men as are necessary to control the trade. There is no place for the unskilled laborer in the trade-union of the prevailing type. There are situations where the interests of the craft union may be antagonistic to organization among the unskilled, as has been exemplified in the recent Lawrence strike. The United Textile Workers' Union of America, of which Mr. John Golden is president, for many years previous to the strike, had at Lawrence an organization confined to the skilled men in the mills. It was easy for the mill owners to satisfy the demands of the few skilled men, who were but a very small fraction of the whole labor force. They were willing to remain at work. The demands of the thousands of unskilled workers, however, could not be satisfied without a greater financial sacrifice than the mill owners were prepared to make. The suspension of work caused by the strike of the immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe and Asia Minor was an injury to the members of the United Textile Workers' Union, who had nothing to gain from the success of the strike. Viewing the controversy not from an altruistic, but from a business point of view, they naturally sided with the mill owners against the strikers, "comforted that the whirligig of time was bringing them around as bulwarks of conservatism even in the eyes of the employers." This diversity of economic interests of the aristocracy of skilled labor and of the masses of unskilled men, women, and children accounts for the fact that "the English-speaking labor men have not been urged by such a missionary zeal toward the recent immigrants as should have been theirs on human grounds no more than on the basis of sound association among the whole labor force."'"

organization; would not make the organization necessary. A better condition would be one where hours, conditions of employment, and wages were such that organization of labor for these purposes was unnecessary." —Hearings before the Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, Sixty-first Congress, p. 256.

Robert A. Woods: "The Clod Stirs," The Survey, March 16, 1912, pp. 1930-1931. • Ibid.

Discussing the possibilities of organization among the unskilled, a student of organized labor says:

The immigrant is usually accustomed to some form of social organization. He is not as individualistic as is the typical American. He can be organized with others into labor unions; and when the unskilled immigrants from a variety of birthplaces are thus associated, the resulting union is usually strong, coherent, and easily directed by capable and enthusiastic leaders. The McKees Rocks strike furnishes an excellent illustration of the solidarity of the unskilled when organized.1

On the home training of Italian immigrants in organization the report of the Immigration Commission contains interesting material, which unfortunately has been disregarded in its conclusions.

In recent years the labor-union movement has grown rapidly and to large proportions among the industrial as well as the agricultural workers of Italy, and it is said that the activities of the unions have helped to advance wages in both fields. In 1907, according to Annuario Statistico for 1905-1907, there were 2950 industrial unions in the Kingdom, with a total of 362,533 members. From 1901 to 1904, inclusive, there were 3032 industrial strikes, involving 621,737 workers, and in the various years from 63 to 80 per cent of the strikes were reported as "successful" or "partly successful."2

The most noteworthy feature of this movement is the progress of organization among farm hands, which has no counterpart in the United States. The statistics presented in Table 105 show that even the despised South Italian farm laborer is capable of organization and concerted action.

On the labor movement in Russia, a compilation of statistics from Russian official sources has been published by the United States Bureau of Labor.

Previous to the revolution of 1905, labor organizations and strikes were treated as conspiracies in Russia. During the revolution the severity of the law was relaxed for a short time, but with the suppression of the revolution the old repressive policy was resumed. Thus the only oppor

Carlton: loc. cit., pp. 346–347.

* Reports of the Immigration Commission, vol. 4 (in press).

TABLE 105.

AGRICULTURAL LABOR UNIONS AND STRIKES AMONG AGRICULTURAL LABORERS IN ITALY.

tunity the wage-warners of the Russian Empire had to show their capacity for organization and concerted action was in 1905. According to the statistics published by the Russian government, the total number of strikers in factories and mines during the year 1905 was 2,915,000. This figure does not include the railways and the postal-telegraph service, which were completely paralyzed by the strikes of 1905.3 According to the census of 1897, the total number of railroad employees, exclusive of administrative officials, was 682,000 and the total number of employees in the postal-telegraph service, exclusive of higher officials, was 75,000.4 The total number of strikers for the year 1905 may therefore be conservatively estimated at 3,672,000. The highest number of strikers recorded in the United States for any one year between 1881 and 1905 was 533,000, in 1902.5 The strikes in the factories of the Russian Empire in 1905 affected 32.6 per cent of all establishments under

1 Reports of the Immigration Commission, vol. 4, Table 17 (condensed). Of the 1105 strikes among agricultural laborers a large majority were reported as successful or partly successful.

3 Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 86: I. M. Rubinow, Foreign Statistical Publications, Russia, p. 284.

• Prémier Récensement Général de la Population de l'Empire de Russie, 1897, vol. ii., pp. II, 250-251.

5 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1909, p. 240.

factory inspection, comprising 60 per cent of all wageearners.'

The strikes in the Russian Empire drew together wageearners of all those nationalities which make up the bulk of our immigration from Russia: Hebrews, Poles, Lithuanians, Russians, and Ruthenians (South Russians).

It is evident that a good many of the immigrants from Russia, Poland, and Italy bring with them an understanding of the aims of organized labor. These immigrants serve as a nucleus of organization among their countrymen. This fact has been brought to the attention of the American public in the recent strikes of the garment workers and textile mill operatives.

From all available data it is clear that if organized labor in the United States has not succeeded in welding together a majority of the wage-earners and in securing for them a greater share of the prosperity of the country, the fault is not with immigration in general, nor with immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe in particular. Race prejudice, which the coming of the immigrant has increased among the English-speaking workers is considered by some writers among the contributory causes which have retarded the development of unionism in this country. The primary cause, however, is the substitution of machinery for human skill, which is taking the ground from the craft union. Since the unskilled labor which has superseded the labor of the skilled mechanic is performed by recent immigrants, the breakdown of the old organization is conceived by the tradeunionist as the effect of recent immigration. This view is given expression in the following statement:

In the occupations and industries in which the pressure of the competition of the recent immigrant has been directly felt, either because 1 Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 86, pp. 271–272.

* Since these lines were written (in 1912) the revolution in Russia and the great strikes of 1920 in Italy have made labor a dominant force in the economic and political life of those countries.

Carlton, loc. cit., p. 63.

the nature of the work was such as to permit of the immediate employment of the immigrant or through the invention of improved machinery his employment was made possible in occupations which formerly required training and apprenticeship, the labor organizations have been, in a great many cases, completely overwhelmed and disrupted.'

Where the invention of improved machinery has dispensed with the necessity of training and apprenticeship, it is plain that labor organizations which were built upon special training and apprenticeship were doomed to die a natural death for want of supporters. Could a union of blacksmiths be maintained in a modern foundry where steam hammers are used? With the occupation of the blacksmith gone, his union must inevitably have been "disrupted" even in a purely American community without a single immigrant from Southern and Eastern Europe.

Another obstacle to the progress of trade-unionism is that the principal industries to-day are controlled by combinations, which have reduced competition among employers of labor to a minimum. A trust can afford to hold out in a strike as long as it chooses, since it can shift its losses to the consumers. The workmen, on the contrary, cannot strike without end. As a result, "the unions have practically disappeared from the trusts, and are disappearing from the large corporations."

1Jenks and Lauck, loc. cit., p. 192.

Prof. Commons in the American Journal of Sociology, vol. xiii., (1908), p. 759.