The Daily Worker Newspaper, July 19, 1927, Page 6

Six THE DAILY WORKER. ‘ NEW YORK, TUESDAY, JULY 19, 1927 Join the Navy and See the Cooler By CHARLES YALE HARRISON. Wherever the unemployed gather in crowds—-Union | Square, the Bowery, or Battery Park; multi-colored navy enlistment posters are to be found. “Uncle Sam Wants You!” or “Let The Navy Train You!” graphs (New York’s a tough burg when a guy’s out of work) showing the cool spray of the surf on the beach | at Waikiki, another showing a couple of hula-hula girls | 4 Shaking a basketful of shredded wheat (the dames look hot and wilted on Fourteenth St.). * * * More alluring scenes all of which originate in the clastic imagination of the navy’s advertising artist. The green coolness of a Chinese temple with a couple of manly-icoking gobs unobtrusively watehing the mys- terious rites—another—a groap of U. S. sailors garbed an cool trepical whites, watching a gang of Haitians sweating, stripped naked under a broiling equatorial sun (contrast—no hard work in the navy)—still an- other--a group of ‘officers and men taking in the sights at Guam (idea to be conveyed—no social distinctions in the navy, just one big happy family), many posters, many slogans, and every now and then some hungry worker enlists. But what really happens after his en- listment. Let’s see! “THE NAVY OFFERS YOU A POSITION FOR LIFE.” That’s what Captain Ridley McLean, U. S. N., says in a remarkably frank book called The Bluejackets Manual (you get one free when you join) and it has a foreword written by the secretary of the navy. Says the doughty captain on page 18 of the aforesaid manual, “Few men realize the full value of a ‘position for life,’ . - as far as actual pay is concerned, a man who behaves thimself and tries to get ahead, is much better off in the service than out of it.” What is meant by “behaves himself”? Simply this. Obey every order, rule and regulation contained in the manual—it has only 807 pages! For the slightest in- fraction of a rule your pay is docked. And any gob will tell you it’s a physical impossibility to keep “a clean slate.” T quote from the valiant captain’s opus thruout. “Ne- glect of duty. Offences under this classification may vary in nature from minor cases—such, for example, as ‘late at muster,’ or ‘slow in sweeping down’—to neglecting to close water-tight doors when it is your duty to do so.” There are hundreds of rules which may be broken and for every infraction there is an ap- propriate punishment. Ten minutes are allowed to “stow hammocks” after reveille.’ If more is taken you go “on report.” Neglect of duty. If you smoke after “turn to”—more neglect of duty. “Smoking in any part of the ship during divine service is forbidden’—another offence, ‘Men are not permitted to lean on the life lines.” “No per- son in the navy shall act as a correspondent for a news- paper or a periodical.” Letters to newspapers com- plaining of conditions on board ship comes under this ruling. More infractions—more punishments. “Whistl- ing is never permitted on board ship.” Buckets must be put in one place, scrubbing brushes in another, if they swap places some poor gob is out of luck. Hundreds and hundreds of rules; every rule means a possible in- fraction. . * * ¥ “YOU'RE IN THY NAVY NOW!” With almost every infraction of a rule comes con- finement and the loss of pay. When you are tried by a “deck court” or a summary court-martial the inevi- table loss of pay is included in the punishment. Well may the gob dolefully sing, “You're in the navy now, You're not behind a plow, You'll never get rich You of a-——, You're in the navy now.” a * * Punishment in the navy may be assigned in four different w , says Captain McLean on pages 21-22 of the manual: “1, The captain is uthorized to assign certain pun- ishments; as a rule, these are sufficiently severe to| punish minor offences only.” “2. Deck Courts.—If the captain thinks you ought to get more severe punishment than he is authorized to assign, but that your case is not sufficiently serious for a summary court martial, he may order a deck court. Such. a court is not authorized to assign more severe punishment than 20 days confinement and 20 days loss of pay. “3. If your offence is still more serious, the captain orders you to be tried by a summary court-martial. Such a court can sentence you to 30 days’ solitary con- finement and to loss of three months’ pay, or to a bad conduct discharge.” “4, In case of a very serious offence, the commander- in-chief or secretary of the navy may order a general court-martial. As a rule this court-martial