in the twentieth century are Judges Brandeis, Clark and Holmes.

The six hang-overs have solemnly decided that to ask men working in a nonunion shop to join the union is unlawful. The court would permit us to solicit men working in a union shop, or in a shop employing both union and non-union men, or men out of a job, but not the man who accepts a job in a shop, factory or mine where only non-union men are employed and where that is one of the conditions of employment. The theory underlying the decision is that when we try to unionize the non-union shop our purpose is not to build up the union but to injure the employer by persuading his men to strike and so violate their unwritten contract and cause him financial loss. This the court holds is malicious and unlawful conspiracy. That contracts entered into under duress are void and that the unfair employer reserves the right to discharge a man at a moment's notice are facts not considered as deserving consideration, nor does the court concern itself with the action in the premises taken by congress and embodied in the Clayton bill.

This Rip Van Winkle decision was handed down on an appeal of the Hitchman Coal and Coke Company of West Virginia, a low wage concern that hires non-union men only. The United Mine Workers tried to organize the plant. The company asked for and obtained from notorious Judge Dayton an order restraining the union; from which order the union appealed. The Federal Court of Appeals reversed Judge Dayton and ruled that the union had the right to induce the men to organize. The company carried the case to the Supreme Court which has reversed the Court of Appeals.

Incidentally and without formality the Court has undone all that Congress did when it enacted the Clayton bill. It rules that peaceful persuasion is not always lawful; on the contrary, to induce men to join the union, when the employer objects and when this might result in an attempt to compel him to recognize the union rather than face a strike and financial loss, is a conspiracy-despite the Clayton bill and the free speech provisions of the Federal Constitution. In short the legality of the actions of a trade union depends upon their possible effect upon the tranquility and the pocket-book of the employer.

If this decision were to be taken seriously, the unfair employer, by simply announcing that he intended to hire non-union labor exclusively and finding a crew willing to work under such conditions, could continue indefinitely in his evil way. Our hands would be tied, our lips sealed. We would

be denied the right to do or to say anything that might incidentally cause him to lose a dollar's worth of business or a cent of profit. He might underbid fair employers, undermine working conditions, reduce wages, lower the standard of living and we would have no redress.

Well, that may be the law in the minds of the majority of the members of the Supreme Court but such legalistic hair-splitting is too refined for the shop, the job and the mine. We shall continue to invite nonunion men to join the union and shall press the battle for industrial iberty and economic freedom regardless of the wishes of employers, the effect it may have upon their bank accounts or the opinion of the half dozen estimable old gentlemen at Washington whose singular decisions upon important matters bring them once in a while into unenviable prominence. This latest decision places the Court in contempt of common sense and public opinion.

The decision recalls the story of the Innocent Abroad who had overstepped the bounds of British law and had an appointment with the Court. The morning was foggy and the visitor had lost his way, so asked the corner policeman to direct him to the halls of justice. The policeman removed his helmet, scratched his head and finally said: "'alls o' justice 'alls o' justice? I never 'eard tell o' them, sir. Maybe you want the courts o' law?"

Postmaster Burleson is out of touch with the times. His conception of the manner in which the Post Office Department should be conducted is that of an autocrat. He is woefully out of place as a member of a government charged with responsibility for the prosecution of a war entered into for the purpose of preserving and extending democracy and achieving freedom. His message to Congress, harshly criticising the employes of the Department for daring to organize and to ask for the observance of the laws providing for the eight hour day and guaranteeing the right to petition Congress for better conditions, might have been dated Potsdam or Tsarskoe Selo before the revolution.

As a self-appointed censor he cancelled the second class mailing privilege of the radical daily and weekly newspapers. Having delivered a knock-out blow to the first line of free speech defense, he next attacked the "five and ten" weeklies and the "ten, twenty, thirty" monthlies that are suspected of muck-raking tendencies, potential or actual, by recommending exces

sive increases in second class postal rates, to which recommendations a reactionary Congress gladly gave ear.

