Mr. GARLAND. No, sir. I think we are making as good castings in this country now as any place in the world and, indeed, a little better. I think we can make the best steel in the world, too, and when we excel all competitors I think we do as well as you could expect. Mr. MCCAMMON. It is hardly necessary to call your attention to the fact that there is steel and steel, and, of course, the greater part of your remarks apply to steel of good quality. That was the question asked by Mr. Gompers, not of the very highest grade of steel, and I asked you about the very highest grade of steel; and it only comes down to the question whether the highest grade of steel can be manufactured, in view of our present knowledge, and be made better under the present system than under a yardstick system which will compel the cessation of labor of a particular gang-of every man of a gang-at the end of eight hours. Suppose only eight-hour shifts were used or permitted or employed, how will you proceed if a casting to be perfected should require eight and one-half hours or nine hours, or eight and one-quarter hours? Mr. GARLAND. Just as I have stated heretofore, as they do now. Mr. MCCAMMON. You would put on another shift? Mr. GARLAND. Just as you do now. The other shift takes hold. Mr. McCAMMON. Will you have another shift for a quarter of an hour or a half an hour? Mr. GARLAND. They work continuously until the end of the week. At the wind up of a week you are always able to control the kind of heat you are putting in. They do now. Mr. McCAMMON. Is it not a fact that the last heat on Saturday night, say Saturday afternoon, the men have to work overtime-the shifts-and do work overtime? Mr. GARLAND. They may. I do not know anything about that. Mr. McCAMMON. You do not know it? Mr. GARLAND. I say I do not know whether they do. They might run a minute or two overtime. Mr. MCCAMMON. Do they not work an hour or two overtime, within your knowledge? Mr. GARLAND. Because of the slow running of a particular furnace. Perhaps they had to put in a heat that it required that much time to get it melted to the proper requirements. Mr. MCCAMMON. Is it not a rule in all rolling mills that the last shift on Saturday night have to complete the handling of melted metal? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. MCCAMMON. And put it beyond the possibility of a possible shift? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir; they do. Mr. McCAMMON. And not have an additional shift? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. They go on until it is finished. This bill, I do not think, provides for any such thing. Mr. McCAMMON. If it does not, should it not? Mr. GARLAND. Should it not Mr. MCCAMMON. If it does not contain such an exception, should it not contain a provision for mechanical emergencies? Mr. GARLAND. I think so. In a case of that kind it ought to, perhaps, contain a provision for the emergency, but I do not consider it of vital importance. Mr. HERBERT. When were you last a worker in steel, and where? Mr. GARLAND. I last worked at Mr. Byer's mill, in Pittsburg. Mr. HERBERT. What position did you hold at that time? Mr. GARLAND. Heater. Mr. HERBERT. Are there any grades of heaters? Mr. GARLAND. Oh, there are iron heaters and steel heaters, etc. The heating is pretty much the same. Mr. HERBERT. Is there such a thing as a first-class heater or superintendent of heating? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir; there is no superintendent of heating under our system of amalgamated steel heating. Mr. HERBERT. You were a heater? Mr. GARLAND. I was a heater; the highest position I could attain in the heating. Mr. HERBERT. Did you know at that time all there was to be known about the manufacture of steel? Mr. GARLAND. Oh, I do not think any of us know that. Mr. HERBERT. You did not know it all? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir; I never pretended to. Mr. HERBERT. Since that time, within twelve years, has there been any progress made in the manufacture of steel? Mr. GARLAND. I think so. Mr. HERBERT. There has been very great progress, has there not? Mr. GARLAND. Some progress. Mr. HERBERT. Have you kept up with it? Mr. GARLAND. I have tried to. Mr. HERBERT. What have been your opportunities of keeping up with it? Mr. GARLAND. I was president and assistant president of the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. Mr. HERBERT. That is, it was your business to fix wages? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir; and to be conversant with all these subjects- thoroughly conversant. Mr. HERBERT. Do you think that your business of fixing wages for the steel workers in all the departments makes you a thorough expert in all these different departments of steel manufacture, from start to finish? Mr. GARLAND. With my practice in them before-from the fact I had to know minutely everything connected with it-I think it made me practical all the way through. Mr. HERBERT. Do you think that a man by simply fixing the wages of steel workers would know as much about the manufacture of steel as if he was in the business; is there the same opportunity for keeping up with all those things, and the improvements in the manufacture of steel, that you would have if you were working practically? Mr. GARLAND. I think I have kept up to the practical end. Mr. HERBERT. Will you answer that. Do you think it gives you as good an opportunity of knowing as though you were actually engaged in the work? Mr. GARLAND. I am engaged in manufacturing and using the steel constantly. Mr. HERBERT. In what way? Mr. GARLAND. I have stock in a company that is manufacturing now-in a rolling mill. Mr. HERBERT. Does your interest as a stockholder acquaint you with all the interests? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir; the board of directors. Mr. HERBERT. The board of directors. Well, do the board of directors know as much by reason of their being on that board about the manufacture of steel as the men who are engaged in the work themselves as those who are actively engaged in the work? Mr. GARLAND. I think I am nearly as fully informed, have as much knowledge, from the fact that I am a practical worker. I have experience along with my practical knowledge. Mr. HERBERT. Then you think you have practically as much knowledge of this thing as anybody else? Mr. GARLAND. Oh, no; not as anybody else. Mr. HERBERT. Practically as much as the manager of the Bethlehem Iron Works? Mr. GARLAND. I do not know the manager of the Bethlehem Iron Works, and I do not know anything about his knowledge. Mr. HERBERT. Ör the Homestead works? Mr. GARLAND. I do not know anything about his knowledge; only I know my own experience. Mr. HERBERT. Do you think you could command such salaries as those men? Mr. GARLAND. I have always been able to command the highest wages. Mr. HERBERT. You simply got your wages as the other heaters of steel got them. You never got the salary that a superintendent gets, and you never claimed to have the knowledge that the superintendents I have named have? Mr. GARLAND. That is probably the reason that I do not get the salary. Mr. HERBERT. That is the reason you did not get the salary, because you did not have the knowledge? Mr. GOMPERS. That is not the claim. Mr. GARLAND. I never attempted to fill the position as a manager. Mr. HERBERT. You never did? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir. Mr. HERBERT. And you never were deemed to have the superior knowledge and qualifications to fit you for a manager, and therefore you never were selected as manager? Mr. GARLAND. I never made an application. Mr. HERBERT. You never made an application, and nobody ever applied to you to accept such a position? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir; I have had applications of that kind. Mr. HERBERT. From whom? Mr. GARLAND. From one of the companies now existing. Mr. HERBERT. And you refused it? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. Why did you do that; did you distrust your qualificaitons? Mr. GARLAND. I thought I knew my own business, and I know it better than I can explain to you why I did not accept. Mr. HERBERT. Do you claim that you know as much about the subject-matter about which Mr. Johnston testified here as he does? Mr. GARLAND. I did not say that. Mr. HERBERT. I am asking you Mr. GARLAND. No, sir; I do not say that. Mr. HERBERT. Or as much about that matter as the superintendent of the Homestead works? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir; I do not claim that. Mr. HERBERT. You do not claim that you do? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir. Mr. HERBERT. You said a while ago-changing the subject-that some years ago there was a conference to which you were a party that resulted in trying the eight-hour system, and it was tried with a number of sheet-steel mills? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. And it made progress, the eight-hour system, because it was found to be the best for the laborers and employers? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. How far did it progress? Did it take in all the sheet-steel mills? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. And it was adopted because it was found to be the best? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. And because the managers of those mills knew what was best for them and for the workingmen too? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. Did it make much progress in other steel mills? Mr. GARLAND. How is that? Mr. HERBERT. Did the eight-hour system make much progress in other steel mills? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. Well, what percentage? I believe you said a while ago that you could not tell, but can you make any estimate at all as to the amount or percentage of other steel mills outside of the sheet-steel mills that were run on the eight-hour system? Mr. GARLAND. Well, I should say in 1892, prior to July of 1892, that almost half of the output of the steel mills was on the eight-hour system. Mr. HERBERT. Prior to July of 1892? Mr. GARLAND. Yes, sir. Mr. HERBERT. How is it since that time? Mr. GARLAND. Well, there are not so many. Mr. HERBERT. Not so many? Mr. GARLAND. No, sir. Mr. HERBERT. Then there has been a retrograde movement, so far as the eight-hour system is concerned, in the steel mills? Mr. GARLAND. Apparently. Mr. HERBERT. Well, if the steel mills adopted-if the sheet-steel mills