We spoke of it as a contract, but, as is pointed out by the Illinois State Board of Arbitration in their report on the case, it is an entirely one-sided arrangement, lacking mutuality, and invalid under Supreme Court decisions.

After reading the above agreement, which was forced upon the men, one would rather expect to read of open and somewhat violent revolt on part of those upon whom it was imposed. But let us see! Becoming dissatisfied with the agreement, the men in one department of the works formally requested the management to abrogate it and discontinue its use. Mr. U. G. Orendorff, secretary and manager of the company, promised to give the men an answer to their petition on August 25. When the employes arrived at the factory on the morning of that date they found it closed and a notice posted on the gate that it would remain closed indefinitely.

This was the answer to their petitioneight hundred employes locked out without a moment's notice; and all because they, or some of them, had requested to be relieved of the necessity of working under an agreement which no man who was possessed of the slightest sense of fairness or consideration for his employes would ask one of them to sign.

Members of the Illinois State Board of Arbitration sought, by concilliation and mediation, to arrange a conference between the officers of the company and the locked out employes. The employes were perfectly willing to submit to arbitration whatever differences there were. The manager of the company refused to even discuss the matter or to consider any proposition to arbitrate. A committee of the employes representing all departments of the works had called on Mr. Orendorff requesting a conference before the members of the state

board visited the scene. He simply refused to see them. After the visit of the state board the employes prepared a petition for arbitration, specifying that the question for decision should be whether or not the company should continue to make the deduction of ten per cent from the wages of the men. Another committee called upon Mr. Orendorff, seeking to make arrangements for arbitration. When he learned the mission of the committee he closed the interview, refusing to consider the matter and declaring that he had nothing to arbitrate.

The State Board of Arbitration had a hearing on the petition of the employes, of which full notice was given the officers of the company. The men appeared and testified relative to the objectionable agreement, but the company made no appearance and was not represented at the hearing.

The principal objection to the contract was the witholding of ten per cent of the earnings of the men, to be restored in whole, in part, or not at all, just as the officers of the company chose. The State Board of Arbitration say that it was proven that in many instances the ten per cent was never paid, but that, upon an employe ceasing to work or declining to sign the contract for another year, the sum had been declared "forfeited." It should be borne in mind that before the ten per cent witheld would be paid to the employe, a contract for another year was presented to him for signature. He was thus given the option of signing another contract or surrendering one-tenth of his earnings for the year just past, no matter how faithful, loyal, earnest and careful he had been in his work.

It should also be noted that, according to the report of the State Board of Arbitration, the note of rate of wages paid by the Parlin & Orendorff Co. was lower than that paid in competing factories in other cities, and that it was cut still lower by the witholding of the ten per cent.

Some effort has been made to make it appear that the men in this case violated their working agreement. Surely a re

quest to alter the terms of an agreement is not a violation of the agreement; and it is in evidence that the men came, as usual, to their work and found the doors closed and locked against them.

It is argued by some that the company's action was based in the belief that a general strike was contemplated. There does not appear to be any evidence of such intent on part of the employes. But if, at the end of the year, and when they could do so without violating their agreement, they had

struck against such gross imposition as was put upon them by the company in question, they would have had the sympathy and approval of all fair-minded persons.

That they did not rebel is the best evidence that they were patient and long suffering in the extreme.

It is to be hoped that the doors which were locked against the employes may remain forever locked, unless opened under much more decent conditions than before obtained.

Many attempts have been made to offer good reasons for the non-attendance of the working people at church and the general drift of the opinions has been to the effect that the well-to-do made it so unpleasant for them that they were glad to take themselves away from the atmosphere of congealed christianity to the more enticing air of freedom and good fellowship to be found elsewhere.

The writer does not claim to be a profound student of the question of church going, but with observation as the basis for his opinion, the judgment is from a practical point of view, if there is nothing else to be said in favor of it. When the whole question has been simmered down and all of its hair-splitting features have been eliminated, the judgment of the writer is that if the working people do not go to church it is because they do not want to go.

There is not much sympathy for the propagandist, who always presents something to get people into trouble, and we know of no question that is calculated to do it quite so effectually as the one of religion and church going.

It is the usual thing to pass over the question by saying that the working people are not welcome at the churches. To make this a general statement is to lie. There are churches to which the working people are not welcome, but neither is any one else not registered in the social

class of worshippers that predominate in its membership. The Four Hundred holds a swell function and the working people are not invited; they do no not expect to be, and that ends the matter. But when it comes to church going, the fact of the exclusiveness of the few serves as an excuse for the many who gloss over their own religious indifference by saying generally they are not welcome to the churches.

To cure this evil, created on the weakest fabric of the imagination, there comes to the front about every so often the "leader of the common people," who is going to establish a labor union church because the working people are not welcome at the other churches.