sentences a guilty person to imprisonment at hard labor, loss of pay and dishonorable discharge. The prison term may vary from six months to any number of years,” depend- ing upon the offence.” * * * “The prison term may vary to any number of years.” Gone the bright hued pictures of Honolulu—no taking it-easy where the Chinese temple bells call at eventide— no white “ducks” or an aristocratic pith helmet taking in the sights at Colon or Belboa. For an infraction of the rules, instead you may find yourself in a navy cooler deing “ten years hard.” And once you have been sentenced there is no ap- peal. For as Captain McLean says, a court-martial is the highest military bar, “no one, not even the presi- dent, can order it to reverse a decision. An approving authority can mitigate its punishment, but can neither commute nor increase it.” * * * The navy is such a swell institution that the deser- tion laws are almost barbaric in their intensity. Of course the posters down at Battery Park were all the bunk, sure they were. Swabbing a deck or stoking in a coal hole that would sear the lining of your lungs— “Learn a Trade and See the World.” Yeah, From the dirty end of a port-hole. Listen to McLean, “Few men realize how frequently deserters are captured . . owing to the increased re- ward which has been offered 30 per cent of the men who desert are either captured or voluntarily surrender. Many times deserters are captured by the civil service men (who keep up with all deserters) after they have married and have families. These civil police are all over the United States, and many of them live on the rewards which they receive by apprehending deserters.” You see, it’s this way, the navy is so anxious for you to have a good time that they’d hate to see you miss all that wonderful fun they promised you down in the tropics and out on the cool surf at Waikiki and listen- ing to the tinkling of the temple bells in some Chinese garden. Why they'd even pay civil service dicks to get you back. . . . There’s always a rat low enough to do any dirty job. * * * Any added comment to this cold-blooded recital would ae a see the gpoler, ¢ Enticing litho- | ‘Against the War Danger The Future War and the Working Class TV. By D. MARETZKY. (Continued.) Every social system must have a special economic character, must represent a special type of produc- tion relations. Every significant | “economy’ ’in history must also cor-| |respond to a special “poli a spe-| cial “concentrated expre: mn.” ,Ac-| | cordingly, the third line of the chair |——-war-—can only form a special “con-| |tinuation” of the given policy, and,} jaccording to the epoch and circum-| stances, can possess only various so- | cial sense of class. It is j consequent class treatment question of war, that Marxism and Leninism are distinguished from all bourgeois and petty-bourgeois con- ceptions of war. The view that Marx and Engels were opponents of war in general is an opportunist misrepresentation. Only pacifists from the bourgeois and the Social-Democratic camp, os- tensible opponents of war, can make} Marx and Engels out to be Tolstoi- ans or disciples of Voltaire. This tiick of the pacifists is a match for the Social Democratic falsehood that Marx was an opponent of “force” in general and consequently also an “opponent” of the dictatorship of the proletariat. From the standpoint of revolution- ary Marxism and Leninism the deci- sive point is: which class is making war; this must also decide the atti- tude of the international proletarian revolutionaries towards this or that war. Every effort to group wars only according to characteristics ‘“be- yond class,” the distinction of wars into “wars of defence” and “wars of attack,” into “just” and “unjust,” civilized and barbarian wars—can only lead the working class into con- fusion, to casuistic sophisms, and is at bottom-—as was shamefully con- firmed by the experience of the years 1914-1918—only a device for deceiv- ing the masses. Beneficial Wars. If a war is made by a progressive class against a reactionary one, if) a war is made by a revolutionary government against a reactionary power, if a war robs a class of “posi- | tions of influence’ which impede the develoment of productive powers, such war will be a paramount pro- gressive factor. Conversely, if a re- actionary State makes war upon a revolutionary State, or reactionary States fight for a “redistribution of |the world” it is then a reactionary, predatory war, against which revolu- | tionaries must fight with all their strength. Formerly the bourgeoisie carried on progressive “wars of