His impatience at being crossed or criticised finds illuminating expression in his petulant protest in his report to Congress in which—urging the repeal of the law allowing the employes of the Department to organize-he attempts to draw a parallel between the pay of the men in the Post Office Department and that of enlisted men at the front. He alleges that the Department employes receive three times as much pay as the enlisted men. Postal clerks receive from $800 to $1,200 a year -from $65 to $100 a month; enlisted men receive $33 a month. Other things being equal the comparison might be worth making-though for reasons other than those that Mr. Burleson had in mind. But other things are not equal. The postal clerk must feed, clothe and house himself and his family out of his pay, whereas Uncle Sam feeds, clothes and shelters the enlisted man and, if married, makes an allowance for his wife and family that, together with his pay puts the two men on an equal basis from a pecuniary standpoint.

Mr. Burleson thinks seventy-five or a 'hundred dollars a month extravagant pay for a man with, perhaps, a half dozen children to support in a city where the cost of living is exceptionally high. Considering the service rendered, it is not nearly as extravagant as is the salary paid the Postmaster General. In addition to his salary Mr. Burleson has a large private income derived from rents paid by the tenants on his extensive land holdings in Texas. In its report to Congress, the Commission on Industrial Relations described vividly the miserable existence of the tenant farmers of Texas and their families, bled white by rack-renting landlords of the Burleson type.

President Wilson should ask for the resignation of this Texas junker. As a member of the Cabinet of Grover Cleveland he might have passed muster but he is out of his class as a member of the present administration.

As trade unionists and as men who love liberty we believe in voluntary service. We are unalterably opposed to compulsion. We are confident that the men needed in the navy-yards, the private shipyards, the factories and other establishments engaged in building ships and making guns and munitions can be secured without resorting to the draft-always provided the Government and the private contractors

are willing to pay fair wages, work the eight hour day and concede reasonable working conditions.

The Government is of this opinion and the Labor Department has devised a plan to ascertain how many men of each craft are willing to work for Uncle Sam or for firms having Government contracts. We are mailing to each local union a letter explaining this plan and a sample of the enrollment cards to be filled out by members willing to join the Public Service Reserve. Each local union is requested to appoint a member to act as enrollment officer. His duty will be to see that the cards are properly filled out and to forward them to the Department of Labor at Washington. Members that fill out cards do not bind themselves to accept work that may be offered. When men of our craft are needed they will be informed of the location and nature of the work and the wages paid, and given the opportunity to accept or decline the proffered job. The object of the registration is to determine how many men of each craft are available for Government work.

All members whose home conditions will permit them to leave their present employment and place of residence and who are willing to do so, should register with the Public Service Reserve by filling out an enrollment card.

In May, 1916, average wages were nineteen per cent higher than they were in 1907. So says Bulletin 214 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, of the Labor Department. In August of this year food prices as a whole had advanced forty-seven per cent compared with prices before the war. This means that to the average man the cost of living has increased two and one-half times as fast as his wages have advanced. In the organized trades the race has not been so unequal but even so it is doubtful whether any of us have held our own. The vast majority of the workers have been steadily losing ground.

To facilitate the adjustment of disputes and that more satisfactory results may be secured the United States Ship-building Labor Adjustment Board has been re-organized. Labor is given a larger representation and a Board of Appeals is to be established at Washington to be composed of three representatives of the Government and three labor representatives. The decision of this Board will be final and binding upon all parties interested.

Bro. E. J. Marley, L. U. 19, San Francisco, Cal.

Bro. Wm. W. Stone, L. U. 848, New York, N. Y.

Bro. J. S. Thompson, L. U. 9, Kansas City, Mo.

Bro. Aaron Slutzky, L. U. 777, Newark, N. J. Bro. W. J. Lowry, L. U. 1, Baltimore, Md. Bro. Jos. Ray, L. U. 267, Crown Point, Ind. Bro. Jas. H. Cronin, L. U. 195, Providence, R. I.

Bro. Karlo Sautora, L. U. 1011, New York, N. Y.

Bro. Oliver C. Ward, L. U. 417, McKeesport, Pa.

Bro. Morris Rogoff, L. U. 442, New York, N. Y.

Bro. Chas. H. Worley, L. U. 242, Orange, N. J.

Bro. Jas. H. Bennett, L. U. 1005, hickasha, Okla.

Bro. Flavill S. Barrett, L. U. 110, Bradford, Pa.

Bro. Henry Kessenick, L. U. 781, Milwaukee, Wis.

