The Daily Worker Newspaper, October 15, 1924, Page 6

ptr) Page Six THE DAILY Wwoorer Published by the DAILY WORKER PUBLISHING co 1113 W. Washington Blvd., Chicago, Il. Monroe 4712) (Phone: SUBSCRIPTION RATES By mall: $3.50....6 months $2.00. By mail (in Chicago only): $4.50....6 months $2.50....3 months Address all mail and make out checks to THE DAILY WORKER $6.00 per year 3 months $8.00 per year 1113 W. Washington Bivd. Chicago, Illinois J. LOUIS ENGDAHL Editors WILLIAM DUNNE { Ea Maik Hl MORITZ J. LOEB...... ...Business Manager Entered as lass mail Sept. 21, 1923, at the Post- Ill., under the act of March 3, 1879. Office at Chic Advertising rates on abplication We Have With Us Again... A “red scare” may be down but it is never out. Of course, there are red scares which are neither down aud out. There is a big red scare in Russia which is scaring the wits out of the plundering capitalists of the world. There is a red scare in Germany. It hangs like a Damocles sword over the necks of the frightened Teutonic bourgeoisie. There is a sizable red scare in China. The cap- italist pirates are scampering around in all direc- tions wondering what has hit them. There are red scares in Italy, Bulgaria, Spain and in other countries. In other words, the po- litieal power of capitalism in those countries hangs by a slender thread and the proletariat is develop- ing the will to power. Here in America the capitalists are yet strong and the great masses of workers are suffering from the illusion that their problems can be solved by reforming capitalism and rather than take on the job of solving their own problems by giving the capitalists the tip of the proletarian boot, they rely on fossilized political jockeys like LaFollette to dope them with promises. But even in the United States the red nightmare haunts the couch of the capitalist class. While they are yet strong they know that the onward march of the world revolution will not skip Amer- ica. Tho the masses in this country are now in- dulging in a political debauch as the paying guests of LaFollette, our rulers know that the morning after will bring cooler heads and the conditions of life will force the workers to turn to Commun- ism as their only salvation. Therefore we have periodical “red scares.” It is true that the so-called exposures are ninety-nine per cent lies. But that there is a market for the wares of the stoolpigeons shows how deep is the capitalist dread of the inevitable awakening of the labor giant. Thus Jakey Spolansky, unemployed government fink, can get good American dollars for a series of imaginary tales about the “Red Terror” in the Chicago Daily News. If the editor of the News is satisfied, the feeling shofild“be unanimous. No doubt Jakey got the money—it is safer than work- ing as a prohibition agent and: holding up saera- mental wine stores with the possibility cf detec- tion and a jail sentence. The Communists are not bothered seriously—it gives them publicity of a sort. It calls attention to them and The DAILY WORKER is here to give the tight kind of pub- licity. Life being such as is it, a good “red scare” served-up by an artistic liar would make better reading than one of the Calyin Coolidge’s speeches. 3ut Spolansky is a great disappointment. His stuff is very stale. The Supreme Court Once More The United States supreme court is back on the job. No sooner does it get back on the job than it strikes a blow at the workers of the whole country. This time it is the railway workers that have been singled out for the assault by the highest oracle of the employing class. The holy synod of capitalist bishops has decided to uphold the con- viction of workingmen formerly employed on the Santa Fe railroad and charged with conspiracy to obstruct the mails and interference with in- terstate commerce. The case grew out of the shop- men’s strike in 1922 and the difficulties arising in this dispute on the California-Arizona border. Two years after a struggle waged by the work- ingmen in behalf of their right to organize and against unspe ble conditions of employment the supreme court finds it necessary to punish rail- way men. There is only one crime the workingmen are guilty of in the eyes of the supreme court. It is a crime against the bosses. In the eyes of the capitalist judges the worst crime that can be com- mitted is the fighting against exploitation. Everyone knows that the charges against the railway men were unfounded. Everyone knows that the Santa Fe workers were especially singled out for assault during the shopmen’s strike be- cause of the heroic struggle they put up against overwhelming odds, Everyone knows that the out- rages attributed to the Santa Fe workers were perpetrated by the gunmen and detectives hired by the corporation in order to secure a legal pre- tense for a vicious assault by the government againet the strikers. We recall the tale of marooned passengers suffering in the desert, We recall that even the hard-boiled Santa Fe was compelled to repudiate many of these faudulent stories, The Santa