arise, and, in addition to the overtime which might be required of the men under the statute, provided that they might also be required to work on Sundays and holidays. The contract, however, in recogni tion of the eight-hour law* also provided that, excepting Sundays and holidays and cases of extraordinary emergency, the work should be carried on continuously during the 24 hours of each day by three shifts of 8 hours *each. Neither the law nor the contract justify the assumption that the work was one of continuing extraordinary emergency, or that a case of extraordinary emergency would cover the time employed in repairing the injuries, and in removing the obstacles caused by the flood. The phrase “ continuing extraordinary emergency” is self-contradictory. A condition or conditions which necessarily must continue for years can not be called an uncom 717 DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. mon, sudden, unexpected happening, which presents a sudden and unexpected occasion for action. E m ployers’ L ia b il it y — R a il r o a d C o m p a n ie s — L o g g in g R a il — Hemphill v. Buck Creek Lumber Comparty, Supreme Court o f North Carolina, 54 Southeastern Reporter, page Jj.20.— This case was before the supreme court of the State on appeal road— F ellow -S e r v a n t L a w from the superior court of Buncombe County, in which A. W. Hemp hill had been awarded judgment for damages for injuries received while in the service of the company named. Hemphill was a brakeman on a private railroad owned by the company and was injured by reason of defects in the road. The action was brought under the fellow-servant act (Revisal 1905, section 2646), which deprives “ any railroad operating in this State” of the defense of assumption of risk |as to “ any defect in the machinery, ways or appliances of the com pany.” The lumber company contended that this section had no application to private roads. The court denied this contention, however, and affirmed the judgment of the court below. - From the remarks of Judge Clark, who delivered the opinion of the court, the following is quoted: In Schus v. Power-Simpson Co., 69 L. R. A. 887, 85 Minn. 447, 89 N. W. 68 [see Bulletin No. 42, p. 1104], this point was raised und§r the Minnesota “ fellow-servant act,” which is very similar to that in this State, and the court held that the words “ every railroad corpo ration owning or operating a railroad in this State” embraced a “ logging road,” that, though it is not a common carrier of freight and passengers, its employees engaged in the operation of its trains are exposed to the same dangers and risks as are employees of rail roads operating as common carriers, and come within the spirit and intent of the act, and that the wider signification of the word “ rail road ” meaning any road operated by steam or electricity on rails was intended by the legislature. Both street railways and logging roads are railroads— i. e., roads whose operations are conducted by the use of rails— and come within the general term “ railroads,” cer tainly within the meaning of the fellow-servant act, which sought to protect all employees, engaged in this dangerous avocation, by requir ing safe ways, machinery, and appliances, and taking away from such companies the defense that an employee had been injured or killed by the negligence of a fellow-servant. E m ployers’ eral L ia b il it y — R a il r o a d G overnm ent— I nterstate C o m p a n ie s — P o w e r s of F ed C o m m e r c e — C o n s t it u t io n a l it y o f S t a t u t e — Kelley v. Great Northern Railway Company, United States Circuit Court, District o f Minnesota, Fifth Division .— (Copy of opinion obtained from the Department of Justice.) John Kelley was injured while in the employment of the railway company above named as a track repairer. The company is a common carrier 718 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. engaged in interstate commerce, and suit was brought to recover damages under the act of June 11, 1906, relating to the liability of common carriers carrying interstate commerce. The complaint was demurred to on the ground that the law in question is unconstitu tional and void. The demurrer was overruled, however, Judge Morris, speaking for the court, maintaining the constitutionality of the law and the consequent sufficiency of the complaint under it. (For the law in full see Bulletin No. 64, page 909.) Having cited the law and the provision of the Constitution relat ing to the power of Congress to regulate commerce among the States, Judge Morris said: The first ground on which that contention is based is that the subject-matter of the act is the creation and enforcement of liabili ties growing out of the negligence of common carriers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce to their employees, and it is therefore not a regulation or commerce among the States or with foreign nations within the meaning of that clause of the Constitution, and hence not within the power of Congress. As preliminary and leading up to a more direct consideration of the power of Congress in reference to such legislation as that embod ied m this act, it may be well to call attention very briefly to some of the decisions, State and Federal, as to the power of the State leg islatures in reference thereto, a proper understanding of which will prepare us to correctly apprehend the true doctrine in reference to the extent of the power reposed in Congress. It can no longer be questioned, in the face of these decisions, that the common-law rules which are affected by this act are simply rules of decisions enunciated by the courts, according to their iaeas of justice and public policy, and are necessarily subject to the control of the State legislatures in the exercise of what is commonly termed the police power. But when the State legislation is directed to par ticular occupations, such, for instance, as that of railroad companies, it is subject to certain limitations growing out of the constitutional provisions of the fourteenth amendment prohibiting the taking of property without due process of law, or the denying to any person the equal protection or the laws, or an interference with the liberty of contract. It seems that the contributory-negligence rule has never been directly modified by State legislation; at least none such has been called to my attention. But the reasoning of the cases would apply with equal force to that rule. The judge then cited Missouri Pacific By. Co. v. Mackey, 127 U. S. 205, and other cases, after which he said: All of these decisions are to the effect that it is competent for a State, in the exercise of the police power, to change or modify the rules of decision determining the liability of employers to their employees, as applied to particular pursuits or callings, and that legislation to that effect is not obnoxious to the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution, if all persons brought under its influence are treated alike under similar circumstances and conditions, and if, with a wide legislative discretion, the classification is practical and not palpably arbitrary. In other words, the liability of those in particular occu DECISIONS OE COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 719 pations, as, for instance, railroad companies, for injuries to their employees, is a proper subject for governmental regulation, and a State may make such reasonable regulations on the subject with respect to all within its territorial jurisdiction as the legislature thereof may think that the public welfare demands, subject only to the limitations above indicated. Counsel for defendant, as I have understood them, not only admit but urge that such is the well-established law; but they contend that such legislation is within the power of the State legislatures only, and that it is not within the power of Congress under the commerce clause of the Constitution to enact such a statute as that here under consid eration with reference to common carriers engaged in interstate com merce, because it merely changes or modifies the common-law rules determining the liability, and thus merely creates a liability of such earners to their employees for their negligence or for the negligence of the fellow-servants of the injured employee, and in no way pre scribes, rules for carrying on traffic or commerce among the States, and therefore in no way regulates such commerce. As I have said above, I have referred to and given the effect of the foregoing decisions because I think they prepare us to correctly appre hend the effect of those which more nearly touch the above contention and from which the true doctrine in reference to the extent of the power of Congress may be ascertained. In this latter class are those decisions in which the Supreme Court of the United Stated has had under consideration State statutes whose validity was attacked on the ground that they affected interstate commerce, and were regulations of such commerce, and were there fore within the exclusive power of Congress. While it might be said that in none of these cases was the exact question raised which is here being considered, yet, as I think, they not only throw light upon it, but indicate beyond question the views entertained thereon by the justices of our highest court. But before proceeding to the consideration of these cases let us first ascertain, as far as we can, from other decisions, the meaning and scope of the commerce clause of the Constitution! In determining the meaning and scope of that clause the Supreme Court has, from the time of the delivery of the opinion of the great Chief Justice in Gibbons v. Ogden until now, seemed to think it unde sirable to give to tfie words therein any hard and fast definition, or to mark with absolute certainty the extent of the power thereby con ferred. It has been declared that interstate commerce is a term of very large significance (Hopkins v. U. S., 171 U. S. 578, 597, citing many cases), and that the constitutional power conferred b y the Constitution is, as to interstate and foreign commerce, one without limitation. “ It authorizes legislation with respect to all the subjects of foreign and interstate commerce, the persons engaged in it, and the instruments by vdiich it is carried on. ” (Sherlock v. Ailing, infra.) In Lottery Cases (188 TJ. S. 321, 346) Mr. Justice Harlan, deliver ing the opinion of the majority of the court, reviews at great length the cases in which the court has considered the meaning of the term “ commerce among the several States” in the commerce clause of the Constitution and the power of Congress thereunder, and very completely summarises the effect of the decisions. I can only quote 720 BULLETIN OF TH E BUEEAU OE LABOE. a small portion of what lie says, but an examination of the case will show the very large significance of the term and the difficulty of giv ing it a precise definition and the wide scope of the power. He says: “ The leading case under the commerce clause of the Constitution is Gibbons v. Ogden (9 Wheat. 1,189,194). Keferring to that clause, Chief Justice Marshall said: “ 6W e are now arrived at the inquiry—what is this power? It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which com merce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Con gress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than are prescribed in the Consti tution. These are expressed in plain terms, and do not affect the questions which arise in this case, or which have been discussed at the bar. If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of Con gress, though limited to specified objects, is plenary as to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution tne same restric tions on the exercise of the power as are found in the Constitution of the United States/ ” * * * * * * * “ This reference to prior adjudications could be extended if it were necessary to do so. The cases cited however sufficiently indicate the grounds upon which this court has proceeded when determining the meaning and scope of the commerce clause. They show that com merce among the States embraces navigation, intercourse, commu nication, traffic, the transit of persons, and the transmission of mes sages by telegraph. They also show that the power to regulate com merce among tne several States is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution the same restrictions on the exercise of the power as are found in the Constitution of the United States; that such power is plenary, com plete in itself, and may be exerted by Congress to its utmost extent, subject only to such limitations as the Constitution imposes upon the exercise of the powers granted by it; and that in determining the character of the regulations to be adopted Congress has a large discretion which is not to be controlled by the courts, simply because, in their opinion, such regulations may not be the best or most effec tive that could be employed.” Decisions sustaining the validity of State laws affecting commerce and stating the relations of State and Congressional powers were then cited, after which the court said: In all of-these cases the State legislation has been sustained as a valid exercise of the police power of the State, although it may affect interstate commerce, against the contention that it was an invasion of the power given by the Constitution to Congress to regulate inter state commerce. But in all of them the court has been careful to indicate that, as to interstate commerce, Congress also has the power to enact such legislation; that while the power of Congress to regu late such commerce is plenary, it is competent for the States to pass DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 7 21 such legislation until Congress acts; and that such State legislation, in so far as it may conflict therewith, must yield to similar legisla tion by Congress, whenever it chooses to exercise its power. In M., K. and T. Ry. v. Haber, at page 635, the court says: “ These cases all proceed upon the ground that the regulation of the enjoyment of the relative rights, and the performance of the duties, of all persons within the jurisdiction of a State belong primar ily to such State under its reserved power to provide for the safety of all persons and property within its limits; and that even if the subject of such regulations be one that may be taken under the exclu sive control of Congress and be reached by national legislation, any action taken b y the State upon that subject that does not directly interfere with rights secured by the Constitution of the United States or by some valid act of Congress must be respected until Con gress intervenes.” In Pierce v. Van Dusen, (78 Fed. Rep. 693) the circuit court, com posed of Mr. Justice Harlan and Judges Taft and Lurton, had under consideration the Ohio statute which changed or modified the fellowservant rule, thus, as is contended here, creating a liability which did not theretofore exist. After citing and commenting upon many of the cases which I have above cited, the court says, at page 700: “ Undoubtedly, the whole subject of the liability of interstate rail road companies for the negligence of those in their service may be cov ered by national legislation enacted by Congress under its power to regulate commerce among the States. But as Congress has not dealt with that subject, it was competent for Ohio to declare that an employee of any railroad corporation doing business here, including those engaged m commerce among the States, shall be deemed, in respect to his acts within this State, the superior, not the fellow-ser vant, of other employees placed under his control. If the effect of the Ohio statute be, as undoubtedly it is, to impose upon such corpora tions, in particular circumstances, a liability for injuries received by some of its employees which would not otherwise rest upon them according to the principles of general law, that fact does not release the Federal court from its obligation to enforce the enactments of the State. Of the validity of such State legislation we entertain no doubt.” It is difficult to understand why, if Congress may regulate the liability of common carriers engaged in interstate commerce to strangers, it may not regulate their liability to their employees, the rotection of interstate commerce and of the persons engaged therein, eing as much involved in the one case as in the other. Nor are these cases to the effect that the power of Congress can only be exerted by prescribing that some particular thing shall be done. And it would seem to be apparent that this act is none the less a rule or regulation under which the business of such carriers is to be con ducted and by which it is to be governed, because it does not prescribe that some specific thing should be done or some specific appliance used. In Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co. (196 U. S., 1) [Bulletin No. 56, p. 303], the court had under consideration the act of Congress known as “ the safety appliance act” of March 2, 1893 (U. S. Stats., vol. 27, 531), requiring railroads engaged in interstate commerce to equip E 722 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, their locomotives, trains, and ears with air brakes, automatic couplers, etc. The plaintiff claimed that he was relieved of assumption of risk under common-law rules b y section 8 of that act, which provided— “ That any employee or any such common earner who may be injured b y any locomotive, car, or train in use contrary to the pro vision of this act shall not be deemed thereby to have assumed the risk thereby occasioned, although continuing in the employment of such carrier after the unlawful use of such locomotive, ear, or trainhad been brought to his knowledge.” That this act was squarely within the power of Congress under the commerce clause of the Constitution was not questioned. And that in connection with such a regulation as that requiring the use of such appliances Congress had the power, under the commerce clause of the Constitution, to change the common-law rule as to the assumption of risk seems to have been thought too clear for argument. In that case the court said: “ The object was to protect the lives and limbs of railroad employees by rendering it unnecessary for a man operating the couplers to go between the ends of the cars, and that object would be defeated, not necessarily by the use of automatic couplers of different kinds, but if those different kinds would not automatically couple with each other.” And again: “ The primary object of the act was to promote the public welfare by securing the safety of employees and travelers.” The court here recognizes that the public welfare, as involved in interstate commerce, may be promoted by legislation o f Congress for the protection o f persons employed in carrying it on. While the act here under consideration does not state either in its title or body, as did that act, what the object of it is, it seems to me that such object is plain upon its face. It will be apparent, I think, from a mere reading of the statute that Congress had in contempla tion much more than the mere creation and imposition of the liability mentioned upon common carriers engaged in interstate commerce to their employees. It seems to me to be apparent that it had in con templation the protection of the lives and persons of the employees of such carriers whose employment had any relation to such com merce, and that it enacted the statute for that purpose, and by its provisions changed certain common-law rules determining liability m order to promote that object by securing a more careful selection of employees, a closer and more careful supervision of them-, and a more rigid enforcement of their duties, and thus to promote the public welfare. Now, if Congress has power,* as a regulation of commerce, having in view the promotion of the public welfare by securing the safety of employees and travelers, to pass an act like the safety-appliance act, requiring the use of specific appliances, and can in connection therewith and to promote tlie objects o f the statute change the com mon-law rule as to the assumption of risk, has it not power as a regulation of commerce to pass such an act as the one we are here considering? Must Congress be obliged, in order to bring its legislation within the commerce clause of the Constitution, to provide specifically and definitely for all the conditions that may exist and for all of the DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 723 almost infinite situations and circumstances that m a y arise affect ing the safety of employees in the conduct of the business of com mon carriers ? Must it specifically and definitely provide what pre cautions should be taken for the safety of employees under all such conditions and in all these almost innumerable situations? Can it not say generally, as it has in effect said in this act, we can not anticipate all of these conditions and situations; we can not provide for all the precautions which ought to be taken for the safety of em ployees by common carriers engaged in interstate commerce; but in order to secure, under all conditions and in all situations, a more diligent and thorough performance of the duties of such carriers, and in order to compel and insure that every proper precaution shall be taken for the safety of their employees, both as to the agencies and instrumentalities used and as to the selection apd supervision of such employees, and in order to minimize as far as possible the dan gers to such employees, we will not permit such carriers, in case of the death or injury of an employee resulting from their negligence or the negligence of any of then servants, to invoke certain commonlaw rules for the purpose of escaping liability, but they shall be overned by and their liability snail be ascertained by the rules erein laid down? May not Congress say, as it has, in effect, said in this act, we declare that interstate commerce, including those en gaged therein and the public to be served thereby, must be safe guarded by the rules of liability herein prescribed and that such commerce must bear the burden hereby imposed? It seems to me there can be but one answer to these questions, and that is that Con gress need not provide specifically and definitely for all such con ditions and situations, and that it has power under the commerce clause to pass such an act. Undoubtedly if Congress may prescribe specific rules it may pre scribe general rules, and may prescribe the consequences which shall follow m case of a violation o f either. There is no suggestion in the Constitution or in reason to the contrary. The field belongs to Con gress and it may, if it sees fit, occupy all of it. Congress has by the statute here in question in effect said: The employees of those engaged in interstate commerce are too frequently placed in peril of life and limb through the negligence of their employers and through the negligence of their own fellow-servants. Such commerce itself is subject to unnecessary hazards for the same reason. This must be prevented, or at least reduced to a minimum. The negligence of fellow-servants is in large measure under the control of the employers, if the latter but exercise proper care in the selection of such servants and in their supervision and require of them the performance of tasks only which will impose reasonable tests upon their skill or powers or endurance. Increasing the liability of the employer will tend to decrease those perils and hazards. The duties of such carriers as declared by the courts and as prescribed by particular statutes are well known and understood, and such duties must be more' faithfully performed and such carriers must see to it that greater precautions are taken to safeguard such commerce and to protect their employees engaged therein, and in order to secure this the rules of their liability shall be as herein provided. If it be contended that the creation of such liabilities is an exercise of the police power, and that such power belongs to the States, the f 724 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. answer is, that while as a general rule the police power belongs to the States, and was by the Constitution reserved to the States, yet Congress may, in the exercise of its power to regulate commerce, impose upon such commerce regulations which are in their essential nature police regulations. Upon no other theory can the decisions in Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co., supra, and in Lottery Cases, supra, be justified and sustained. I am therefore of the opinion that the first ground on which the constitutionality of this act is denied is not well taken. The second ground on which the constitutionality of the act is attacked is: That, if it be admitted that the act does regulate inter state commerce, it also regulates commerce that is exclusively within the several States, and that the latter is so inseparably combined with the former as to ^condemn the whole act as unwarranted by the Con stitution. The contention, as I understand it, is that a common car rier engaged in interstate commerce may be engaged in intrastate commerce also, and the language of the act being so broad as to cover all the employees of such carrier, without reference to the nature of their employment, it is not only a regulation of interstate commerce, but also a regulation of intrastate commerce, and as it is impossible to so construe it as to separate the two it must be held invalid. This contention is, I think, answered by what I have already said, and by the decisions to which I have referred, and others to which I shall call attention. Congress evidently intended that the act should embrace all the employees to whom its power under the commerce clause of the Con stitution extends, and if the power of Congress over interstate com merce is one without limitation, plenary and complete in itself, and which may be exerted to its utmost extent, subject only to such limi tations as the Constitution of the United States imposes, and if it authorizes legislation with respect to all the subjects of foreign and interstate commerce, the persons engaged in it, and the instruments b y which it is carried on; and if under such power Congress can, for the purpose of promoting the safety of employees engaged therein, and of persons and property carried therein, enact legislation such as that contained in this act under which the liability of carriers engaged in such commerce to their employees shall be determined (and the cases cited fully sustain all the foregoing propositions), it would seem to be apparent that it can make such legislation applicable to all employees of such carriers whose employment relates to such com merce. And if such carrier is also engaged in intrastate commerce, using therein the same means and agencies, such as railroad tracks, switches, cars, etc., it would also seem to be apparent that Congress can make such legislation applicable to all employees of such carrier whose employment relates to such means and agencies. In such case it may be said that the employment of such employees relates to interstate commerce. It seems to me that, as to a carrier engaged in both interstate and intrastate commerce, the act applies and was intended to apply, where such carrier uses, in whole or in part, the same means and agencies in both, and where the employment of the injured employee has some relation to such interstate commerce or to such means and DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 72£ If the carrier's Dusmess is carried on in such a way that the act must apply to all its employees for the reason that the employment of all of them relates to interstate commerce, it can make no difference,, so far as the power of Congress to pass the act is concerned. That it is within the power of Congress to regulate the liability of common carriers engaged at the same time in both interstate and intrastate commerce, and using the same means and agencies for both,, to all their employees whose employment has some relation to such means and agencies, and that Congress so intended, would seem to be apparent when we reflect that the safety of interstate commerce, and the protection of the lives and persons of those engaged therein, and of the persons and property carried therein, may depend as much upon the taking of proper precautions for the safety of employees* engaged upon intrastate traffic as upon the taking of such precautions, for the safety of those engaged upon interstate traffic only. The fact that a common carrier engaged in interstate commerce* may also be engaged in intrastate commerce, using therein in whole or m part the same means and agencies, can not defeat the power o f Congress to regulate such carrier. The regulation of intrastate com merce which may result in such a case (if indeed in such case there can be said to be any regulation of intrastate commerce by such an. act as this) is due to the fact that the carrier is at the same time and with the same means and agencies engaged in both kinds of com merce; and it seems to me that it could not possibly be said that because the legislation of Congress may operate upon intrastate com merce on account of the carrier being thus engaged in both kinds o f commerce it must be declared unconstitutional, and thus the power o f Congress defeated. The cases cited show that the States may enact legidation of the kind here in question when Congress has not already spoken, and that such legislation will be valid, although it may affect interstate commerce. Is it possible, then, if such legislation i& within the power of Congress as a regulation of interstate commerce,, that Congress can not exercise that power as to those engaged in. such commerce merely because at the same time and with the same means and agencies tney are engaged in intrastate commerce ? The question, it seems to me, answers itself. In an able article on the act here in question in the Central L aw Journal of October 12, 1906, volume 63, page 284, cited by counsel here and very largely quoted from, the authors say: “ The general and sweeping terms ‘ every common carrier/ ‘ any o f its employees/ ‘ any of its officers, agents, or employees/ ‘ all instru mentalities/ ‘ any common carrier/ and ‘ any employee* must estab lish the proposition that there was but one idea in the mind o f Congress, namely, that as to commerce there shall be no States.” To say that because Congress, as a regulation of interstate com merce, and for the purpose of promoting the public welfare by pro tecting life and person therein, has seen fit to abolish or modify certain rules of decision founded on the common law upon considera tions of public policy, in reference to those engaged in such com merce, it has thereby in effect meant that as to commerce there shall be no States, seems to me to be very extreme, if not absurd. The plain answer to any such assertion is that a person or corporation, engaged in both interstate commerce and intrastate commerce, and using therein the same means and agencies, and employing those 304 b — No. 7 0 -0 7 ------ 17 726 BULLETIN OF TH E BUBEAU OF LABOR. whose employment relates to such interstate commerce or to such means ana agencies, must submit to such conditions as that branch of the Government to which plenary power over such commerce has been given by the Constitution may prescribe, even though such con ditions may affect the intrastate commerce in which such person or corporation is engaged. In the same article its authors seem to look upon the changes made b y this act in the fellow-servant rule, the contributory-negligence rule, the rule as to the freedom of a carrier to contract with its employees concerning its liability for an injury to [an employee, and the removal of the limit to the amount of recovery for an injury resulting in death, so often prescribed by State statutes, as startling and dangerous. They do not so impress me. I think it has come to be generally recognized that the reasoning of the cases in which the fellow-servant rule has been laid down by the courts has, in view of modem methods and the many dangerous mechanical means and appliances used in almost every branch of modem industry, lost much, and in some cases all, of its force. I think it may be fairly asserted that the contributory-negligence rale, as laid down and applied by the courts, is, in view of modem conditions, certainly as applied to those engaged in certain occupations, a harsh, cruel, and unjust rale, and ought long since in the furtherance of justice and in the interest of humanity to have been greatly modified. It has never been the rale in admiralty, to which one of the text books on the Law of Negligence refers as being certainly nearer ideal justice, “ if juries could be trusted to act upon it.” This act at least leads in the direction of the admiralty law, and certainly if a rule is an ideal one its adoption should be striven tor in any intelli gent judicial system, and even if it were admitted that juries could not be trusted to act upon it, to which I do not at all agree, that would not be a condemnation of the rale, but of a part of that sys tem of jurisprudence which has come down from our forefathers, and which is, and let us devoutlv hope always will be, firmly rooted in our Constitution and laws. And is it not absurd that a common maximum standard should be established to measure the value of the lives of men to their families, especially when that standard is as low as some of the legislatures have fixed it? It would seem that the value of the life of a man to his family, or to those depend ent upon him, should be determined, as all other damages are deter mined, by the particular circumstances of each case. And there are substantial reasons why an employer, especially one engaged in certain occupations, should not be permitted to relieve himself by contract with his employees from liability for injuries caused by his negligence or the negligence of his other employees. Again, let us remember that it is the carrier, one engaged in inter state commerce, which the act here in question regulates in relation to its duty to its employees, and that if it may be said (as I do not think it can be) to regulate interstate commerce by reason of the fact that it may apply to an employee who at the time of his injury is engaged upon intrastate traffic, it is because of the manner or method in which the carrier conducts its business, combining or commingling its inter state with its intrastate commerce. The act here in question is directed to common carriers engaged in interstate or foreign com merce, and over such carriers Congress has plenary power. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 727 This act on its face relates to carriers engaged in interstate com merce. It extends to all such carriers. It extends to no others. Its fair meaning and interpretation is that it applies to all those em ployees of such carriers, and to those only, who have some relation to such commerce or to the means and agencies employed therein. Cases may possibly arise where a carrier engaged to some limited extent in interstate commerce may not be an interstate carrier within the mean ing of this act, as respects a particular employee, or as respects the cir cumstances of some particular case. That remains to be declared when the case arises. Extreme cases which may have no existence, and which may never exist, are not to be conjured up for the purpose of defeating the obvious intention of Congress. Extraordinary situ ations are usually not in the minds of the lawmakers, and legislation is not to be held bad with reference thereto. If the general purpose of the law, as fairly indicated by its terms, is within constitutional limits, it will not be defeated by applying to it the test of some extreme case, possibly within the literal provisions of the act, but entirely beyond its spirit and meaning as a whole. In the foregoing discussion reference has been made principally, if not altogether, to railroads engaged in interstate commerce, but the same principles and the same reasoning would apply as well to other common carriers engaged in such commerce. I am therefore of the opinion that the second ground on which the objection to the constitutionality of this act is based is not well taken. The contention that the act is void because it denies the equal pro tection of the laws is, I think, without merit. It is beyond question that a State legislature can change the common-law rules determin ing the liability of employer to employee as to all employers within its jurisdiction, and that such legislation would not be contrary to the fourteenth amendment because the danger to employees is greater in some occupations than in others, or because in the same occupation some of the employees may be exposed to greater danger than others. It was the evident intention of Congress that the act here in ques tion should embrace all employers ana all of their employees to whom its power under the commerce clause of the Constitution extends, and, considering the extent of that power, the fact that it .applies to all such employees, irrespective o f the danger of their particular em ployments, no more affects its constitutionality than would such fact affect the constitutionality of a similar State enactment whose pro visions were made applicable to all employers under its jurisdiction. But if the foregoing position is unsound, and if this Congressional enactment is subject to the equal-protection paragraph of the four teenth amendment, I am still of the opinion that, bearing in mind the object of the statute, the peculiar character of the business of the carriers affected and the public nature of their functions, and the fact that they are all treated alike under similar circumstances and conditions, it is valid, because the classification therein made is within the range of the legislative discretion and is practical and not palpably arbitrary. (Missouri Pacific Ry. Co. v. Mackey, 127 U. S. 205; Tullis v. Lake Erie and Western R. R., 175 U. S. 348; St. L., I. M. and S. Ry. Co. v. Paul, 173 U. S. 404.) Nor can it be said that for this reason the law is harsh and inequit able, because where the danger is less the liability will less frequently arise, and if there be practically no danger, there will be practically 7 28 BULLETIN OF TH E BUKEAU OF LABOR. no liability. But if it is, that would furnish no just cause for declar ing it invalid. The remedy would lie not with the courts, but with Congress. In Lottery Cases, supra, Mr. Justice Harlan says: “ But, as often said, the possible abuse of a power is not an argu ment against its existence. There is probably no governmental power that may not be exerted to the injury of the public. If what is done by Congress is manifestly in excess of the powers granted to it, then upon the courts will rest the duty of adjudging that its action is neither ’ egal nor binding upon the people. But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden, when he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constitu ents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in* all representative gov ernments/ ” The contention that the act violates the tenth amendment of the Constitution, is but another way of saying that it is not within the power of Congress under the commerce clause. And I think that no argument is necessary to refute the contention that it violates the fifth and seventh amendments. I am therefore of the opinion that the act in question is constitu tional and valid, and the demurrer must be overruled. I am not unmindful of the fact that the foregoing opinion, in so far as it relates to the commerce clause of the Constitution, is in conflict with opinions already pronounced by other Federal judges of the highest learning and ability [see Bulletin No. 68, pages 188-197], and I have approached and considered the questions involved with a just and real respect for decisions supported by such authority. But, feeling that I must exercise my own understanding and judgment with that independence which is expected from this department of the Government, I find myself unable to reach any other conclusions than those above indicated. (a) E mploym ent O f f ic e s — L abor A gents— L ic e n s e — Co n stru c Watts v. Commonwealth, Supreme Court o f Appeals o f Virginia, 56 Southeastern Reporter, page 223 .— This case was t io n o f St a t u t e — before the court of appeals on appeal from the corporation court of Danville, in which Albert Watts had been convicted of conducting business as a labor agent without a license. The law under which the action was brought defines a labor agent as “ any person who hires or a Similar conclusions as to the constitutionality of this law were arrived at in a case decided by Judge Hanford, Plummer v. Northern Pacific Railway Company, United States Circuit Court, Western District of Washington, Northern Division (March 2, 1907), another by Judge Trieber, Spain v. St. Louis and San Francisco Railroad Com-' pany , United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas (March 13, 1907), and a third by Judge Speer, Snead v. Central of Georgia Railway Company, United States Circuit Court, Southern District of Georgia, Eastern Division (March 25, 1907), 151 Fed. Rep. 608. The cases in which adverse decisions were rendered are at the time of the publication of this Bulletin before the Supreme Court of the United States on appeal. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 729 contracts with laborers, male or female, to be employed by persons other than himself; ” and provides that no person shall engage in such business without a license. Watts vras employed by a railway construction company as a day laborer, and was sent by his employers to undertake to secure addi tional help in Danville, without, however, taking out a license under the statute. The appeal resulted in a reversal of the judgment of the lower court. The opinion of Judge Whittle, who spoke for the court, is given herewith. After a statement of the facts he said: It thus appears that the single question presented by the record for our determination is, whether or not the plaintiff in error was engaged in the business of a labor agent within the meaning of the foregoing statute; it being admitted mat he had no license. W e have no difficulty in resolving that question in the negative. Indeed, it would seem clear that nothing more can be predicated of the transaction than that it constituted a hiring of laborers by the con struction company, the principal, through the medium of its own agent, for the lawful prosecution of its business. The case is con trolled by the maximum, “ Qui facit per alium, facit per se” (Broom’s Max. 818), a failure to observe which, in such case, would impose impossible restrictions upon corporations and natural persons throughout the Commonwealth, whose businesses necessitate the employment of large numbers of laborers. Corporations must of necessity act through agents; and it is wholly impracticable for individuals engaged in large affairs personally to hire laborers to carry on their work. If the doctrine contended for were maintained, contractors and others of that class would be compelled either to rely on labor agents to secure necessary labor or else go out of busi ness. It can not be inferred that the legislature, if within its com petency, intended to place such unreasonable limitations upon these essential factors in the internal improvement of the State. The purpose of the statute is to reach a class of persons who, for compen sation, conduct the business of employing laborers for other persons, with respect to whom they bear no other contractual relation; but it can have no application to a principal (whether a corporation or natural person) who in good faith employs such laborers for his own service by means of his own employee. In such case, under the maxim referred to, the acts of the agent are the acts of the principal. The differentiating features between the two transactions of hiring laborers by labor agents and by one’s own agent may be illustrated by the instances o f a purchase of real estate through a real estate agent, whose business it is to negotiate sales for any one who may choose to engage his services, with whom and his patron no other contractual relation exists, on the one hand, and a purchase by a principal through his own private agent, on the other. From the former the State exacts a license, but not from the latter. In our opinion, the statute in question is plainly not susceptible of the interpretation placed upon it by the trial court; but, even if it were of doubtful import, being a law imposing a license tax, upon familiar principles, it would have to be construed strictly, and most strongly against the State and in favor of the citizen. 730 E BULLETIN OF THE BUKEATT OF LABOB. x a m in a t io n and L ic e n s in g of P l u m b e b s — Sp e c ia l L aw s— Douglas v. People ex rel. Ruddy, Supreme Court o f Illinois, 80 Northeastern Reporter, page 3^1.—J. J. C o n s t it u t io n a l it y of Statu te— Ruddy filed a petition in the circuit court of Kane County, Illinois, for writ of mandamus to the mayor and aldermen of the city of Aurora, directing them to appoint and confirm a board of examiners of plumb ers, in accordance with the provisions of an act approved June 10, 1897, Hurd’s R. S., 1905, p. 403, c. 24. (See Tenth Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor, p. 295.) The mayor had refused to proceed with the appointment, contending that the law in question was unconstitutional and void. The law provided that all plumbers in cities, towns, or villages of 5,000 inhabitants or more should pro cure a license as a condition precedent to engaging in their trade. Boards of examiners are provided for in cities and towns having a pop ulation of 10,000 jot more, and the subjects of examination are pre scribed, as well as the fees, penalties, and other details. The ruling of the lower court was in favor of the petitioner, where upon the mayor appealed to the supreme court, in which the law was sustained and the judgment of the lower court affirmed. From the remarks of Judge Hand, who delivered the opinion of the court, the following is quoted: It is first contended that the act hereinbefore referred to is in con flict with those provisions of the constitution of this State and of the United States which provide that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The right of the citi zen to follow any legitimate busmess, occupation, or calling which he may see fit to engage in, and to use such right as a means of livelihood, is fully recognized m the constitutions of this State and of the United States. (Gillespie v. People, 188 111. 176, 58 N. E. 1007, [Bulletin No. 35, p. 797]; Bessette v. People, 193 111. 334, 62 N. E. 215 [Bulletin No. 41, p. 842].) Such right, however, is subject to the paramount right of the State to impose upon the enjoyment thereof any reason able regulation the public welfare may require, and the courts have frequently held that the legislatures of the several States may impose any restraint and prescribe any requirement they may deem proper for the protection of the public against the evils resulting from the incapacity and ignorance of persons engaged in the plumbing business, as master plumbers, employers of plumbers, or journeymen plumbers. (Singer v. State of Maryland (Md.) 19 Atl. 1044, 8 L. R. A. 551; Peo ple v . Warden of the City Prison (N. Y.) 39 N. E. 686, 27 L. R. A. 718; State v . Gardner, 58 Ohio St. 599, 51 N. E. 136, 41 L. R. A. 689, 65 Am. St. Rep. 785.) It is generally held that the legislature of a State may pass laws for the protection of the health, comfort, safety, or welfare or society, and in view of the right to exercise this general power, and the holdings of the courts in the cases from which the citations hereinbefore set out are made, we think it clear the subject-matter covered by the statute whose constitutionality is here assailed was properly incorporated into law by the legislature under an exercise of the police power of the State. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 731 It is next contended that the classification by said statute of the different cities, towns, and villages of the State into three classes, namely, those having less than 5,000 inhabitants, those of 5,000 inhab itants or more, and those of 10,000 inhabitants or more, is an arbitrary classification, and that by reason of that fact said act is special ana class legislation, and void. The general rule is that a classification of the cities, towns, and villages of the State by population as a basis for legislation may be made if such classification is based upon a rational difference of situation or condition found in the municipalities placed in the different classes; otherwise legislation based upon such classi fication will not be sustained. (Peojffe v. Knopf, 183 111. 410, 56 N. E. 155; L ’Hote v. Village of Milford, 212 111. 418, 72 N. E. 399, 103 Am. St. Rep. 234.) The statute under consideration does not apply to cities, towns, or villages whose inhabitants number less than 5,000, but does require master plumbers, employing plumbers and journeymen plumbers who engage in or work at the business of plumbing in cities, towns, or villages of 5,000 or more inhabitants, to pass an examination and obtain a certificate, in accordance with the provisions of the act, before engaging in business or in work; and in cities, towns, or vil lages of less than 10,000 inhabitants no board of examiners are required to be appointed and maintained, while in cities, towns, or villages of 10,000 inhabitants or more such boards are required to be appointed and maintained. W e think it clear that there is a rational difference in the situation or circumstances, so far as the plumbing business and the appointment of a board of examiners of plumbers are con cerned, between a city, town, or village of less than 5,000 inhab itants and a city, town, or village of 5,000 inhabitants or more, and between a city, town, or village of less than 10,000 inhabitants and a city, town, or village of 10,000 inhabitants or more— that is a city, town, or village of less population than 5,000 usually does not have a complicated system of sewers and is often without a sys tem of water supply, and has but little use for a complicated system of plumbing in its buildings or otherwise, while in a city, town, or village of 5,000 inhabitants or more a system of water supply and sewerage is likely to be established and a complicated system of plumbing made necessary, and the workmen who are to perform the work of supplying the plumbing to connect with said complicated system of water supply and system of sewers must necessarily have more experience and knowledge than it would be necessary to possess to install the plumbing in a house in a small city, town, or village— and, while the maintaining of an examining board might be burden some and unnecessary in a city, town, or village whose inhabitants number less than 10,000, in a city, town, or village of that number of inhabitants or more such examining board would be necessary and the expense of maintaining the board not burdensome. It is also urged that the act is not general in terms, and does not apply to all persons in the State alike, and for that reason, it is said, it is class or special legislation. The act does not apply uniformly to the persons engaged in or working at the business or plumbing as master plumbers, employing plumbers or journeymen plumbers in the several classes of cities, towns, and villages created by the act throughout the State, and we think, therefore, it is not subject to the criticism of want of uniformity in its application. A law is said to be 732 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. general and uniform not because it operates upon every person in the State alike, but because it operates alike upon every person in the State who is brought within the conditions and circumstances pre scribed by the law. (People v. Board of Supervisors, 223 111. 187> 79 N. E. 123.) In People v. Hazelwood, 116 111. 319, 329, 6 N. E. 480, 486, it was said: “ Laws are general and uniform and hence not obnoxious to the objection that they are local or special, when they are general and uniform in their operation upon all in like situation.” It is also urged that arbitrary powers are conferred by the statute upon the board of examiners provided for by said act. W e can not discover wherein such can be said to be the fact. The act provides that the board, when created, as soon as may be, shall meet, and designate a time and place for the examination of all applicants desir ing to engage in or work at the business of plumbing within their jurisdiction. The examination it is provided, may be oral or in whole or in part in writing, and is to be conducted with a view to test the practical knowledge of plumbing, house drainage, and plumbing ventilation of the applicant, and if, upon such examination the exam ining board shall be satisfied of the competency of the applicant, they shall issue to him a certificate authorizing him to engage in or work at the business of plumbing as a master plumber or employing plumber or a journeyman plumber, as the case may be. While the act may not be perfect in all its details, we think it a step in the right direction, and that it is not unconstitutional. L abor O r g a n iz a t io n s — P r o c u r in g D is c h a r g e — M a l ic e — D am Wyeman v. Deady et al., Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut, 65 Atlantic Reporter, page 129 .— In this case William E. ages— P roof— Wyeman sued John M. Deady and the Painters, Decorators and Paper Hangers of America, Local Union No. 481, to recover damages for unlawfully procuring his discharge; he also charged malicious and unlawful conspiracy. Wyeman was a painter and decorator and had been employed by D. and F. Hawley until his discharge was procured, “ because of the threats and intimidation of the defendants,” Deady being the business agent of the labor union. Wyeman sued in the superior court of Hartford County to recover $1,500 damages, and was awarded a judgment for $425, from which an appeal was taken. The supreme court of errors affirmed the judgment of the lower court, as shown by the following quotation from its opinion, which was delivered by Judge Hall: The defendants contend that the record contains no evidence of the alleged conspiracy, nor of the alleged malice, at least, upon the part of the union, nor of any authority of Deady from the union to make the claimed threats; and that as it appears from the plaintiffs own testimony that he was unemployed but 86 days during the period between the day of his discharge, and the date of the commencement of this action, and could have earned but $3 a day, the damages recoverable could not have exceeded $258. Section 1296 of the DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 733 General Statutes of 1902 makes it a criminal offense to threaten or use any means to intimidate any person to compel him to do or abstain from doing against his will any act which such person has a right to do. To deprive a workman or his employment by threaten ing and intimidating his employer is a criminal offense under this statute.* (State v. Glidden, 55 Conn. 46-74, 8 Atl. 890, 3 Am. St. Rep. 23.) That one who, by such means, has so injured an employee would also be liable in damages in a civil action is not questioned in this action. When such an injury results from the execution of a conspiracy it is the wrongful act done in carrying out the concerted plan, and not the conspiracy itself which furnishes the real ground for a civil action. (Savill v. Roberts, 1 Ld. Raymond, 374; Hutchins v. Hutchins, 7 Hill (N. Y .) 107.) The gist, therefore, of the present action is not the alleged con spiracy, but the injury to the plaintiff caused by the unlawful acts of the defendants in procuring his dismissal by threatening and intimi dating his employers. (Bulkley v. Storer, 2 Day 531.) To entitle the plaintiff to a verdict against both defendants no further proof of a conspiracy was required than that they were joint tort-feasors in procuring the dismissal of the plaintiff by means of such threats and intimidation; and had the proof been that but one of the defendants so procured the discharge the plaintiff, under section 760 of the General Statutes of 1902, w~ould have been entitled to a verdict against that one. Neither was it necessary for the plaintiff, to entitle him to a verdict under the allegations of the complaint, to prove any other malice than that which the law might imply from the unlawful act proved. The allegations of conspiracy and of malice contained in the complaint were neither of thepi essential to a sufficient statement of the plaintiff's cause of action. The former may be regarded either as an averment of a fact, the proof of which might aid the plaintiff in establishing a joint liability of the defendants, or like the averment of malice, as an allegation of a fact in aggravation of the injury complained of. (Robertson v. Parks, 76 Md. 118, 24 Atl. 411; Garing v. Frazer, 76 Me. 37.) Upon the question of whether the procurement of the plaintiff's discharge by the means alleged, was the joint act of the defendants, the testimony of the plaintiff, or his said employers, of the defendant Deady, and of other officers and members of the union, and the records of the doings at various meetings of the union were presented in the trial court. It is not our purpose to repeat that evidence here. It is sufficient for us to say of it that the record shows that there was evidence before the jury from which, in our opinion, they might reasonably have concluded that the plaintiff was discharged "from his employment on account of the threats to his employers, and the means to intimidate them made and used by the defendant Deady for the purpose of compelling the plaintiff's discharge; that Deady was the business agent and so-called walking delegate of the defendant union, and did said acts not only with the knowledge and approval, but by the authority of the union. Such facts would render both defendants liable as joint tort-feasors. The damages awarded are not necessarily excessive. Punitive damages might have been awarded even against the union if it either directed Deady to do the particular 734 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. acts complained of, or if it afterwards approved them (Maisenbacker v . Society Concordia, 71 Conn. 369-379, .42 Atl. 67, 71 Am. St. Rep. 213), or the jury may have found, as alleged in the complaint, that the plaintiff was otherwise injured in his business, than by the loss of employment during said period. L abor t iv e — O r g a n iz a t io n s — S t r ik e s — I n j u n c t io n — P P u n is h m e n t for Contem pt— L ia b il it y o f U ic k e t in g — M o n in c o r p o r a t e d n i o n s — Allis-Chalmers Company v. Iron Molders’ Union No. 125 et-al., United States Circuit Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, 150 Federal Reporter, page 155 .