national emancipation ” severed the feudal shackles by force of arms, broke down the petrified barriers of pro- duction and thereby “lead the nation forwards.” Even today the bour- geoisie or a portion thereof are ca- pable for a certain period of carry-| ing on a “progressive,” “just” war in their own countries (namely, those suffering oppression under Imperial- m). An example in recent times, which all will remember: The army of*rev- olutionary China, under bourgeois | commanders, defeated the army of | the northern military, of the agents and “compradors” of the imperialism |of Great Britain, Japan and the United States. A portion of the Chi- | nese bourgeoisie was able during the | first phases of development of the} revolution to make a revolutionary} war against reactionary foreign im- perialism. | Chiang Kai Shek, the authorized | representative of the Chinese bour- | geoisie at this stage of development |of the national freedom movement, conducted the revolutionary war of the people against reaction. This is |the historic difference betwecn the | bourgeois Chiang Kai Shek and, for jinstance, the Socialist Minister Kerenski, who, in the year 1917, in | the allies,” i.e., the entente imperial- ists incited the Russian soldiers to} | take the offensjve. The Reactionary Trend. | | The revolution in Shanghai, in the name of “fulfillment of duty to} |whigh Chiang Kai Shek played the | part of a Chinese Cavaignac, amount- | |ed to an immense social “regrouping | | of the ranks” in the camp of the na-| | tional freedom movement and to the| | going over of the Chinese bour-| | feoisie to the camp of reaction, a de-| sertion _which the Comintern had foreseen and of which they had in) their resolutions and _ instructions warned the Chinese Communists. The shootings in Shanghai in April of this year constitute a blood demar- cation in the history of the Chinese revolution whereby tha Chinese bourgeoisie cut themselves off from the possibility of taking the leader- ship in a progressive national war of emancipation. All Imperialist Wars Reactionary. The wars, which the present-day imperialists are making, cannot be progressive in the slightest degree; they are reactionary, predatory wars. For Imperialism, per se, Capitalism in a state of dpeay, is—according to Lenin’s statement—a thoroughly predatory, reactionary system. “From being a liberator of the na- tions, which Capitalism was in ‘its fight against feudalism, Imperial- istic Capitalism has become the greatest oppressor of the nations. Progressive Capitalism has been con- verted to reaction; it has developed productive power to such an extent that there remains nothing else for humanity to do but adopt Socialism or suffer for years and decades the armed fight of ‘great’ powers for the artificial maintenance of Capitalism by means of colonies, monopolies, privileges and through national op- pression of every kind” (Lenin, From the brochure “Socialism and War.”). Messrs. Scheidemann, Renaudel, Turati and the whole of interpa- tional Social Democracy, which, dur- ing the years 1914 to 1918, solicited with such zeal among the working class of devotees of the imperialistic slaughter, committed an unprece- dented piece of villany against the literary heritage of ‘Marx in forcing into a radically different setting, in- to the relations of imperialist war, isolated statements of Engels’ con- cerning the progressive tendencies of the former bourgeois, national wars of emancipation. The Revolutionary Offensive. In the presetn epoch of the decline | of capitalism a progressive war can be carried on only by the progressive class, by the revolutionary proleta- viat (a civil war, if the proletariat fights for the possession of power, a class war, if, after the capture of the reins of government, war is carried on against imperialistic armies). The proletariat organized as a State power may (under especially favorable conditions, with the great- est precaution and with the requisite social rearguard, and, particularly, with a firm alliance of the workers and peasants, and when there exists sharp difference of opinion in the camp of imperialism, etc.) take up a revolutionary offensive war in aid of the proletariat rising or in open re- volt in other countries. Soviet Union Is Defiant. The working class organized as a State power not only has the right, but is in duty bound, to carry on a revolutionary war of defence when attacked by imperialists. The policy of “non-resistance” in the matter of imperialistic attack would be treach- ery against the international revolu- tion: The Bolsheviki would