The penalties proposed in the bill are more severe than in the Australian law. It would punish by imprisonment for not more than ten years or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment, anyone who, while the United States is at war, (a) acts as an officer, or speaks as the representative, of such an association, (b) becomes or continues to be a member of, or contributes anything to, such an organization, or (c) publishes or distributes any publication whatever which defends the use of "physical force, violence of physical injury to person or property ... as a means of accomplishing any governmental, social, industrial or economic change." The last section of the bill would impose a fine of not more than $500 and imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, upon any landlord who permits on his premises, while the United States is at war, any meeting of such an association or any assemblage of persons who teach or advocate the use of physical force or violence, etc.[708]
So-called "criminal syndicalism" or sabotage laws have been enacted by the States of California,[709] Idaho,[710] Michigan,[711] Minnesota,[712] North Dakota,[713] Montana,[714] South Dakota,[715] and Nebraska.[716] In the State of Washington a "syndicalism bill," and in Arizona a "sabotage" law, were passed by the State legislatures in 1918 but were vetoed by the governor in each case.[717] The "criminal syndicalism" laws of Minnesota, Idaho and Montana are reprinted in Appendix X. The South Dakota statute is very similar to that of Minnesota. It defines criminal syndicalism "as any doctrine which teaches or advocates crime, sabotage (sabotage as used in this act means wilful and malicious damage or injury to the property of another), violence or other methods of terrorism, or the destruction of life or property, for the accomplishment of social, economic, industrial or political ends." It declares such advocacy to be a felony and punishes "by imprisonment in the state penitentiary for not less than one nor more than twenty-five years, or by a fine of not less than $1000 nor more than $10,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment ..." anyone who (1) advocates or "suggests" such doctrines, (2) publishes, circulates or has in his (or her) possession printed matter which advocates or "suggests" any doctrine that economic or political ends should be brought about by "crime, sabotage," etc., (3) belongs to or assembles with any group or organization which advocates or suggests such a doctrine, or (4) permits in any room or building owned or controlled by him (or her) any assemblage of this character. This statute is not limited to the duration of the war, which, indeed, is not mentioned. The North Dakota and Nebraska laws are less comprehensive and less drastic than the law of Minnesota. They are anti-sabotage laws within the scope of the definition of sabotage given above in the South Dakota act. Of all the "criminal syndicalism" statutes referred to in these pages that of South Dakota inflicts the heaviest penalties. The Minnesota law has recently come into the courts[718] and the State Supreme Court, in a decision rendered April 19, 1918, held it to be constitutional.[719]
The I. W. W. does not lack constructive ideas. The trouble has been always that those ideas have not been applied very extensively. They have remained merely a part of the Wobblies' varied collection of slogans and doctrines. As the delegates at the tenth convention realized, the first decade of I. W. W.-ism in America has been marked by excessive propaganda activity—critical and non-constructive, if not destructive ... and very little constructive activity.[720] This fact is strikingly illustrated by the very transient character of its membership. The "turnover" for the decade 1905-1915 has been exceedingly heavy—not only as measured by individual members but also by local unions. The most favorable report of the present strength of the I. W. W. is given in the World Almanac for 1917, where it is stated that the I. W. W. is composed of five hundred and thirty-five recruiting and industrial unions (not including five [foreign] "national administrations") and has a membership of 85,000.[721] This latter figure probably included delinquent members, and in any case is almost certainly much exaggerated. The same statement applies to the figure given for local unions. But even on such a generous assumption, the figures in columns 7 and 11 of Table A (Appendix IV) show, first, that there have been more than five times as many local unions chartered by the I. W. W. as are now in the organization, and second, that there have been at least twice and probably ten times as many membership cards issued during the past ten years as there are members in the organization today. But the real situation is much worse. Conservative estimates of the active membership in 1915 put it at 15,000, distributed among 150 local unions.[722] Not less than 2,000 locals were chartered and approximately 200,000 membership cards issued in the ten-year period 1905-1916. This indicates that only 7.5 per cent of the locals chartered and of the individuals enrolled in the I. W. W. have remained in the organization. This means an average annual turnover (of individual members and locals) for the past ten years of 133 per cent. As the table shows, the numerical strength of the I. W. W. in comparison with the whole number in labor organizations and the whole number gainfully employed is very insignificant. Its membership in 1910 was four-tenths of one per cent of all trade-unionists and two-hundredths of one per cent of all gainfully employed. In the textile industry where the I. W. W. is numerically strongest, the Detroit I. W. W. had enrolled in 1910 one per cent and the Chicago I. W. W. fourteen per cent of all trade-unionists.
It is not easy to say to what extent the I. W. W. is likely to develop its constructive features. In so far as more and more stress is placed on job organization, the I. W. W. is and will continue to become a more constructive organization. But it is not easy to credit the statement made at the tenth convention that the I. W. W. has "passed out of the propaganda stage." It will become more actively constructive, probably, but only its complete annihilation can put a period to its propaganda work.
FOOTNOTES:
[641] T. P. Esmond, letter dated July 17, 1914, Proceedings, 21st Convention, W. F. M. (1914), p. 26.
[642] Editorial, Solidarity, July 9, 1910, p. 2, col. 4.
[643] Proceedings, 20th W. F. M. Convention, p. 426.