Ke decision comes at a time when the workers are called upon to yote another in- cersement of the whole capitalist system and its judicial oligarchy, Mr, John W. Davis now asking the workers ty (ie for him as the democratic presi- lential candidate was, until the election campaign, ne of the stockholders of this strikebreaking road. As soon as he is ignominiously defeated in the election contest he will go back to this director- ship. Among the owners, of the Santa Fe are many financiers and industrialists who are today back- ing the Coolidge campaign. The supreme court'is the chief defender of the employing class in the United States. When the supreme court speaks it speaks for the ruling class as a whole. This attack on the workers ought to be answered by the working ¢lass as a whole. * Gompers Prepares for “Victory” Samuel Gompers is preparing for “victory” at the polls. Mr. Gompers is preparing for a victory for his policy of non-partisan political action, for his policy of “reward your friends and punish your enemies.” Mr. Gompers has announced that he expects the election of at least 250 “friends” of labor to be chosen as congressmen in the November elections. In the last elections Mr. Gompers boasts of having sent to the house of representatives 170 “friends.” This year the outlook for such “success” is much better. Consequently Mr. Gompers is certain that he will be right in his prophecies. Granting the accuracy of Mr. Gompers as a prophet and political seer, one fails to see where the workers and poor farmers of this country will be in a position to claim a victory or have cause for jubilation, The men who will be elected as champions of the workers will not be representa- tives of the workers, but republicans and democrats who happened to have received the indorsement of certain officials of the trade union movement. They will not: be elected as spokesmen of the workers and poor farmers but as so-called good men, honest men who are at the same time regular republicans and hundred per cent democrats. In the last congress there were 170 such worthies who received the indorsement of Mr. Gompers. This is an auspicious number. If this were a criterion of the conscious political strength of the working masses it would certainly indicate con- siderable progress by our<working class towards independent class political action along national lines. But it is nothing of the sort. These self- styled friends of labor were pliant tools of the big business interests of the country. The best proof of their not being defenders of the workingmen is to be found in the record of this congregation of fraudulent friends. The last congressional gession in which there were so many Gompers “friends” of labor did noth- ing in the way of enacting measures to enhance the welfare and interests of the working masses. The vicious railway labor board, the Esch-Cum- mins Act, agricultural relief, and many other pressing problems confronting the workers and poor farmers were deliberately evaded by the last session. In short the Gompers “friends” of labor have been everything but spokesmen for and de- fenders of the interests of the workers. The “victory” Mr. Gompers is preparing to celebrate is no victory for the working class. The Reward of Ability One of the loudest wails raised by the defenders of capitalism when the sanctity of the profit sys- tem is challenged, is over the integrity of indi- vidual incentive. .The spokesmen for the ruling class would have us believe that once the means of production and exchange socially used are so- cially owned and controlled, that once the private ownership for profits is abolished there will be an end to the incentive of the individual for achieve- ment. These champions of the capitalist” system as a rule ‘tend to cite the case of the inventor or \the scientist. They would have the world believe that under a Communist system of society these men would be denied the fruits of their labor. This contention is based on a wholly gratuitous as- sumption. There is nothing further from the truth than the notion being spread that individual ability is the basis of capitalist reward. We have a particular case in mind. This case is typical of the countless instances where men of ability, men of science and training have been crushed by poverty, by a denial of the fruits of their socially highly constructive labor. * Mr. Edgar Lucien Larkin, a noted astronomer and writer on scientific subjects, has just died. Mr. Larkin was widely, known as the director of the famous Mount Lowe observatory, At the time of his death Larkin was virtually penniless. A lifetime of scientific toil did not enable him to have even enough to pay his last hospital bill. The paths of capitalist progress are strewn with many Lucien Larkins. For the mass of workers, for the great mass of steel workingmen, coal miners, railway hands, garment workers, and other laborers capitalism holds neither hope nor op- portunity.: Capitalism lives on erushing the in- dividual incentive of the vast masses of