be crim- inals if they did not consolidate the capability of the country of prole- tarian dictatorship to defend itself. “We have become defenders of home and country, but such as defend the positions of Socialism,” said Lenin. The Communist Party of the So- viet Union must strengthen the mil- itary power of the Soviet Union and defend themselves by force of arms and with the utmost energy in case the Soviet Union is attacked by the Imeprialists and their Fascist vas- sals. The Communists of the other countries, as well as the honest workers of the whole world, are in duty bound to lend all their strength and means towards helping the pro- letarian State in its revolutionary de- fensive fight. ® (To be continued.) Youths Drown. Two bodies found floating off Staten Island early yesterday, were later identified as being those of Ed- ward Maynard, 15 years old and his friend, Aloysius Diehl, 16 years old, both of Jersey City. Diehl was found floating in Prince’s Bay, off the foot of Arbutus Ave., Hugenot. The body of Maynard was found in New York Bay off Graham Beach. The youths were drowned while in bathing Sunday. BUY THE DAILY WORKER AT THE NEWSSTANDS My Prison Sun By DAVID GORDON. No Homer’s rosy-fingered dawn Designs the prison’s heaven; No rain can ever stop that sun From rising just at seven. You’ll never find the sun at noon Shining uverhead and hot, You'll only see a yellow glow Burning sick above my cot. No setting sun ensnares my sight With mystic colors, hues and taints, Without a warning night-time comes, My steel-walled cell with darkness paints. ‘ My incandescent prison sun, Which does not shine from heaven, / From seven eats my eyes; sets nine, | To rise again at seven, [FRENCH PROPAGANDA ABOUT A GER- | MAN-AUSTRIAN ALIGNMENT Taking advantage of the precarious situation in Europe and Asia, which threatens again to embroil the world in another war, the official and semi-official French press is raising the scare of a new Mitteleuropa to be realized through an alliance between Germany and Aus- tria. It is strongly suspected that this cry is raised in order to force Czechoslovakia to abandon its hostile pol- jicy of maintaining high tariff walls against Austria, and ‘it is not at all improbable that bekind the propaganda of , the French publicists, especially M. Jules Sauerwein, | dering states. Real War Danger Not Touched. In a labored argument which leaves untouched the real threat of war in Europe—the series of provocations, forgeries and murders against the Soviet Union, accom- panying the desperate efforts to build a bloc of reac- tionary nations against the workers’ and peasants’ gov- ernment—-Sauerwein depicts the union between Germany |his jingo conclusions therefrom. In following the arguments of this French journalistic harlot, it is well to keep in mind the fact that only re- | cently he was a visitor in the United States and therefor | became more than familiar with the imperialist policy of Wall Street. In the nine years that Austria has enjoyed as an “in- dependent” nation, according to Sauerwein, she has sev- eral times been saved by the League of Nations from complete collapse and ruin, on the express condition that she remain a sovereign state and allow herself to be used as a buffer against the possible encroachments of Ger- many toward the Adriatic Sea; but that in order to main- the future “a regime of restrictions and privations” which no country could be expected to endure if there were any other way out. There are indications, M. Sauerwein thinks, that Aus- tria would consider a union with Germany as a way out. far preferable to her precarious role of sham independ- ence, but such a union could only be achieved in the light of day by the express permission of the League of Na- tions, in conformity with the Treaty of St. Germain. This the League would be unlikely to grant, particularly in view of the rumpus raised by the allies in 1918, when the Provisional Assembly at Vienna. voted for the union of Austria with Germany, and the Germans had already prepared seats at Weimar for the Austrian Deputies. The allies would not hear of such a union, and declared the decision null and void. Pretends to See Sly Conspiracy. The only other way to effect a union, then, according to the political sage of Le Matin, would be by the subtle and subterranean method of achieving a de facto incor- poration, “without using that word and without commit- in every way as if it were a province of the Reich.” This the wily Austrians have already begun to do. “On Feb. 5th Austria decreed the unification of criminal