adoptedthe eight-hour system because it was beneficial, and the other steel mills began to adopt it because they thought it was beneficial, and then ceased to adopt it, that was because they thought it was not beneficial, was it not? Mr. GARLAND. I do not know what their reasons are. Mr. HERBERT. Do you not know, as a practical man, that the managers of those industries resort to what is best, as a rule? Mr. GARLAND. You want me to say why they changed that, and I do not really know. Mr. HERBERT. You are giving your opinion on other questions very freely, and I do not see why you should not give your opinion on this. Have you not an opinion on it? Mr. GARLAND. I have an opinion on it. Mr. HERBERT. I would like to have you give your opinion as to whether that does not indicate that in the opinion of the men managing these mills the eight-hour system is not a good system. Is it not your opinion that that is what they think. Mr. HERBERT. But you said the converse of that was true-that the sheet-steel mills went on that system because they thought it was a good system; and now you say that you can not say that the other mills did not go to it, failed to go on it, or went back from it, because it is not a good system? Mr. GARLAND. No; to give you a frank expression, I think the reason they went back was because the other mills continued on the twelve-hour system, and therefore had an advantage of lower wages against them. STATEMENT OF MR. JOSEPH E. RALPH. Mr. RALPH. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I will state my name is Joseph E. Ralph, and I reside at No. 312 S street NE., in the city of Washington, D. C. Deeming that I have an idea of the questions you wish to be brought out as to my knowledge of steel, and so forth, I wish to go on in chronological order, to save time, on the questions that have been asked the previous witness, if the committee has no objection. The CHAIRMAN. We would like to know first as to your opportunities for knowing in regard to these matters. Mr. RALPH. I will state that I have been a steel worker ever since 1875, up to and including 1895, with the exception of two years and a half. Those two years and a half were 1890 and 1891 and part of 1892. I entered the pursuit of a livelihood in the steel mills at the age of 12 years, and worked up through various positions to and including that of confidential clerk of the manager of the mills. While my experience has not been in more than two or three mills, yet in my official capacity as chairman of the wage committee and as secretary of the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers for the western district, which comprises the States of Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Iowa, I became possessed of a great deal of information as to the processes used and applied in the various mills as they were operated at that time. In the settlement of our wage those things were essential and entered into the discussion as to the wages paid-not only the wages paid in other mills, but the mechanical and practical methods of doing the work, which in many mills were not similar. I will state that in those years I have seen a great deal of history making in the processes of the manufacture of steel. I have seen the products increase three hundred fold, in some instances four hundred fold. I have seen the capacity for twelve hours increased from 75 tons to 1,000 tons. I have seen the price of steel go down to a very low figure, when it was hardly possible, in my judgment, to manufacture and make a profit in the condition of affairs as they existed. Subsequently, from 1892 to 1895, I reentered the employment of the steel works at Joliet, Ill., in the capacity of confidential clerk to the manager of the blast furnaces, Mr. Miller. During the time I was out of the service I of course lost touch with the situation of affairs, yet I regained it during that employment, and I saw that during my absence from the work as an employee still further advances had been made in the processes and methods of the manufacture of steel, until at that time they had reached, I believe, the prefection that they hold to-day. The market had been good, and the men had permanent employment, and the prices had been maintained through the organization of the various companies into a combine and otherwise; that instead of, as theretofore, going into the field of the open market as competitors, they went into the field as one, and divided the market, thus got contracts at their own prices, and they were able to pay fair wages. I come here before this committee as a witness to give you the facts as I know them to be. I have not read the bill which is being discussed or considered by the com mittee. I am not interested in the bill any further than the interest I might have in the welfare of all concerned and what I deem to be right and just to the employees of those manufacturing industries, judging from that which I had experienced as an employee, and I want to state that I will give those facts just as I have found them. I do not come here as a man expert in the technicalities of the work or in the chemistry of it, and all that, but I do claim that I have had the opportunity of, and have acquired a practical knowledge of, the mechanical operations as operated by the mills. During my incumbency as the chairman of the committee that settled the wages of the employees of the Illinois Steel Company and the Joliet Works, that entered into the combine with the Illinois Steel Company, and has since been absorbed by the United States Steel Company, it was my duty to familiarize myself not only with the wages paid to the employees, but the actual operations and conditions in those and other establishments engaged in the manufacture of steel. True, in one mill the work was made very much easier and lighter than it was in another mill from the mechanical processes and operations, and I saw a great development in the mechanisms. I saw that improved machinery made it possible to a great extent to have a larger capacity. I saw labor-saving machinery introduced which eliminated 50 per cent of the skilled workers in the process of manufacturing steel. But to touch now upon the principal facts, while I will state that I have no knowledge of the bill, and have not read it, I did read this morning in a short time, before being called as a witness, forty pages of the testimony of Mr. Johnston, the superintendent and manager of the Bethlehem Steel Works. While I do not set myself up as a man possessed of as much technical knowledge required in the manufacture of steel as Mr. Johnston, yet I will say that I believe Mr. Johnston stated it in what I read, all that was possible for a man to state in defense of the object he wishes to accomplish without coming direct to the point. He stated it ably, and I believe he is a very able man and fully conversant with the operations in the steel business, so much so that he consumed about twenty-five pages of his testimony to cite the fact that it was not feasible for one shift of men operating or a heater and a melter operating on a furnace, to turn that over to their successors. It took him twenty-five or thirty pages to intimate that, and I did not find in his evidence where he said positively that it was not so. Now, I wish to say as a witness before this committee that it is not true. Mr. MCCLEARY. One moment upon that point. Your statement has been so clear that I want to get that last part. To me it is not quite clear. Mr. RALPH. Very well. Mr. MCCLEARY. You allege that while he intimated in his testimony that such a shift was impracticabie he did not say so. Mr. RALPH. Yes; he did not say so in a positive way, that it was not feasible and possible to do so; but he cited arguments that it was not, and so insinuated by innuendo and intimations. Mr. MCCLEARY. And your statement is that if he had said so-that if he had so stated that he would not have been stating the facts? Mr. RALPH. Yes, sir; and I will base my opinion from my observations and experience that it has been a practice in the manufacture of steel; and while I have never visited the Bethlehem Steel Works, yet I am conversant with the custom at Homestead. I have seen steel manufactured in Homestead, and I have seen the shifts change, and I have witnessed the entire process from the first to the finished product where they put the templet on the plate, and it was cut in sections; and I have seen heats charged, and I have seen one heater come up and relieve another, and the crews change on the heats or casts. And I know it is the practice of other mills, and it is possible to do it without injury to the quality of the steel. I know it is possible for one heater to turn over his heat to another heater, notwithstanding he may have operated on it for three or four hours and brought it up to a very high degree of heat; that the other man could take it and successfully carry out the heat and finish the steel, notwithstanding it might take him three or four hours longer, and could produce as good results as if the man who started it had finished it. Mr. RHEA. Would it interrupt you to ask you a question here? Mr. RALPH. No, sir. Mr. RHEA. What is your opinion as to the product by those who change shifts and those who have continued through the whole process? Mr. RALPH. My experience has been that there has been no discrepancy in the result, although in the manufacture of steel discrepancies have always existed; and while they have been able to find defects, they have always been able to locate where the fault originated. Perhaps through the carelessness of a heater, possibly, the steel may have been burnt; or a high per cent of sulphur. Mr. RHEA. That is not the fault of the shift itself. Mr. RALPH. No, sir; I am speaking of the ingots that have been cast by open-hearth process. But in the result of the Bessemer process the man who blows the steel in the Bessemer process governs his judgment by the conditions of the flame and amount of carbon that is being forced out of the mouth of the vessel that contains the molten iron, and when that flame attains to a certain hue and the conditions are in his judgment just what they should be, he says "That heat is blown sufficiently now to cast. Very often he makes a mistake and makes a failure; it is underblown or overblown, and the per cent of carbon is not what the contract of the company or the demands of the company would require. |