people to be thrifty with that they do not have is typical of a great deal of presentday American statesmanship and is typical of a great deal of ignorance and misunderstanding regarding industry and its problems. Of course thrift, intelligent thrift, and thrift for patriotic purposes is commendable and has been loyally sup ported by the masses of the workers. 52. What form of profit sharing, if any, will promote thrift, co-operation, and a better understanding of the function of the capitalist as trustee and administrator of wealth in the interests of producers and consumers alike? Is this question predicated upon a possible declaration of a national political party to the effect that employers are "trustees and administrators of wealth in the interests of producers and consumers alike?" Surely this is interesting. By what right have they obtained trusteeship? By Divine Right? American labor entertains no such delusion. Trustees derive their authority from a principal who trusts them. "Producers and consumers" have, so far as the records show, never agreed upon any "trustee" of the character here suggested. The thrift section of the question should be kept distinct from the ridiculous assumption of capitalist trusteeship and is dealt with in reply to question 51. Profit sharing is not a device for the promotion of thrift and co-operation. It is a device for the entrenchment of privilege and for the subjection of workers. It is calculated to produce docility of spirit and to discourage organization among the workers. Without organization and without freedom of action among workers there can be no true and effective co-operation with employers for any of the objects which are worth while in industry. The capitalist who asks the workers to accept profitsharing has no notion that he is acting in the capacity of a trustee in the adminis tration of the property he possesses and the implication to that effect in the question is evidently a crude and clumsy effort to give standing and circulation to a misconception. Does the question imply the resurrection of the idea of the trusteeship of wealth which was believed to have been interred with the remains of the late Geo. F. Baer? 53. What kind of "blue sky" laws or other measures will best protect small investors from worthless investments and at the same time secure their participation and co-operation in industrial enterprises? 54. Should all issues of securities be subject to Government scrutiny? Careful study fails to remove the suspicion of inconsistency between these two questions and the question immediately preceding. The assumption that the beneficent "trustees" need to be restrained from doing violent financial injury to the small investors who have not attained to the stature of "trusteeship" is novel, at least, and on the whole interesting. The best reply to what may be the thought underlying both of these questions is found in the declaration of labor representatives (adopted in Washington, D. C., on December 13, 1919) entitled "Labor, Its Grievances, Protests and Demands." The following section from that document should be given most serious attention: "Credit is the life blood of modern business. At present under the control of private financiers it is administered not primarily to serve the needs of production, but the desire of financial agencies to levy a toll, upon community activity as high as 'the traffic will bear.' "Credit is inherently social. It should be accorded in proportion to confidence in production possibilities. Credit as now administered does not serve industry but burdens it. It increases unearned income at the expense of earned incomes. It is the center of the malevolent forces that corrupt the spirit and purpose of industry. "We urge the organization and use of credit to serve production needs and not to increase the incomes and holdings of financiers. Control over credit should be taken from financiers and should be vested in a public agency, able to administer this power as a public trust in the interest sof all the people." 55. Should the labor of prisoners be utilized for their physical and industrial training in production of goods for Government uses (the State-use system) and paid for so as to provide (b) For the support of their dependent families? (b) A fund to start them in an honest livelihood upon release from prison? The American Federation of Labor has repeatedly declared that "convict labor should be employed only by the State and for State use only," and that "departure from this principle would be disastrous to the public welfare as well as to the welfare of the convicts whose confinement is primarily for reformatory purposes. We are of the opinion, however, that such labor should be performed under conditions tending to assist in the convict's reformation." It would seem not only a measure of broad national economy but a measure of fairness to make certain that released convicts be assured a fund sufficient to start them in life upon release. There is no reason why if the position of the American Federation of Labor is made effective in law, the fruits of the convict's labor, while imprisoned, should not only go at least part way towards providing for such a new beginning but should also apply towards the support of dependent families during the term of imprisonment. Very respectfully yours, (Signed) SAMUEL GOMEPRS MATTHEW WOLL, FRANK MORRISON, Platform Committee, National Non-Partisan Campaign of the American Federation of Labor. Treasurer McKinley of the State Federation of Labor, "should take an active part in these conventions to the end that none but friends of organized labor be sent as delegates to the State convention." If the House approves a retirement bill that has been passed by the Senate, it will prove a money saver for Uncle Sam. It is stated that the Government is now paying annually $6,738,150 to some 8,125 employes for work done by other employes. It would cost the Government about $4,917,000 a year to retire these employes. The joint conference of retirement, representing the civil service employes, has forwarded these estimates to every member of