legisla- tion. A little later came the assimilation of Austrians and Germans in matters of inheritance and guardianship. For several months the uniforms of the army have been identical in the two countries and the commission of the entente has learned that the same regulations and the same method of mobilization will be adopted by both countries in case of conflict. In respect to telegraphic and telephonic communication, the two countries profit from an interior tariff. Again, a cable has been estab- lished between Vienna, Passau and Nuremberg. In 1920 the two countries accorded each other in commercial re- lations the most favored nation treatment. Thanks to arrangements concluded in 1924, 1925 and 1926, the cus- toms union has been very close except for certain mate- rials such as agricultural products and horses, on which Germany maintains very high duties in order to swing to her cause the Austrian peasants, who in general are not very favorable to incorporation. In each branch of pro- duction there exist Austro-German cartels. University professors travel from one country to another, belong to the same union and maintain the same pension funds. Dramatic authors, writers and musicians are united in the enjoyment of the privileges in the central syndicate in Berlin.” : All these facts, one is led to suppose, are straws point- ing to the gradual absorption of Austria by Germany, whereby the latter stands to gain a population of 7,000,000 Austrians, an advance of her territory to within 100 kilometers of the Adriatic and to the borders of the Balkan States. Terrorizes Czechoslovakia With Speculations. “The most troublesome phase of the situation,” says M. Sauerwein, is that if the big powers by chance are finally brought to accept incorporation, there will there- after be no chance of any stability realizing itself on the Continent. Czechoslovakia, completely locked in, would no longer be able to live. Yugoslavia would have her ex- istance menaced by the bastions of Hungary thirsting for revenge and playing on the side of Germany. Italy would be confronted along the entire northern frontier by a neighbor so powerful that it would have no other choice than to wage war or to form a close alliance with large compensation in the Balkans.” He concludes finally that “incorporation means war” and that a remedy must quickly be found if this calamity is to be averted. This is all very interesting speculation, and it is prob- able that the barrage of smoke conceals at least a small tongue of flame. Britain and America Behind Scenes. It is equally interesting and more to the point to spec- ulate on something that has far more of a foundation in fact—that is the great rivalry of Britain and America throughout the whole world. No one can discuss the realignment of economic and political forces in Europe without taking this conflict between the two rival impe- rialisms into consideration. Capitalist political writers of all shades are careful not to mention this dominant factor. Behind all the diplomacy, the manouvering of statesmen, relentlessly proceeds the great economic struggle wherein the Wall Street imperialists strive to align on their side the nations of Europe. Only last week the United States showed its hand in German-Austrian affairs by a series of loans and com- mercial treaties. It concluded a “fovored nation’ com- mercial treaty with Austria, floated a $30,000,000 loan to Germany based upon agricultural property as security, placed upon the market an additional $4,000,000 loan for the state of Hanover and at the same time organized a concern known as the International Germanic trust com- pany for “the financing of commercial intercourse be- tween America and the Central European business world,” Britain, through her dominant position in the league of nations, desperately strives to use her political power derived therefrom against the steady encroachment of American investment capital, but with dubious results. No one doubts her desperation at her predicament and anyone who knows European political and economic con- | ditions can doubt for a moment that this great rivalry | politically and economically must finally be tested on the ‘field of mars. | In preparation for this struggle both Britain and Amer- ‘ica are indulging in provocations against the Soviet | Union, because they know that that mighty proletarian [power stands as the outpost of the world revolution, an inspiration to the revolutionary forces of the colonial as well as the capitalist countries of the world, The real threat of war is not to be sought as yet because of