— This case was before the court on pro U ceedings to punish for contempt. An injunction was applied for by the company named in June, 1906, against four unions of iron molders in Milwaukee and South Milwaukee, to restrain them from obstructing the company’s business by coercion, intimidation, vio lence, etc. The unions complained of are voluntary associations of workmen, associated in the usual manner of trade unions, and were made parties by name, all the members not being joined, nor one or more members joined as representing all the members. There is no statute of Wisconsin providing for bringing actions against such voluntary associations as these, except section 2604, R. S. 1898, which provides that when the question is one of common or general interest to many persons, or when the parties are very numerous, one or more may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Union No. 125 contains about 1,000 members. A restraining order was granted on the bill of complaint and accom panying affidavits, but on hearing for a preliminary injunction the latter was denied. A supplemental complaint was filed September 11, 1906, and on the hearing on this bill, ten days later, an injunction issued, which prohibited the defendants— (1) From in any manner interfering with, hindering, obstructing, or stopping the business of the said company complainant, or its agents, servants, or employees, in the maintenance, conduct, manage ment, or operation of its business. (2) From compelling or inducing, or attempting to compel or induce by threats, intimidation, force, or violence, any of the said company’s employees to fail or refuse to work for it, or to leave its service. (3) From preventing, or attempting to prevent any person or persons by threats, intimidation, force, or violence, from freely enter ing into or continuing in the said company’s service. (4) From doing any acts whatever in furtherance of any con spiracy or combination to interfere with or obstruct the business of the said company, its officers, agents, or employees. (5) From congregating upon or about the company’s premises or the streets, approaches, and places adjacent or leading to said premises, for the purpose of intimidating its employees, or preventing or hinder DECISIONS OE COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 785 ing them from fulfilling tlieir duties as such employees, or for the purpose, or in such manner as to induce or coerce by threats, violence, intimidation, or persuasion, any of the said company’s employees to leave its service, or refuse to enter its service. (6) From maintaining at or near the premises of said company any picket or pickets in a threatening or intimidating manner. (7) From interfering with the said company’s employees in going to and from their work. (8) From going singly or collectively to the homes of said company’s employees for the purpose of intimidating or threatening them or collectively persuading them to leave its service. (9) From enforcing, maintaining, or aiding any illegal boycott against the said company, its agents or employees. (10) From endeavoring to illegally induce people not to deal with the said company, its agents and employees; which commands and injunctions you are respectively required to observe and obey. The court commented on the subject of picketing, stating that too many men had been employed for that purpose. Persuasion was held to be allowable, while a show of power, tending to coerce, vrould be objectionable. The suggestion had been made that the two men who stood at the gate as the representatives of the union, “ for the peaceful and honorable purpose of discussion,” be distinguished by some badge. A picket’s badge or button was accordingly adopted, but in such numbers— about two hundred in all— as to depart com pletely from the idea of the court in making the suggestion. Proceedings were begun on October 23, 1906, citing the defendant unions and certain individuals named to appear and show cause why they should not be punished for contempt in violating the injunction of September 24. Judge Sanborn, who delivered the opinion of the court, reviewed the evidence in considerable detail and discussed a number of cases in the course of a somewhat extended review of the principles involved. The action was held not to lie against the unions as such, and proceedings were continued against certain individuals named, while against others a penalty was assessed. The following quotations present the principal features of the opinion, and reproduce in part the facts and cases on which the court relied in reaching its conclusions: The right to strike for any cause or no cause is clear arid fully sus tained b y all authority. Even a conspiracy to strike, followed by legal damage, is not unlawful if formed to better labor conditions. The right of workmen to combine in trades unions in order to secure the economic advancement of their members is also unquestioned; and such unions are generally regarded as beneficial institutions for bettering the conditions of labor, and the relations between employer and employed. (Wabash R. Co. v. Hannahan (C. C.) 121 Fed. 563 [See Bulletin No. 49, p. 1374]). Whether a threat to strike, or bring about a strike, when made by a number of persons acting in concert, is lawful, is an entirely different question. The right to strike being clear, the first question which comes up is how far may the union and its members 736 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. go to make the strike effective by preventing the employer from engaging other workmen, so that he will eventually be compelled to yield to the demands of the strikers? This is usually the pinch of the situation. Here is the point where two equally clear and valu able constitutional rights come into opposition— the right of the workman to get as much as possible for himself on the best terms, and the right of the employer to use his capital and ability as he pleases to secure whatever profit his investment and skill may bring. The legal right involved is single, but asserted by two independent and conflicting interests, and the question is, which one must yield his right to that of the other, so far as they conflict. The general answer to this question is that neither must be permitted to maliciously injure the other without just cause or excuse. A more special answer is that so long as each, in the conflict between them, pursues only his own fair interest or advantage, and not the injury of the other, he is not liable for any injury which is merely incidental. As said by the supreme court of Wisconsin in the news paper advertising case (State v. Huegin, 110 Wis. 189, 85 N. W. 1046, 62 L. R. A. 700), stating their conclusion negatively, a combination of persons to do acts to promote their own legitimate interests is not liable for injury which is only the incidental result of such acts, and such a combination is not a conspiracy to inflict malicious injury, within section 4466a, Rev. St. 1898. In other words, indirect inter ference by a labor union with the employer’s business, not amounting to coercion, by preventing him from getting workmen to carry on his shop, is not unlawful so long as the combination is merely taking measures to secure its own legitimate advantage or economic advance ment, although harm may incidentally result to the employer. So long as the betterment of labor conditions is the main object sought, even though the strikers may succeed in persuading all the available laborers to join their union, and support the strike, and, having thus secured a monopoly of the labor market, compel the employer, after long struggle and great loss of profit, to yield to the demands or go out of business, yet such injuries can not be regarded as malicious, or such acts as criminal or unlawful, either at the common law or under section 4466a of the Wisconsin Revised Statutes of 1898. This conclusion is well expressed by Judge Adams in Wabash R. Co. v. Hannahan (C. C.) 121 Fed. 563. It is upon this principle that the act permitting picketing in England was passed, and many cases per-‘ mitting “ peaceful picketing” have been decided, as well as other cases holding serious injury caused by sharp competition in business not to be actionable. While “ peaceful picketing” is very much of an illusion, yet it is at least theoretically possible, and entirely lawful. It is expressly permitted by act of Parliament (St. 38 and 39 Yict. c. 86, section 7); Lyons v. Wilkins (1896) 1 Ch. 811; (1899) 1 Ch. 255. The recent case of Karges Furniture Co. v. Amalgamated W ood workers Local Union, 165 lnd. 421, 75 N. E. 877, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 788 [Bulletin No. 63, page 564], discusses the question of lawful and unlawful combination, and holds that a strike by concerted action, followed b y an agreement that the strikers would take peaceable means to induce other employees to join the union and strike, it being expressly resolved that under no circumstances should any striker endeavor by violence or intimidation to influence any work man, did not constitute a conspiracy. Peaceful persuasion of men DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 737 to prevent them from taking the places of strikers, and paying their return railroad fare, held not unlawful. [Cases cited.] Members of labor unions may, for the purpose of strengthening their organiza tion, persuade and induce others in the same occupation to join their union, and, as a means to that end, refuse to allow their members to work in places where nonunion workmen are employed. There would be nothing wrongful or unlawful in their going upon the prem ises of the owner, with his permission, where their associates were engaged at work, for the purpose of ordering them or notifying them to desist from work thereon, unless their conduct in that respect be so persistent and annoying as to constitute a nuisance. (Gray v. Building Trades' Council, 91 Minn. 171, 97 N. W. 663 [Bulletin No. 53, page 955.]) Whatever may be thought of the soundness of these views there can be no doubt that the injunction in this case permitted all such picketing as should not be done in a threatening or intimidating manner. But, though interference by strikers causing damage may not be unlawful, and be permitted by the injunction, it is equally true that immunity ceases where coercion, intimidation, violence, or malicious interference with contract rights begin. (Wabash R. Co. v. Hannahan, supra.) Where peaceful picketing develops, as it generally does in a strike, into “ strong, persistent, and organized persuasion," and social pressure of every description, making the condition of workmen disagreeable and intolerable, followed by hints of injury, veiled threats, offensive or abusive language, and occasional instances of assault and personal violence— all of which conditions are shown in the evidence in this case— then we have a condition condemned by the injunction, a compelling or inducing by threats, intimidation, force, and violence, the quitting of workmen, a pre venting by threats, etc., workmen from entering the service, and the maintaining of picket lines in a threatening and intimidating manner. The condition has passed from that of the peaceful purpose of pro moting the economic ends of the union men, and has entered the unlawful stage of malicious injury, without just cause or excuse, to rights just as important, and as fully protected by the Constitution, as those on whose, behalf these acts are committed. I understand the word intimidation to denote two kinds of coercion: (1) A threat by word or act of an individual, or by a combination of persons, to do' something unlawful, reasonably calculated to compel the person threatened to do or not to do something; and (2) request or persuasion by or on behalf of a combination of persons to do or not to do something, resulting in coercion of the will from the mere force of numbers. In the first case the nature of the act, and the coercion, determine liability; in the second the conspiracy or concerted act and the coercion determine it. A. threatens B. with assault unless he quits work, and thus coerces him. A number of men, representing themselves and a larger number, request B. to quit work, and by the force of numbers coerce him to do so. Civil liability follows in both cases— in the first, from the nature of the act threatened; in the second from the coercion by force of numbers. In this case, however, it is unnecessary to go to the extent of holding that coercion of the second description would be a violation of the injunction, as I find that the company's workmen, and those about to become workmen, were coerced by threats of unlawful acts. The view of the law herein 738 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. expressed is not only the well-settled rule in the Federal courts, and in Wisconsin by the decisions construing section 4466a of the Wisconsin Revised Statutes of 1898 (binding on this court), but is the strongly noticeable trend of decision both in England and the United States. Section 44<?6a reads as follows: “ Any two or more persons who shall combine, associate, agree, mutually undertake or concert together for the purpose of willfully or maliciously injuring another in his reputation, trade, business or profession by any means whatever, or for the purpose of maliciously compelling another to do or perform any act against his will, or preventing or hindering another from doing or performing any lawful act, shall be punished/’ etc. All agreements to maliciously injure another are unlawful. A con spiracy to wrongfully injure another is actionable-at the common law if it is so carried out as to cause damage, whether or not the person injured would have had a remedy if the act had been done by a single person. The doctrine that an act which is not actionable ir done by one is not when done by many is not the law of Wisconsin. A combi nation to produce injury not the incidental effect of the promotion of the legitimate interests of the members of the combination, is a con spiracy to inflict a malicious injury under section 4466a. The ele ment of malice may make that act an actionable injury which would not otherwise be so. The union of individual forces by agree ment, to accomplish injury, gives to such agreement or combination the character of a purpose to reach the end b y violence, and the accomplishment thereof the character of a purpose effected by violence. The Huegin Case was taken to the United States Supreme Court to test the constitutionality of section 4466a. The opinion was written by Justice Holmes, whose dissent in Vegelahn v. Guntner, 167 Mass. 92, 44 N. E. 1077, 35 L. R. A. 722, 57 Am. St. Rep. 443 [Bulletin No. 9, p. 197], has given rise to much comment in later cases. The statute was held not to violate the fourteenth amendment of the Federal Constitution, providing that no person shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process or law. Justice Holmes lays down the following propositions: Malicious' injury means, to harm malevolently for the sake of the harm, and not merely as a means to some further end legitimately desired. The intentional infliction of damage creates liability, unless the defendant had a just cause or excuse. A statute may properly punish a combination to do a malicious injury. Liberty of persons to combine in order to inflict malicious damage was not among the rights which the fourteenth amendment was intended to preserve. I conclude, therefore, that where persuasion reaches the stage of intimidation and coercion, as I believe it has in this case, -it becomes malicious injury if harm or damage results, and is within section 4466a, as thus construed by the courts of Wisconsin and the Supreme Court of the United States. The court then reviewed a number of American and English cases in which the motive of the parties complained of was considered, and continued as follows: Coming now to the question whether the picketing was maintained in a threatening and intimidating manner, were the workmen coerced by threats of unlawful acts to quit work, or not to enter service? DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 739 Were they so coerced by individual acts or by a combination of per sons with threats of personal injury, etc.? Excluding the case of coercion b y mere force of numbers without threats of unlawful acts, as indicated above? Were the acts of the pickets, and those aiding them, reasonably calculated to constrain, overcome the will, destroy freedom of action, coerce the volition, by putting the workmen in fear of injury by violent means ? It is established by the evidence that the conduct or the pickets calculated to persuade, induce, or force the workmen, consisted entirely of the concerted action of two or more. The pickets were in groups of two, four, six, and sometimes more. Their words and acts, as well as the silent but powerful influence of the badges or buttons were all on behalf of the unions, for the benefit of union molders, the asserted betterment of labor conditions as rep resented by the unions. Indeed, as has been already said, this benefit to the cause of union labor is the only just cause or excuse which could relieve their acts from the charge of illegality; this is the only way they can possibly justify combined interference with the company’s busmess. Consequently, acts of interference, obstruction, organized, constant and persistent persuasion, social pressure and similar meth ods, when they reach such a point as to be clearly and (in a criminal case) beyond reasonable doubt coercion, making the situation of the workmen so unpleasant, disagreeable, and intolerable that they are constrained to quit work or not go to work, are unlawful, even though there is no direct or positive threat to do an act in itself unlaw ful. The combination or concert of action, resulting in coercion, stamps conduct as illegal, without such a threat of harm or bodily injury as would be necessary to make intimidation by one illegal. In this case, after giving full scope to the presumption of innocence and the rule of reasonable doubt, I am thoroughly convinced that intimidation has been shown, mainly by coercion through constant threat of unlawful harm, exerted by the concerted action of the pick ets. The picket line has been systematically, constantly, and long maintained. The pickets have officers, a marshal, and picket cap tains, and they wear emblems of authority, white picket buttons. While the use of these buttons was suggested by the court when grant ing the injunction, to afford means of detection of those committing unlawful acts, and thus designed to deter violations of the injunction, yet, although they may have been of use in this respect, they have, on the other hand, much increased the efficiency and pressure of the coercion. These buttons, like the uniform of the soldier, are emblems of a mysterious and powerful organized authority, and greatly increased the potency of the picket line. The pickets were always on hand, exercising constant, systematic, and persistent pressure. There were many specific acts of violence, vile and offensive language, threats of injury and bodily harm, and one homicide. The workmen became terrorized and intimidated, resulting in serious injury to the employer. It is said that there have been many arrests and convictions of non union workmen for the crime of carrying concealed weapons, but this is only additional evidence that the men feared bodily harm. Under these circumstances it makes no difference that the pickets, as a gen eral rule, spoke politely to the workmen. Under such circumstances, the mere constant presence of the pickets, their buttons, and numbers, even if they said nothing, would carry with it constant threat, produc ing fear and alarm among the workmen. Thus the picketing was 740 BULLETIN OF TH E BUEEAU OF LABOR. maintained in a mreatening and intimidating manner, in violation of the sixth paragraph of the injunction; also in violation of the second paragraph, restraining the constraint of workmen to quit by threats, intimidation, force, or violence; also the fourth and seventh para graphs restraining all acts in furtherance of conspiracy and unlawful interference with workmen. A simple “ request” to do or not to do a thing, made by one or more of a body of strikers under circumstances calculated to convey a threatening intimation, with a design to hinder or obstruct workmen, is unlawful intimidation, and not less obnoxious than the use of physical force for the saipe purpose. (In re Doolittle (C. C.) 23 Fed. 545.) A like method of “ peaceful picketing” is vig orously condemned by Judge McPherson, in Atchison R. Co. v. Gee (C. C.) 139 Fed. 582. There can be no doubt, as it seems to me, that the constant and regular maintenance of the pickets after repeated acts of violence by pickets, the use of abusive epithets, the creation of an unfriendly atmosphere surrounding the workmen, with the other conditions mentioned, constitutes a clear case of a conspiracy among the pickets to unlawfully intimidate and coerce the workmen. While I do not find a conspiracy on the part of the unions at the beginning of the strike, yet I am satisfied from the testimony that all the pickets after wards combined and conspired to intimidate workmen, and that such conspiracy existed at the time of filing the original bill in this case. I find a conspiracy existed as defined by section 4466a, Rev. St. Wis. 1898, as construed and limited by the Supreme Courts of Wisconsin and the United States. It still remains to consider wrhat particular pickets should be punished for violation of the injunction, whether their officers and the strike committee should be so punished, and whether the unions are shown to have become identified with the conspiracy of the pickets, or can in any event be punished. As to the unions: I shall assume, without particularly examining the evidence, that it sufficiently appears that the unions, by their continued support of the strike through the strike committee, and otherwise, have approved of the picketing as actually carried on. Upon this assumption, it becomes necessary to consider whether the unions, as unincorporated voluntary associations, can be made parties to a suit, fined, or punished for violating an injunction. A trade union, in this State, is simply an assemblage of persons. It is in no manner recognized by the law as an entity separate from its members, except to the extent that a partnership is so recognized. No statute has permitted it to sue or be sued in its common name. Its members may sue or be sued, either by joining all of them or one or more for all, where the members are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all in, but it is the suit of the members, not or the union. I have no doubt that an injunction may properly go against a trade union by name, and will operate to restrain all of its members who have knowl edge of it; Consolidated Steel & Wire Co. v. Murray (C. C.) 80 Fed. 811; United States v. Coal Dealers’ Ass’n (C. C.) 85 Fed. 252, 260; but that is a very different thing from fining the union, or rendering judgment for damages against it. It is also true that such a judg ment or fine may go against a trade union in England; but this liability has been taken away by the statute passed in December, 1906. The bill of complaint names four unions as defendants, and 59 DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 741 individual members of such unions, and alleges that some of the defendants are also officers of the unions. It does not expressly make the individual defendants parties on behalf of the unions, nor indi cate which defendants belong to a particular union. A general appearance was entered in the names of the four unions and the individual defendants, who all answered the bill. Such appearance of course operated as a waiver of any objection of nonjoinder of parties. After such general appearance the defendants could not stop the proceedings until other parties defendant should be brought not operate to bring in persons not named as parties. Individual members of the unions not mentioned in the bill, or sued either in a personal or representative capacity, were not, by the general appear ance of all the defendants, brought in or joined in any manner. The status of persons represented in equity suits by others is dis cussed in Pomeroy's Remedies, sections 396-398 of the second edition and in Code Remedies, sections 296, 297. It appears from his discussion that such represented parties plaintiff are not actually before the court unless they assent in some way; though a slight act of assent is enough; nor are they bound by the decree without such assent. As to represented defendants, he says that where the pro ceedings assume a hostile character, even as to a represented plain tiff, he must either have taken the steps necessary to make him an actual party, or, having notice and an opportunity to come in, he refuses or neglects to do so. And he lays down the same rule as to defendants. The matter, however, seems to be set at rest by equity rule 48, which follows: “ Where the parties on either side are very numerous, and can not, without manifest inconvenience and oppressive delays in the suit, be all brought before it, the court in its discretion may dispense with making all of them parties, and proceed in the suit, having sufficient parties before it to represent all the adverse interests of the plaintiffs and defendants in the suit properly before it. But in such cases the decree shall be without prejudice to the rights and claims of all the absent parties." It will be seen that the decree does not bind the absentees or represented defendants, as it is required to be made without prejudice to their rights. (See Coann v. Atlanta Cotton Factory (C. C.) 14 Fed. 4.) No case was cited on the argument in which a judgment or decree for damages, or a fine for contempt of court, went against an unincorporated society or trade union, except Barnes v. Chicago Typographical Union, where Judge Holdom or the superior court of Cook County, 111., imposed a fine of $1,000 upon the defendant union, which was composed of 2,800 members, was named as a party defend ant, and whose officers and executive committee were also joined as defendants. The case is now pending on appeal in the appellate court of Illinois. In the Racine Boycott Case, decided by Judge Fowler, judge of the eighteenth Wisconsin circuit, August 27, 1906,' the final injunction went against the unions, but the decree for dam ages was limited to individual defendants. In Guilfoil v. Arthur, 158 111. 600, 41 N. E. 1009, and Fitzpatrick v. Rutter, 160 111. 282, 43 N. E. 392, there was no personal judgment against the union. (See, 304 b — No. 70— 07----- 18 7 42 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. also, Franklin Union v. People, 220 111. 355, 77 X. E. 176, 4 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1001,110 Am. St. Rep. 248 [Bulletin No. 65, p. 347] and Flan nery v. People, 225 111. 62, 80 N. E. 60.) “ A voluntary association, unincorporated, which is not organized to carry on some trade or business, or to hold property in this State, and does not in fact carry on a trade or business or hold property therein, can not sue or be sued as such. (Railroad Co. v. Dick, 7 Neb. 246.) The individual members are to be sued in such cases, not the association.” (Cleland v. Anderson, 66 Neb. 252, 92 N. W. 306, 96 N. W. 212, 98 N. W. 1075.) The St. Paul Typothetse, an association of employers formed to promote and protect the firms, corporations, and persons composing it in controversies with their workmen, and the St. Paul Bookbinders’ Union, a trade union formed for similar pur poses, can not sue or be sued in the association name. “ It is well settled that, in the absence of a statute otherwise providing, to be entitled to conduct judicial proceedings in court, a party litigant must be either a natural or artificial person.” They have no legal entity distinct from that of their numbers. “ The rule is followed by an unbroken line of authorities, though a different rule has been applied in many of the courts in actions purely of an equitable nature.” (Citing Niblack on Soc. and several cases; 22 Pl. & Pr. 242; St. Paul Typothetse v. St. Paul Bookbinders’ Union 94 Minn. 351, 102 N. W. 725 [Bulletin No. 59, p. 355]). Voluntary association can not be made liable to a personal judgment in an equity suit to foreclose a lien. (M. E. Church South v. Clifton (Tex. Civ. App.) 78 S. W. 732.) Suit may be brought against two or more members of a voluntary association to represent the interests of all. (Pearson v. Anderburg, 28 Utah 495, 80 Pac. 307; Niblack on Soc. 181.) I think therefore that no fine can go against the unions named and who have answered as defendants. In respect to the punishment of individual defendants who have been served with process or have appeared, for participating or tak ing part in the picketing or any particular act of intimidation or coercion, it is clear that those members of the strike committee who have been made parties and were served or appeared on the order to show cause are also liable to be punished for violating the injunction. Those defendants who, although they have done picket duty, yet are not shown to have taken part m any specific act of coercion or intimi dation, will only be punished by a nominal fine. Being members of the picketing combination, the act of any one picket is technically the act of all, but this will not make them liable to more than a nominal fine. The marshal and captains of the pickets at the three foundries, so far as they are before the court, have clearly violated the injunc tion by maintaining the picket system, and should be punished accordingly. In regard to the punishment of persons who are not made parties defendant, but who have been brought into the contempt proceed ings as having violated the injunction after having obtained notice of it, I adopt the rule stated by Judge Kohlsaat in Employers’ Team ing Co. v. Teamsters (C, C.) 141 Fed. 679. A further hearing for the purpose of argument will be necessary in order that the proper pun ishment may be fixed, and the proper persons who have violated the injunction clearly ascertained. At the same time the question of costs in favor of those cited in these proceedings, who have already 743 DECISIONS OE COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. been or should hereafter be entirely dismissed from the proceedings, will be disposed of. The necessity of a formal finding of facts and conclusions will also be considered at the same time. N o t e .— In Flannery v. People, supra, several of the defendants had been sentenced to imprisonment for contempt, and after the decrees were affirmed, and on January 17, 1907, they commenced serving their terms. They were convicted of the violation of an injunction, and an order continuing it, issued on a bill in equity filed in the superior court of Cook County, in the name of Chicago Typothetse, an unincorporated trade union, against Franklin Union (incor porated) and others. The bill recited that it was brought on behalf of nine members of the union, who signed and sealed a paper, attached to the bill, requesting it to be filed in the name of the union. An injunction was issued at the time of filing the bill. The defendants Flannery and others appeared and answered. Six weeks after filing the bill the court gave leave to amend it by joining as complainants all the persons who signed the written statement and one other, and by the same order the injunction was continued. Flannery and others were convicted of violating both injunctions. Flannery and Shea, two of those undergoing imprisonment, applied to the United States Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illinois for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that they were deprived of their liberty with out due process of law, on the ground that the superior court had no jurisdiction to issue the injunction, or allow the amendment, because no person was named as complainant. They relied on the cases cited above, and Proprietors of the Mexican Mill v. Yellow Jack Sil ver Min. Co., 4 Nev. 40, 97 Am. Dec. 510, Barbour v. Albany Lodge, 73 Ga. 474, Richardson v. Smith & Co., 21 Fla. 336, Seely v. Schenck & Denies, 2 N. J. Law, 75, Steamboat v. Wilson, 11 Iowa, 479, and Steamboat Bums, 9 Wall. 237, 19 L. Ed. 620. The writ was quashed and the petition dismissed February 25, 1907. R a il r o a d ees— Co m p a n ie s — L Co n s t it u t io n a l it y of ia b il it y to St a tu te — R W orkmen not e g u l a t io n o f E m ploy Co m m er ce— Martin v. Pittsburg and Lake Erie Railroad Company, Supreme Court o f the United States, 27 Supreme Court, page 100.