war.

European labor

is making war upon In the oft-repeated phrase of the London cockney, they are "bloody well fed up" on war. They are going to end Krupps and Skodas, and also Armstrongs, Cruesots and the whole breed.

As the one element that had nothing to do with bringing on the war, and that suffered most from war, labor is now determined to have a world without war.

It sees that kaisers and czars, governmental and industrial tyrants, imperialists, diplomats and militarists made this war inevitable. Labor smashed these things in the Central Empires. It kept at the job of smashing Prussian autocracy under what was sometimes great provocation from profiteers, and oppression and trickery at home. But it refused to listen to those who would have stopped the war to whip these domestic enemies. Now that the war is over, however, labor is ready to attend to these questions.

Labor took the statements that we were fighting for liberty, democracy and social justice seriously. Even though it knew that some who repeated these phrases were only using them as political platforms are always used, as mere rallying cries full of sound and

fury and empty air, yet it knew its own strength to be sufficient to give substance to the otherwise hollow mockery.

Now labor is insisting upon nothing more and nothing less than that these promises be fulfilled.

British unions have demanded and secured almost equal voice with employers in the management of industry. They are insisting that the fertile acres of the British Isles be opened for cultivation and no longer held as deer pastures and pheasant runs. They have condemned the slum, and it is being replaced by model homes, built and managed by the state.

Labor co-operated with employers during the war. It fully and fairly fulfilled every pledge it made. It is willing to continue such co-operation so long as the faith is kept. It welcomes every proposal to secure progress without friction, social justice without disorder, universal peace without revolution.

But labor is fully conscious, not only of its purposes and its duties, but also of its power. It is not going back. It will move forward. It will not now lose the war after having won through these four bloody years.

HE recent "Reconstruction Conference" at Atlantic City, attended by almost five thousand business men, afforded an interesting glimpse of the mental processes of the commercial mind after the war has wrought its supposedly cataclysmic changes. The formal speeches, couched always in terms of an idealism which nobody takes seriously, gave only a slight clue to what the business man is really thinking; the resolutions introduced by the dozens of small groups representing specific industries came nearer to it; and the casual conversation of the delegates while off duty, in hotel lobbies and over the dinner table, offered the best interpretation of all.

If the "business interests" of the nation have suffered a spiritual rebirth out of the world's blood bath, the men who gathered at Atlantic City offered suprisingly little evidence of it. The elaborate and widespread socialization of industry during the war represents to these Chamber of Com

merce members merely a perversion of business from its true course, to be tolerated only during the hour of national crisis; and the multiplex system of checks and balances built up by the government, its boards and committees and rules and regulations, are all to be swept away forthwith. Business is to return to unrestricted private enterprise. In fact, the delegates will not be satisfied with a mere return to pre-war conditions of private control; they want, and many of them expressly said so, the repeal of the Sherman and Clayton laws, "and all other checks on private initiative." The vacant places on the Federal Trade Commission should be filled at once by the appointment of "sound business men." Sentiment was freely offered in favor of a new law which should make possible in domestic sales efforts the same type of co-operation which the Webb-Pomerene law offers abroad. Acting on evident concerted inspiration, a large number of the special committee con

ferences from specific trades introduced resolutions condemning government ownership in principle. The railroads should be returned to their owners, as should telephones, telegraphs, and cables. The merchant marine is to be operated with "full benefit of the driving force of private initiative," which, as Charles M. Schwab told the delegates, is necessary for maximum efficiency of our American shipping. One observer, at least, who sat through the convention, was now and again haunted by a sudden conviction that none of these men had read a newspaper for at least six months.

The delegates themselves were well satisfied with their own advanced mental viewpoint. The convention marked, as they were told not infrequently, a new era in American industry, and the discussions of the labor question were Exhibit A in support of this contention. It is true that the tone of the discussion of labor was radically different from that of ante-bellum conventions of this character. Labor, as everyone told everyone else, must have "a better deal" than it has ever had. Mr. Schwab explained to his audience in a humorous way that "it is time to stop talking about capital sharing equally with labor, and to begin doing it." His audience cheered, but were much more enthusiatic when he protested, a moment later, aganist "labor trusts," and declared darkly that while organization of the workers is all right, such organization must be truly representative of the workers in the plant, and not of any outside influence.