To refute the pretended necessity for the statement it is only necessary to point to the fact that the most humble, poverty stricken class of labor in this country is the most devoted in its religious duty. There is no crowding it out of the churches, but to the contrary every effort is made to welcome this class of worshippers to the church.

It has been reported that a labor union church is to be started at Indianapolis, Indiana, the membership of which shall be limited to members of labor unions and from which all rich people are to be excluded. This story of a proposed church may be true, and it may not be true, but if is true, it is an

evidence of the influence of some one for evil rather than for good.

The Brooklyn Eagle, commenting on the matter, said:

"Well, why not? The rich have their churches. It is as sure that fearless truth will not be spoken in some churches on Fifth avenue as that fearless untruths will be spoken in a church to be founded on hate and class distinctions. He who preaches to millionaires only dare not say what he inwardly thinks of the actions of those who pay his salary, or of the worth of money when a man has ten times more of it than he can spend. The labor union preacher will be as timid in respect of his opinion of the labor trusts, with its strikes, its riots, its injustices, its oppressions, its denials of the constitutional right of Americans to work. His view must be biased away from wealth. By striking a balance between what is said in the plutocrats' churches and that which the walking delegate presides over, we may come to the truth, which is what the people seek and measurably get in churches that just present the oldfashioned Gospel."

What an argument in this day of liberal opinion. It is true that the rich have their churches, but there are thousands of other churches open to the working people, and if the truth were told every workingman and his family goes to the one of his choice if he desires to do so. Barring the very wealthy, fashionable churches, the officers and members of the majority of the churches are workingmen and it would be strange if they shut themselves out of their own churches.

The reference to the fear of the preachers is an insult to the majority of the clergy, for to do them justice they, with few exceptions, speak the truth and many of them have made sacrifices to defend the position taken by them in the pulpit.

There are "Canon Wealthys" in few numbers, but there are "John Storms" by the thousand to show them their churchly littleness.

The New York Evening Post saw the humorous side of the question, and

while it ridiculed the idea and took occasion to throw its shot at the walking delegate and the unionists, its comment is of as much moment as that of the Eagle. The Post said:

We

"The project is an interesting departure from the Biblical idea of the rich and poor meeting together before the Lord, who is the maker of them all. With a membership limited to those in good and regular standing in trades unions, and with the running expenses paid by 'assessments'-as if for a strike -the success of the new evangelical venture would seem to be assured. presume there would be a stringent rule against long sermons; twenty minutes, with a leaning to the side of mercy, was Mr. Evart's idea, and a labor union congregation would have peculiar advantages in enforcing it. They could rattle their pew doors, or all get up and go out, on the stroke of the clock, just as they drop their hammers on week days. The pastor, we fear, would find himself somewhat limited in point of Scriptural texts-many of them he would obviously have to avoid. The doctrine of not being entitled to eat unless you worked would never do for walking delegates, and praise of swearing to your own hurt and changing not would cast a gloom over an audience of contract-breaking unionists."

mor.

The references, made in a funny vein, are ill-timed and not overloaded with huThere is apparently more of vindictiveness than anything else in the statements made and which were very likely inspired by the antipathy of the writer for organizations of labor and not by an overweening interest in the church going tendencies of the working people.

It is true that there are too many instances where the cold shoulder is turned on the workingman who ventures into the pew of the purse proud worshipper who believes he has purchased a corner in heaven for himself and his family, but there are other churches and other worshippers who haven't made themselves believe they have merged heaven and all of its rewards.

It is also true that there are a very few

denominations that oppose labor organizations and forbid their members from affiliating with such organizations, but if these members desire to place the labor organization ahead of the church, and in this instance it is perfectly proper for them to do so, there are other denominations more liberal that will offer just as smooth a road to heaven without ecclesiastical interference with their labor organizations.

The writer has found among the clergy some of the best friends the workmen ever have had. When our organizations have been in trouble the clergyman has been found on the public platform in our defense, when public opinion was directed against labor organization the clergyman has directed the public mind to the favorable side of the labor organization question, and even when death has invaded the organizations it was the clergyman who referred with commendation to the work of the labor organization to which the dead belonged.

From the office window once a week there can be seen a gathering of business men, clerks, street cleaners, draymen, in fact, every branch of employment to be found on the street in a busy city at noon tide. This crowd gathers to listen to the honest talk of the minister who presides over the church that has for its foremost member the richest man in America. There is no hesitation in his talk. It is straight from the shoulder and offers in the simplest, yet most convincing form, the lesson of the true meaning of the doctrine of the "Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man." The talk is always ended with

an earnest invitation to every man to attend the Sunday service. When the street meeting is ended men from every position in life, from the millionaire to the fruit peddler, grasp the hand of the speaker and one has but to observe to be convinced that the workman is just as much included in the invitation to attend church as the millionaire and, if anything, the invitation to him is more cordial.