the popula- tion who are turned into automatons of the gigan- tic profit machinery. What hope, what incentive can the average employe of the United States Steel corporation or the Standard Oil have? The age of the overall-to-the-presidency has gone, if it ever was with us at all under capitalism, There is only one system that holds out any hope for the abilities and incentive of the great masses of the country. This system is one which will be based on the socialization of the collectively used means of production and exchange. This sys- tem is one which will make it impossible for a few to live on the exploitation of the many. This sys- tem is Communism where the working masses will own the agencies and means of production and ex- change and not pay tribute to a parasitic class. “THE DAILY WORK LaF ollette - By ALEXANDER TRACHTENBERG. Workers Party candidate for Congress 10th New York District. 'HE socialists and liberals who pub- licly proclaimed their opposition to restricted immigration are giving the LaFollette stand on immigration the silent treatment. Hoping for votes for their “progressive” presi- dential candidate from the foreign- born elements, the supposed advo- cates of free immigration have kept from the public the record of senator LaFollette on immigration legislation. When senator LaFollette was re- cently referred to by a well-known Jewish leader as an opponent of free immigration, “the socialist foreign- language press “proved” that | their newly-acquired leader could not be classed as an enemy of immigration, since on account of illness, he wasn’t even present at the senate session when the last immigration bill was voted upon. It/is true that LaFollette was ab- sent during the voting on the last im- migration measure last April. But LaFollette has been a senator for about twenty years, and restrictive immigration legislation was a great public issue since 1897, when presi- dent Cleveland vetoed an immigration bill containing a literacy test provi- sion. What are the facts about LaFol- lette’s stand on immigration legisla- tion during his career in the U. senate? «What was the official record of the “radical” senator from Wiscon- sin whenever this important issue came before the senate? Not only the foreign-born, but progressive workers in general, want to know how senator LaFollette voted every time the re- actionary immigration laws came up for action in the senate. The following is a review of sena- tor LaFolfette’s official part in the vicious and oppressive immigration legislation during the past ten years. 1913—LaFollette Votes For the Lit- eracy Test. On Feb. 1, 1913, the Burnett-Dilling- ham Immigration Bill, providing for a literacy test for all incoming immi- grants passed the senate, and was sent to president Taft for approval on the eve of his retirement from office. Om account of public agita- tion whieh the méasure had awaken- ed, president Taft was forced to.grant a public hearing in the White House. Representatives of Jewish, Italian, Irish, German, Polish, Hungarian, and other organizations, as well as dele- gateS from progressive labor unions, attended the hearing, attacked the proposed immigration law, and impor- tuned the president to veto the in- iquitous measure. Impressed by the opposition ‘to the proposed law, and upon advice of the secretary of com- merce and ‘labor Nagel, president Taft vetoed the bill on Feb. 14. On Feb. 18, the senate passed the bil! over the veto of the president, by 72 to 18 votes, and senator LaFollette voted to override the veto of the president, so that the Burnett-Dilling- ham bill providing for the literacy test could become a law. While’ the senate, with the aid of LaFollette voted 4 to 1 for the mea- sure, the bill failed to become a law because ‘the foes of immigration could not muster the necessary two-thirds majority in the house of representa- tives, to override the veto of the presi- dent. In voting for restri immi- gration in 1913, senator LaFollette joined such reactionaries as senator Lodge, who declared in the senate ER essary defense of American citizen- ship.” for further restricted immigration, which culminated in the infamous im- 1915—LaFollette Absent With Excuse. | migrant quota legislation. The Burnett-Dillingham tion bill was resurrected in congress. in 1914, The senate again passed the immigra-|1921—LaFollette Votes for Vicious Quota Law. An attempt was. first made in 1921 bill, but\president Wilson vetoed the | by congressman Johnson, to bar all measure on Jan. 28, 1915. As in 1913, |immigrants for 14 months. The mea- the senate passed the bill over the|sure which was passed however, pro- veto of the president, by a vote of | vided for a 3 per cent quota, based up- fifty to seven, but the Hteracy test {ow the 1910 census. This quota would bill failed to get the necessary two-| allow 355,461 immigrants to enter this thirds majority in the house by four] country in one year. The senate com- votes, and come a law. therefore, not present when the measure came| changed it to’ 8 per cent. failed to be-| mittee recommended that the quota Senator LaFollette was | should be 6 per cent, but the senate The law up for a vote in the senate on Jan.