Bros Adolph Wetler, L. U. 1011, New York, N. Y.

Bro. James W. Bickell, L. U. 102, Cleveland, Ohio.

Bro. George Hoffman, L. U. 1011, New York, N. Y.

Bro. J. Daley, L. U. 31, Syracuse, N. Y. Bro. Adam R. Spradling, L. U..970, Charleston, W. Va.

Bro. Arthur J. Underwood, L. U. 685, Meriden, Conn.

Bro. Walter Conrad, L. U. 242, Orange, N. J.
Bro. J. Tamminga, L. U. 194, Chicago, Ills.
Bro. Fred W. Tuschhoff, L. U. 51, New York,
N. Y.

Bro. Ainslee Millbury, L. U. 111, Lynn, Mass.
Bro. Thos. Cook, L. U. 46, St. Louis, Mo.
Bro. Unbert Principi, L. U. 51, New York,
N. Y.

Bro. Geo. S. Pierce, L. U. 72, San Francisco,
Cal.

Bro. F. B. Katchelhoffer, L. U. 33, Joliet, Ills.

Bro. Stephen S. Stilwell, L. U. 102, Cleveland, Ohio.

Bro. M. H. Eidman, L. U. 103, Binghamton,
N. Y.

Bro. A. Mount, L. U. 261, New York, N. Y.
Bro. J. M. Loye, L. U. 612, Norfolk, Va.
Bro. Otto Hadasek, L. U. 830, Chicago, Ills.
Bro. Alfonse LaVerdure, L. U. 51, New York,
N. Y.

Bro. Jos. Stapleton, L. U. 19, San Francisco,
Cal.

Bro. Chas. Lane, L. U. 365, Herkimer, N. Y. Bro. W. F. Kreitzer, L. U. 511, Los Angeles, Cal.

Bro. Oswald Radsay, L. U. 499, New York, N. Y.

Bro. George Imhoff, L. U. 989, Newark, N. J. Bro. John E. McDonald, L. U. 841, Canton,

Ills.

Bro. Wm. Isaackoff, L. U. 848, New York, N. Y.

Bro. Lewis Hopner, L. U. 848, New York, N. Y.

Bro. Walter Mader, L. U. 180, Oak Park, Ill. Bro. James Hall, L. U. 848, New York, N. Y. Bro. Chas. Cleaver, L. U. 301, Trenton, N. J. Bro. Jas. J. Meade, L. U. 166, New Orleans, La.

Bro. Michael Giaculli, L. U.. 892, New York, N. Y.

Bro. W. K. Rowley, L. U. 6, Pittsburg, Pa. Bro. James Butler, L. U. 151, Toronto, Ont., Can.

Bro. John Cunningham, L. U. 206, Canton, Ohio.

Bro. Fred Sass, L. U. 19, San Francisco, Cal. Bro. Abraham Kramer, L. U. 442, New York, N. Y.

Bro. Tyler T. Abbe, L. U. 257, Springfield, Mass.

Bro. Albert J. Murphy, L. U. 19, San Francisco, Cal.

Bro. W. G. Todd, L. U. 10, Portland, Ore. Bro. Henry Weisling, L. U. 115, St. Louis, Mo.

Bro. Irvin Ericson, L. U. 679, Brooklyn, N. Y. Bro. Wm. Carroll, L. U. 679, Brooklyn, N. Y. Bro. Wm. H. Edwards, L. U. 37, Detroit, Mich.

Bro. Frank W. Coon, L. U. 580, Saratoga

Springs, N. Y.

Bro. Elwood Pearson, L. U. 368, Washington, D. C.

Bro. Wm. Black, L. U. 451, Franklin, N. H. Bro. Wm. J. Connolly, L. U. 36, Jersey City, N. J.

Bro. Harry Hansen, L. U. 241, Montclair, N. J.

Bro. Timothy J. Walsh, L. U. 11, Boston, Mass.

Bro. G. Israelson, L. U. 180, Oak Park, Ills. Bro. R. A. Milstead, L. U. 368, Washington, D. C.

Bro. Wm. J. Carthy, L. U. 215, East St. Louis, Ills.

Bro. Frank Beaudry, L. U. 250, White Plains, N. Y.