John D. Rockefeller, Jr., did the convention a great service by offering it a happy way of appearing liberal toward labor without actually doing anything distressing. His paper was a model of idealism, and showed conclusively that starting from his erstwhile Colorado viewpoint, he has now caught up with the opinions which sociologists held ten years ago. The happiness of the individual is of paramount importance, he declared; the piling up of more material wealth must give first place to considerations of general social welfare. He thereupon developed a complex theory of the creation of shop committees of employes which should co-operate with the managers and adjust grievances, schemes excellent so far as they went, but which were really intended to avoid the problem of co-operating with union labor. The convention endorsed Mr. Rockefeller's "creed' unanimously. For the most part, however, the humanitarianism of the speakers who discussed labor would seem to have been: about two-fifths left-over war phrases about co-operation;

two-fifths real fear of the spread of radical Socialism; and one-fifth a comfortable expectation that there will soon be a convenient margin of the unemployed which will abrogate the necessity of arranging too idealistic conditions. More than one delegate said this freely in private conversation. Apparently there was little approval of the sound and thoughtful "labor program offered by Henry P. Kendall, chairman of the Committee on Industrial Relations of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, whose central point was the principle that every individual has the right to regular and continuous employment at a wage sufficient for the maintenance of proper living conditions.

The reactionary viewpoint which found expression in the slogan of "Hands off" was, naturally, echoed in the discussions of taxation. Alba B. Johnson, president of the Baldwin Locomotive Works, wanted a twobillion dollar cut in the revenues to be raised by taxation, in order that business may be unhampered in expanding, such expansion being for the welfare, of course, of the nation. It almost seemed, for some bewildered moments, as though he advocated a permanent policy of paying government expenses only partially by taxation, the greater burden being borne by constant new bond issues! In any event, the amortization of our war indebtedness is something which may safely be postponed to the indefinite future.

That prices must be kept up was the burden of many speakers at special committee meetings. This is to be done in order that high wages may still be paid. Though givernment "interference" with private business was so heartily decried, it is interesting to note that industry after industry was advised, by the various War Service Committees, to retain in force the economies of operation, the restrictions of wasteful practice, which the authorities at Washington forced upon them.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the repressions which the war placed upon individual expression served merely to bottle up a vast amount of fermenting emotion which is now blowing itself off with redoubled vigor. The business man has had to sit back meekly and swallow a great deal of "government interference" with his business, his profits and his handling of labor. Now he feels that patriotism, if not adjourned, is at least laid on the table; and the Atlantic City convention gives us what is probably only a mild indication of how proud the business man is of himself and his theories; and how uncompromisingly he proposes to put them into effect.

'HE labor movement has made remarkable progress throughout the world during the last two years. There has been a great awakening among the working class in England, culminating in the marvelous advance in the prestige of the British Labor party. There are not wanting signs of a similar awakening of labor in the United States. As yet, however, the awakening in the United States has hardly got beyond the stage where a large number of the wage earners and producers feel that some sort of political action is necessary in addition to industrial action, in order for labor to successfully fight its battles. Just what form this political action will take is at present uncertain, but there are those who favor independent political action; in other words, the formation of an American Labor Party. As an aid in this discussion, the writer, who is an Australian, presents the following facts concerning the organization of the Labor Party of Australia:

Australia is a self-governing dominion of the British Empire. It is a federation of states somewhat similar to the United States. The federal prime minister and the state premiers are, for practical purposes, chosen by the federal House of Representatives and the state lower houses, respectively.

The Australian Parliament Labor party is some 25 years older than the British party. It was not until 1906 that a definite Labor party made its appearance in the English House of Commons. Before this date there were individual labor members in the English Parliament, but their number was not sufficient to warrant the term "Labor party." Even now, in 1918, there are only some 40 Labor members in the English House of Commons, which consists of 670 members. In Australia, however, a definite Labor party was established in the Parliament of New South Wales in 1891, there being 36 Laborites in a house of 141 members. Shortly after this date Labor parties made their appearance in the parliaments of each of the Australian states, and in 1901, when the six Australian colonies were federated, it was found that there were 16 Laborites in the first federal House of Representatives. During the years 1891-1909 there were three parties in the Australian Parliaments-Liberals, Conservatives and