| was to be in force for one year—till 2, 1915. LaFollette’s praise him for his stand on immigra- friends who|June 80, 4922, The senate passed the first immi- tion, declare that LaFollette was ab-| grant quota law on May 3, 1921, by a sent from the session on account of | vote of 78 to 1, and senator LaFollette death in the family, and must, there- | was not the one who voted against the fore, be excused for failing to register |measure. The sole opponent of re- his vote for the notorious Burnett- Dillingham’ bill. stricted immigration was senator Reed of Missouri. Senator LaFollette 1916 and 1917 — LaFollette Votes| voted for the quota law, as did the Twice for Literacy Test Law. other “progressive” senators, Norris The literacy test laws, having fail-|0f Nebraska, Ladd of North Dakota, ed of enactment because of vetoes by | Walsh of Montana, Johnson of Cali- presidents ‘Taft and Wilson, came be-| fornia, some of whom are supporting fore congress again in 1916. The sen- | Senator LaFollette in\the present cam- ate passed a bill by a vote of 64 to| Paign. 7, and senator LaFollette was among those who voted for the measure to require of every prospective grant a literacy test. President Wilson vetoed for the sec-| tion, but the congressmen and sena- ond time the proposed law on Jan.| tors, reactionary and so-called pro- When it came before the | 8tessives alike, voted for the oppres- senate for passage over the presi-| ive immigration regulations. Presi- dent's veto, 19 senators voted to sus-| dent Harding approved the 3 per cent tain president Wilson, while 62 voted | Wota bill on May 19, 1921. for the law. Senator LaFollette was | 1922—LaFollette Votes to Extend 3 28, 1917. one of the 62, and with him were the other stalwart “progressives” and allies—senators Borah of Idaho; Nor-|in force only one year, hope was en- ris of Nebraska; and Kenyon of Iowa. | tertained that the law would not be re- Thanks to senator LaFollette and | enacted. A great deal of agitation was his “progressive” colleagues, the lit-|carried on against the law, and the eracy test provision was written into | dreadful experiences with the oper- the immigration law after a struggle| ations were used to prove the Cruelty of twenty years of foreign-born and | of the quota legislation. But the house progressive organizations to defeat | of representatives voted to extend the this reactionary measure. The Amal-| operation of the law for another year. gamated Clothing Workers of Ameri- ca, the International Ladies’ Garment | present, voted without a rollcall to ex- Workers’ Union, and other progres-|tend the law for two years, instead sive unions in the American Federa-| of for one year, as the house provid- tion of Labor, sent representatives to | ed, that is, to June 30, 1924, anid presi- measure | dent Harding approved the extension every time it came before congress or | of the law the president. Presidents Cleveland,\ Senator Taft, and Wilson (twice) have vetoed | his consistent support of reactionary Washington to fight the immi-| came to Washington to plead against ° As on previous occasions represent- tatives of progressive labor unions | the enactment of the quota legisla- Per Cent Law. Since the 3 per cent law was to be The senate, with senator LaFollette F May 11, 1922. ‘LaFollette again showed the measure because of general op-| immigration legislation for which he position, but the reactionary leader-| first voted in 1913, ship of the A. F. of L, aided by La-| senator, The Wisconsin Teputed “champion of the Follette and his friends in the senate | poor people,” voted for the extension succeeded in passing the literacy test|‘of the 3 per cent quota law for two law, which became effective May 1,| years, notwithstanding the tremen- 1917. dous opposition of progressive labor In 1916, the socialist party sent] organizations to this reactionary and Charles Edward Russell to argue be-| cruel measure. fore president Wilson against the | 1924—LaFollette measure, and congressman London) voted against the bill in the house. ] Absent, But His Friends Are There. As tho the 3 per cent quota law was The socialist, party and former con.| not reactionary enough, the anti-im- gressman London are now supporting| migration lobby in congress worked senator LaFollette, the foe of immi,|'to make the law still more severe, and gration, the man who voted for a mea-|the “progressives” in congress help- sure which the socialists then declar-|ed to reduce still further the actual ed was reactionary and inhuman. Further Restriction of Immigration. Having successfully restrictive measures. inaugurated | proposed that the quota be cut in the beginning of legislation for re-|half—that is, strictéd immigration, Samuel Gompers | about 350,000 immigrants a year; only and his reactionary friends in con-| 160,000 should be permitted to land gress continued to work for further | here. The same day | vide for 2 per cent quota based on the the literacy test law was passed over | 1890 census. It was particulrly direct- the veto of president Wilson, in 1917,|ed against the Jewish, quota of immigrants to “free” Ameri- ca. The immigration bitter-enders instead of allowing The law was changed to pro- Italian and Senator Gardner of Massaghusetts in-| Slavic immigrants. troduced a bill limiting the number Senator LaFollette was not pres- of immigrants to 200,000 in one year.