— Reuben L. Martin, a railway postal clerk, was injured by the derailing of a train of the above-named company on which he was employed. This derailment took place in the State of Pennsylvania, in consequence of the negli gence of the crew of a work train. Among other defenses offered by the company was a statute of Pennsylvania limiting the right of recovery for personal injury or loss of life of persons other than pas sengers, “ lawfully engaged or employed on or about the roads, works, depots, and premises of a railroad company or in or about any train or car therein or thereon, of which company such person is not an em ployee/7 to such rights as the person would Lave if he were an employee of the company. The suit wras brought in the court of common pleas of Mahoning County, Ohio, and wrent on appeal to the circuit court of the county and the supreme court of the State, 744 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. in all of which the judgment was in favor of the railroad company. Martin then appealed the case to the Supreme Court of the United States, which affirmed the judgment of the lower courts. The case was considered in the Supreme Court solely as it depended on the validity and application of the Pennsylvania statute above mentioned, the constitutionality of which was disputed by the plain tiff. The grounds on which the law was upheld are disclosed in the following extracts quoted from the opinion of the court, as delivered by Judge White: As the application of the statute, if valid, presents no Federal ques tion, we are unconcerned with that matter, although it may be ob served in passing that it is conceded in the argument at bar that tinder the settled construction given to the statute by the supreme court of Pennsylvania the plaintiff, as a railway postal clerk, was not a passenger, and had no greater rights in the event of being injured in the course ot his employment than would have had an employee of the railroad company. Was the application of the statute thus construed to a railway postal clerk of the United States in conflict with the power of Con gress to establish post-offices and post-roads ? In Price v, Pennsvlvania R* Co., 113 U. S. 221, 28 L. ed. 981, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427, this question was in effect foreclosed against the plaintiff in error. That case was brought to this court from a judg ment of the supreme court of Pennsylvania (96 Pa. 258), holding that a railway postal clerk was not a passenger within the meaning of the Pennsylvania act, and hence had no right to recover for inju ries suffered by him in consequence of the negligence of an employee of the company. The Federal ground there relied upon was sub stantially the one here asserted; that is, the power ot the Govern ment of the United States to establish post-offices and post-roads, and the effect of the legislation of Congress and the act of the Post master General in appointing mail clerks thereunder. After fully considering the subject the case was dismissed because no substantial Federal ground was involved, the court saying (113 U. S. 221, 28 L. ed. 98\, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 428): “ The person thus to be carried with the mail matter, without extra charge, is no more a passenger because he is in charge of the mail, nor because no other compensation is made for his transportation, than if he had no such charge; nor does the fact that he is in the employment of the United States, and that defendant is bound, by contract with the Government, to carry him, affect the question. It would be just the same if the company had contracted with any other person who had charge of freight on the train to carry him without additional compensation. The statutes of the United States which authorize this employment and direct this service do not, therefore, make the person so engaged a passenger, or deprive him of that character, in construing the Pennsylvania statute. Nor does it give to persons so employed any right, as against the railroad com pany, which would not belong to anv other person in a similar employment, by others than the Unitect States.” This brings us to the second contention,— the repugnancy of the Pennsylvania statute to the commerce clause of the Constitution. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 745 It is apparent from the decision in the Price case, just previously referred to, that in deciding that question we must determine the application of the statute to the plaintiff in error, wholly irrespec tive of the fact that at the time he was injured he was a railway postal clerk. In other words, the validity or invalidity of the stat ute is to be adjudged precisely as if the plaintiff was, at the time of the injury, serving for hire in the employment of a private individual or corporation. Cases were then cited in which the power of the States to regulate the liability of common carriers was affirmed, after which Judge White said: The contention that because, in the cases referred to, the opera tion of the State laws which were sustained was to augment the liability of a carrier, therefore the rulings are inapposite here, where the consequence of the application of the State statute may be to lessen the carrier's liability, rests.upon a distinction without a differ ence. The result of the previous rulings was to recognize, in the absence of action by Congress, the power of the States to legislate, and of course this power involved the authority to regulate as the State might deem best for the public good, without reference to whether the effect of the legislation might be to limit or broaden the responsibility of the carrier. In other words, the assertion of Fed eral right is disposed of when we determine the question of power, and doing so does not involve considering the wisdom with which the lawful power may have been, under stated conditions, exerted. And the views previously stated are adequate to dispose of the assertion that the Pennsylvania statute is void for repugnancy to the 14th Amendment. If it be conceded, as contended, that the plaintiff in error could have recovered but for the statute, it does not follow that the legislature of Pennsylvania, in preventing a recovery, took away a vested right or a right of property. As the accident from which the cause of action is asserted to have arisen occurred long after the passage of the statute, it is difficult to grasp the con tention that the statute deprived the plaintiff in error of the rights just stated. Such a contention, in reason, must rest upon the propo sition that the State of Pennsylvania was without power to legislate on the subject,— a proposition which we have adversely disposed of. This must be, since it would clearly follow, if the argument relied upon were maintained, that the State would be without power on the subject. For it can not be said that the State had authority in the premises if that authority did not even extend to prescribing a rule which would be applicable to conditions wholly arising in the future. The contention that because plaintiff in error, as a citizen of the United States, had a constitutional right to travel from one State to another, he was entitled, as the result of an accident happening in Pennsylvania, to a cause of action not allowed by the laws of that State, is in a different form to reiterate that the Pennsylvania stat ute was repugnant to the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States. Conceding, if the accident had happened in Ohio, there would have been a right to recover, that fact did not deprive the State of Pennsylvania of its authority to legislate so as to affect persons and things within its borders. The commerce clause not 746 BULLETIN OE THE BUREAU OE LABOR, being controlling in the absence of legislation by Congress, it follows, of necessity, that the plaintiff in error, as an incident of his right to travel from State to State, did not possess the privilege, as to an accident happening in Pennsylvania, to exert a cause of action not given by the laws of that State, and had no immunity exempting him from the control of the State legislation. The proposition that the statute denied to the plaintiff in error the equal protection of the laws because it “ capriciously, arbitrarily, and unnaturally,” by the classification made, deprived railway mail clerks of the rights of passengers, which they might have enjoyed if the statute had not been enacted, is without merit. The classifica tion made by the statute docs not alone embrace railway mail clerks, but places in a class by themselves such clerks and others whose employment in and about a railroad subjects them to greater peril than passengers in the strictest sense. This general difference ren ders it impossible in reason to say, within the meaning of the 14th Amendment, that the legislature of Pennsylvania, in classifying pas sengers in the strict sense in one class and those who are subject to greater risks, including railway mail clerks, in another, acted so arbitrarily as to violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Judgment affirmed. DECISIONS UNDER COMMON LAW. L O r g a n iz a t io n s — P r o c u r in g abor D is c h a r g e — V io l a t io n of Brennan v. United Hatters o f North America , Local No. 17, et al., Court o f Errors and Appeals o f New Jersey, 65 Atlantic Reporter, page 165.— This was an action to recover R ules— M a l ic e — D am ages— damages from the Hatters’ Union because of interference with em ployment. Brennan was a hatter by trade and a member of the union named, and was fined for an alleged violation of its rules. He claimed that the rules of procedure in such cases had been violated and refused to pay the fine, whereupon his membership card was taken up, which resulted, under the terms of agreement between the union and Brennan’s employers, in his discharge. Judgment for damages was awarded in the circuit court of Essex County, from which this appeal was taken. Judge Pitney, who announced the judg ment of the court, sustained the finding of the court below in an opinion in which he discussed with much fullness the principles involved and cited a number of cases, both British and American, in support of the position taken. A syllabus, prepared by the court, announced the conclusions of law in the case, and is reproduced herewith: 1. Plaintiff was a member of a trade union (a voluntary associa tion), whose rules provided for fining and otherwise punishing any member violating the laws of the association or the rules of trade. The rules provided for a trial of the accused member before a tri bunal established within the association, at the same time providing that he should be entitled to “ due notice and a fair trial,” and should DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 747 not be put on trial unless charges were submitted in writing by a member of the association. Plaintiff, having been put on trial with out the submission of written charges and without due notice, wras sentenced to pay a fine and to give up his place of employment for one year. Held, that this course of procedure, unless consented to by plaintiff, furnished no justification for the subsequent action of the association and its officers in procuring his discharge from employ ment. 2. Whether plaintiff did consent to be put on trial without charges or notice was, under the evidence in this case, a question for the jury. 3. The constitution of this State (article 1, par. 1) establishes the unalienable right of all men to acquire property and pursue and obtain safety and happiness. Included in this is the right of making contracts for personal services as a means of acquiring property. It is therefore the right of every man to engage in such lawful business or occupation as he may choose, free from hindrance or obstruction by his fellow-men, saving such as may result from the exercise of equal or superior rights on their part. 4. Whoever intentionally and without legal justification or excuse >rocures an employer to discharge his employee, to the damage of the atter, is liable to an action for damages at the suit of the employee; and this, although there was no binding contract of employment. 5. Malice, in the law, is the intentional doing of a wrongful act, without justification or excuse. A “ wrongful act,” within the mean ing of this definition, is any act which in the ordinary course will infringe upon the rights of another, to his damage, except it be done in the exercise of an equal or superior right. 6. Where a party has entered into an agreement that is void, because contrary to public policy, he may, on repudiating such agreement, recover upon a ground of action that exists independent thereof. His suit is not barred by the operation of the maxim “ in pari delicto.” I L abor O r g a n iz a t io n s — R ig h t to S t r ik e — S y m p a t h e t ic Pickett v. Walsh, Su preme Judicial Court o f Massachusetts, 78 Northeastern Reporter, page 758.— Robert H. Pickett and others prayed for an injunction against S t r ik e s — U n in c o r p o r a t e d A s s o c ia t io n s — one Walsh, walking delegate of the Stone Masons’ Union No. 9, one Driscoll, walking delegate of the Bricklayers’ Union No. 3, and other officers of these unions, all of the city of Boston. The plaintiffs also undertook to make the two unions named and the Bricklayers’ Union No. 27 defendants in the case, all being unincorporated associations of wTorkingmen. The prayers were three in number, asking that the defendants might be enjoined (1) “ from combining and conspiring in any way to compel L. P. Soule & Son Company, or any other per son, firm, or corporation, by force, threats, intimidation, or coercion, to discharge the complainants in the bill of complaint, to wit: Robert H. Pickett, Charles A. Pickett, Thomas J. Lally, and Walter H. Wil kins, or to refrain from further employing them in and about their 748 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. trade and occupation; ” (2) “ from combining and conspiring to com pel the owners of the so-called Ford Building on Ashburton Place in the city of Boston to break or to decline to carry out their said con tract with the complainant Robert H. Pickett; ” and (3) “ from com bining and conspiring to interfere with said complainants, or any of them, in the practice of their trade and occupation, or to prevent them from obtaining further employment thereat.” An injunction to the intent indicated was granted b y the superior court of Suffolk County, whereupon an appeal was taken, resulting in a modification of the decree. The plaintiffs were by trade brick and stone pointers, whose work it was to clean the walls of buildings (usually when first erected), and to finish the mortar at the joints. These men commonly worked under contract, and at a less cost to the contractors than where the pointing and cleaning were done by the masons. It was also claimed that they were more skillful in the use of the acids used in cleaning the walls than were the bricklayers and masons. The latter, however, had agreed that members of their unions would do no work on any building where the contractor would not agree to have the pointing done by them. On the day set for the agreement to go into effect, the owners of the Ford Building, for the erection of which L. P. Soule & Son Company were the general contractors, had made a separate agreement with Robert H. Pickett, one of the complainants, to do the work of pointing on the building named. When this was discovered by walking delegates Walsh and Driscoll, they notified the masons and bricklayers on other buildings which L. P. Soule & Son Company were constructing, whereupon these workmen struck. It was shown also that another firm had been told that it must dismiss the pointers in its employment if it wished to avoid a strike on all the buildings then being erected by it in the city of Boston. These facts having been reviewed by Judge Loring, who delivered the opinion of the court, he then proceeded as follows: There seem therefore to be three causes of action upheld b y the decree. In the first place, Robert H. Pickett, one of the plaintiffs, had a contract with the owners of the Ford Building and was at work under it when the defendants struck. He seeks protection from a strike on L. P. Soule & Son Company to force the owners of the Ford Building to give this work to the unions and to take it away from him. Except for the fact of this contract in which the plaintiff Robert H. Pickett was alone concerned, the first and second causes of action are alike. The second cause of action consists in the effort of all the plaintiffs to be protected from being discharged or not employed b y the L. P. Soule & Son Company because the defendants struck work for that corporation so long as that corporation worked on a building on which Robert H. JPickett was employed by the owners of that building. DECISIONS OE COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 749 Finally, the plaintiffs sought to be protected against a strike by the defendants in order to get the work of pointing for the members of their unions. No objections have been taken to the bill on the ground of multi fariousness. We shall therefore consider all three causes of action. We will consider first the last of the three causes of action. The question, so far as this the third cause of action goes, apart from a question of fact which we will deal with later, is whether the defendant unions have a right to strike for the purpose for which they struck; or, to put it more accurately and more narrowly, it is this: Is a union of bricklayers and stone masons justified in striking to force a contractor to employ them by the day to do cleaning and pointing at higher wages than pointers are paid, where the contractors wish to make contracts with the pointers for such work to be done by the piece, because they think they get better work at less cost with no liability for accidents, and where the pointers wish to make con tracts for that work with the contractors on terms satisfactory to them ? In other words, we have to deal with one of the great and pressing questions growing out of the powerful combinations, sometimes of capital and sometimes of labor, which have been instituted in recent years where their actions come into conflict with the interests of indi viduals. The combination in the case at bar is a combination of workmen, and the conflict is between a labor union on the one hand and several unorganized laborers on the other hand. It is only in recent years that these great and powerful combinations have made their appearance, and the limits to which they may go in enforcing their demands are far from being settled. It is settled however that laborers have a right to organize as labor unions to promote then welfare. Further, there is no question of the general right of a labor union to strike. On the other hand it is settled that some strikes by a labor union are illegal. It was held in Carew v. Rutherford, 106 Mass. 1, 8 Am. Rep. 287, that a strike by the members of labor unions was illegal when set on foot to force their employer to pay a fine imposed upon him by the union of which he was not a member, for not giving the union all his work. To the same effect see March v. Bricklayers’ & Plasterers’ Union No. 1 (Conn.) 63 Atl. 291 [Bulletin No. 67, p. 884]. Again, it was held in Plant v. Woods, 176 Mass. 492, 57 N. E. 1011 [Bulletin No. 31, p. 1294], that a labor union could not force other workmen to join it by refusing to work if workmen were employed who were not members of that union. To the same effect see Erdman v . Mitchell, 207 Pa. 79, 56 Atl. 327 [Bulletin No. 51, p. 450]; O’Brien v . People (111.) 75 N. E. 108 [Bulletin No. 62, p. 324]; Loewe v. Cali fornia State Federation of Labor (C. C.) 139 Fed. 71 [Bulletin No. 61, p. 1067]. And' see in this connection Giblan v. National Amalga mated Laborers Union (1903) 2 K. B. 600. When and for what end this power of coercion and compulsion commonly known as a strike may be legally used is the question which this case calls upon us to decide. In the present state of the authori ties it becomes necessary to consider the general principles governing labor unions and strikes by labor unions. The right of one or more citizens to pursue his or their calling as he or they see fit is limited by the existence of the same right in all 750 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. other citizens. The right and the result are accurately stated by Sir William Erie in his book on Trade Unions in these words: “ Every person has a right under the law, as between him and his fellow sub jects, to full freedom in disposing of his own labor or his own. capital according to his own will. It follows that every other person is subject to the correlative duty arising therefrom, and is prohibited from any obstruction to the fullest exercise of this right which can be made compatible with the exercise of similar rights by others.” We have now arrived at the point where a labor union, being an organization brought about by the exercise on the part of its members of the right of every citizen to pursue his calling as he thinks best is limited in what it can do by the existence of the same right in each and every other citizen to pursue his and their calling as he or they think best. In addition to the limitation thus put on labor unions there is a fact which puts a further limitation on what acts a labor union can legally do. That is the increase of power which a combination of citizens has over the individual citizen. Take for example the power of a labor union to compel by a strike compliance with its demands. Speaking generally a strike to be successful means not only coercion and compulsion but coercion and compulsion which, for practical purposes, are irresistible. A successful strike by laborers means, in many if not most cases, that for practical purposes the strikers have such a control of the labor which the employer must have that he has to yield to their demands. A single individual may well be left to take his chances in a struggle with- another individual. But in a struggle with a number of persons combined together to fight an individual, the individuals chance is small, if it exist at all. It is plain that a strike by a combination of persons has a power of coercion which an individual does not have. The result of this greater power of coercion on the part of a com bination of individuals is that what is lawful for an individual is not the test of what is lawful for a combination of individuals; or to state it in another way, there are things which it is lawful for an individual to do which it is not lawful for a combination of individuals to do. Take for example the case put in Allen v. Flood [1898] A. C. 1 , 165, of a butler refusing to renew a contract of services because the cook was personally distasteful to him, whereupon, in order to secure the services of the butler, the master refrains from reengaging the cook whose term of service also had expired. We have no doubt that it is within the legal rights of a single person to refuse to work with another for the reason that the other person is distasteful to him, or for any other reason however arbitrary. But it is established in this Commonwealth that it is not legal (even where he wishes to do so) for an employer to agree with a union to discharge a nonunion workman for an arbitrary cause at the request of the union. (Berry v. Donovan, 188 Mass. 353, 74 N. E. 603 [Bulletin No. 60, p. 702].) A fortiori a labor union can not by a strike refuse to work with another workman for an arbitrary cause. For the general proposition that what is lawful for an individual is not necessarily lawful for a combination of individuals see Quinn v. Leathern [1901] A. C. 495, 511; Mogul Steamship Co., Limited, v. McGregor, Gow & Co., 23 Q. B. D. 598, 616, on appeal [1892] A. C. 25, 45; Gregory v. Brunswick, 6 M. & G. 205, on appeal 3 C. B. 481. It is in effect included by Plant v. Woods [supra]. DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 751 These being the general principles, we are brought to the question of the legality of the strike in the case at bar, namely, a strike of bricklayers and masons to get the work of pointing, or, to put it more accurately, a combination by the defendants, who are bricklayers and masons, to refuse to lay bricks and stone where the pointing of them is given to others. The defendants in effect say we want the work of pointing the bricks and stone laid by us, and you must give us all or none of the work. The case is a case of competition between the defendant unions and the individual plaintiffs for the work of pointing. The work of point ing for which these two sets of workmen are competing is work which the contractors are obliged to have. One peculiarity of the case therefore is that the fight here is necessarily a triangular one. It necessarily involves the two sets of competing workmen and the con tractor, and is not confined to the two parties to the contract, as is the case where workmen strike to get better wages from their employer or other conditions which are better for them. The right which the defendant unions claim to exercise in carrying their point in the course of this competition is a trade advantage, namely, that they have labor which the contractors want, or, if you please, can not get elsewhere; and they insist upon using this trade advantage to get additional work, namely, the work of pointing the bricks and stone which they lay. There are things which an indi vidual can do which a combination of individuals can not do. But having regard to the right on which the defendants7 organization as a labor union rests, the correlative duty owed by it to others, and the limitation of the defendants7 rights coming from the increased power of organization, we are of opinion that it was within the rights of these unions to compete for the work of doing the pointing and, in the exercise of their right of competition, to refuse to lay bricks and set stones unless they were given the work of pointing them when laid. The result to which that conclusion brings us in the case at bar ought not to be passed by without consideration. The result is harsh on the contractors, who prefer to give the work to the pointers because (1) the pointers do it by contract (in which case the contractors escape the liability incident to the relation of employer and employee); because (2) the contractors think that the pointers do the work better, and if not well done the buildings may be permanently injured by acid; and finally (3) because they get from the pointers better work with less liability at a smaller cost. Again, so far as the pointers (who can not lay brick or stone) are con cerned, the result is disastrous. But all that the labor unions have done is to say you must employ us for all the work or none of it. They have not said that if you employ the pointers you must pay us a fine, as they did in Carew v. Rutherford. They have not undertaken to forbid the contractors employing pointers, as they did in Plant v. Woods. So far as the labor unions are concerned the contractors can employ pointers if they choose, but if the contractors choose to give the work of pointing the bricks and stones to others, the unions take the stand that the contractors will have to get some one else to lay them. The effect of this in the case at bar appears to be that the contractors are forced against their will to give the work of pointing to the masons and bricklayers. But the fact that the contractors are forced to do what they do not want to do is not decisive of the legality 7.52 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. of the labor union’s acts. That is true wherever a strike is successful. The contractors doubtless would have liked it better if there had been no competition between the bricklayers and masons on the one hand and the individual pointers on the other hand. But there is com petition. There being competition, they prefer the course they have taken. They prefer to give all the work to the unions rather than get nonunion men to lay bricks and stone to be pointed by the plaintiffs. Further, the effect of complying with the labor unions’ demands apparently will be the destruction of the plaintiff’s business. But the fact that the business of a plaintiff is destroyed by the acts of the defendants done in pursuance of their right of competition is not deci sive of the illegality of them. It was well said by Hammond, J., in Martell v. White, 185 Mass. 255, 260, 69 N. E. 1085 [Bulletin No. 53, p. 958], in regard to the right of a citizen to pursue his business with out interference by a combination to destroy it: “ Speaking generally, however, competition in business is permitted, although frequently disastrous to those engaged in it. It is always selfish, often sharp, and sometimes deadly.” We can not say on the evidence that pointing is something foreign to the work of a bricklayer or a stone mason, and therefore something which a union of bricklayers and stone masons have no right to com pete for or insist upon and so to bring the case within Carew v. Ruther ford; March v. Bricklayers’ and Plasterers’ Union No. 1 (Conn.); and Giblan v. National Amalgamated Laborers’ Union. On the contrary the evidence shows that in Boston the pointing is done to some extent by bricklayers and stone masons, and there is no evidence that the trade of pointing exists outside that city. The protest of the defendant unions against the plaintiffs’ being allowed to organize a pointers’ union is not an act of oppression. It is not like the refusal of the union in Quinn v. Leathern to work with the nonunion men or to admit the nonunion men to their union. The defendants’ unions are not shown to be unwilling to admit the plaintiffs to membership if they are qualified as bricklayers or stone masons. But the difficulty is that the plaintiffs are not so qualified. They are not bricklayers or masons. The unions have a right to determine what kind of workmen shall compose the union, and to insist that pointing shall not be a separate trade so far as union work is concerned. They have not undertaken to say that the contractors shall not treat the two trades as distinct. What they insist upon is that if the contractors employ them they shall employ them to do both kinds of work. The application of the right of the defendant unions, who are com posed of bricklayers and stone masons, to compete with the individual plaintiffs, who can do nothing but pointing (as we have said), is in the case at bar disastrous to the pointers and hard on the contractors. But this is not the first case where the exercise of the right of compe tition ends in such a result.^ The case at bar is an instance where the evils which are or may be incident to competition bear very harshly on those interested but in spite of such evils competition is necessary to the welfare of the community. So far as previous decisions go the case which comes nearest to the case at bar in the kind of question raised is that of Allen v. Flood. In that case there was a dispute between shipwrights and boiler makers as to iron work in shipbuilding. It was stated by some of the judges DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 753 that it was lawful for either to strike to get this work from the other. But the decision in Allen v. Flood went off on another ground. (See Lord Halsbury, Ch. in Quinn v. Leathern [1901] A. C. 495.) The plaintiffs have asked us to find on the evidence that the actions of the unions and of the business agents and other officers and of the members in compelling L. P. Soule & Son Company to discharge “ the plaintiffs was due in part to a desire to further and protect their own interests, or what they conceived to be such, but more to a reckless and wanton, if not malicious, disregard of the rights of the plaintiffs and of others engaged in the business of pointing and to a determi nation to force them out of business and thereby deprive them of their accustomed means of earning a livelihood.” We find on the evidence that the plaintiffs have not made out the fact that the defendants’ action was due to a reckless and wanton if not malicious disregard of the rights of the plaintiffs and of others engaged in the business of pointing. Under these circumstances we do not find it necessary to decide what would have been the result had we found that fact. It follows that the third clause of the decree, which follows the third prayer of the bill, must be stricken out. This brings us to the legality of the strike by the union bricklayers and masons employed by the L. P. Soule & Son Company on other buildings because that corporation was doing work on a building on which work was being done by pointers employed not by the L. P. Soule & Son Company but by the owners of the building. That strike has an element in it like that in a sympathetic strike, in a boycott and in a blacklisting, namely: It is a refusal to work for A., with whom the strikers have no dispute, because A. works for B., with whom the strikers have a dispute, for the purpose of forcing A. to force B. to yield to the strikers’ demands. In the case at bar the strike on the L. P. Soule & Son Company was a strike on that contractor to force it to force the owner of the Ford Building to give the work of pointing to the defendant unions. That passes beyond a case of competition where the owner of the Ford Building is left to choose between the two competitors. Such a strike is in effect compelling the L. P. Soule & Son Company to join in a boycott on the owner of the Ford Building. It is a combination by the union to obtain a decision in their favor by forcing third persons who have no interest in the dispute to force the employer to decide the dispute in their (the defendant unions’ ) favor. Such a strike is not a justi fiable interference with the right of the plaintiffs to pursue their calling as they think best. In our opinion organized labor’s right of coercion and compulsion is limited to strikes on persons with whom the organization has a trade dispute; or to put it m another way, we are of opinion that a strike on A., with whom the striker has no trade dispute, to compel A. to force B. to yield to the striker’s demands, is an unjustifiable interference with the right of A-. to pursue his calling as he thinks best. Only two cases to the contrary have come to our attention, namely: Bohn Mfg. Co. v. Hollis, 54 Minn. 233, 55 N. W. 1119; and Clothing Co. v. Watson, 168 Mo. 133, 67 S. W. 391 [Bulletin No. 44, p. 157]. The first of these two cases was overruled on this point in Gray v. Building Trades Council, 91 Minn. 171, 97 N.W. 663 [Bulletin No. 53, p. 955]. The conclusion to which we have come is suoported by My Maryland Lodge v. Adt, 100 Md. 238, 59 Atl. 754 BULLETIN OE THE BUEEAU OP LAB OP. 721; Gray v. Building Trades Council [supra]: Purington v. Hinchliff (111.) 76 N. E. 47 [Bulletin Xo. 64, p. 892]; Beck v. Railway Team sters’ Protective Union, 118 Mich. 497, 77 X. W. 13 [Bulletin Xo. 22, p. 457]; Crump v. Commonwealth, 84 Ya. 927, 6 S. E. 620; State v. Glidden, 55 Conn. 46, 8 Atl. 890; Purvis v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters (Pa.) 63 Atl. 585 [Bulletin Xo. 67, p. 897]; Gatzow v. Buening, 106 Wis. 1, 81 X. W. 1003 [Bulletin Xo. 40, p. 625]; Barr v . Essex Trades Council, 53 X. J. Eq. 101, 30 Atl. 881; Tempcrton v. Russell [1893], 1 Q. B. 715; Taft, J., in Toledo, Ann Arbor & Xorth Michigan Railway v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 54 Fed. 730; Loewe v. California State Federation (C. C.), [supra]; Hopkins v. Oxley Stave Co., 83 Fed. 912 [Bulletin X o .1 6 , p. 459] ; Casey v. Cincinnati Typo graphical Union (C. C.) 45 Fed. 135. It is settled in this Common wealth by a long line of cases that a defendant is liable for an inten tional and unjustifiable interference with the pursuit on the part of the plaintiff of his calling, whether it be of labor or business. For the reason that the strike on the buildings being erected by the L. P. Soule & Son Company was not a strike in a trade dispute between the union and that corporation, the first and second clauses of the decree were in substance correct. Robert H. Pickett, how ever, is the only plaintiff who is shown to have had any interest in the work on the Ford Building, and therefore the second clause of the decree alone should stand. A few matters of detail remain to be dealt with. All that the Bricklayers’ Union Xo. 27 seems to have done was to adopt working rules making pointing a part of the trade of brick laying. There is no evidence that they authorized the sending of the circular letter or took part in the strike. That union and the mem bers of it should be stricken from the decree. X o objection has been taken to the decree in favor of Robert II. Pickett on the ground that damages would have given him adequate compensation for breach of his contract. For that reason it is not necessary to consider whether his proper remedy was an action at law, for damages as in Carew v. Rutherford; Berry v. Donovan; and Quinn v. Leathern. There is a point of practice which must be noticed. As we have said, the plaintiffs have undertaken to make three unincorporated labor unions parties defendant. That is an impossibility. There is no such entity known to the law as an unincorporated association, and consequently* it can not be made a party defendant. That was conceded in Taff Yale Railway v. Amalgamated Societies of Railway Servants [1901] A. C. 426. The point'decided in that case was that the labor union defendant in that case could be sued because it was registered under Trades Union Act 1871, c. 31, and Trades Union Act 1876, c. 22. At law, if the objection is properly taken, eveyy member of an unincorporated association must be joined as a party defendant. In equity, if the. members are numerous, a number of members may be made parties defendant as representatives of the class. The iractice in Massachusetts in suits against members of unincorporated abor unions generally has been in accordance with these well settled principles. The judge who entered the decree in the case at bar made it apply to the unions “ and each and every member thereof.” He seems to have treated the case as a case where a numerous body had been properly represented by defendants joined for that pur f DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 755 pose. Possibly, so far as the trial of the case was concerned, the members of these two unions were in fact represented by the individual defendants. But there is nothing on the record which justifies a decree against “ each and every member” of the three unions on the ground that the defendants were joined as representing the individual members of the unions constituting a numerous class of defendants. The three unions should be stricken from the bill as parties defendant, and proper allegations should be made to bind the members of the two unions as parties defendant. If the individual defendants were proper representatives of the members of the unions in question, and these members would suffer no damage from the bill being so amended now, that can be done. The cases are collected in Fav v. Walsh, 190 Mass. 374, 77 N. E. 44. Upon the bill being so amended within 60 days the decree may be modified as hereinbefore set forth, and on being so modified, affirmed; otherwise the decree must be reversed. L abor O r g a n iz a t io n s — R ig h t s of M em bers— E x p u l s io n — R e — B y - l a w s — Dingwall v. Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees of America , Court of Appeal, First District of California, 88 Pacifc Reporter, page 597 .— George Dingwall had been expelled from the labor organization above named on a charge of conspiring against the welfare of the union and against its president,, and, after exhausting his remedies under the constitution and rules of the organization, had sued for reinstatement. This suit was successful, the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco granting an order to compel such reinstatement, which judgment was affirmed on appeal. Judge Harrison, who spoke for the court, used in part the following language: The constitution and general laws of the Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees of America, by which the appellant is governed in exercising control over its members, contain the following provisions for the expulsion of a member, and no others, v iz: “ S e c t i o n 69. All business of the local division must be strictly private from persons outside of the association, unless publication be authorized by the local division, and persons giving out information contrary to the local divisiomshall be fined, suspended or expelled. “ S e c . 70. Any member who divulges the quarterly password for any purpose other than to enter the meetings shall be expelled.” The appellant has also enacted the following by-law: “ S e c . 62. The president shall have power to fine any member who in any way disturbs a meeting while in session, but for all other offenses the executive board shall have the power to impose a fine according to their judgment. Such fine not to exceed fifteen dollars ($15), and no member shall be entitled to his working card until all dues, assessments and fines are paid.” Tne constitution and rules and by-laws of a voluntary unincorpo rated association constitute a contract between the association and its members, and the rights and duties of the members as betwreen in s t a t e m e n t 756 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. themselves and in their relation to the association, in all matters affecting its internal government and the management of its affairs, are measured by the terms of such constitution and by-laws. Mem bership in a social or beneficial association is in itself a personal rights especially when the purposes of the association include the amelioration or improvement of the condition under which the members obtain their livelihood, and the holder of such right is entitled to be protected in its enjoyment against any unauthorized act or proceeding on the part of his fellow-members, either as indi viduals or in their official or collective capacity, by which his enjoy ment of such right will be impaired or destroyed. The right of a member to retain his membership is subject to the terms and con ditions contained in the constitution or articles of association, and such by-laws or rules of conduct as may be adopted under these provisions, and, whenever it is sought to deprive him of his member ship, he has the right to insist upon a strict observance of the pro ceeding therefor which may have been prescribed in such articles or rules. Under the provisions of sections 69 and 70 of the constitution of the appellant above set forth, its right to expel a member is provided for certain offenses, none of which is included in the charges which were presented against the respondent herein, and by section 62 of the by-laws, a right is given to the president to fine a member for disturbing a meeting while in session. But for “ all other offenses” the appellant has declared, in section 62, that the executive board shall nave the power to impose a fine “ according to their judgment” not to exceed $15. The parties to the association having by agree ment thus limited and declared the penalty to be imposed, for all offenses, it was not within the power of the appellant to impose a different penalty for the offense with which the respondent was charged. (See Allnutt v. Subsidiary High Court, 62 Mich. 110, 28 N. W. 802; Meurer v. Association, 95 Mich. 451, 54 N. W. 954.) By enumerating certain offenses for which the penalty of expulsion may be imposed, the right to inflict such penalty for any other offense is impliedly excluded and the further provision that for “ all other offenses” the penalty shall be a fine not to exceed $15 is a positive declaration that the only penalty which could be imposed upon respondent for the offenses with which he is charged is such pecuniary fine. The failure of the respondent to appear at the hearing on December 13th did not confer upon the appellant any further authority than was given by its constitution ana rules. The charges served upon him contained no proposition for expulsion, and as he had the right to assume that the only penalty would be a fine within the limits rescribed by the above by-law, he may have been willing to submit is case to the determination of the executive board upon such proof as might be presented in support of the charges. The affirmance of the order of expulsion upon the appeal taken ’ therefrom by him did not validate the order. If provision was made by the association for any review of the proceeding, it was incumbent upon him to exhaust his remedies within the association before making application to the courts, but, as the order of expul sion was void, by reason of a want of jurisdiction in the appellant to make it, its affirmance did not give it any vitality. E DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 75 r The action of the appellant in expelling the respondent from its* membership was therefore without authority, and the order of the superior court directing that he be reinstated in his membership was; correct. S t r i k e s — P i c k e t i n g — I n j u n c t i o n — Pope Motor Oar Company v~ Keegan, United States Circuit Court, Northern District o f Ohio, Western Division , 150 Federal Reporter, page H 8 .— This was a hearing on the question as to the issuance of a preliminary injunction against certain persons named, among whom were J. J. Keegan and J. M. Keck,, officials of the International Association of Machinists, and a con siderable number of other persons, former employees of the Pope Motor Car Company, at the time engaged in a strike against the com pany. Judge Taylor in granting the injunction said in part: There is little controversy among counsel as to the law applicable to a case of this kind; the chief contention arising as to the application of the law to the facts in this case. The rules of law which I conceive to be well established, and which I shall apply to the consideration and determination of the questions now before the court, are, substan tially, as follows: To interfere, by violence, by threats or by intimi dation, with others who are pursuing their natural and constitutional right to labor when and where they please, is always wrong, and always unlawful. No sense of personal wrong, however great, how ever natural, or however excusable, can justify such interference.. No offended sense of right, as, for instance, that another is unjustly “ taking his job,” gives warrant to such interference. The strikers’ themselves are entitled to no more rights than those whom they find working in their old places. Individual freedom is the chief of the rights of each. It can not be said that a job is held except by mutual, consent. It can not be claimed by any intelligent man that one holds his job whether his employer desires it so or not. As well might we say that the workman, against his will, can be held to service by his employer. But nothing can be better settled, either in law, in conscience, or in common sense, than that every man may seek or refuse work, wheresoever he will; that workmen may combine for their mutual advantage; that they may persuade fellow-workmen, or others, to leave their employment; but such persuasion must be such as to per suade by reason, and not compel by threat, or violence, or intimida tion. One of the forms of persuasion which, under proper circum stances, the law recognizes as permissible, is “ picketing” b y strikers* that is to say, the detachment of men in suitable places for the purpose of coming into personal relations with the new workmen, in order, if possible, to induce them, by means of peaceful argument, to leave the places which they have taken, for such natural and proper reasons, as may appeal to men in such circumstances. Much has been said by the courts, and by others, as to the peacedisturbing quality of picketing; and it is claimed by many that picketing, though intended to be peaceable, and engaged in by no more than two or three at each station, necessarily results in violence1 or intimidation, and is itself intimidating. A learned judge, in 1867,, 304 b — No. 70— 07 -------19 7 58 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. said that, in his opinion, “ it was impossible to have an effectual sys tem of picketing without being guilty of that alarm, intimidation, and obstruction which is a breach of the law.” Possibly that may still be true, but it can not now be said without qualification, as it then could. In knowledge of their rights, in law-abiding spirit, in general intelligence, there has been a great advance, especially among skilled artisans. In this country, at least, they make up a large part of our intelligent and law-abiding citizens. If we can apprehend anything, we must observe that a better prac tice is prevailing, due, doubtless, to the increasing intelligence and good sense of those involved, and also to the fact that courts have come lo be recognized as ready to protect persons in their rights, and to punish those who unlawfully interfere with them. Undoubtedly violence and intimidation have, to some extent, been associated with picketing in this case; not always, though perhaps generally, at .the hands of the strikers themselves. The idle, the dissolute, and the law less are likely to take advantage of such a situation as this to commit unlawful acts, and the state of mind into which striking mechanics are likely to come, in such a case as we have here, is more or less likely either to make them indifferent to these acts when committed by others, or, in some instances, to encourage them. Nevertheless, I can not believe that, under proper circumstances, and with such a sense of self-restraint as men can exercise, picketing may not be prop erly conducted. A very instructive case in this connection is Karges Furniture Co. v . Amalgamated W oodw ork er Local Union et al. (Ind. Sup.) 75 N. E. 877, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 788. [Bulletin No. 63, page 564.] Some of the defendants named in this [present] case are shown to have participated in violence and intimidation. As to most of the defendants, there is a total absence of testimony respecting them. True, it is stated by some of the witnesses that large numbers of strikers were congregated in the neighborhood of the works, and used threatening and intimidating language to employees and officers of the complainant. Undoubtedly such conduct is unlawful. The presence of a large number of strikers, under such circumstances, is m itself intimidating. But no proof has been offered identifying any of the persons who made up this intimidating crowd of strikers. It is, as I have said, menacing .and intimidating for any considerable number of strikers to assemble for the purpose of “ picketing” or “ persuading.” And so, also, would be the establishing of many picketing stations in the same neighborhood, for the effect of the mass would be the same, in either case. No intelligent man fails to under stand what is meant by picketing which is solely for the purpose of lawful persuasion. Some claim is made on the part of the complainant that, in view of the testimony of the general character to which I have just referred, any injunction allowed in this case ought to reach all of the defend ants named in the bill; and the chief ground upon which the propri ety of this claim is rested is that, except Keegan and Keck, all of the men went out on strike, and that, if they were law-abiding and did not intend to participate in acts of intimidation or violence, they would not be harmed by the issuance of an injunction against them. I can not escape the conclusion that, under the circumstances of this case, where the defendants are made such in their individual DECISIONS OF COURTS AFFECTING LABOR. 759 capacity, and not in any organized capacity, it would be a gross injustice to attach to persons who have not been shown to be par ticipants in these transactions the stigma of an injunction, or to make them— as they might be without further order of the court— subject to the payment of any costs which necessarily accrue in such a case. In the case in Indiana, to which reference has just been made, a somewhat similar situation arose, and there the injunction was allowed against such of the defendants as were shown to have par ticipated in the violence or intimidation. Those who were not thus found to be unlawful participants in wrongful acts were not enjoined. That will be the order in this case. Nor is it necessary, in order to hold the defendants who are not enjoined to a strict compliance with the terms of such an injunction as will be issued in this case, that they should be named as defendants who ought to be enjoined. The Supreme Court of the United States, in Ex parte Lennon, 166 U. S. 548, 17 Sup. Ct. 658, 41 L. Ed. 1110, has definitely determined the law under such circumstances. It is there held that, to render a person amenable to an injunction, it is neither necessary that he should have been a party to the suit in which the injunction was issued, nor to have been actually served with a copy of it, so long as he appears to have had actual notice. That was a case which arose in this jurisdiction, and the question to which I have just referred was distinctly made and decided. That rule would applv, not only to persons named in this bill who are not found guilty or any viola tion of the rights of the complainant, but also to any other persons who, with knowledge of the issuance of the injunction, violate its terms. As to those who are parties to this bill, and not included by name within its terms as violators of the rights of others, they must be held to have knowledge of this opinion, and of the decree herein. (Union Pacific Ry. Co. (C. C.) v. Ruef, 120 Fed. 116.) I can not help but believe that the officers of the International Association of Machinists, and the leading and influential spirits among the men who have gone on strike, will fully understand the views of the court as to their rights and duties, and that a real and successful effort will be made to keep the conduct of those with whom they are asso ciated within the limits which are defined in this opinion. The pro priety of the rule as to picketing .as I have laid it down is, as to them, on trial. LAWS OF VARIOUS STATES RELATING TO LABOR, ENACTED SINCE JANUARY 1, 1904. [The Tenth Special Report of this Bureau contains all laws of the various States and Territories and of the United States relating to labor, in force January 1, 1904. Later enactments are reproduced in successive issues of the Bulletin, beginning with Bulletin No. 57, the issue of March, 1905. A cumulative index of these later enactments is to be found on page 783 et seq. of this issue.] KENTUCKY. ACTS OF 1906. Ch a pte r 52.— Employment of children—Hours of labor— Age limit—Factory inspection. S e c t io n 1. No child under sixteen years of age, employed in any manufacturing establishment, mine, mill or workshop in this Commonwealth, shall be required, per mitted or suffered to work therein more than sixty hours in any one week, nor more than ten hours in any one day, unless for the purpose of making a shorter work day on any one day of the week, and in no case shall any child under sixteen years of age work in any manufacturing establishment-, mine, mill or workshop after seven o’ clock in the evening or before six o’ clock in the morning of any day; and every person, firm, corporation or company employing any child under sixteen years of age in any manu facturing establishment, mine, mill or workshop shall post, and keep posted, in a conspicuous place in the office, a printed notice, stating the number of hours of labor per day required of such persons for each day of the week, and the number of hours of labor exacted or permitted to be performed by such persons shall not exceed the number of hours of labor so posted as being required. The time of beginning and ending the day’s labor shall be the time stated in such notice. Sec. 2. No child under fourteen (14) years of age shall be employed at any time in any factory, workshop, mill or mine, unless said child shall have no othfer means of support. No such child shall be employed in any mercantile establishment, nor in any service of any telegraph, telephone or public messenger company, laundry, printing establishment, except during the vacation of the public schools. No child under sixteen (16) years of age shall be employed at any occupation dangerous or injurious to health or morals. And in event of disagreement between the labor inspector and proprietor, the city or county physician shall be called in as referee, and his decision shall be final. It shall be the duty of every person employing children to keep a register in which shall be recorded the name, birthplace, age and place of residence of every person employed by him under the age of sixteen years; ana it shall be unlawful for any proprietor, agent, foreman or other person in or connected with a manufacturing establishment, mine, mill or workshop to hire any child under the age of sixteen years to work therein without there is first provided and placed on file in the office an affidavit made by the parent or guardian, stating the age, date and place of birth of said child. If said child has no parent or guardian, the said affidavit shall be made by the child, which affidavit shall be kept on file by the employer, and said register and affidavit shall be produced for inspection on demand by the labor inspector. There shall be posted conspicuously in every office of every factory, mill, workshop or mine, where children under sixteen years of age are employed, a list of their names, with their ages, respectively. The labor inspector shall nave the power to demand a certificate of physical fitness from the city or county physician in the case of children whom he deems physically unable to perform the labor at which they may be em ployed, and shall have the power to prohibit the employment of any child that can not obtain such a certificate. Sec. 3. No person, firm or corporation shall employ or permit any child under the age*of sixteen years to have the care, custody, management of, or to operate any ele vator, nor shall any person under sixteen years of age be employed at sewing belts or [to] assist in sewing belts. 760 LABOR LAWS---- KENTUCKY-----ACTS Ob1 1906. 761 Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the owner of any manufacturing establishment, or his agents, superintendents or other person in charge of the same, to furnish and supply, when practicable, or cause to be furnished and supplied therein, belt shifters, or other safe mechanical contrivances for the purpose of throwing belts on or off pulleys; and, whenever practicable, machinery therein shall be provided with loose pulleys. A ll vats, pans, saws, planes, cogs, gearing, belting, set screws and machinery of every de scription therein, which is palpably dangerous, where practicable, shall be properly guarded, and no person shall remove or make ineffective any safeguard around or attached to any planer, saw, belting, shafting or other machinery, or around any vat or pan, while the same is in use, unless for the purpose of immediately making repairs thereto, and all such safeguards shall be promptly replaced. No person under eighteen years of age shall be allowed to clean machinery while in motion. Sec. 5. Suitable and proper wash rooms and water-closets shall be provided in each manufacturing establishment, and such water-closets shall be properly screened and ventilated and be kept at all times in a clean condition; and if women and girls are employed in any such establishment, the water-closets shall have separate approaches and be separate and apart from those used by men. All closets shall be kept free [from] obscene writing and marking. A dressing room shall be provided for women and girls when required by the labor inspector m any manufacturing establishment in which women and girls are employed. Sec. 6. Every person, firm, corporation, association, individual or partnership employing girls or adult women in any manufacturing, mechanical or mercantile industry, laundry, workshop, renovating works or printing office in this Common wealth shall provide seats for the use of the girls and women so employed, and shall permit the use of such by them when not necessarily engaged in the active duties for which they are employed. Sec. 7. The walls and ceilings of each room in every manufacturing establishment shall be lime washed or painted, when, in the opinion of the labor inspector, it shall be conducive to the health or cleanliness of the person working therein. Sec. 8. The grand jury shall have inquisitorial powers to investigate violations of this act, and judges of the circuit courts of the State shall specially charge the grand jury at the beginning of each term of the court to investigate violations of this act. Sec. 9. The words “ manufacturing establishment,” wherever used in this act, shall be construed to mean any mill, factory or workshop where labor is employed. Sec. 10. A copy of this act shall be conspicuously posted and kept posted in each workroom of every manufacturing establishment, mill, mine or workshop in this Commonwealth. Sec. 11. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this act, or who suffers or permits any child to be employed in violation oi its provisions, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not more than fifty dollars for the first offense and not more than two hundred dollars for the second offense. Sec. 12. The provisions of this act shall not apply to the handling of fruits and vege tables in season, and the delivery of tobacco'at the warehouses, and preparing same for the manufacturer. Approved March 17, 1906. C h a p t e r 108.— Mine S e c t io n 1. regulations— Inspectors . * * * The governor is hereby authorized and directed to appoint two additional assistant inspectors of mines, who shall hold office for four years and until their successors are appointed and qualified. Said assistants shall have a thor ough knowledge of the different systems of working and ventilating coal mines and of the nature and properties of mine gases, especially of explosive gas, and shall have a thorough and practical knowledge of mining gained by at least five years experience at and in such mines. Said assistant inspectors before entering upon the discharge of their official duties, shall be sworn to discharge them faithfully and impartially, which oath shall be certified by the officer administering it and said certificate shall be filed with the secretary of state in his office and each of said assistants shall give bond in the penal sum of two thousand dollars, with surety to be approved by the governor, for the faithful discharge of his official duties. Each of said assistants shall give his entire time and attention to the duties of his office, which shall consist of aiding, under the directions of the chief inspector of mines, in carrying out the provisions of this act and of all other acts relating to the inspection of mines. He shall keep a record of all inspec tions made by him and make monthly report of the same to the chief inspector, and he shall at all times in all things pertaining to the duties of his office be subject to the orders of the chief inspector. Said assistants shall not be interested in operating any mine in this State, ana they shall each be liable to dismissal for willful neglect of duty or malfeasance in office. 762 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOE. Each assistant inspector shall receive an annual salary of twelve hundred dollars, payable monthly, and shall likewise be allowed and paid his necessary traveling expenses when engaged in the discharge of his official duties. Sec. 2. In order that the work of inspection of the mines may be systematized and expedited, the State is hereby divided into two inspection districts, the main line of that division of the Louisville and Nashville railroad, which extends from Louisville, Kentucky, to Nashville, Tennessee, being the division line between them. That part of the State west of the said railroad line shall be known as the first, or western, district, and that part east of said line shall be known as the second, or eastern, district. But, whenever he may deem it advisable to do so, the chief inspector of mines may divide the eastern district into two districts, thus making three inspection districts in all. One of the assistant inspectors shall reside in the western district and have as his especial assignment the inspection of the coal mines thereof; one shall reside in and have as his especial work the inspection of the coal mines of the eastern, or second, district; and one shall work in both districts, as the chief inspector may direct. When ever the chief inspector may deem it expedient to divide the second district into two districts, he shall assign one of the assistant inspectors to work in the third district resulting therefrom, so that each of the three assistant inspectors (and the two addi tional ones herein provided for and the one already provided for by law) shall have charge of a district; but all the assistants shall be subject to the rules and regulations laid down by the chief inspector for the general conduct of the office of inspector of mines, and whenever the chief inspector may deem it necessary, in the interest of efficient supervision of the mines, to temporarily employ the services of two or of all three assistants at the same time in one and the same district, or whenever he may deem it desirable in the interest of efficient inspection to temporarily change assistants from one district to another, he shall have authority so to do. Sec. 3. The owner, agent or operator of every coal mine in this State at which the miners are paid by weight shall provide at such mines suitable and accurate scales for the weighing of the coal for which the miners are to be paid; and when differences arise between the owner, agent or operator of the mine and the miners employed in the same as to the accuracy or capacity of the scales, the question shall be referred to the chief State inspector of mines, whose duty it shall be to inspect and test said scales in E erson or b y an assistant inspector of mines, as early as practicable after receiving notication; and should said inspector find the scales inaccurate or defective beyond the limit admitted in scales of standard manufacture, he shall notify the owner, agent or operator of the mine and said scales shall forthwith be repaired and made accurate or accurate scales substituted therefor. Any owner, agent or operator of a coal mine who refuses or fails to comply with instructions to render his mine scales accurate shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than five dollars nor more than fifty dollars. Sec. 4. All mines known to generate fire-damp or explosive gas shall, as nearly as practicable, be inspected every sixty days; and the chief inspector of mines is hereby directed to procure the most efficient ana modern appliances and instruments, includ ing a Shaw or other equally efficient gas tester, for detecting and estimating the amount of explosive gas in the mines, the same to be paid for upon the order of the inspector, approved by the governor, and they shall be the property of the State. Sec. 5. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation, or any agent, or employee of same, to sell or furnish any oil to be used for illuminating purposes in coal mines in this State, unless the same shall have been inspected, approved and certified as hereinafter provided; and any person, firm or corporation, or the agent or employee of same, violating the provisions of this section, shall be guilty of a misdeameanor and fined not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars for the first offense; and for each sub sequent offense shall be fined not less than fifty dollars nor more than one hundred dollars. Sec. 6. It shall be the duty of the State inspector of mines, in person or b y an assist ant inspector of mines, to inspect all miners’ oil or equivalent material used for illumi nating purposes in (foal mines, and when said oil complies with the requirements and tests of the seventh section of this act, he shall stencil, or otherwise plainly mark, each barrel, cask or package in which it is contained substantially as follows: “ Approved th is -------day o f -------------------- by Inspector------------------------ , ” the blanks to be filled out with the date and name of the inspector making the inspection; but if the oil does not come up to the said requirements and tests, the barrel, cask or package shall be so marked substantially as follows: “ Rejected for illuminating purposes in the coal mines of the State of Kentucky th is-------day o f --------------------b y Inspector----------------------- , ” the blanks to be filled out with the date and name of the person making the inspection. A record shall be kept in the office of the chief inspector of mines, showing the num LABOR LAW S---- KENTUCKY-----ACTS OF 1906. 763 ber of barrels or other packages or gallons inspected, whether approved or rejected, and giving date, place of business and name of the person, firm or corporation for whom inspection was made. Sec. 7. The requirements and tests which will authorize the approval provided for in the preceding section are as follows: It shall be a pure animal or vegetable oil or other material as free from smoke and bad odor and of equal merit as an llluminant as pure animal or vegetable oil, and not the product or by-product of rosin. The oil must be tested at sixty degrees Fahrenheit. Its specific gravity must not exceed twenty-four degrees Tagliabue. The test must be made in a glass jar one and five-tenths inches in width and seven inches in depth. Should the oil to be tested be below forty-five degrees Fahrenheit in temperature, it must be heated until it reaches eighty degrees Fahrenheit; and should the oil be at or over forty-five degrees Fahrenheit, but below sixty degrees, it must be raised to a temperature of seventy degrees Fahrenheit, and then, after being well shaken, it is to be allowed to cool gradually to a temperature of sixty degrees Fahrenheit before finally being tested. In testing the gravity of the oil, the Tagliabue hydrometer must be, when possible, read from below, and the last line which appears under the surface of the oil shall be regarded as the true reading. Should the oil be opaque or turbid, one-half of the capillary attraction shall be deemed and taken as the true reading. When the oil is tested under difficult circumstances, an allowance of one-half a degree may be made for possible errors in parallax before con demning the oil for use in the mine. All oil or other material used for illuminating purposes in mines shall be contained in barrels, casks or packages branded conspicu ously with the name of the dealer, the specific gravity and date of shipment. Sec. 8. The inspection herein proviaed for shall be made at all reasonable times and places on request of any person, firm or corporation engaged in selling or furnishing illuminating oil for use in the coal minesbf this State. Sec. 9. Any person using any barrel, cask or package marked with the inspector’s approval for the storage of any other oil than that which was contained therein at the time said barrel, cask or package was so marked, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished as provided in the fifth section of this act. Sec. 10. There shall be provided for the office of inspector of mines all the instru ments and appliances necessary for carrying out the provisions of this act, which shall be paid for*on the order of the chief inspector, approved by the governor, and which shall belong to the State. Approved March 21, 1906. LOUISIANA. ACTS OF 1906. A ct N o. 5.— A ssign m en t o f wages. S e c t io n 1. No sale, transfer or assignment of salary or wages of an employee to be earned in the future, that is subsequent to the date of said sale, transfer or assignment, shall be valid or binding upon the employer unless the said employer shall consent to same in writing. Sec. 2. In the event of any employee of any person, firm or corporation shall make a sale, transfer or assignment of any salary or wages to be earned in the future, to any person, firm or corporation, that the employer can in no manner or form be held responsible unless said employer shall have consented in writing to said sale, transfer or assignment. Approved June 15, 1906. A ct N o . 13 (Joint resolution proposing an amendment to the constitution).—Inspection of factories—Appointment of female inspectors. Section 1. The following amendment to the constitution of the State [shall] be submitted to the electors of the State at the next general election for representatives in Congress to be holden on the 4th [6th] day of November, 1906, to-wit: Article 210 of the constitution of the State of Louisiana * * * is hereby amended so as to allow the appointment or election to office of factory inspectors, of either male or female persons, as provided for by an act entitled “ An act to regulate the employment of children, young persons and women in certain cases, and to provide penalties for violations of the provisions of this act,” adopted by the general assembly at its session of the year 1906. Approved June 221 1906. (The above amendment was adopted November 6, 1906.) 764 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. A ct No. 34.— E m p lo ym en t o f wom en and children— A g e In sp ection o f factories , etc. lim it— H o u rs of labor— Section 1. No boy under the age of twelve years, and no girl under the age of fourteen years, shall be employed in any factory, mill, warehouse, workshop, or manufacturing establishment where the manufacture of any goods whatever is carried on, or where any goods are prepared for manufacturing. Sec. 2. No child or person under the age of eighteen years, and no woman, shall be employed in any factory, mill, warehouse, workshop, clothing, dressmaking or millinery establishment, or any place where the manufacture of any kind of goods is carried on, or where any goods are prepared for manufacturing, for a period longer than an average of ten hours in a day, or sixty hours in any week, ana at least one hour shall be allowed in the labor period of each day for dinner. Sec. 3. Every person who shall employ any female in any factory, mill, warehouse, manufacturing establishment, workshop, or store, shall provide suitable seats, chairs, or benches, for the use of the females so employed, which shall be so placed as to be accessible to said employees, and shall permit the use of such seats, chairs or benches by them when they are not necessarily engaged in the active duties for which they are employed. Sec. 4. Every factory, mill, manufacturing establishment, workshop, warehouse or store in which five or more persons are employed, and every such institution in which two or more children, young persons, or women, are employed, shall be supplied with proper wash and dressing rooms, and kept in a cleanly state and free from effluvia arising from any drain, privy, or other nuisance, and shall be provided, within rea sonable access, with a sufficient number of proper water-closets, earth closets or privies, for the reasonable use of the persons employed therein, at least one of such closets for each twenty-five persons employed, and wherever two or more persons, and one or more female persons, are employed as aforesaid, a sufficient number of separate and distinct water-closets, earth closets or privies, shall be provided for the use of each sex, and plainly so designated, and no person shall be allowed to use any such closet or privy assigned to persons of the other sex. Sec. 5. Stairways with substantial hand rails shall be provided in factories, mills, and manufacturing establishments, for the better safety of persons employed in said establishments. Wherever practicable the doors of such establishments shall swing outwardly, or slide, as ordered by the factory inspector, and it shall be neither-locked, bolted, or fastened during working hours. Sec. 6. In incorporated cities and towns the mayor, with the consent of the council, and in parishes the police jury, shall appoint a factory inspector, who may be either male or female, to see that the regulations of this act are observed, and also to prosecute all persons who shall violate the same. Such inspector shall be paid a salary of not more than seven hundred and fifty dollars ($750) per annum. Said factory inspectors are hereby empowered to visit and inspect, at all reasonable hours, the factories, mills, manufacturing establishments, workshops and other establishments in this State, where the manufacture of goods is carried on, and all stores employing ten or more persons. It shall also be the duty of the factory inspectors to enforce all the provisions of this act, and to prosecute for all violations or the same before any magistrate, in any court of competent jurisdiction in this State, in the city or town, in which the said inspector is appointed and in which he exercises his powers. Sec. 7. Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of an offense for each violation thereof, and upon conviction for the same, shall be punished by a fine of not less than ten nor more than twenty-five dollars, or by imprisonment in the parish jail (parish prison in New Orleans) not more than thirty days, or both, in the discretion of the court. Sec. 9. The word “ person ” wherever used in this act shall be deemed to mean firms and corporations as well as individuals. Sec. 11. This act shall apply only to cities and towns in this State having a popula tion of ten thousand or more persons and shall take effect from and after January 1st, 1907. Nothing contained in this act shall be construed to apply to domestic or agri cultural laborers or industries. Approved June 29, 1906. A ct N o. 54.— Contracts o f employment— Violation — Interference. Section 1. Whoever shall willfully violate a hire, tenant or share contract, condi tioned on the cultivation of land in this State, upon the faith of which contract money or goods have been advanced, by leaving the employ of the person or abandoning the land, the subject of the contract, without first tendering to the person by whom said LABOR LAW S— LOUISIANA---- ACTS OF 1906. 765 money or goods was advanced, the amount of money or the value of the goods obtained; shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not less than ten ($10) dollars nor more than two hundred ($200) dollars, and in default of the payment of the fine shall be imprisoned in the parish jail for not more than ninety days at the discretion of the court. Sec. 2. Whoever shall willfully interfere with, entice away, intimidate or induce a hired person, tenant or share hand to leave the service of the employer or to abandon the land the subject of the contract, or who shall knowingly take into his employ any such person before the expiration of the contract, shall be deemed guilty of a mis demeanor and upon conviction shall be fined in a sum not less than ten ($10) dollars nor more than two hundred ($200) dollars for each offense, and shall be liable in a civil action for damages to double the amount of any debt due by said hired person, tenant or share hand to the person, who had made the advances. Sec. 3. Any person taking advantage of the provisions of this act who shall falsely or fraudulently cause the arrest of, or otherwise unlawfully detain a hired person, tenant or share hand, who has not violated the contract, or after its expiration, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined in a sum not less than two hundred ($200) dollars nor more than five hundred ($500) dollars or imprisonment for not less than thirty days nor more than sixty days. Sec. 4. * * * None of the penalties prescribed by this act, shall apply to any farming contract which may be made for a period longer than one year. Approved July 2, 1906. M ARYLAND. ACTS OF 1906. C h a p t e r 192.—Hours of labor in factories—Employment o f children. Section 1. Section 4 of article 100 of the Code of Public General Laws of Maryland, title “ Work hours of, in factories,” as amended by chapter 566 of the Acts of the General Assembly of Maryland for 1902, is hereby repealed and reenacted, with amend ments, so as to read as follows: Section'4. No proprietor, owner, superintendent, manager, or foreman, or other subordinate or agent of any mill, factory, workshop, office, restaurant, hotel, apart ment house, store, telephone or telegraph office, or other establishment or business shall, after the first day of September, in the year 1906, employ for wages or hire, or retain in employment in any such mill, factory, workshop, office, restaurant, hotel, apartment house, store, telephone or telegraph office, or other establishment or busi ness, any person or persons under twelve (12) years of age, except in the counties, from June 1st to October 15th, in every year. S e c . 2. Certain new sections to come in after said section 4 and to be known as sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, are hereby added to said article 100 of the said Code of Public General Laws of Maryland, the same to read as follows: Section 5. No child between the age of twelve (12) and sixteen (16) shall be employed, permitted or suffered to work in any offices, establishment or business mentioned in the preceding section unless the person or corporation employing him or her produces and keeps on file and accessible to the inspectors authorized by this act and the attendance officer of the public schools, an employment permit, and keep a complete list of all such children employed therein on file, and in the case of children employed in factories, workshops, mills or messenger service, a duplicate of said list shall be conspicuously posted near the principal entrance of the building in which such children are employed. Sec. 6. The employment permit for all employments in Baltimore City under the provisions of this act shall be issued by the Maryland Bureau of Statistics and Informa tion, and for employment in other cities or in the counties of this State, by any member of the board of health or principal health officer of the city or county in which the employment is sought. Sec. 7. The employment permit shall not be issued unless satisfactory evidence is furnished by duly attested transcript of the certificate of birth or baptism of such child, or other religious records, or the register of birth, or the affidavit of the parent or guardian or custodian of the child, which latter affidavit shall be required, however, only in case it is certified by the proper authorities that the birth certificate showing the place and date of birth of such child is not on record, which affidavit must be taken before the officer issuing the employment permit, who is hereby authorized and required to administer such oath and who shall not demand or receive a fee therefor. Sec. 8. The employment permit shall read as follows: 7 66 BULLETIN OE THE BUREAU OE LABOR. EMPLOYMENT PERMIT. The birth certificate giving the name, date and place o f ---------------------- (name of child) is attached hereto. (If there be no birth certificate, then a certificate to that effect, i. e., that there is none from the proper authorities of the city or county where said child was born, shall be attached.) This certifies that I am t h e ---------- father, mother, guardian or custodian o f-------;----------- (name of child) and that (he or she) was born a t ---------- (name of town or city) in the county o f ------------(name of county) and State o f ---------- , on t h e -------day o f ------------, in y e a r -------, and is n o w --------------(number of years and months) old. Signature of (father, mother, guardian o r ---------custodian.) Signature o f ---------- child. (Date.) There personally appeared before me the above-named (name of father, mother, guardian or custodian of) and made oath that the aforegoing certificate by (him or her) signed, is true to the best of (his or her) knowledge and belief. I hereby approve the foregoing certificate of (name of child), height (feet and inches), eye3 (color), complexion (fair or dark), hair (color); having no sufficient reason to doubt that (he or she) is oi the age therein certified I hereby certify that (he or she) can read at sight and write legibly simple sentences in the English language, and that (he or she) has reached the normal development of a child of (his or her) age, and is in sound health and is physically able to perform the work which (he or she) intends to do. This certificate belongs to (name of child in whose behalf it is drawn) and is to be surrendered to (him or her) whenever (he or she) leaves the service of the corporation or employer holding the same; but if not claimed by said child within thirty days from such time it shall be returned to the Maryland Bureau of Statistics and Informa tion (if the employment be in Baltimore City) or the board of health or principal health officer o f (if the employment be in any of the counties or other cities outside of Baltimore City). Signature of (person authorized to prove and sign with official character or authority.) D a te------------------ . A duplicate of each employment permit shall be filled out and kept on file by the Maryland Bureau of Statistics and Information or board of health or principal health officer of the county or city outside of Baltimore City, as the case may be. Sec. 9. Whoever employs a child in violation of the provisions of this act, and who ever having under his or her control a child, permits such child to be employed in violation of the provisions of this act, shall for such offense be fined not less than five (5) nor more than fifty ($50) dollars, and whoever continues to employ any child in violation of the provisions of this act, after being notified bv an inspector authorized by this act or an attendance officer of the public schools, shall for every day thereafter tnat such employment continues be fined not less than five (5) nor more than twenty ($20) dollars. A failure to produce to an inspector authorized by this act or an attend ance officer of the public schools any employment permit or list required by this act shall be prima facie evidence of illegal employment of any person whose employment permit is not produced, or whose name is not so listed. Any corporation or employer retaining any employment permit in violation of the provisions of this act shall be fined ten ($10) dollars. Every person authorized to sign the employment permit prescribed in this act who knowingly certifies to any materiallyialse statement therein shall be fined not more than fifty ($50) dollars. The chief of the Maryland Bureau of Statistics and Information or any member of the board of health or principal health officer of any county or city outside of Baltimore City is hereby authorized to sign the employment permit mentioned herein and to administer the necessary oath without cost to the applicant. Sec. 10. The inspectors authorized by this act and the attendance officers of the public schools may visit any office, establishment or place of business contemplated by this act throughout the State of Maryland and city of Baltimore and ascertain whether any minors are employed therein contrary to the provisions of this act, and they shall report any cases of such illegal employment or other violations of this act to the justice of the peace having criminal jurisdiction in the locality where such illegal employment or other violations of this act occur, and which justices of the peace shall have full authority to try and determine all cases arising under this act. Inspect ors authorized by this act, and the attendance officers of the public schools may require that the employment permits and lists provided for in this act of minors employed in any such office, establishment or business, shall be produced for their inspection. They shall also be authorized to require a birth certificate or other record evidence of the date of birth of any child, which they have reason to believe is being LABOR LAW S---- MARYLAND---- ACTS OF 1906. 767 employed contrary to the provisions of this act, to be produced by either parents, guardian or custodian of said child, and in the absence of such record, evidence of the date of birth of such child, they may require an affidavit from either parent, guardian or custodian of such child as to its age, name, place and date of birth. Sec. 12. This act shall not include farm labor. S e c . 3. All acts or parts of acts inconsistent herewith be and the same are hereby repealed. Approved March 30, 1906. C h a p t e r 228.— Exemption of wages— Unlawful assignment of claims. S e c t io n 1. Article 83 of the Code of Public General Laws of Maryland, 1888, is amended by adding thereto a section to be known as section 17 A , to come in after section 17, and to read as follows: Section 17 A . In addition to being liable in action of debt as provided in section 15, the person sending, assigning or transfering any claim for debt against a resident of this State in violation of the provisions of said section 15, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding fifty dollars for each offense. [The section named makes it unlawful for any citizen of the State to assign or transfer any claim for debt against a resident of the State for the purpose of having such claim collected outside the State with the intent of depriving the debtor of the right to have his personal earnings or property exempt from application to the payment of his debts according to the provisions of the State law, where both parties are within the juris diction of the courts or justices of the peace of the State.] Approved March 30, 1906. C h a p t e r 399.