the House. The official call for the Fortieth Annual Convention of the American Federation of Labor, which is to be held in Montreal commencing June 7th, has been issued from Washington by President Samuel Gompers. The delegates to represent our organization are H. B. Perham, past president; E. J. Manion, president; W. L. Braun, assistant general chairman of the G. C. & S. F. Lines; Owen D. Gorman, general chairman of the Atlanta, Birmingham & Atlantic, and M. W. Atkins, of the Norfolk & Western. Both branches of congress have passed the vocational rehabilitation bill which is intended to aid persons disabled in industry or otherwise and to assist them in their return to civil employment. The Federal board for vocational education will have charge of the plan and will cooperate with the various States. While the Senate and House are agreed on the principle of the bill, there are differences as to details and these will be adjusted in conference. The bill marks a new departure in national legislation. Both branches of congress have passed the vocational rehabilitation bill which is intended to aid persons disabled in industry or otherwise and to assist them in their return to civil employment. The Federal board for vocational education will have charge of the plan and will cooperate with the various states. While the Senate and House are agreed on the principle of the bill there are differences as to details and these will be adjusted in conference. The bill marks a new departure in national legislation. The union label is the inspiration, the guidepost, and the rallying point of the energetic and conscientious woman in every community. It gives us the Woman's Union Label League. If a man wants to air his views, let him talk, said Glenn Frank, associate editor of Century Magazine. Free speech should be allowed the fullest possible expression, the speaker said, "since extreme doctrines, like germs, die in the sunlight but flourish in darkness." "The American people can be trusted to take the necessary action when it sees liberty really menaced. There should not be a stopping, but the most effective stimulation of free speech." The union label, symbolizing as it does the conditions which the union itself is established to secure and maintain, is proof that these conditions obtain in the making of the article upon which it appears. Firm names, brands, trademarks and other devices by which products are advertised may lose their origi nal significance through changes in the fortunes of those who own them. The union label, being owned by the union, and subject exclusively to its control, represents the same thing always, namely, fair wages and hours, clean workshops and good workmanship. The trade unionists of England who have hoped that living costs would be reduced are confessing disappointment. Despite a strong anti-profiteering law from which much was expected, prices mount higher. As a part of this campaign workers have been urged to produce more, and a large number of responsible trade union executives joined in this movement. As a result of the failure to secure lower prices workers in practically every organized industry are asking for increased wages. It is stated that on February 1 last living costs were 130 per cent higher than pre-war prices. The following births have been reported since the last issue of THE TELEGRAPHER: To Bro. and Mrs. E. T. Fry, of Celeste, Tex., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. W. F. Cooks, of Hornell, N. Y., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. W. A. Canafax, of Weatherford, Tex., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. P. M. Hicks, of Center, Texas, a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. W. B. Edwards, of South Berkeley, Calif., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. W. T. Bierley, of Beaver, Ohio, a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. F. B. Holcomb, of Springfield, Ohio, a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. R. G. Anderson, of Gatesville, Miss., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. Ward O'Neil, of Beaver Falls, Pa., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. C. M. Love, of Rosamond, Calif, a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. M. T. Parks, of Bainbridge, Indiana, a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. T. M. Mitchell, of Humrick, Illinois, a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. C. O. Robinson, of Del Ray, Calif., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. E. O. Twedt, of Prior Lake, Minn., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. F. E. Young, of Tex arkana, Texas, a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. F. E. Houdersheldt. of Denton, Neb., a girl. To Bro. and Mrs. N. W. Bishop, of Chowchilla, Calif., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. N. A. D'Amour, of Highlands, Que., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. G. F. Charbonneau, of Highlands, Que., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. R. Legendre, of Highlands, Que., a boy. To Bro. and Mrs. Jos. Pelletier, of St. Anne, Man., a girl. At Montevideo, Minn., Brother 0. J. Kolb, of Div. 23, to Miss Esther Moudry. At Easton, Maryland, Brother L. V. Travers, of Div. 17, to Miss Frances E. Faulkner. At Hudson, Wisc., Bro. Geo. Welch, of Div. 4, to Miss Florence Mitchell. At Billings, Montana, Bro. H. E. Hill. yer, of Div. 130, to Miss Olive Duncan. At Youngstown, Ohio, Bro. R. E. Was son and Sister Marion Spear, both of Div. 17. At Azalea, N. C., Bro. A. B. Yow, of Div. 59, to Miss Lewis. At Blanford, Ind., Sister E. Anderson, of Div. 180, to Mr. John Underwood. At Cynthiana, Ky., Bro. Ray Gardner, of Div. 62, to Miss Levy. At Monahans, Tex., Bro. J. B. Jarrell, of Div. 88, to Miss Mary Lee Terrell. At Chester, Montana, Sister Lyda Reip. of Div. 70, to Mrs. C. F. Scheppler. At Buffalo, N. Y., Sister Geraldine C. Deitrich, of Div. 30, to Mr. Edward Du Pont. At Windsor, Vermont, Brother R. J. Joyal, of Div. 171, to Miss Blanche Guild. At Mount Horeb, Wis., Bro. J. E. Holden, of Div. 76, to Miss Ruth Garfoot. |