the reservation of all lands for actual settlers; the "abrogation of all laws that do not bear equally upon capital and labor, the removal of unjust technicalities, delays, and discriminations in the administration of justice, and the adopting of measures providing for the health and safety of those engaged in mining, manufacturing, or building pursuits"; the enactment of a weekly pay law, mechanics' lien law, and a law prohibiting child labour under fourteen years of age; the abolition of the contract system on national, state, and municipal work, and of the system of leasing out convicts; equal pay for equal work for both sexes; reduction of hours of labor to eight per day; "the substitution of arbitration for strikes, whenever and wherever employers and employés are willing to meet on equitable grounds"; the establishment of "a purely national circulating medium, based upon the faith and resources of the nation, and issued directly to the people, without the intervention of any system of banking corporations, which money shall be a legal tender in payment of all debts, public or private."

This preamble, which now replaced the ritual as the formula of its principles and demands, was practically verbatim the declaration of principles of the Industrial Brotherhood in 1874. It had then been prepared by Robert Schilling, who was now a member of the committee on platform and resolutions. There were, however, several planks on which the two platforms differed and these differences are very significant in determining the philosophy of the Knights at this time. The preamble totally omitted the plank of the Industrial Brotherhood, stating that trade unions were effective "in regulating purely tradeunion matters," but it cautioned them that their influence upon all questions appertaining to the welfare of the masses as a whole" must prove comparatively futile, without a closer union. It omitted also the plank demanding the enactment of apprenticeship laws. The reason for these omissions is obvious. The Knights of Labor started out as the antithesis of the trade unions in the form of organisation; and, similarly, it emphasised education, mutual aid, and co-operation rather than the policy of restriction; hence the negative attitude on apprentice

6 Ibid, 243-246. See above, II, 164, 165.

7 Chicago Workingman's Advocate, Apr. 24, 1875.

ship. This is explained in part also by the fact that the Order gathered into its ranks workingmen largely of the semi-skilled class to whom strict apprenticeship rules are of small consequence. Another significant difference is the modification of the money plank. While greenbackism was reaffirmed in principle, the Kellogg scheme of interchangeable bonds and paper money was omitted, reflecting the change that had taken place with regard to this matter in the greenback movement of the country. Other omissions were of less significance, namely, the planks demanding "a system of public markets" and systems of cheap transportation. These omissions indicate the waning influence of the Patrons of Husbandry.

The constitution which was adopted provided for a highly centralised form of organisation. Just as the district assembly had absolute jurisdiction over its subordinate bodies, so the General Assembly of the Knights of Labor of North America, as the national body was styled, was given "full and final jurisdiction," and was made "the highest tribunal" of the Order. "It alone possesses the power and authority to make, amend, or repeal the fundamental and general laws and regulations of the Order; to finally decide all controversies arising in the Order; to issue all charters. . . . It can also tax the members of the Order for its maintenance."

The district assembly was made the highest tribunal within its district, thus retaining its old function and powers, subordinate only to the General Assembly. The territory of a district assembly and the nature of its membership were left undefined, since there was no controversy on these matters at the time.10 Local assemblies were to be "composed of not less than ten members at least three quarters of whom must be wage-workers; and this proportion shall be maintained for all time.'

99 11

The minimum initiation fee set at this time was 50 cents, and any person over eighteen years of age "working for wages, or who at any time worked for wages" could become a member. However, no person who either sells, or makes his living by

8 See above, II, 112.

• Constitution of the General Assembly,

in General Assembly, Proceedings, 1878 (Reading), Art. I, Sec. 2, p. 29.

10 Constitution of the District Assembly, Art. I, Sec. 2, p. 85, in ibid.

11 Constitution of the Local Assembly, Art. I, Sec. 1, p. 86, in ibid.

the sale of, intoxicating drink, can be admitted, and no lawyer, doctor or banker can be admitted." 12

No provision was made at this time in the constitution as to the body to which a local assembly owed its direct allegiance, and we find later considerable anarchy, because local assemblies were free to change affiliation at will. The clause allowing non-wage workers to join was later a means of bringing in large numbers of farmers, small merchants, and masters.

The matter of secrecy was discussed at a special convention held in June, 1878, in Philadelphia. It was called expressly for the purpose of considering the "expediency of making the name of the Order public, for the purpose of defending it from the fierce assaults and defamation made upon it by Press, Clergy, and Corporate Capital, and to take such further action as shall effectually meet with the GRAVE EMERGENCY." 13

Secrecy was thoroughly discussed, but a two-thirds vote could not be raised 14 in favour of a resolution requiring the grand master workman and the general secretary" to give to D. A.'s 15 and to L. A.'s 16 under the jurisdiction of the G. A.17 permission to make the name of the Order public, but only upon a request made by a two-thirds vote of such body." 18 It was decided, however, to submit to a referendum vote of the membership the questions, among others, of making the name of the Order public, and "of making such modifications in the initiatory exercises as will tend to remove the opposition coming from the church." 19 In the vote taken, the former question was decided upon favourably by a majority of those voting, but a majority of the locals were against making the name of the Order public. The latter question was rejected by a majority of both the votes and the locals.20

When a large number of the membership, the press, and the church demanded a change, and when the enemies of the Order libelled it because of its extreme secrecy, some action in the way of modification was inevitable. Consequently, the General Assembly of 1879 decided that any district assembly might,

12 Ibid.

18 General Assembly, Proceedings, 1878 (Special session, Philadelphia), 40.

14 The vote stood 9 for and 6 against

the resolution. Ibid., 42.

15 District Assemblies,

16" Local Assemblies."

17" General Assembly."

18 General Assembly, Proceedings, 1878 (Special session, Philadelphia), 42. 19 Ibid., 44.

20 Ibid., 1879 (St. Louis), 62, 63.

by a two-thirds vote, make the name of the Order public in its own district only.21 This was a compromise between those who believed secrecy no longer necessary for the success of the Order, and those who believed that "the veil of mystery was more potent for good than the education of the masses in an open organisation." 22 However, the former insisted that making the name of the Order public would lead to an increase in membership. The demand from those districts where the Catholic Church was dominant was also insistent against complete secrecy. An unsuccessful attempt was made in 1880,23 but in 1881 a resolution to make the name public throughout was carried by a vote of 28 to 6.2 The opposition this time came again from those who believed in the educational value of secrecy. The provision, however, was still retained which forbade members from revealing any of the secret work of the assembly meetings, or from revealing "to any employer or other person the name or person of any one a member of the Order without permission of the member." 25

The national organisation of the Knights of Labor did nothing in the nature of aggressive activity until 1880. The district assemblies, and, in the absence of these, the individual local assemblies, took separate action on whatever policies they saw fit. The sessions of the General Assembly in 1878 and 1879 were devoted, in the main, to perfecting the organisation and threshing out the future policies of the Order. Strikes, politics, and co-operation were the prevailing issues, although some of the coal districts urged the adoption of a beneficial feature, not agreeing as to whether it should be a sick benefit, funeral, or burial, or all. The membership doubled during these two years. At the end of 1878 it was 9,287,26 and at the end of 1879 it was 20,151.27 Reference has already been made to the enormous fluctuation in membership during the early years of the Order,28 but apparently the situation did not change with national organisation. During the year October, 1879,

to October, 1880, although 18,104 members were initiated, 10,056 were suspended.29 The main cause for dissatisfaction was the neglect of the Order to take up any particular line of action. Naturally, financial response was slow.

In accordance with the call for the Reading convention, a resistance fund was created, requiring each local "to set apart

each month, a sum equal to five cents each for every member upon the books." 30 This resolution was adopted without opposition. When the question was raised as to what purpose the fund should be put, there was much difference of opinion. The committee appointed to draw up this part of the constitution took it for granted that the fund was to be used for strike purposes only, and reported a clause embodying that view.31 But a majority in the convention was opposed and believed that the fund should either not be touched at all, or put to such uses as co-operation,32 propaganda, or mutual benefits.38 It was finally decided, after two and a half days' discussion, that the resistance fund should remain intact for the space of two years from January 1, 1878. After that time it should be held for use and distribution under such laws and regulations as the General Assembly might then adopt.34

The struggle during those two years, which includes three regular sessions of the General Assembly, January, 1878 (Reading), January, 1879 (St. Louis), and September, 1879 (Chicago), centred around the disposition of the resistance fund. One element that was either preparing for, or in the midst of, a strike demanded that the fund be used for the support of strikes alone; another element, either not being in a position to start a strike,35 or having gone through a disastrous one, demanded that the fund be appropriated either for co-operation or educational purposes, or both. Then there was a sentiment in favour of using the money for mutual benefit purposes, coming mainly from coal communities where local assemblies were in the habit of providing burial expenses, sick and death benefits.

29 Proceedings, 1880, pp. 214, 215. 30 Constitution of the General Assembly, Art. VIII, p. 82, in General Assembly, Proceedings, 1878 (Reading).

31 Ibid., 11, 12, 14.

32 Ibid., 1879 (Chicago), 120, 130. 33 Ibid., 106.

84 Constitution of the General Assem.

bly, Art. VIII, p. 32, in General Assembly, Proceedings, 1878 (Reading).

35 Because such elements were located in an isolated community or composed of artisans of various trades in small towns. As we shall see later, this element was on the whole negligible during the succeeding period.