men was called a "strike;" a general stoppage in all the shops was known as a "general turn-out," while a member of a journeymen's association who broke his obligations to the organization was denominated a "scab." [The People v. Melvin et al., Wheeler's Criminal Cases, vol. 2, p. 262. See, also, post, pp. 911-913.]

1815.—In this year certain journeymen cordwainers of Pittsburg, Pa., were tried for conspiracy in connection with a strike, and were convicted. [See pp. 933, 934.]

1817.-In 1817 Thacher Magoun, a shipbuilder at Medford, Mass., determined to abolish the grog privilege customary at that time, drink being furnished to workmen at certain intervals during the day. Upon notice being given by Mr. Magoun that no liquor should be used in his shipyard, the words "no rum! NO RUM!" were written upon nearly every clapboard of the workshop and upon each timber of the yard. Some of the men refused to work, but finally gave in, and a ship was built without the use of liquor in any form. [McNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day, p. 333.]

1821. A typographical society in Albany, N. Y., ordered a strike in 1821, because of the employment of a "rat" in one of the printing offices. [Ely: The Labor Movement in America, p. 39.]

1822. Strike on November 20 of journeymen hatters in New York City, three of whom-Henry Trequier, James Clawsey, and Lewis Chamberlain-were indicted and tried for conspiracy before the mayor's court. The defendants were found guilty. [Wheeler's Criminal Cases, vol. 1, p. 142, et seq. See, also, post, pp. 913, 914.] 1825-1830.-During these years the ship carpenters and calkers in New York City and along the Atlantic coast were agitating the ten-hour day question, and small strikes in these trades were of frequent occurrence, sometimes succeeding and sometimes failing. [MeNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day, p. 74.]

1827. On August 14 fourteen journeymen tailors, employed by Robb & Winebrener, master tailors of Philadelphia, struck to secure the reinstatement of five other journeymen who had been discharged for demanding more wages on a particular job. Strikers threatened new employees and induced some of them to quit work. Robb & Winebrener thereupon sent work to other shops. Strikers then went to these shops and in two of them, Mr. Jewell's and Mr. Mahan's, prevailed upon the journeymen there employed to refuse to do any work so long as work was received from Robb & Winebrener's. A trial for conspiracy grew out of this strike. [Journeymen Tailors' Trial, 1827, pp. 11-15. See, also, post, pp. 936-938.]

1829. The laborers on the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal struck in 1829. They were arrested and brought before a judge on a writ of habeas corpus, but were discharged, the judge deciding that the case

did not come under the statute of 1815. [McNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day, p. 74.]

1830. In 1830 there were several short strikes in Boston, to secure shorter workdays. From 50 to 150 men-carpenters and masons-engaged in these movements, which were generally unsuccessful, the places of the strikers being easily filled. Some of the employers looked upon the ten-hour plan with favor and expressed their willingness to pay their workmen by the hour, and to allow them to make ten hours the limit of a day's work. [Eleventh Annual Report, Bureau of Statistics of Labor of Massachusetts, p. 3.]

1831.—During this year other strikes occurred, similar to those of 1830, and with like results. In October, 1831, about 60 machinists in Taunton, Mass., struck to secure permission to quit work at sundown, their employers requiring them to remain until 7.30 p. m. [Idem, p. 3.]

1832. Early in this year there was a strike of carpenters in Boston in behalf of the ten-hour system; the masons, painters, and slaters also joining to some extent. About 150 men were engaged in the strike, but more than half of them returned to work at the end of ten days. The places of the others were filled by new men. A meeting of master mechanics was called in May to consider the expediency of adopting the ten-hour system, but it was deemed inadvisable to do so. [Idem, pp. 3, 4.]

In May of this year 120 shipwrights and calkers in Boston went on a strike on account of a disagreement as to the manner of employing a workman. [McNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day,

pp. 79, 80.]

On May 15 the merchants and shipowners of Boston held a meeting, at which they adopted a report containing, among other things, the following language concerning labor unions, etc.:

We will neither employ any journeyman who at the time belonged to such combinations, nor will we give work to any master mechanic who shall employ them while they continue thus pledged to each other and refuse to work the hours which it has been customary for mechanies to work. [Idem, p. 81.]

In this year five or six hundred workmen in the town of New Bedford, Mass., struck for the purpose of regulating the hours of labor. They held daily meetings, employing the town crier to announce them. [Idem, p. 80.]

1833. In July the employees in the Thompsonville carpet factory, in Connecticut, struck for an increase of wages. A trial for conspiracy grew out of this strike. [Report of the Bureau of Statistics of New Jersey, 1885, p. 272. See, also, post, p. 875.]

On August 1 the journeymen shoemakers of Geneva, N. Y., comprising the "trades union of Ontario County," struck in a body against the refusal of the employers to dismiss one of the men who

did not live up to the rules of the union. The strike was successful, but the strikers were indicted and tried for conspiracy. [Idem, p. 272. See, also, post, pp. 914-919.]

In this year 75 carpenters of Boston again struck for the adoption of the ten-hour system. Their places were readily filled and some of them were out of work for six months or longer. [Eleventh Annual Report, Bureau of Statistics of Labor of Massachusetts, pp. 3, 4.]

1834. During the latter part of the year 1833 the female shoe binders of Lynn, Mass., began to agitate the question of an increase of wages. In those days the women engaged in this industry took their work to their homes, returning it to the shops when completed. The manufacturers being unwilling to increase the prices paid, a meeting for consultation was held by more than 1,000 binders, January 1, 1834. At this meeting it was resolved to take out no more work unless the desired increase was granted. As the employers steadily refused to accede to the demands of the strikers and found no difficulty in having their work done in neighboring towns at their own prices, the strike came to an unsuccessful end in three or four weeks. [Idem, p. 4.]

In February a brief disturbance occurred at Lowell, Mass., among the female factory operatives on account of a reduction of wages. [Idem, p. 4.]

In April several hundred laborers employed at Mansfield, Mass., upon the construction of the Providence Railroad, struck for higher wages. The strike resulted in a riot, which was at once suppressed by the sheriff of the county, assisted by a company of militia. Several arrests were made. [Idem, p. 4.]

A large strike probably took place among the shipbuilders of Bath, Maine, in favor of the ten-hour system. It was a failure. [McNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day, p. 84.]

1835. Early in this year the stonecutters in New York City struck for increase of wages to $2 per day and for regulation of piecework. Increase of wages was granted. Horseshoers struck at the same time and paraded the streets with drum and fife. According to the New York Daily Advertiser, few Americans were in their ranks. [Report of the Bureau of Statistics of New Jersey, 1885, p. 272.]

There was a strike early in this year of laborers on certain section of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal for increase of wages. They would neither work themselves nor allow others to work. Strikers were

dispersed by a troop of horse and a company of riflemen. [Niles Register, vol. 47, p. 429.]

On May 26 the Schuylkill merchants pledged themselves not to employ laborers unless they would agree to work by the day, and from sunrise to sunset, "with an allowance of one hour to breakfast and one hour to dinner to June 1, and from that date one hour to breakfast

and two hours to dinner, and that we will not give exceeding $1 per day to laborers." A writer of the time commented upon this lockout by saying: "All combinations are wrong, but, if on one part, they must be on the other." [Report of the Bureau of Statistics of New Jersey, 1885, p. 272.]

A strike in May of the workmen in the Philadelphia coal yards for a reduction of hours to ten per day was compromised upon the proposition of the employers "that the laborers work from sunrise to sunset, with an intermission of three hours, the workmen to designate the hours for themselves." The loss from the strike to employers and others was estimated at not less than $10,000. [Report of the Bureau of Industrial Statistics of Pennsylvania, 1880-81, p. 263.]

On June 3 there was a demonstration of several trades in Philadelphia for a change in the hours of labor. A procession bearing a large white banner with the motto "From 6 to 6," marched to the statehouse yard and was addressed by laboring men; conduct peaceable. Wages of the laborers in the employ of the city were raised without attempt at coercion on their part. The city council also resolved" that the hours of labor of the workingmen under the authorities of the city corporation shall be from 6 to 6 during the summer season, allowing one hour for breakfast and one hour for dinner." The building committee of the Eastern Penitentiary and the board of Southwark granted the same reduction of hours, and in addition agreed that "the wages. now allowed (874 cents per day) being manifestly too scanty to supply all the wants of the laboring men in the employment of the public, each laboring man in the public employment shall receive as compensation for such day's work (ten hours) the sum of $1 instead of 87 cents." [Idem, p. 263.]

On June 5 and 6 the master house carpenters and master bricklayers of Philadelphia adopted resolutions fixing the hours of labor from 6 to 6. [Idem, pp. 263, 264.]

On June 8 the employees of C. Cornelius & Son, lamp and chandelier manufacturers of Philadelphia, and the journeymen tin-plate and sheetiron workers made similar demands for the ten-hour system. The demands were promptly complied with in both cases, the firm of Cornelius & Son replying, "We hereby comply with your request, it being our candid impression that if a man works ten hours of a day it is all sufficient, and more especially in the summer months." [Idem, p. 264.]

Early in June there was a strike of journeymen cordwainers in Philadelphia, numbering 1,500, for an increase of wages. The strike committee of the Union Benevolent Society of Journeymen Cordwainers reported on June 22 that upward of 140 employers had acceded to their demands. [Idem, pp. 264, 265.]

On June 20 working women, consisting of tailoresses, seamstresses,

binders, folders, milliners, stock makers, corset makers, mantua makers, etc., met to form a scale of the prices then allowed and ask such advances as were deemed essential to enable those interested to live with some degree of comfort. The master bookbinders “considered the cause of the laboring class of females as one whose claims were founded on the immutable principles of justice and humanity, and deprecated the course of those who, for their own gain or private interest, would, by their tyranny and oppression, if possible, drain the last drop of blood, and then grudgingly give an acknowledgment, much less an equivalent;" and resolved that "$3 per week is the least amount of wages those possessed of the practical principles of humanity could offer; that less is unjust, inhuman, and oppressive." [Idem, p. 265.]

In July there was a strike of the saddlers and harness makers of Philadelphia for an advance in wages. Result unknown. [Idem, p. 266.]

In July the workingmen connected with shipbuilding in the Philadelphia Navy-Yard forwarded a communication to the Secretary of the Navy asking for ten hours, as in private shipyards. The request was acceded to. [Idem, p. 266.]

Strike in July of about 500 mechanics of Boston for the ten-hour system. The strike came to an end in two weeks without accomplishing anything for the workmen, some of whom were unable to find employment for several months. [Eleventh Annual Report, Bureau of Statistics of Labor of Massachusetts, p. 4.]

Strike in August of workmen in the navy-yard at Washington for change of hours and a general redress of grievances. Appeal was made to the Secretary of the Navy, but little satisfaction was received and the men returned to their work. [McNeill: The Labor Movement, the Problem of To-day, p. 86.]

Strikes of the stonecutters in New York and other large cities for the ten-hour system. Employers offered to compromise on the basis of two hours for dinner. This offer was refused, and the strikes were eventually successful. The carpenters of several large towns and cities also succeeded, after a number of strikes, in securing the ten-hour system. [Idem, p. 87.]

Strike of operatives in 20 mills at Paterson, N. J., for reduction of hours. Work was resumed after six weeks' idleness; loss in wages, $24,000; working hours after strike, eleven and one-half hours per day. [Report of the Bureau of Statistics of New Jersey, 1885, p. 273.]

1836.-Strike early in this year of laborers on the Susquehanna Railroad for increase of wages. Strikers attempted to prevent others who were satisfied with their wages from working; a fight ensued and the military was called out. About 30 strikers were taken prisoners, but all except three were discharged. [Niles' Register, vol. 50, p. 74.]