The Great Steel Strike and its LessonsFoster, William Z.
History
The Great Steel Strike and its Lessons
Foster, William Z.
Steel Strike, U.S., 1919-1920; United States Steel Corporation
Then there was the Margolis case. I charge that to be a deliberate
frame-up against the steel strike. To prove the Steel Trust's contention
that the strike was a desperate revolutionary _coup_, engineered by men
seeking to destroy our civilization generally, somewhat more was
required than merely an eight year old booklet. The thing had to be
brought down to date and a far-reaching plot constructed. Hence the
Senate Committee dragged in Mr. Margolis and made him a scapegoat. Mr.
Margolis is a well known Anarchist attorney of Pittsburgh. He has the
reputation of having served ably as counsel for several trade-union
organizations, and has a wide circle of acquaintances among labor men.
The Senate Committee selected him as the man who had organized, with my
hearty support and co-operation, the real force behind the strike, the
I. W. W.'s, Anarchists and Bolshevists.
Now the fact is that Mr. Margolis had nothing whatever to do, officially
or unofficially, with the policies or management of either the
organizing campaign or the strike. He had no connection with the Strike
committee; nor did he ever even speak at a union meeting of steel
workers during the whole movement in question. If he wrote an article in
some radical paper, or spoke to a meeting of Russian workmen in
Youngstown, endorsing the strike, as is said, he did it purely as an
individual sympathizer acting upon his own initiative. Mr. Margolis
freely stated this on the stand, and every union official in Pittsburgh
knew it to be the case. So did the investigating Senators; but it the
better served their purpose to enlarge upon Mr. Margolis' activities, in
the hope that his radical reputation would lend color to the plot theory
which they were laboring so hard to establish, and which was so
advantageous to the Steel Trust.
In their final report the Senators continued their plot "evidence" and
insinuations, so persistently worked up all through their hearings. They
ignored highly important testimony tending to put the movement in its
right light as a strictly trade-union affair, and gave prominence to
everything to the contrary. They elevated unheard-of I. W. W.'s into
powerful strike leaders and surrounded the most ordinary comings and
goings with revolutionary mystery. Where they lacked facts they cast
suspicion, leaving a vicious daily press to draw its own conclusions.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account