the|lard but in the interna-| the internal rivalries of Central ghd | foreign editor of the Paris journal, “Le Matin,” is the| hand of Wall Street, whose Austrian investments are} | endangered because of tariff barriers maintained by bor- | and Austria as almost an accomplished fact and draws | taip her independence, she must impose upon herself for | By V. Q. | The Baltimore and Ohio Plan of | Cooperation was te solve all industrial \ills. Labor and capital were to be |partners’ in the management of in- |dustry. No more strife, no more |strikes,- no more. disagreements. | Everything was to be settled across the conference table. The era of good will was to be inaugurated. | Dan Willard, presidént of the Balti- more and Ohio Railroad, was one of the foremost exponents of this har- binger of peace and prosperity. And now, the name of Dan Willard is sign- led to a report made recently by a special committee last week of the Association of Railway Executives, laecording to “Labor,” official organ of the railway unions. Nay, more. committee, appointed in 1924 to bring in measures designed “to stabilize employment.” The report is a vicious attack on the 8-hour day, and aims to introduce the 10-hour day, eliminat- ing extra pay for overtime. This |Slashing is disguised under the plea- sant term of a “more flexible working day.” The paragraph which spills the ‘beans is as follows: “If the day could |be increased from eight to nine, and ‘even to ten hours, in times of business | activity, such a policy would enable | the carriers to employ a more uniform |force throughout the year and avoid the necessity of laying off or fur- loughing large numbers of men in times of business recession.” Of | course, the owners would not consider |a proposition to share work in times |of depression, so that the burden | would not lie too heavily on those who are laid off, as is done now. The logical proposal is the 8-hour day, with special pay for overtime, as now; |ing of work equally among the mem- bers. This would take care of the |“stabilization of employment,” ‘¢ith- out any victimization of workers. But this plan would mean payment for | overtime; would mean no unemployed |to batter. down working standards; \and so the railway companies are op- posed, When the statement appeared, there ting any official act; that is to say, by erecting Austria| was considerable protest, and Willard | lespecially had to do some tall ex- | plaining. As some of the railroad |men put it: “We expécted such stuff |from Rea, (former president of the Pennsylvania R. R.) and Loree (of |the Delaware and Hudson); but Wil- lard—we can’t understand it.” | In an interview with “Labor,” Wil- |lard explained: “The plan would be | for the men to work an extra hour or | two each day in rush periods only, in- | stead of forcing the railroads to em- |ploy extra men, who have to be dis- | charged at the end of the seasons of |increased activity, Adoption of the | arrangement would mean extra money for the men during the. periods of increased activity. When business re- turned to normalcy, the men would only work eight hours a day.” But even this forced attempt to ex- | plain away the lengthening of hours | with elimination of overtime does not | satisfy, for as “Labor” says: “But all jcamel of longer hours once gets his nose into the tent, he never will rest | till he takes full possession.” | | Willard, Apostle of Harmony. It is not so long ago that Willard was an honored guest at the banquet given by “Labor,” the weekly news- paper, to the editors of the standard railway labor magazines, in Washing- ton, D. C. The Machinists’ Monthly Journal for May, 1927, gives a 5 page account of this dinner, held. March 16th at the New Willard Hotel, under |the caption “An Interesting Event.” |It was a typical worker-employer co- operation gathering, with the follow- ing speakers: James P. Noonan of the Electrical Workers; Representative George Huddleston of Alabama (Con- gressman); William Green, president of the A. F. of L.; Frank McKenna, vice-president of the Brotherhood of |Railway Carmen; former Governor Pinchot of Pennsylvania; and last but not least, Daniel Willard, president of the Baltimore and Ohio R. R. President Green endorsed the scheme of cooperation between the companies and the unions. Willard’s speech is given almost complete, tak- ing up two closely printed columns, occupying a page. Another column is given over to the toastmaster’s speech, introducing Willard. Remember that this was the first time that a railroad president addressed one of “Labor’s” banquets. Willard was praised