— Assignment of ivages. S e c t io n 1. Article 8 of the Code of Public General Laws, title “ Assignment of choses in action,” * * * is hereby amended by adding thereto certain sections, to follow section 10 of said article, to be known as sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, and to read as follows: Section 11. No assignment of wages or salary shall be valid so as to vest in the assignee any beneficial interest, either at law or in equity, unless such assignment be in writing, signed by the assignor and acknowledged in person by him or her before a justice of the peace in and for the city or county, as the case may be, in which the assignor resides, and entered on the same day by said justice of the peace upon his docket; and unless further, within three days from the execution and acknowledg ment of said assignment a true and complete copy thereof, together with the certifi cates of its acknowledgment, be served upon the person, firm or corporation by whom said wages or salary are due or to become due, in the same manner that the summons in chancery is now required by law to be served: Provided, however, That no assignment of wages or salary by a married person shall be valid unless the same is also executed and acknowledged as above by the assignor’s wife or husband, as the case may be. Sec. 12. Proof of said service, as provided for in the preceding section, shall be by an admission thereof in writing by the person, firm or corporation, his, their or its agent on the original assignment, which admission of service shall also be entered by said justice of the peace upon his docket within two days thereafter. Sec. 13. In addition to said acknowledgment to be made by said assignor, he or she, as the case may be, shall make affidavit that he or she has not paid, and will not, directly or indirectly, pay more than the legal rate of six per centum per annum on any sum borrowed, or permit a deduction from said sum so loaned to him or her at the time, of said loan, or any time thereafter, of more than a sum equivalent to six per centum per annum for the time said loan is made. Sec. 14. The term “ assignment” as used in this act, shall include every assign ment, transfer, sale, pledge, mortgage or hypothecation, however made or attempted, of the wages or salary of any person, or of any interest therein. Sec. 15. Whenever any assignment of the wages or salary of any person or persons shall be given as security for a loan tainted with usury, or shall be given to secure the payment or fulfillment of a contract or th6 payment of the principal or interest of a usurious debt, such assignment shall be absolutely void. Sec. 16. Every assignment of wages to be earned in whole or in part more than six (6) months from and after the making of such assignment, shall be absolutely void. Sec. 17. Whenever any person, firm or corporation shall bring, or threaten to bring any action or suit to enforce any assignment of wages or salary which has not been duly executed, acknowledged, sworn to and served upon the employer in conformity 768 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU OF LABOR. with the provisions of this act, or which is declared invalid by the provisions of this act, courts of equity shall have full power, upon the application either of the assignor of such wages or salary, or of the person, firm or corporation from whom such wages or salary is, or is to become due, to perpetually enjoin the threatened or attempted enforcement of any such assignment; and the fact that the complainant has a com plete and adequate remedy at law shall constitute no defense to the maintenance of a suit in equity for the purpose aforesaid. Approved April 3, 1906. MASSACHUSETTS. ACTS OF 1906. Chapter 151.— Employment of children—Street trades. Section 1. Section seventeen of chapter sixty-five of the Revised Laws, as amended b y chapter five hundred and thirty-one of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and two is hereby further amended * * * so as to read as follows: Section 17. The mayor and aldermen or selectmen may make regulations relative to the exercise of the trade of bootblacking by minors and to the sale by minors of any goods, wares or merchandise the sale of which is permitted by section fifteen, and may prohibit such sales or such trade, or may require a minor to obtain from them a license therefor to be issued on terms and conditions prescribed in such regulations: Provided, That in the case of persons under the age of fourteen years in the cities of the Common wealth the foregoing powers shall be vested in and exercised by the school commit tees of said cities. A minor who sells such articles or exercises such trade without a license if one is required or who violates the conditions of his license or any of the provisions of said regulations shall be punished by a fine of not more than ten dollars for each offense. Approved March 9, 1906. Chapter 250.— Inspection of factories— Toilet rooms in foundries. Section 1. The proprietor of every foundry engaged in the casting of iron, brass, steel or other metal, and employing ten or more men, shall establish and maintain, except in cities or towns where to do so would be impracticable by reason of the absence of public or private sewerage or of any running water system, toilet room of suitable size and condition for the men to change their clothes therein, and provided with wash bowls, sinks or other suitable set appliances connected with running hot and cold water, and also a water-closet connected with running water and separated from the said toilet room. The said water-closet and toilet room shall be connected directly with the foundry building, properly heated, ventilated and protected, so far as may be reasonably practicable, from the dust of the foundry. Sec. 2. Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of this act, after being requested so to do by a member of the district police, shall be fined not more than fifty dollars for each offense. Approved April 5, 1906. Chapter 284.—Employment of children—School attendance— Work on Saturday . Section 1. The ability to read at sight and to write legibly simple sentences in the English language, which is required by chapter two hundred and sixty-seven of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and five, amending section twenty-eight of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws, as a condition of the employment of certain minors in factories or otherwise, shall be construed as meaning, in the year nineteen hundred and six, such ability to read and write as is required for admission to the second grade, in the year nineteen hundred and seven such as is required for admis sion to the third grade, and in the year nineteen hundred and eight and thereafter such as is required for admission to the fourth grade of the public schools of the city or town in which such minors live. Sec. 2. Minors to whom the said chapter two hundred and sixty-seven applies shall be permitted to wqrk on Saturdays between the hours of six in the morning and seven in the evening, in mercantile establishments. Approved April 14, 1906. LABOR L A W S -----MASSACHUSETTS-----ACTS OF 1906. C h a p t e r 370.— Liability 769 of employers fo r injuries to employees. S e c t io n 1. Section seventy-two of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws is hereby amended * * * so as to read as follows: Section 72. If the injury described in the preceding section results in the death of the employee, and such death is not instantaneous or is preceded by conscious suffering, and ij there is any person who would have been entitled to bring an action under the provisions of the following section, the legal representatives of said employee may, in the action brought under the provisions of the preceding section, recover damages for the death in addi tion to those for the injury; and in the same action under a separate count at common law, may recover damages for conscious suffering resulting from the same injury. Approved May 8, 1906. C h a p t e r 387.— Inspection of steam boilers. S e c t io n 1. Every steam boiler in this Commonwealth, except those which, under the provisions of section seventy-eight of chapter one hundred and two of the Revised Laws may be operated by an unlicensed person, shall be inspected internally and externally once each year, between the first day of June and the first day of October, by the licensed engineer or fireman in charge of or operating the same, except such boilers as are inspected by properly authorized inspectors of insurance companies or by the State inspectors. The engineer making the inspection shall forward to the chief of the district police within ten days after such inspection a report of every boiler so inspected by him. Such reports shall be made on blanks furnished by the chief of the district police and shall be made in conformity therewith. Sec. 2. In case any boiler which is required under the provisions of section one to be inspected is not in use or operation between the first day of June and the first day of October in any year, such boiler shall not be operated until the inspection required by this act has been made and the report thereof has been forwarded to the chief of the district police. Sec. 3. If it appears to the chief of the district police from any report of such an inspection that safety requires changes to be made in any boiler so inspected, notice shall be given by the chief of the district police to the owner or user of such boiler of the changes required. Any owner or user failing to comply with the requirements of the chief of the district police respecting his boiler, after receiving notice thereof, shall be liable to a fine of not more than one hundred dollars for such failure, and the use of such boiler may be enjoined in the manner provided in section four of chapter one hundred and five of the Revised Laws. Sec. 4. Any owner or user failing to have made any inspection required by this act shall be punished by a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars for each offense. Sec. 5. Any owner or user who interferes with an engineer while making such inspection or who seeks to prevent or hinder the same shall be liable to a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars and not more than one hundred dollars. Sec. 6. The district police shall have authority in the discharge of their duty to enter upon any premises where steam boilers are located, for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this act. Approved May 11, 1906. C h a p t e r 390.— Assignment of wages. Section 1. No assignment of future wages shall be valid for a period exceeding two years from the date thereof, nor unless made to secure a debt contracted prior to or simultaneously with the execution of said assignment, nor unless executed m writing in the standard form herein set forth and signed by the assignor in person and not by attorney, nor unless such assignment states the date of its execution, the money or the money value of goods actually furnished by the assignee and the rate of interest, if any, to be paid thereon. Sec. 2. N o such assignment shall be valid unless a copy thereof is delivered to the assignor by the assignee at the date of the execution of such assignment. No such assignment shall be binding on the employer of the assignor until a copy of the assign ment and an account, which shall conform to the requirements hereinafter stated, have been delivered to said employer. Said account shall be in writing and shall contain a statement of the balance due and of the sums of money received by the assignee, together with the date of every such payment and a statement as to whether such pay ment is interest, a payment on the principal, or, in case of a loan, a payment on the charge for making ana securing the loan. 770 BULLETIN OF TH E BUREAU" OF LABOR. Sec. 3. The term “ assignment,” as used in this act, shall include every instrument purporting to transfer an interest in or an authority to collect the future wages of a person. Sec. 4. Said standard form of assignment shall be as follows: Know all men b y these presents: That I , ----------------------o f----------- , in the county o f---------- , for a valuable consideration, to me paid by*------------------- , of--------- , the receipt whereof I do hereby acknowledge, do hereby assign and transfer to sa id ---------------------- all claims and demands [which I now have, and all] which within a period o f ---------- from the date hereof I may and shall have against m y present employer, and against any person whose employ I shall hereafter enter [for all sums of money due and] for all sums of money and demands which, at any time within said period may and shall become due to me, for services as ---------- . To have and to hold the same to the said —1----------------- , his executors, admin istrators and assigns, to secure a debt (1) o f ---------- dollars [with interest thereon from ----------- at the rate o f -------- per cent per annum], for money [or goods] actually furnished by the assignee amounting t o ---------- dollars. (2) Contracted prior to the execution of this assignment, [or contracted simultane ously with the execution of this assignment.] In witness whereof, I have set m y hand th is-------day o f --------------------. Signed and delivered, in presence o f ----------------------h----------- m----------- M. Received and entered in records of assignment of wages in the clerk’s office of th e---------- o f----------- , book------, page----- . ----------------------, Cleric. Sec. 5. An assignment of wages made in accordance with the provisions of this act shall bind all wages earned by the assignor within the period named in such assignment. Approved May 15, 1906. Ch a p t e r 414.—Examination and licensing o f engineers and firemen. Section 1. Section eighty-two of chapter one hundred and two of the Revised Laws, as amended by section two of chapter three hundred and ten of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and five, is hereby further amended * * * so as to read as fol lows: Section 82. Licenses shall be granted according to the competence of the appli cant and shall be distributed in the following classes: Engineers’ licenses: First class, to have charge of and operate any steam plant. Second class, to have charge of and operate a boner or boilers, and to have charge of and operate engines, no one of which shall exceed one hundred and fifty horse power, or to operate a first class plant under the engineer in direct charge of the plant. Third class, to have charge of and operate a boiler or boilers not exceeding in the aggregate one hundred and fifty horse power, and an engine nof exceeding fifty horse power, or to operate a second class plant under the engineer in direct charge of the plant. Fourth class, to have charge of and oper ate hoisting and pprtable engines and boilers. Firemen’s licenses: Extra first class, to have charge of and operate any boiler or boilers. First class, to operate any boiler or boilers. Second class, to have charge of and operate any boiler or boilers where the pressure carried does not exceed twenty-five pounds to the square inch, or to operate high pressure boilers under the engineer or fireman in direct charge thereof. A person holding an extra first or first class fireman’s license may operate a third class plant under the engineer in direct charge of the plant. A person holding an engineer’s or fireman’s license who desires to have charge of or to operate a particular steam plant or type of plant may, providing he holds an engineer’s or fireman’s license, if he files with his application a written request signed by the owner or user of said plant for such examination, he examined as to his competence for such service and no other, and if found competent and trustworthy shall be granted a license for such service and no other. No special license shall be granted to give any person charge of a plant over one hundred and fifty horsepower. Approved May 24,1906. Ch a p t e r 427.—Payment o f wages— Weekly pay day. [Section 62 of chapter 106, Revised Laws, as amended by chapter 450 of the Acts of 1902, is by this chapter further amended so as to direct the weekly payment of wages to employees of counties, instead of leaving such payment to the option of the employee as heretofore.] LABOR L A W S -----MASSACHUSETTS— ACTS OF 1906, C h a p t e r 435.— Free 771 'public employment offices. S e c t io n 1. There shall be established and maintained, under the care and direction of the chief of the bureau of statistics and labor, in such cities as may be selected after proper investigation by said bureau, and with the approval of the governor and coun cil, offices for the purpose of bringing together those who seek employment and those who desire to employ. Sec. 2. The chief of the bureau of statistics of labor is hereby authorized and directed to organize and establish within three months after the passage of this act, in the city or cities selected, a free public employment office, which office shall be provided with suitable rooms, furniture and equipment required for the transaction of the business provided for in this act, and shall appoint a superintendent and clerk for each of said offices, to discharge, under the direction of said chief, the duties hereinafter set forth, .or which may be required by said chief. S ec . 3. It shall be the duty of such superintendents to receive and record in properly arranged books, devised by the bureau of statistics of labor, all applications from those seeking employment and also from those desiring to employ, and to take such other action as may be deemed best by the chief of said bureau to promote the purpose of said offices. Such records shall show plainly in brief the qualifications of all appli cants and such other facts as shall be deemed necessary by the chief of said bureau, who shall furnish to each superintendent all such record books, forms, blanks, or other stationery and postage as may be required in conducting the office. Each superin tendent shall plainly indicate by a proper sign or signs the location of his office, and he shall be allowed such additional clerical assistance as the chief shall deem necessary. Sec. 4. No fees, direct or indirect, shall in any case be taken from those seeking the benefits of the offices herein provided for. Sec. 5. The privilege of registration shall be confined to residents of the Common wealth. Proof of residence, when necessary, may be required from a selectman of a town or the mayor of a city. Sec. 6. Each superintendent shall make to the chief of said bureau a semiweekly report of such applications for labor or employment as may be registered in his office, with such details as may be required by the chief. The said chief shall cause all such reports to be printed at regular intervals, and to be exchanged between the said offices, and shall supply them to the newspapers and to citizens upon request; and the several superintendents shall cause such reports to be posted in a conspicuous place in their offices so that they may be open to public inspection. Sec . 7. Any clerk or superintendent who directly or indirectly charges or receives any fee in the performance of his duties shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be subject to a fine of not more than one hundred dollars, or to imprisonment in the county jail for a term not exceeding thirty days. Such fine or imprisonment shall disqualify him from holding further connection with said offices. Sec. 8. There shall be paid out of the treasury of the Commonwealth, on the approval of the chief of the bureau of statistics of labor, for salaries and for contingent expenses in connection with such free employment offices and for the expenses of the bureau of statistics of labor in connection with the requirements of this act, a sum not exceeding five thousand dollars. The annual salary of the superintendents and clerks shall be fixed by the chief of said bureau, with the approval of the governor and council. Approved May 31, 1906. C h a p t e r 463. P a r t I .— Accidents on railroads. S e c t io n 62. Every railroad corporation and street railway company shall give imme diate notice of an accident on its/railroad or railway, which results in a loss of life, to the medical examiner of the county who resides nearest to the place of accident, and shall also, within twenty-four hours, give notice to the board of railroad commissioners of any such accident or of any accident of the description of accidents of which said board may require notice to be given. For each omission to give such notice, the cor poration or company shall forfeit not more than one hundred dollars. Approved June 7, 1906. C h a p t e r 463. P a r t I I I .— Street railways—Allowing newsboys on cars—Inclosed plat forms—Hours of labor. S e c t io n 89. If a street railway company, its agent or servant, allows a child under the age of ten years to enter upon or into any of its cars for the purpose of selling news papers or other articles therein or offering them for sale, it shall forfeit fifty dollars for each offense, which shall be recovered by any person by an action brought within three months after the offense has been committed. 772 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. S e c . 92. Every street car in use for the transportation of passengers in December, January, February and March, which, while in motion, requires the constant care or service of an employee upon its platforms or upon one of them, shall, except as provided in the following section, have said platforms or platform inclosed in such manner as to protect the motormen, conductors or other employees who operate such car from exposure to wind and weather in such manner as theboard of railroad commissioners shall approve. Sec. 94. A street railway company which fails or neglects to comply with the pro visions of either of the two preceding sections shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars for each day during which such neglect continues. ^ S e c . 95. A day’s work for all conductors and mototmen who are employed by or on behalf of a street railway company shall not exceed ten hours, and shall be so arranged b y the employer that it may be performed within twelve consecutive hours. No officer or agent of any such company shall require from said employees more than ten hours’ work for a day’s labor; but on legal holidays, on days when the company is required to provide for extraordinary travel, and, in case of accident or unavoidable delay, extra labor may be performed for extra compensation. S e c . 158. * * * Section twenty-two of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws [relating to hours of labor of employees on street railways], chapter one hundred and twelve of the Revised Laws [relating to enclosed platforms for the protection of employees on street railways]; * * * are hereby repealed. Approved June 7, 1906. C h a p t e r 499.—Employment of children—Requirements as to age, etc.— Enforcement. S e c t io n 1. Whoever employs a minor under the age of sixteen years, and whoever rocures or, having under his control a minor under such age, 'permits such minor to e employed in violation of the provisions of sections twenty-eight or twenty-nine of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws, as amended by chapter two hun dred and sixty-seven of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and five [relative to requirements as to age and school attendance], shall for each offense be punished by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and whoever continues to employ a , minor in violation of the provisions o f either of said sections as so amended, after being notified thereof by a truant officer or by an inspector of factories and public buildings, shall for every day thereafter while such employment continues be punished by a fine of not less than twenty nor more than one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than six months. S e c . 2. Inspectors of factories and public buildings shall visit all factories, workshops and mercantile establishments within their respective districts, and ascertain whether any minors are employed therein contrary to the provisions of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws and amendments thereof or additions thereto, or contrary to the provisions of this act, and shall enter complaint against whomever is found to have violated any of said provisions. Any inspector of factories and public buildings who knowingly and willfully violates any provision of this section may be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars. S e c . 3. A truant officer may apprehend and take to school, without a warrant, any minor under the age of sixteen years who is employed in any factory, workshop or mercantile establishment in violation of the provisions of sections twenty-eight or twenty-nine of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws, and of any amend ments thereof or addition thereto, and such truant officer shall forthwith report to the .police, district or municipal court or trial justice within whose judicial district the illegal employment occurs, the evidence in his possession relating to the illegal employ ment of any child so apprehended, and shall make complaint against whomever the court or trial justice may direct. Any truant officer who knowingly and willfully violates any provision of this section may be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars for each offense. S e c . 4. Inspectors of factories and public buildings, and truant officers may require that the age and schooling certificates and lists of minors who are employed in factories, workshops or mercantile establishments shall be produced for their inspection. A failure to produce to an inspector of factories and public buildings or to a truant officer an age and schooling certificate or list required by law shall be prima facie evidence of the illegal employment of any person whose age and schooling certificate is not produced or whose name is not so listed. A corporation or other employer or any agent or officer thereof, who retains an age and schooling certificate in violation of the provisions of s^id certificate shall be punished by a fine of not less than ten nor more than one hundred dollars. E LABOR L A W S -----MASSACHUSETTS-----ACTS OE 1906. 77a Sec. 5. Police, district and municipal courts and trial justices shall have jurisdic tion of offenses arising under the provisions of this act. A summons or warrant issued by any such court or justice may be served, at the discretion of the court or magistrate, by an inspector of factories and public buildings, or by a truant officer, or by any officer qualified to serve criminal process. Approved June 20, 1906. C h a p t e r 517.—Hours of labor on 'public worTcs— Eight-hour day. Section 1. Eight hours shall constitute a day’s work for all laborers, workmen and mechanics now or hereafter employed by or on behalf of the Commonwealth, or of any county therein, or of any city or town which has accepted the provisions of section, twenty of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws; but in cases where a. Saturday half-holiday is given the hours of labor upon the other working days of the week may be increased sufficiently to make a total of forty-eight hours for the week’s work. Sec. 2. Every contract, excluding contracts for the purchase of material or supplies, tofwhich the Commonwealth, or of any county therein, or of any city or town which has accepted the provisions of section twenty of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws, is a party which may involve the employment of laborers, workmen or mechanics shall contain a stipulation that no laborer, workman or mechanic in the employ of the contractor, sub-contractor or other person doing or contracting to do the whole or a part of the work contemplated by the contract shall be required to work more than eight hours in any one calendar day. Sec. 3. This act shall apply to all laborers, workmen or mechanics engaged upon any works which are or are intended to be the property of the Commonwealth, or of any county therein, or of any city or town which has accepted the provisions of section twenty of chapter one hundred and six of the Revised Laws, whether such laborers, workmen or mechanics are employed by public authority or by a contractor or other private person. Sec. 4. Any agent or official of the Commonwealth or of any county, city or town who violates any provision of this act shall be subject to a penalty of fifty dollars for each offense. Sec. 5. The provisions of this act shall hot apply to or affect contractors or sub contractors for work, contracts for which were entered into prior to the passage of this act. Approved June 22, 1906. Chapter 521.—Inspection of steam boilers— Chief inspector. Section 1. The governor is hereby authorized to appoint, as hereinafter provided, one of the members of the boiler inspection department of the district police as chief inspector of said boiler inspection department. Said chief inspector shall have super vision over the members of said boiler inspection department in order to secure the uniform enforcement throughout the Commonwealth of all acts relative to the inspec tion of boilers and the examination of engineers and firemen. Said chief inspector shall receive an annual salary of two thousand dollars* and his actual and necessary traveling expenses. Sec. 2. As soon as practicable after the passage of this act the civil service com missioners shall hold an examination to determine the qualifications of applicants for the position of said chief inspector. The commissioners shall certify to the governor the names of the three persons receiving the highest percentage on such examination, and the percentage obtained by each, and the governor shall appoint one of said three persons as chief inspector of the boiler inspection department. Approved June 26, 1906. Chapter 522.—Inspection of steam boilers— Inspector. Section 1. The governor is hereby authorized and directed to appoint five addi tional members of the inspection department of the district police, who shall be not above forty-five years of age. Said age limit shall apply to all new appointments to said boiler inspection department, but shall not apply to any reappointment thereto. They shall be detailed for the inspection of boilers, and shall receive the same com pensation now received by the present inspectors of boilers. The governor is also* hereby authorized to appoint one clerk, at an annual salary of eight hundred dollars, to serve in the said department, and four additional clerks, at an annual salary of six hundred dollars each, to serve at branch offices in the said department. 