|ent when the yote was taken in the The introduction of this measure|senate-on April 18, 1924, on the 2 per ——$—$___=. Sa Wednesday, October 15, 1924 Bitter Enemy of Immigration that the immigration bill was “a nec-] marked the beginning of a campaign, cent Jaw. He was ill at the time, but is there reason to believe that he would have voted against this mea- sure had he been present in the sen- ate? F The record of senator LaFollette on previous and similar occasions, re- vealed above, proves that the Wiscon: sin senator would have voted “yes” on this bill as he. did on every other occasion when he was present and re- strictive immigration laws were be- fore the senate for consideration. An additional proof that senator La- Follette would have heartily support- ed the 2 per cent quota law which passed the senate by 62 to 6 votes, is | that the entire galaxy of “progres- sive” senators, LaFollette’s comrades in arms, the “friends of the people,” Brookhart of Iowa, Norris of Nebras- ka, Borah of Idaho, Johnson of Cali- fornia, Dill of Washington, Walsh of Montana, and even the “farmer-labor” senators of Minnesota, Shipstead and Johnson, voted for this measure. Obedient to the injunction of prest- dent Coolidge, who in his message to congress on Dec. 6, 1923, declared as follows’ on the question of immigra- tion: “America must be American. For this purpose it is necessary to continue the policy of restricted immi- gration,” the “progressive” senators voted to keep out those, who, because of economic necessity, want to come to live with their relatives in this country. ; The “humane” and “demo- cratic” American senators from the “progressive” west voted as one for a law which is breaking up families of immigrants, and puts untold hard- ships on all those who seek admission to this country. The iniquities of the American. im- migration policy can be compared on- ly to those of the Spanish inquisition, and senator LaFollette has given his whole-hearted support to this policy. As a legislator he has helped to make this barbaric law, and as such he stands convicted as an enemy, not of the rich travelers, but of the poor people who seek entrance to this country as immigrants. The relatives and friends of these poor immigrants who live a tragic existence in the various Buropean ports awaiting their quota allowances, and progressive workers in general should stamp senator LaFollette as a bitter. enemy of immigration, and as an enemy of the poor people. The socialist party, the foreign-lan- guage socialist newspapers, and the reactionary leaders of labor organiza- tions with large foreign memberships, who now support LaFollette in his ambition to become president of the United States, have betrayed the for- eign-born workers they claim to rep- resent, as they have betrayed the prin- ciples of . international solidarity, which requires, of every progressive worker to support the free and un- hindered admission of workers who come to this country because of eco- nomic necessity. The progressive workers of this country will repudiate the consistent foe of immigration, LaFollette, and will denounce those who support him. A vote for LaFollette will not only be a vote for capitalism, but also a vote for the barbaric immigration laws, which LaFollette helped to en- act. The progressive workers will vote for the only party which stands for free immigration, the Workers Party, and its presidential candidates, Will- iam Z. Foster, and Ben Gitlow, as well as all the other local-candidates of the Workers Party in the various parts 9f this country. Mass Revolt in the I. L.G. W. U. By A. SIMON, The struggle of the rank and file of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union against the small band of unscrupulous officials has again taken on a mass chatacter. Again the thousands of workers who have bled for the organization, have come out in open revolt against the ruinous tactics of those in power, who have converted this once powerful or- ganization into an instrument for their personal advancement. On Saturday, October 11, thousands of cloak and dressmakers marched in masses to Cooper Union and Stuyve- sant Casino, At the call of the needle trades section, Trades Union Educa- tional League, those working men and women gathered to give expression to their determined opposition to the tactics of the corrupt machine, which has again, in gross violation of the most mentary principles of union- ism, decided to impose new financial burdens on the workers of the indus- try. ‘ t A Real Mass Protest. This mass of * urged on by their common and provocation, came to voice their protest against the unwarranted inerease in dues im- posed uj b st their will, and to tern struggle against the in the union, which is abandtal Wad ons. of hard struggle What is t the convention were spent in unseat- ing the left wing delegates. Has this fight in any way helped to increase the confidence of the rank and file in the leadership? © Saturday’s demonstration is the an- swer. Why did thousands of workers respond to the call of the T. U..B. L. Beside fighting the left wing, the con- vention of the international adopted two other decisions. One calling for a general strike in the cloak industry to enforce the demands decided upon by the membership; the other to in- crease the per capita tax five cents per member. ‘ Open Betrayal, Immediately after the convention, the officials of the International enter- ed into negotiations with the employ- ers. These very same leaders who have shown themselves in full fight- ing array against the left wing oppo- sition in the union were very meek in their attitude towards the employers. In a most cowardly manner, with- out conbulting the membership, they placed the fate of fifty thousand cloakmakers in the hands of a com- mittee of bankers and Tammany Hall politicians. On their own responsi- bility they accepted an agreement conceding to the employers the most vital demands of the workers. The stoppage staged in the cloak industry drained a half million out of the treasury of the union, but re- sulted in no improvement in the con- ditions of the workers who are today subjected to the same cutthroat com- petition; the same long periods of un- employment, miserable earnings, and) the same bitter exploitation, .- ‘ Greedy Officlaldom. the matter, They were simply regard- ‘The cloakmakers had no choice in| fight ed as sheep who were to be sheared for the ease and comfort of the “offi- cials and their supporters. It was in/this spirit that the one constructive decision of the conven- tion was carried thru. Not so with the increase im dues. The five cents increase decidéd upon by the conven- tion did not suffice, The herd of ma- chine hangers-on must have their toll. The “loyal” supporters must be re- warded with jobs and fat salaries, Hence the cloak and dress makers must pay increased dues. The recommendation for an increase of fifteen cents, coming after ‘a colos- sal.defeat in the cloak industry, out- rages even the most backward Lory: ers. The recommendation met with overwhelming’ defeat even in locals that had been under the control of the machine, but no matter, the offi- cials are armed with a constitution which gives them the legal right to openly defy ‘the expressed wishes of the membership. The cloak and dress makers must pay fifty cents a week dues instead of thirty-five because this is the will of the arch-believers in democracy— Feinberg and company. ~ Re th __, Workers Answer Officials. Saturday's demonstration was the answer to the , outrages committed against the members of the union. It was spoken in clear and unmistakable terms, It was a reminder to those who in their lust for power have lost sight of the great elemental force that lies in a mags of discontented workers and a reminder the day of reckoning was near, “ It was a most inspiring sight to see this mass of plain men and women’ respond most generously to the ap- rd a @ collection to carry on the These workers who seemingly came because of their unwillingness té pay fifteen cents, gave dollar bills amount- ing to seven hundred dollars and pledged their fullest support to make, the demonstration in Madison Square Garden a huge success, The high-salaried officials of the in- ternational no longer sense the “spirit and sentiment of the workers. They are blind to the burning indignation in the hearts of the workers who have thru years of struggle developed a flaming spirit of independence. The leaders of the international had attempted to allay the basic discontent of the workers by means of expulsion and persecutions. All they accomplished. was to increase the hot hatred of the workers far the parasites that are preying on them. Cooper Union opened a new chap- ter in the struggle of the rank and file against the bureaucracy, The work- ers may suffer many a wound at the hands of the officials, but anyone who has seen these men and women clam- oring for admission into the jammed halls, anyone who has still seen their glowing eyes And sensed their fighting spirit, will not despair of the outcome of this momentuous struggle, “f Knit Goods Workers Get Charter, | H NEW YORK, Oct, 14—The Amal gamated Knit Goods Workers’ Union has been granted a charter by the In- ternational Ladies’ Garment Worker: Union, Julius Goldstein is the ganizer of the knit goods workers. He is quoted as saying that 2000 workers are organized in the trade out of a possible 20,000 in New York, Bronx and Brooklyn. Conditions are varied and bad. Sixty hours work per week in some shops and no standard of wages, — Join the Workers Party! i: