|
By 1924, known Reds were being driven from the union. In Toledo,
seven members of Lodge 105 who joined a Communist front organization
were convicted on charges of dual unionism. When Johnston rejected
their appeal, the Executive Board upheld the conviction. The
Convention ratified this action--thereby ruling in effect that
Communist association was a prohibited from of dual unionism. The
following year Johnston codified the ban on Communism in the IAM in
an official circular which stated that the purpose of the Communist
Party "is the destruction of the Trade Union Movement in
America."
As revenues and membership continued their downward slide
following the 1924 Convention, the factions opposed to Johnston
gained strength. He had successfully beaten back challenges for the
International Presidency in earlier elections. But the defeat of
Pete Conlon in 1916 along with the election of a General Executive
Board controlled by the anti-Johnston faction in 1922 indicated that
this support was slipping. By 1925, GVP J. F. Anderson, who unseated
Pete Conlon in 1916, decided to go for the top spot. Johnston now
seemed to be as vulnerable as O'Connell had been in 1911.
When running against O'Connell, Johnston advocated a
"progressive" platform and cooperation with the Socialist
Party. By the early 1920's he had become more conservative. As the
war-time gains melted under the heat of post-war employer resistance
Johnston swung back toward the Gompers and O'Connell philosophy o
craft trade unionism. This repelled some of his supporters. Others
were alienated when he endorsed the B & O Plan. Still others
were antagonized when he defined membership in Communist front
organizations as dual unionism.
In the campaign Anderson criticized Johnston for spending
union time and money on the Conference for Progressive Political
Action, for leaving Grand Lodge to attend political conventions and
for his travels to Mexico and Russia. He also exploited a nostalgic
yearning among old-time journeymen for the craft-conscious unionism
of earlier times. Anderson hit a nerve in campaign literature
demanding that "the leaders quit offering the IAM as an asylum
for all who have had machine shop soil on their hands. Let us
maintain it for real machinists . . . We have opened our arms to
everybody . . . we should give first consideration the
ourselves."
According to the March 1925 Journal the lines between
contending factions within the union were more sharply drawn than
ever before. The campaign took a venomous turn when The Daily
Worker denounced Johnston as a "tool of the bosses."
The official organ of the Communist Party called on
"militants" in the IAM to defeat Johnston and his slate.
In fairness it should be noted that the Party did not get
commitments it demanded from Anderson, namely to fight the B & O
Plan, reinstate the Toledo Seven, stop persecuting
"militants" (i.e. Communists" and to work for
amalgamation of the metal trades (i.e. one big union). According to
the long-time editor of the Journal, Fred Hewitt, the
Communists tried to elect Anderson "not because they loved him
more, but because they loved Johnston less." Throughout the
campaign mud was slung from all sides. Hewitt described it as
"the most vicious in our entire history" and reported
"all sorts of ridiculous, trumped-up charges hurled at
candidates for office . . . Locals were flooded with circular
letters of such a vile character that in many lodges they were
consigned to the wastebasket."
Johnston survived the challenge but just barely. He won by
only 945 votes out of more than 35,000 cast. Before the dust settled
Anderson circulated a paper titled "The Story of the Big
Steal" to all IAM lodges. He charged GST Emmet Davison with
election fraud, alleging the GST peeked at the tally sheets before
Anderson's observer arrived for the counting of the ballots.
Anderson claimed that when Davison saw Johnston's slate, including
himself, was behind, he contacted a number of friendly business
representatives and urged them to rush more Johnston votes to Grand
Lodge.
A thorough investigation by a panel that included Anderson
himself, demolished these accusations. Microscopic examination of
postmarks which Anderson claimed were May 13 (which would have been
after the official close of the balloting) proved they were actually
May 3. Moreover, it was found that if Davison had chosen to be
strictly technical he could have thrown out some 2,000 votes counted
for Anderson while disqualifying only 100 of Johnston's ballots on
the same ground.
Though Anderson's allegations did not hold up under scrutiny,
his supporters pressed noisily on. They initiated a recall petition
aimed at the entire Executive Council and set out to collect the
needed number of endorsements. Some were sent in the name of lodges
that had become defunct. Others were mailed without the knowledge of
officers and members of local lodges.
During the summer of 1925 IAM lodges seethed with discord and
dissension. Charges and counter-charges swarmed back and forth like
angry wasps. The rupture threatened to tear the organization apart.
Under constant pressure Johnston collapsed, felled by a stroke from
which he never fully recovered. Vice President Pete Conlon took over
as acting president.
Throughout the fall and winter Conlon and others moved to bind
the union's wounds. When it came time for the Executive Council to
choose a successor to the stricken IP, Conlon would appear to have
been the logical choice. he was popular and, as resident GVP, had
experience as Johnston's second in command at Grand Lodge. But with
the Ku Klux Klan at its height in 1926 his religion may have been
the factor that ruled him out.* In fact many years later
|