304b— No. 70—07---- 20 774 BULLETIN OF THE BUBEAU OF LABOR. Sec. 2. Upon every boiler which has been inspected and approved by the district police, or upon the fittings of the said boiler, there shall be attached by the inspector, by a seal or otherwise, a metal tag, and upon the tag or seal shall be inscribed the number of the boiler, the year, month ana date of the inspection and the number of the district. Sec. 3. Any person, excepting a member of the district police, who defaces or removes the tag or seal specified in section three, shall be punished by a fine of not less than five nor more than one hundred dollars. Approved June 26, 1906 NEW JERSEY. ACTS OF 1906. C h a p t e r 26.— Trade-marlcs of trade unions . S e c t io n 1. Section ten of the said act [chapter 50, Acts of 1898] is hereby amended so as to read as follows: i Section 10. Any person or persons, association, organization or corporation, that shall violate any of the provisions of this act, shall be liable to a penalty of two hundred dollars, to be recovered in an action of debt in any court of law of this State having jurisdiction in civil causes, by any such person, association, organization or corpora tion, that has adopted and filed, or caused the same to be done as aforesaid, any such label, trade-mark, term or design; which action may be commenced by summons as in ordinary cases, and shall be proceeded with therein as in other civil actions, in said courts, and in case any execution shall be issued upon any judgment obtained against the defendant or defendants in any such action at law, and the same be re turned unsatisfied, the court, on application and two days’ notice to the defendant, may award an execution to take the body of the defendant or defendants as in other cases where a capias may issue out of the circuit or supreme courts of this Statej and thereafter the rights, remedies and liabilities of the parties, and the proceedings m the case shall be the same, or as nearly as may be, as in other actions in the said courts where an execution to take the body^of the defendant or defendants has been issued; and it shall be the duty of the court in which any such action at law may be brought to make all proper and necessary orders to restrain and prevent any defendant or defendants from continuing the committing of any violation of any of the provisions of this act. Approved March 24, 1906. C h a p t e r 91.— Inspection of steam vessels—Examination and licensing o f engineers, etc. S e c t io n 1. The provisions of this act shall be applicable to all vessels navigating the waters, above tide waters, exclusively within the jurisdiction of this State. S e c . 2. The term “ master” as used in this act shall include every person having for the time the charge, control or direction of any power vessel of any kind, and the term “ power vessel ” shall include every vessel not propelled wholly by sails or by muscular power. S e c . 3. (As amended by chapter 174.) The governor shall, within thirty days after this act becomes a law, and thereafter when vacancies shall occur, appoint one chief inspector and one assistant inspector of power vessels, each of whom snail have a prac tical knowledge of the construction and management of power vessels and an expe rience of at least two years as a licensed master, licensed pilot or licensed engineer of steamboats, and shall have a practical knowledge of the use and construction of boilers, engines and other machinery and appurtenances used in propelling vessels, and he shall be otherwise properly qualified to perform the duties prescribed by this act. Each inspector shall hold office for the term of three years from the date of his appoint ment, and thereafter until his successor has been appointed. * * * S e c . 4. The chief and assistant inspectors shall annually, or oftener, if they have good cause therefor, inspect every power vessel engaged in carrying passengers or freight for hire, or towing for hire, examine carefully her hull and other equipments, and may require such changes, repairs and improvements to be adopted and used as they may deem expedient for the contemplated route. They shall also fix the number of passengers that may be transported. The chief inspector shall also, whenever he may deem it expedient, visit any vessel licensed under this act and examine into her condition for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not any party thereon having a certificate from said inspectors has conformed to and obeyed the conditions of such certificates and the provisions of this act, and the owner, master, pilot, captain or engineer of such vessel shall answer all reasonable questions and give all the informa tion in his or their power in regard to said vessel, her machinery and the manner of LABOR L A W S -----N E W JERSEY----- ACTS OF 1906. 775 managing the same. In case of any accident from any cause whatsoever, either the chief inspector or assistant inspector may investigate the cause thereof, and if found bv him to have been occasioned by a violation of any of the provisions of this act, or of the orders, regulations and requirements of said inspector, he shall so certify to the prosecutor of the pleas of the county where such violation occurred, together with the names of the persons guilty thereof and the witnesses. The chief inspector provided for in this act is authorized to make further rules and regulations applying generally to all power vessels, or especially to one or more of them, and on framing the rules for the government of managers and employees of boats, but he, the said inspector, so far as practicable, shall be governed by the general rules and regulations prescribed by the United States Board of Supervising Inspectors of Steam Vessels. S e c . 5. The chief and assistant inspectors shall also, annually, or oftener, if they deem necessary, examine the boilers and all other machinery of any power vessel car rying passengers or freight, for hire, or towing for hire. In the case of boilers, they shall determine from their examination, and the data submitted by the manufacturers of each of said boilers, the pressure of steam which it is safe for the boiler to carry, and shall apply to the boiler a hydrostatic test, using a pressure fifty per centum greater than the working pressure to be allowed; but should inspectors be of the opinion that such boiler, by reason of its construction or material, will not safely allow so high a working pressure, they may fix the working pressure of such boiler at less than twothirds of said test pressure, and no boiler* or pipe, or any of the connections therewith shall be approved which is made in whole or in part of bad material, or is unsafe in its form, or dangerous from defective workmansnip, age, use or other cause. In addition to the hydrostatic test, as herein provided, the inspectors may cause a hammer test to be made, and an internal examination of such boiler or boilers so tested, whenever deemed necessary. Any boiler may be drilled at the bottom or shell of boiler, and also at such other point as the inspectors may direct, to determine the thickness of such material at those points, and the general condition of such boiler or boilers at the time of inspection and the steam pressure allowed shall be determined by such ascer tained thickness and general condition of the boiler. They shall also see that all con nections to the said boiler or engines are of suitable material, size and construction, and that the boiler, machinery and appurtenances are such as may be employed with safety in the service to be performed. They shall also satisfy themselves that the safety valves are of suitable dimensions and are properly adjusted, so as to allow no greater pressure than the maximum amount prescribed by them; and that there is a sufficient number of gauge cocks properly attached to the boiler, so as to indicate the height of water therein, and suitable steam gauges to correctly show the pressure of steam carried; and as to any other matter connected with such power vessel or the machinery thereof, that to said inspectors shall appear necessary to the safety of her passengers and crew. S e c . 6. The chief and assistant inspectors, if satisfied that such vessel is in all respects safe and conforms in every respect to the requirements of this act, shall make and subscribe duplicate certificates, setting forth the age of the vessel and date of inspection, the name of the vessel, the name of the owner, the master, the number of licensed officers and crew deemed necessary to manage the vessel with safety, the num ber of boats and life preservers required, and the number of passengers that she can safely carry, and, if a steam vessel, the age of the boiler, and the pressure of steam she is authorized to carry. One of said certificates shall be kept posted in some conspic uous place on the vessel, to be designated by the inspectors in the certificate, and the other copy shall be kept by the chief inspector and by him to be recorded in a book to be kept for that purpose. If the inspectors refuse to grant a certificate of approval, they shall make a statement in writing giving the reasons for such refusal, and deliver the same to the owner or master of the vessel. S e c . 8. All power vessels to which this article is applicable shall hereafter be so con structed that the woodwork about the boilers, chimneys, fire boxes, cook houses, stove and steam pipes, exposed to ignition, shall be so shielded by some incombustible material, that the air may circulate freely between such material and woodwork, or other ignitable substances; and before granting a certificate of inspection the inspect ors shall require that all necessary provisions be made throughout such vessel as they may judge expedient to guard against loss or damage by fire. S e c . 15. Whoever intentionally loads or obstructs or causes to be loaded or obstructed, in any way, the safety valve of any boiler, or employs any other means or device whereby the boiler may be subjected to a greater pressure than the pressure allowed by the inspector’s certificate, or^intentionally deranges or hinders the opera tion of any machinery or device employed to denote the stage of the water or steam in any boiler, or to give warning of approaching danger, or intentionally permits the water to fall below the prescribed low water limit of the boiler, shall forfeit to the people of the State the sum of five hundred dollars for each violation. 776 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Sec. 16. Every person employed as either master, pilot or engineer on board of a power vessel carrying passengers or freight for hire, or towing for hire, shall be exam ined by the inspectors as to his qualification, and, if satisfied therewith, they shall grant him a license for the term of one year [as master, pilot, or engineer] of sucn boat, boats or class of boats as said inspectors may specify in such license. In a proper case, the license may permit and specify that the master may act as pilot, and in case of small vessels also as engineer and pilot. The license shall be framed under glass and posted in some conspicuous place on the vessel on which he may act. Whoever acts as master, pilot or engineer, without having first received such license, or upon a boat or class of boats not specified in his license, shall be liable to a penalty oi fifty dollars for each day that he so acts, except as in this article otherwise specified, and such license may be revoked by the inspectors for intemperance, incompetency or willful violation of duty. Sec. 20. No master, engineer or other person having charge of any boiler or appara tus for the generation of steam of any power vessel shall create, or allow to be created, an undue or unsafe quantity of steam m order to increase the speed of such power ves sel or to excel another boat in speed. Any person violating the provision of this sec tion shall forfeit to the people of the State the sum of five hundred dollars for every such violation. Sec. 25. Whenever any vessel coming under the provision of this act is placed upon the dock for repairs it shall be the duty of the owner to report the fact to the chief inspector, so that a thorough inspection may by him be made to determine what is necessary to make such vessel seaworthy, if the condition or age of the vessel, in the judgment of the chief inspector renders such examination necessary. Before making general repairs to a boiler of a steam vessel coming under the provisions of this act the engineer or master in charge of such vessel shall report in writing the nature of such repairs to the chief inspector. And it shall be the duty of all engineers, when an acci dent occurs to a boiler in their charge tending to render such boiler unsafe, to report the same to the chief inspector. Sec. 26. It shall be the duty of every owner of a power vessel and navigating the waters, above tide waters, exclusively within the jurisdiction of this State, where it is the intent to use such vessel for carrying passengers or freight for hire, or to tow for hire, to notify the chief inspector of such intention, at least ten days before it is desired to use such vessel, and to request an inspection of such vessel. It shall be the duty of the owner of a vessel having a certificate of inspection from the inspectors provided for in this act to notify said inspector of the expiration of such certificate at least twenty days before said certificate shall expire. Sec. 27. All power vessels carrying passengers or freight for hire, or towing for hire, must comply with all the terms and provisions of the preceding section, and with all orders, regulations and requirements of the inspectors. If any such vessel is navi gated without complying with the terms and provisions of this act, or without the requisite certificates of the inspectors, the owners and master shall forfeit to the peo ple of the State the penalties prescribed in this article, and the vessels so navigated shall also be liable therefor, and may be attached and proceeded against in any court having jurisdiction. Every master of a power vessel who shall violate any of the pro visions of this act shall, for every such violation, forfeit to the people of the State the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, unless a different penalty is prescribed herein. The chief inspector shall investigate all violations of the provisions of this act, and for such purpose shall have the power and is hereby authorized to subpoena witnesses and compel their attendance; and they may also administer all necessary oaths to any witnesses thus summoned. Sec. 28. The owner of a vessel inspected and certified as provided in this act shall pay to these inspectors for each vessel under ten tons burden, ten dollars; for each vessel over ten and under twenty tons burden, fifteen dollars; for each vessel over twenty and under fifty tons burden, twenty dollars; for each vessel over fifty, forty dollars; each person licensed shall pay five dollars for each original license and three dollars for each renewal thereof. All moneys received by the inspectors for exam inations, licenses or renewals of licenses shall be by them turned over to the treasury of the State of New Jersey for the use of the State. Approved April 9, 1906. Chapter 206.—Protection of employees as voters. Section 4. Any employer of any workmen, or any agent, superintendent or overseer of any company or corporation employing workmen, or any person whosoever, who shall directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person in his behalf or by his direction, make use of or threaten to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or LABOR L A W S -----N E W JERSEY----- ACTS OF 1906. 777 inflict or threaten to inflict by himself or by any other person any injury, damage, harm, or loss against any person or persons in his employ, in order to induce or com pel such employee or employees to vote or refrain from voting for any particular can didate or candidates at any election, or on account of such employee or employees having voted or refrained from voting for any particular candidate or candidates at any election, or who shall, by any sort of duress, constraint or improper influence or by any fraudulent or improper device, contrivance or scheme, impede, hinder or pre vent the free exercise of the franchise of any voter at any election, or shall thereby compel, induce, or prevail upon any voter to vote for or against any particular can didate or candidates at any election, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on convic tion thereof shall be sentenced to disfranchisement for a period of five years from the date of conviction. Sec. 5. Any person who, having once been convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this act, shall again be convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this act, whether such conviction be for the same offense or not, shall, on such sec ond conviction, be sentenced to disfranchisement and to pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or both, at the discretion of the court. Approved May 3, 1906. OHIO. ACTS OF 1906. Protection of employees on street railways. (Page 5.) S e c t io n 1. Section 1 ox an act entitled, “ An act requiring persons, associations and corporations owning or operating street cars to provide for the well-being of employ ees,” passed April 20, 1893, [shall] be amended to read as follows: Section 1. Every electric street car other than trail cars, which are attached to motor cars, shall be provided, during the months of November, December, January, February and March of each year at the forward end with a screen constructed of glass or other material, which shall fully and completely protect the driver or motorman or gripman or other person stationed on such forward end, and guiding and directing the motor power by which they are propelled, from wind and storm, and the space provided on such car for such person shall during the said months be provided with a sufficient heating device to maintain a temperature at all times not below 60 degrees Fahrenheit. Passed February 8, 1906. Safety appliances on railways— Self-cleaning ash pans on locomotives. (Page 46.) S e c t io n 1. Any person, firm or corporation, owning, operating or controlling any railroad running through or within the State of Ohio, shall in all cases where practi cal, cause each and every locomotive now in use upon such railroad, to be equipped with a self-cleaning ash dump pan of modern and approved pattern and design; and all engines or locomotives now in course of construction or that shall be built or con structed in the future, shall be so equipped. And in no case shall any engineer or fireman be compelled to go under any locomotive for the purpose of removing ashes from the same, except in cases of emergency. S e c . 2. Any person, or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined for each offense in any sum not less than $500 or more than $1,000: Provided , That this act shall not apply to any person, firm or corporation owning, operating or controlling any railroad or division thereof running through or within this State, who do not require engineers or firemen to go under the engine for the purpose of removing ashes from the same except in cases of emergency. Sec. 3. Any person, firm or .corporation failing to comply with the provisions of this act, shall not be allowed to set up or make the defense of contributory negligence, or assumption of risk, in any action for personal injury to, or death of, any engineer or fireman resulting from the failure of such person, firm or corporation to comply with the provisions of this act. S e c . 4. This act shall take effect and be in force on and after January 1, A . D. 1907. Passed March 8, 1906. 778 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR. Safety appliances on railways — Brakes, couplers, etc. (Page 75.) S e c t io n 1. It shall be unlawful for any common carrier engaged in moving traffic b y railroad between points within this State to use on its line any locomotive in moving such traffic not equipped with power driving wheel brakes and appliances for oper ating the train brake system, or to run any train in such traffic that has not seventyfive per centum of its cars in such train having their brakes used and operated by the engineer of the locomotive drawing such train, and all power brake cars in such train shall be associated together and have their brakes used and operated. The com missioner of railroads and telegraphs, or any board or railroad commission, which may by law assume the authority and perform the duties of the commissioner of railroads and telegraphs, may from time to time, after full hearing and for good cause shown, increase the minimum percentage of cars in any train required to be operated by power or train brakes and failure to comply with any such requirement of said com missioner, or commission, shall be subject to a like penalty as failure to comply with any requirement of this act. S e c . 2. It shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to haul, or permit to be hauled or used on its line, any locomotive, car, tender, or similar vehicle used in moving State traffic, not equipped with couplers coupling automatically by impact, and which can be uncoupled, without the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars. Sec. 3. It shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to haul or permit to be hauled or used on its line any locomotive, car, tender, or similar vehicle used in mov ing State traffic, not provided with secure grab irons or handholds in the sides and ends thereof; each and every car used in the movement of State traffic shall be pro vided with secure sill steps on each end of each side thereof. S e c . 4. It shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to use any locomotive, tender, ear, or similar vehicle used in the movement of State traffic, that is not pro vided with drawbars of the standard height, to-wit, standard gauge cars, 34J inches; narrow gauge cars, 26 inches, measured perpendicular from the level of the tops of the rails to the centers of the drawbars; the maximum variation from such standard heights between drawbars of empty and loaded cars shall be three inches. Sec 5. Any such common carrier may refuse to receive from connecting lines or from any shipper any car not equipped in accordance with the foregoing sections of this act. Sec. 6. Any such common carrier using or permitting to be used or hauled on its line any locomotive, tender, car, or similar vehicle, or train, in violation of any of the provisions of this act shall be liable to a penalty of one hundred dollars for each and every such violation, to be recovered in a suit or suits to be brought by the prosecuting attorney in the common pleas court of the county having jurisdiction in the locality where such violation shall have occurred; and it shall be the duty of such prosecuting attorney to bring such suits U])on duly verified information being lodged with him of such violation having occurred; and it shall be the duty of the commissioner of railroads and telegraphs, or any board or railroad commission, which may by law assume the authority and perform the duties of the commissioner of railroads and telegraphs, to lodge with the proper prosecuting attorneys information of any such violations as may come to its knowledge: Provided, That nothing in this act contained shall apply to locomotives, tenders, cars, or trains, exclusively used in the move ment of logs, and when the height of the drawbars on such locomotives, tenders and cars does not exceed 25 inches, or to street cars, or to locomotives, tenders, cars, simi lar vehicles, or trains, while any of which are in actual use in interstate commerce. Sec. 7. Any employee of any such common carrier who may be killed or injured by any locomotive, tender, car, similar vehicle, or train, in use contrary to the provi sions of this act, shall not be deemed thereby to have assumed the risk thereby occa sioned, although continuing in the employment of such carrier after the unlawful use of such locomotive, tender, car, similar vehicle, or train had been brought to his knowledge, nor shall such employee be held to have contributed to his injury in any case where the carrier shall have violated any provision of this act, when such viola tion contributed to the death or injury of such employee. S e c . 8. The commissioner of railroads and telegraphs, or any board or railroad com mission, which may b y law assume the authority and perform the duties of the com missioner of railroads and telegraphs, is hereby authorized to grant to any common carriers, upon full hearing and for good cause, a reasonable extension of time in which to comply with the provision of this act: Provided , That in no case shall such exten sion or extensions in the aggregate exceed the period of one year from the passage of this act. LABOR L A W S -----OHIO-----ACTS OF 1906. 779 S e c . 9. Section 1 of an act entitled “ An act to require railroad corporations to equip and furnish all cars used in their service with air brakes and automatic couplers and their engines with power brakes,” passed April 14, 1893, as amended April 23, 1904, is hereby repealed. Passed March 19, 1906. Mine regulations—Sprinkling dusty entries, etc, (Page 169.) S e c t io n 1. In case any entry or air way of any mine is so dry that the air becomes charged with dust the operator, or whoever is operating said mine, as owner, lessee, agent or in any capacity shall have such entry or air way regularly and thoroughly sprayed and sprinkled with water or cleaned in such manner that the air will not become charged with dust. S e c . 2. It shall be the duty of the State mine inspectors to enforce all possible pre ventive measures necessary to maintain the safety of the persons employed in any mine against the gathering or accumulating of any combustible matter that is explo sive in its nature, and shall cause the operator or whoever is operating such mine as owner, lessee, agent or in any capacity, to immediately remove any such gathered or accumulated matter. S ec . 3. Any operator, or whoever is operating such mine as owner, lessee, agent or in any capacity, who shall neglect or refuse to comply with the conditions required to be performed by sections one (1) and two (2) of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be fined in any sum not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500) nor less than two hundred dollars ($200), at the discretion of the court. Passed March 31, 1906. Mine regulations—Employment of miners. (Page 259.) S e c t io n 1. Every person desiring to work by himself as a miner in the coal mines of this State shall first produce satisfactory evidence to the mine boss of the mine in which he is employed, or desires to be employed, that he has worked at least one year with, or as a practical coal miner. Until said applicant has so satisfied the mine boss of the mine in which he seeks such employment of his competency, he shall not be allowed to mine coal unless accompanied by some competent coal miner, until he becomes duly qualified: Provided, That this act shall not [only] apply to mines gener ating fire damp, gas or combustible matter. S ec . 2. Any person violating section one of this act, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction be fined, not more than two hundred dollars, nor less than twenty-five dollars, at the discretion of the court. Passed April 2, 1906. Accidents on railroads. (Page 356.) S e c t io n 29. Every railroad shall, whenever an accident attended with loss of human life occurs within this State, upon its line of road or on its depot grounds or yards, give immediate notice thereof to the commission. In the event of any such accident, the commission, if it deem the public interest requires it, shall cause an investigation to be made forthwith, which investigation shall be held in the locality of the accident, unless, for greater convenience of those concerned, it shall order such investigation to be held at some other place, and said investigation may be adjourned from place to place as may be found necessary and convenient. The commission shall seasonably notify an officer or station agent of the company of the time and place of the investigation. The cost of such investigation shall be certified by the chairman of the commission, and the same shall be audited and paid by the State in the same manner as other expenses are audited and paid and a record or file of said proceedings and evidence shall be kept by said commission. Passed April 2, 1906. 780- BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, PENNSYLVANIA. ACTS OF 1906— E X T R A SESSION. A ct N o . 18.— Civil service in cities of the first class—Labor ser vice. S e c t io n 1. On and after the first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and six, appointments to, and promotions in, the civil service of the cities of the first class shall be made only according to qualifications and fitness, to be ascertained b y examinations, which so far as practicable shall be competitive, as hereinafter provided. On and after the said date, no person shall be appointed, transferred, reinstated, or promoted as an officer, clerk, employee, or laborer in the civil service, under the government of any city of the first class, in any manner or b y any means other than those prescribed in this act: Provided , That the provisions of this act shall not apply to any soldier, sailor, or marine honorably discharged from service in any war for the United States Govern ment, nor to their widows or children. S e c . 9. All examinations for positions in the classified service shall be practical in their character, and shall relate to those matters which will fairly test the qualifications and fitness of the persons examined to discharge the duties of the office or employment sought b y them. A ll examinations shall be free, and open to all applicants who have fulfilled the preliminary requirements stated in section ten of this act. The examina tions of applicants for employment as laborers shall relate to their capacity for labor, their habits as to sobriety and industry, and their experiences in the kind of work for which they apply. A ll applicants for any position in the classified service may, sub ject to the regulations adopted by the civil sendee commission, be required to submit to a physical examination before being admitted to the regular examinations held by the commission. Adequate public notice of the time and place of every examination held under the provisions of thi