align="center">26,460 1899 28,994 1900 33,955

The Typographia, the only other American trade union which has developed its system of benefits as fully as the Cigar Makers, held its membership equally well during the depression of 1893-1897. The following table shows the membership of the Typographia from 1890 to 1900 by years:

The falling off in membership in 1894 and 1895 was due only to a very small extent to defections. The introduction of the linotype decreased the opportunity for employment in the trade, and the gradual shrinkage in the amount of German printing done in the United States due to the falling off in German immigration was accentuated by the depression.

While the two unions having the most highly developed beneficiary systems thus show an ability to retain members during periods of depression, it would be absurd to assume that this result is solely the effect of the establishment of the benefits. The Cigar Makers' Union in 1892 would undoubtedly have held its membership better than it did in 1872 even if it had developed no benefits. It is interesting in this connection to note that while in the depression of 1873-1878 the membership of the Typographical Union fell from 9799 to 4260, a loss of forty per cent., and the number of local unions decreased from 105 to 60, in the great depression of 1893-1897 the membership fell from 31,379 in 1894 to 28,096 in 1897, a loss of only ten per cent. Part even of this small loss was due to the withdrawal of the pressmen and bookbinders from the organization. It thus appears that the Typographical Union with a death benefit of sixty-five dollars and a home for the aged held its membership almost as well as the Cigar Makers with their much more highly developed beneficiary system. The change in the power of the Typographical Union to retain its membership was obviously due not so much to the establishment of beneficiary features as to the greater support which it gave its members in collective bargaining.

A comparison of the effect of the depression of 1893-1897 on the Typographical Union and on the Brotherhood of Carpenters makes the point still clearer. In 1893 when the depression set in the per capita expenditure of the Typographical Union for beneficiary features was $1.50, while that of the Carpenters was $1.40. The death benefit in the Carpenters' union was graded in such a way as to offer an additional incentive to retain membership. The two unions were, as far as the development of benefits is concerned, on about the same plane. As has been noted above, the Printers lost almost none of their members. The Carpenters lost from 1893 to 1895 over half of their membership. The following table shows the membership of the Carpenters by years from 1890 to 1900:

It is obvious that beneficiary features are only one of several factors in retaining membership.

How far benefits attract members into the unions it is difficult to estimate. In the Cigar Makers' Union, the membership in 1880 was 4440, while in 1881 it was 14,604, an increase of 228 per cent. The increase in 1880 over 1879 had, however, been very large. How far the rapid increase in 1881 was due to the development of the beneficiary system and how far to the natural growth consequent upon a period of industrial activity can only be conjectured. In much the same way the rapid increase in the membership of the Iron Molders, from 20,920 on January 1, 1896, to 41,189 on January 1, 1900, was certainly not due primarily to the introduction of the sick benefit into that union.^[7] The Boot and Shoe Workers introduced a system of sick benefits on January 1, 1900. At that time the union had a membership of 2910; at the close of the year the members numbered 10,618, and on January i, 1904, the number had increased to 69,290.^[8] This phenomenal increase was not due chiefly to the desire of the boot and shoe workers to insure themselves against illness, but to the policy of the union in unionizing shoe plants by a liberal granting of the use of the label.

The causes of an increase in membership are usually so intertwined that nothing can be proved statistically as to the effect of the introduction of beneficiary systems. The executive officers of the unions with beneficiary features are, however, a unit in declaring that the desire to secure the advantage of the benefits does attract members.^[9]

A second effect of the introduction of benefits is the strengthening of the national treasury. The ordinary trade unionist is not disposed to be liberal in voting supplies to his national officials for trade purposes. A union without beneficiary functions usually has small reserve funds or none at all. The effect of the introduction of beneficiary features is, in the first place, to increase the funds which may in an emergency be used for strike benefits, and more important, perhaps, the members, accustomed to paying a considerable sum weekly or monthly for benefits, are less reluctant to vote assessments adequate for carrying on vigorously the trade policies of the union.

Finally, certain trade-union benefits aid even more directly in accomplishing the trade purposes of the unions by tiding the members over illness or unemployment. An unemployed journeyman, or one impoverished by illness, unless supported by his union is tempted to work below the union rate. A starving man cannot higgle over the conditions of employment. The unions recognize that in time of strike they must support the strikers. The establishment of out-of-work benefits is urged on much the same ground.

While these considerations have been effectual in leading the great mass of American trade unionists to believe in the advisability of developing