Labor's Third-Party Question: Washington's Federation Chief Reports from Cleveland

The Conference for Progressive Political Action which recently held its convention at Cleveland has been the subject of much press comment and a great deal of misinformation concerning the same has been disseminated.

There was a great deal of speculation as to whether or not the conference might attempt to launch a third national independent party. However, so universal had been the success of the policy that had been pursued in conjunction with that of the American Federation of Labor that the decision was practically unanimous to continue the same policy, and to organize the forces thoroughly throughout the nation for continued progressive political action.

There has been much reactionary propaganda conducted in an effort to bait labor into launching a radical national third party which would separate it from the other progressive forces of the nation, and by thus dividing the progressive forces, stem the progressive tide and insure a reactionary victory in 1924. The labor representatives saw through the trickery and decided that unless a reactionary should be nominated for president by each of the old parties, no consideration would be given the question of launching a third independent party at this time — an eventuality that is hardly likely to occur in view of the fact that the conference itself, co-operating with the other progressives, will be able to materially influence, if not control, the nomination of either one or both of the old parties.

A short time ago a dispatch from Cleveland was printed on the front page of the Union Record at Seattle to the effect that a motion by Robert M. Buck, organizer, made before the Cleveland convention that the conference launch a national independent party, only lost by twelve votes.

This was the very opposite of the truth, and desiring to get correct and official information on the subject for the workers of Washington, the president of the State Federation of Labor, Wm. H. Johnston, chairman of the National Committee, wired the text of the dispatch and asked for a statement on the subject. His telegram, which settles the entire matter, reads in part:

"Only delegates attending the conference favoring a new party were with the farmer-labor party; one representative of the Foreign [language] federations, and other individuals who represented themselves only. All the delegates representing labor organizations, representing more than three million constituents, were opposed to an independent party at this time. Representatives of the socialist party were opposed at this time on the ground that such movement was premature."

In a subsequent letter received from Chairman Johnston, he said:

"The various farm organizations were well represented, and all of the delegates from the farm organizations, as well as from all of the railroad labor organizations, the typographical union, United Mine Workers of America, the Ladies' Garment Workers, the Amalgamated Clothing Workers and all of the representatives of State Federations of Labor with the exception of one, were opposed to a new party at this time.

"The Socialists read a prepared statement defining their opposition and opposing a new party on the ground that it was premature. I might say for the delegates from the Socialist party that they were most constructive and went along with the other organizations, realizing that if our movement is to amount to anything it must have the support of organized labor."