for cooperation with labor by Mr, Keat- ing, editor of “Labor,” who paid him this tribute: “Wherever railroad workers assemble the name of Dan Willard is spoken with respect and genuine affection. The B. & O. work- ers have done, for Mr. Willard, their part in transforming a threatening de- |ficit into a generous surplus.” In his speech, after a “superb ovation,” Wil- \lard referred to his membership in the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers as a young man, and then showed how much it meant to the state of mind of the workers to have their suggestions given the proper attention. No men- tion of the insignificant raise given the men, in proportion to the increased profits; and to the fact that even this raise was offeet by changes in shop tconditions, Just a wishy-washy speech of glittering generalities. But Willard by his grand stand play of cooperation captuted the fancies of a great many railroad workers for a time. The trade union bureaucracy was working hand in hand with Wil- |. When things and workers clamored for offlolals of the unions would show the | Dan Willard was the chairman of this: and no layoffs in slack time, but shar-| |the railroad workers agree that if the} B.&O. Willard Shows His Hands “wonderful progress” of the B. & 0. Plan. Dan Willard was held up as the ideal type of railroad executive; as the personification of the worker- employer cooperation plan. What Means Cooperation? Willard in his speech says that he began to examine his methods, when the shopmen’s strike began; and that this led to the B. & O. Plan. But | what he fails to mention is that there | would have been no strike, if the rail- way companies had’ not cut the shop- men’s wages repeatedly to a point of desperation. Cooperation was entered into by the machinists, only after of- ficial bungling and treachery had weakened the unions and rendered them helpless. And instead of adopt- ing measures to strengthen the unions through organization drives and amal- gamation, the union officials “bound the union with cords of steel and de- | livered it over bodily to the companies, jas the price for union recognition and |continued per capita into the Grand | Lodge. There have been no benefits from |this so-called scheme of cdperation. | No special wage increases, no special | betterment of shop conditions. But rather, improved profits for the com- pany. The plan; has been one-sided, |of benefit to the company, with the |workers making suggestions for im- | provement in equipment and elimina- |tion of waste. | Why the Drive On the 8-Hour Day? (1) Five of the nine signers of the |veportfor the ten-hour day are from | railways that are in the list of the 25 corporations with the largest pro- | fits in 1926. These are the Pennsyl- vania R. R., New York Central, Union Pacific, Baltimore and Ohio, and St. Paul R. R. (2) Railroad dividends for 1926, ac- |cording to the U. S. Department of | Commerce figures, were $330,336,000, | which surpassed all previous records. (3) The average wage of railway employes paid on an hourly basis for 1926 was under $1,600. In the face of large profits, and a low wage, why the drive for the ten- | hour day? The answer is simple. The railway companies wish to increase their profits, and this is one of the means of doing it. On the basis of a struggle between the workers and the | employers, it is easily understood. But when one has faith in Dan Willard {and his cooperation plan, it cannot be | explained, for it is contradictory to | the basis of the cooperation plan. The | trade union officials supporting the B. & O. plan, especially the officials of the I. of M. are confronted with two possibilities—(1) to renounce the | worker-employer cooperation plan, and enter into struggles to better con- ditions, or (2) to help Willard and the the throats of the membership. The officialdom of the I. A. of M. is weak and passive toward the employers. On- ly the active resistance of the mem- ership to the introduction of the ten- hour day will defeat the plan. But Willard’s action shows that he used the B. & O. plan to rope the I. | A. of M. members in for the financial | gain of his company, and that he would throw over the plan and adopt open warfare when it was advanta- geous to him. He shows that the B, & O. plan is a plan for the B. & O. Company, and not for the workers. An immediate task for the progres- sive elements in the I. A. of M. is to conduct a nationwide campaign linking it up with Willard’s advocacy of the ten-hour day. other officials to force the plan down . against the Baltimore and Ohio Plan, ~ o