Bro. Louis G. Hann, L. U. 115, St. Louis, Mo. Bro. Lambert H. Gerwe, L. U. 50, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Bro. Leonard Phinizy, L. U. 519, Newport

News, Va.

Bro. John Davidson, L. U. 11, Boston, Mass. Bro. Steve Forester, L. U. 781, Milwaukee, Wis.

Bro. H. C. De Ranie, L. U. 318, Ft. Worth, Texas.

Bro. Fred Klebbe, L. U. 51, New York, N. Y.
Bro. John Lee, L. U. 368, Washington, D. C.
Bro. Geo. H. Decker, L. U. 892, New York,
N. Y.

Bro. Harry Lyons, L. U. 12, Troy, N. Y.
Bro. Thomas Obbema, L. U. 265, Chicago,
Ill.

Bro. L. F. Frederick, L. U. 878, Oakland, Cal.
Bro. Max Denbeck, L. U. 37, Detroit, Mich.
Bro. Frank Meyer, L. U. 156, Evansville, Ind.
Bro. C. Koch, L. U. 130, Houston, Tex.
Bro. Frederick W. Lane, L. U. 797, Manches-
ter, Mass.

Bro. F. L. Wickers, L. U. 474, Portsmouth,
Va.

Bro. L. W. Truxa, L. U. 23, St. Louis, Mo. Bro. Peter Boebel, L. U. 927, Brooklyn, N. Y. Bro. Chas. Anderson, L. U. 1047, Seattle, Wash.

Bro. Kurt Berger, L. U. 44, Lawrence, Mass. Bro. Cornelius Basic, L. U. 174, Passiac, N. J.

Bro. Chas. E. Pettit, L. U. 580, Saratoga,

N. Y.

Bro. Geo. L. Frasch, L. U. 282, Pittsburg, Pa.

Bro. Peter F. Cordell, L. U. 830, Chicago, Ills.

DUE BOOKS LOST.

Of Bro. W. L. Kitchen, (card No. 15352) member of L. U. 877 of Sapulpa, Okla., initiated in L. U. 935 of Tulsa, Okla., on Jan. 2nd, 1914. If found, kindly forward to Bro. Fred Helser, Fin. Sec., Box 933, Sapulpa, Okla.

Of Bro. Geo. W. Ryckman, (card No. 70855). If found, kindly forward to Bro. Geo. L. Johnson, Fin. Sec. of L. U. 924, at 1738 King Street, Bellingham, Wash.

Of Bro. Peter Anderson, (card No. 75091), initiated in L. U. 64 of Tacoma, Wash. If found, kindly forward to Bro. Frank Shodry, Sec. of L. U. 64, at 5607 N. 43rd St., Tacoma, Wash.

Of Bro. Frank Armour, (card No. 100,742). If found, kindly forward to Bro. Albert E. Knowles, Fin. Sec. of L. U. 6, at 1637 Maplewood Ave., Wilkinsburg, Pa.

FINED.

Bro. Mike Dylo, member of L. U. 430, of Chicago, Ill.

Bro. O. A. Huck, member of L. U. 554, of Terre Haute, Ind.

Bro. Nathan Nager, member of L. U. 187, of Yonkers. N. Y.

Bro. Walter Geist, member of L. U. 50, of Cincinnati, Ohio.

Bros. Ed. M. Convill and Chas. Knowles, members of L. U. 187, of Yonkers, N. Y.

EXPELLED.

James Whited, formerly member of L. U. 156 of Evansville, Ind.

WANTED TO KNOW THE WHERE-
ABOUTS OF

James B. Scott, formerly of Perth, Scotland. If any one knowing anything concerning his whereabouts will kindly communicate with Bro. Matt Collins, member of L. U. 476, 641 Erie St., Youngstown, Ohio, they will greatly oblige Bro. Collins.

W. H. Stricklin, former member of L. U. 342 of Pratt, Kans. Anyone knowing anything concerning his whereabouts kindly communicate with his wife, Mrs. Stricklin, Liberal, Kans. or Bro. T. L. Wallis, Sec. of L. U. 342, Liberal, Kansas.

Roy Streeter, formerly a member of L. U. 1019, of Beardstown, Ill. Any one in possession of information concerning his whereabouts will oblige Bro. Steve Devlin,