The writer has no sympathy with a labor church. There are differences enough without creating more between the church and its people. There can be no more potent influence exerted toward the division of the laboring people than through the interference of the busybody, who, under the cloak of religious fervor, seeks to separate them through a church project that cannot be supported by one half of the workers.

If the working people desire to go to church there are churches in plenty that will welcome the poorest of them; that will not notice their poor clothing and soiled hands; that will not place the spiritual welfare of the man subordinate to his clothes and his poverty. More churches will welcome him than will turn him away without notice, and if the workingman wants to go to church he can find a church somewhere that will make him at home. If he does not want to go he can find excuse in the lack of welcome and other reasons common to him and which give hope to the pernicious trouble maker for the success of his ill advised plans for the spiritual welfare of the workingman.-Railroad Trainmen's Journal.

The 8th biennial convention of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen opened its sessions with an executive meeting in Chattanooga, Tenn., at 8:30 o'clock Monday, Sept. 8. The following sketch is gleaned from reports in the Chattanooga papers.

In many respects this was the most notable and important gathering the Brotherhood ever held. Conferring the honorary degree of membership upon President Roosevelt was one of the most important events of the entire convention. The President in a public ad

dress, which will be found in full elsewhere in this number, emphatically and repeatedly indorsed labor organizations and paid high tribute to the Locomotive Firemen and railroad men in general. The address of welcome by Mayor Chambliss was responded to on behalf of the brotherhood by Hon. Frank P. Sargent, former grand master. Brief addresses were also made by President Morrissey of the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen, and Grand Chief Clark of the Order of Railway Conductors. The actual serious business of the convention began on the morning of Sept. 9. About 600 delegates were in attendance when Grand Master Hon. Frank P. Sargent placed his resignation before the convention because of his appointment by the President to the Commissionership of Immigration.

The resignation was characteristic of the man and his address to the delegates immediately after its acceptance, was typical and eloquent in his expressions of regret at severing his connection of 17 years' duration with the Order he loved so well and the men for whom he had such deep affection. His retrospective glance over the past showed vividly the mighty strides of organized labor.

Many letters and telegrams from eminent railroad managers and labor advocates were read in answer to invitations to be present at the convention. T. V. Powderly, Ex-Commissioner General of Immigration, made a stirring and characteristic address which is worthy of perusal and study by every member and friend of organized labor. The routine business of the convention was transacted at daily sessions lasting, and consisted of hard, earnest work every minute of the time, from 9 to 12 and 2 to 6.

Mayor Tom Johnson of Cleveland sent a cordial invitation to the Firemen to hold their next biennial convention in Cleveland. Hon. L. S. Coffin addressed the convention speaking feelingly of the needs of the Home and the good it has done, is doing and will do in the future. The delegates spent the whole day Sept. 12th visiting Chickamauga Park and its

historic surroundings. Through the kindness of the officials of Central of Georgia Ry. free transportation was given to all.

The office of Fourth Vice Grand Master was created. This action was made necessary by increase of the field work of the Order.

One of the most enjoyable receptions and entertainments given the Firemen was that tendered by the Chattanooga Elks. An editorial from the Philadelphia Public Ledger complimentary to President Roosevelt's action in recognizing organized labor was read amid great enthusiasm and ordered published in the Locomotive Firemen's Magazine. The Ladies' Society of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen completed their work at their afternoon session Sep. 17 by electing Mrs. Georgie M. Sargent Grand President and Mrs. Julia A. DuBois Grand Secretary. Birmingham, Ala., through its mayor, Mr. Drennan, extended a hearty invitation to the Firemen to hold their 1904 convention in that city. A resolution was brought before the convention appropriating $25,000 for the support of the Railway Men's Home at Highland Park, Ill. The motion was so amended that it is to be referred to each local lodge for their action and report within nine months. A vast amount of work was accomplished by the convention, the doing of which will set a fast pace for future gatherings.

Much rivalry was manifested by the different cities for the honor of having the next convention, but Buffalo, N. Y., was finally chosen. The election of Grand officers resulted as follows:

Grand Master-J. J. Hannahan, Chicago, Ill.

First Vice Grand Master-C. A. Wilson, Phillipsburg, N. J.

Second Vice Grand Master-Timothy Shea, Jersey City, N. J.

Third Vice Grand Master-C.W.Maier, Parsons, Kans.

Fourth Vice Grand Master-Eugene A. Ball, Stratford, Ontario.

Grand Secretary and Treasurer-F. W. Arnold, Peoria, Ill.