Labor. During these years the Labor parties in the various Parliaments held the balance of power between the two old parties. By a judicious use of this strategic position the Labor party was able to obtain much progressive legislation. In 1909, however, the Liberal and Conservative parties decided that it was time to quit fighting one another and to combine against the common enemy. the Labor party. The Liberal Union party was formed in direct opposition to labor. Since 1909 the issue at all elections, with the exception of those held during the last two years, in which new issues due to the war have arisen, has been for or against labor. As a result of the coalition of the two old parties at the federal election of 1910, the Labor party obtained a majority in both federal houses.

The progressive legislation for which Australia is noted is due to the fact that organized labor has entered the arena of politics.

The Labor Party organization varies somewhat in the different states, but the scheme followed in the state of New South Wales is fairly typical of the organization in all the states. In New South Wales the basis of the party organization is the local or district Political Labor League. A league is formed in each election district. All trade unions in the district willing to join are affiliated with the league. Residents in the district who support the party, but who are not trade unionists, can become members of the league on signing the platform of the party and on payment of a small subscription-about a dollar a year. The unions contribute so much per capita to the funds of the league. In this way the Labor party finances the political campaign of the Labor candidates at the elections. The platform of the party for a state election is drawn up by a conference, composed of delegates from every local league. The questions to be considered at the state conference are thrashed out in the leagues and unions before the selection of delegates. The conference instructs and criticizes Labor members of Parliament and elects the state executive council. This executive keeps in touch with members of Parliament and deals with all matters arising between conferences. The state conferences are convened annually unless something unforeseen occurs in

the political field, when a special conference may be called. A federal conference is called every three years. The delegates for the federal conference are chosen at the various state conferences immediately preceding the federal conference. Each state sends six delegates to the federal conference. The federal conference is called only once in three years, because the life of the federal Parliament is three years. A special federal conference may be called if new issues arise.

There are no primary election laws in Australia, and political parties are not recognized by the law. At a state election in New South Wales the elector only votes for the candidate for his district. There are at most four names on the ballot paper. Each candidate may receive the indorsement of a political party, but these indorsements have no recognition on the ballot paper. Some three or four months before the state election the candidates for the Labor indorsement for a certain district are required by the party to sign the following pledge:

"I hereby pledge myself not to oppose the selected candidate of this or any other branch of the Political Labor League. I also pledge myself if returned to the Parliament, on all occasions to do my utmost to secure the carrying out of the principles in the labor platform, and on all questions affecting the fate of a government to vote as a majority of the Labor party may decide at a duly constituted caucus meeting."

The caucus mentioned in the pledge consists of the Labor members of Parliament.

The names of the candidates for this indorsement are then submitted to the state

1

executive for its approval. This approval is given unless there is some particular reason for not giving it. The names thus approved are then submitted to an exhaustive ballot of the party members in the district. If some one candidate does not get a majority a second ballot is taken after the name of the candidate with the lowest number of votes in the first ballot has been struck off the ballot paper. The third and fourth ballots are taken, if necessary. The candidate who obtains the Labor indorsement then files for the Parliamentary election. All Labor candidates must be members of a league or trade union of at least one year's standing and these candidates are chosen in the way explained by the rank and file of the party in the respective districts.

The Australian Labor party is a people's party. In the federal election of 1914 there were about 1,050,000 votes cast for the Labor candidates. Australia has woman suffrage and therefore, there were about 550,000 men's votes cast for the Labor candidates. In 1914 there were 523,000 trade unionists in Australia. The great mapority of these are men. These unionists are members of the party. At the lowest estimate 60 per cent of the men who vote Labor are members of the Labor party. The situation is somewhat the same as if of the 9,000,000 electors who voted the Democratic ticket in the United States Congressional election of 1916 there were 5,000,000 dues-paying members of the Democratic party. A Labor member of Parliament in Australia is looked upon rather as an instructed delegate than as a free representative. The Labor members are continuously responsible to the people who elected them.

ONGRESS was urged to pass a law establishing the U. S. Employment Service on an adequate, permanent basis, as a foremost measure of labor reconstruction for preventing unemployment crises in the period of demobilizing the military forces and the munition workers, by speakers at the "labor supply and demobilization" session of the twelfth annual meeting of the American Association for Labor Legislation.

Thousands of workers will be jobless, hungry, restless, and fomenters of social un

rest, it was declared, unless prompt action is taken to stabilize labor supply and demand.

Jobless Men a Danger.

"There is every prospect," declared Mr. Smyth, "that unless remedial measures are promptly taken, the sight of stranded, workless, moneyless soldiers will be common throughout the land. Soldiers are being dis charged by the thousands daily on the basis of military units, with no reference to whether they are needed or not in industry. Already they are turning up in the cities, im

provident, 'broke,' away from home, without work, applicants for civilian relief. Many of them don't want work yet. Many others are unwilling to undertake the 'day labor' jobs which alone they can find. The great danger in the coming four months is that there won't be jobs enough to go around; that unemployment will come with attendant misery and social unrest at a time when anarchistic tendencies are contagious."

A Social Reconstruction Measure Declaring that the old idea of looking upon labor as a commodity must be abandoned. Mr. Lescohier said: "The Bolsheviki, I. W. W., and similar organizations may be crushed as organizations, but the revolt they express will go on, for they are a concrete expression of the economic discontent of the peasant and common labor classes. Those

of us who believe in democracy as contrasted with autocracy and anarchy should waste no time. It is our task to discover the real causes for these movements and point out the social reconstruction which will remove them. An unorganized labor market has made it impossible for employers to get labor from any central agency as they get capital from the banking system. They have had to depend upon the picking up of labor wherever they could find it lying around loose.

"During the war," he continued, "the government established an employment service and they are trying to organize the labor market; but we must not lose sight of the fact that that service is a piece of war machinery rather than a piece of economic machinery; it was not established to help solve either the employers' or the employees' employment problem, but to facilitate the transfer of labor from non-essential to essential industries in war time. It had a war function, not an economic function. We devoutly hope that the United States Employment Service will be perpetuated and developed into a permanent system of control over the employment market."

That there is an adequate labor supply for the immediate future without any immigration if labor efficiency is conserved by constructive reduction of turn-over, adequate supply of necessaries of life, and a national system of labor distribution, was the opinion expressed by Mr. Lescohier.

"The sufferings which the workers have endured because of irregular employment," he said, "have been many times greater than is necessary. They are one of the deepseated causes of bitterness among workers. They are a sin against humanity for which our civilization will pay a dear price if they are allowed longer to continue."

Unemployment Insurance Urged.

Mr. Tead said it is possible to remove the risk of involuntary idleness. "We can create a permanent and effective Federal employment service," he said. "We can integrate industries so that they will more and more produce in relation to a known demand We can guard against any remaining risk of idleness through unemployment insurance. This is the irreducible minimum if we are sincerely eager to take from people the horrible dread that they will have no bread to eat because no man will hire them.

"The Federal Employment Service must be made by law a permanent national agency, adequately financed, competently organized, and ably led," he insisted. "A definite part of the legislative program of the next Congress should be a bill creating this service, administered by a separate bureau of the Department of Labor, under an executive directly responsible to the Secretary of Labor and appointed by him, whose staff would be under the necessary civil service regulation. All this will do little more than make permanent the organization which the war emergency has evoked."

As a practical method of organizing industry within itself so as to be able to provide consecutive work for all, Mr. Tead, suggested a responsible organization within each industry on a national scale representative equally of employers' and workers' associations in that industry, to determine labor standards, apprenticeship, and regulation of production and marketing so as to stabilize output.

A LECTURER ON COOPERATION.

The Buffalo Convention of the American Federation of Labor decided that a competent trade unionist should be appointed to furnish information by correspondence and through lectures upon the practical work of the cooperative movement. The official is to visit localities in which cooperative societies are being organized or have been established and give practical advice as to their plan and development. To meet this expense each local union affiliated to the American Federation of Labor was requested to contribute but $1.00. So far the contributions have been insufficient to permit the work to be carried on in an effective manner. The Executive Council of the Federation urges every local union to contribute $1.00 to the cooperative fund. Remittances should be made payable to Frank Morrison, Secretary of the American Federation of Labor, Washington, D. C.