Interview of William Seligman, For an Independent Trade Union Movement, Interviewed by Michael Furmanovsky
UCLA Library, Center for Oral History Research
University of California, Los Angeles

Contents

Table of Contents

1. Transcript

1.1. TAPE NUMBER: I, SIDE ONE October 17, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't we start with your earliest memories of your childhood? Now you were born in Poland. Is that right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In Poland.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And what town was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Slupca.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Small place?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A small place. It is in the state of Kalisz. That is merely the state. The city, it was on the border of Germany. That is a border town; that was up until 1915 the border town. From there, it changed.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were born in what year?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was born in 1900.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was then under Polish--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Under the Polish-Russian. That was Russia. The border of Germany, on the border of Germany.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was it a small place, in terms of the population?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, a small place.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In the tens of thousands or even smaller?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Small. It was about ten thousand. And the town was pretty-- Not large, but rather lively, because it was on the border town. All the border towns were sort of more traveled. More people came.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
More cosmopolitan.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
More cosmopolitan would be the right--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Tell me about your parents and what they did and that kind of thing.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My father was a hatter. He had a hat factory.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He had his own factory?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. In Poland. In the town. My mother came from Germany. She was a German. She had a fairly good education. She graduated high school. And she worked in a store as a bookkeeper for a while.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did she speak? Did she speak German and your father Yiddish?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
She spoke German.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And your father?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My father, Yiddish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So how did they communicate?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They communicated. She learned Yiddish after some years. But she never spoke Yiddish really, she spoke German. And then people speak now in America to me that Yiddish and German is about the same. It always invokes in me a particular laughter because they don't know. The German and the Yiddish are far apart. They are so far apart--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Not just in words, but in--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, in a word here and there, it may be similar. If a Jew speaks bad Jewish, he speaks good German. That's about the size.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So your parents were sort of fairly middle-class then.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. They were middle-class. They had a store and they--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you have any very early memories? Or do you want to start talking about maybe your education or any--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My early memories. Now, how early? I was eight years old, and I began to sing in a synagogue. I had a good voice. There were about eight boys older than I. In age, I was the youngest. I was started at seven years, and I began to sing in the synagogue at eight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now were your parents fairly religious then? Is that the reason why--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, they were sort of reformed religious.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, they were. They weren't orthodox at all?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. No orthodox.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you learn Hebrew? Did you go to Hebrew classes?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, that is a story in itself. No, I didn't go to the yeshiva. But I learned in a cheder. That is a school, a religious school. I went there in the afternoon at three o'clock. Because in the morning, I went to the Polish school, city school.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Where you spoke Polish.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Right. Rather, when I was a child, at home I spoke Polish, because all my friends were Polish. Or even the Jewish ones spoke Polish too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you have any non-Jewish Polish friends?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A great many.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were mixing outside the Jewish community?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes, greatly. Now, in connection, I want to tell you a story. I was in the Polish school. I was in the chorus. In the Polish school they had a chorus that were fairly good singers. We used to sing various songs. Then the bishop came to our town. A Polish town and the bishop comes to town, to a church, that is a very big celebration. And the school selected the chorus to sing "Ave Maria" to the bishop. Now that was quite a situation. The chorus leader, he began to select. And he was very careful. And he selected me to sing the solo. So I did not question the school, and I didn't question--I was very glad to--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of course he knew you were Jewish.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. He knew. I was selected, and we all got dressed in the yard of the church. There we met the bishop, and there we sang "Ave Maria." And I sang the solo. And the bishop came over to me and thanked me. Of course I bowed, and he gave me a blessing. I thought that he just didn't know, but he says, "You are an Israel, and I want to thank you," thank me for it. He went into the church, and we went along with him, the big church. There we sang part of the "Ave Maria" stave, and that was the end of the story.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So would you say that you experienced very little anti-Semitism growing up?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very little. But I experienced anti-Semitism more later in my years.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Not that much.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nothing to tell a story about. In town with my friends, at school, we had fights like all children do. I had two friends of mine. They were both Polish. And they were always defending me. Whenever I got into a fight with a gang, they would come out and they would-- They were older than I. But they would bravely start with their fists and then calm down. It wasn't--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you stayed in this school until you were a teenager or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you studied the whole range of subjects?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I studied Polish, the whole range of classwork.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you have any notion of going on to higher education? Or what was the situation at home in terms of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I had the notion of going to higher education. And I did, in part. I went to a high school. I did study. But they were the war years, very disturbing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you talk about some of the things you remember about the way in which your town was affected by war? Who was drafted and who wasn't.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. Before that, I would like to relate a story. I went to the Jewish school--that was a religious school--in the afternoon at three o'clock, from three to five o'clock. It was really a busy day, because you went in the morning to school, the afternoon to school, you came home, you had to juggle down the lessons. You were busy. I didn't like the teacher and I didn't like the school. And for a long time, I came home, and I used to tell my father, my mother. My father used to say the usual thing: "Of course you don't like school. I don't expect you to," and so on. That was the answer. So there was my mother, who understood much better. I tried to explain to her. But she was very strictly brought up in the German school, and she gave me that strictness of school life. I said, "I know all about it." I must say at that time there were very revolutionary expressions. Not amongst us, but amongst the older boys and girls. They were in sympathy-- In fact, most of them were members of the Polish Young Socialist Party. That influenced, of course, a great deal. I was influenced. Why should I go to this school? I don't like the teacher. I don't like what he's teaching. I'm not interested. Well, I wait and I organize, in my fashion, a group of boys. I finally found three boys that were with me, that we wanted to protest. All us children--I was eight years of age--we protested against the rabbi as teacher, in a way. I went out of the room and stood in the back. The window was open. So I had bags, paper bags of water, and I threw it through the window to hit him.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were you protesting against, would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Against his teaching, his beating us. He had a cane right near him. He would pull the cane right across, and sometimes he would hit another boy that he didn't mean to.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now he was teaching you what? Was he teaching you the Torah? Did he teach the Talmud?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Talmud, the Torah, prayers, the whole business.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, when you say that there were kids there who were sympathetic or members of the Young Socialist Polish organization, you're talking about Jews?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You're talking about late teenage boys or what sort of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Even at the age of nine they talked.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were exposed to politics at a very early age.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
At a very early age.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, why would they be members of this, as opposed to members of the Jewish socialist organizations? In other words, you're saying that they were members of the Polish Young Socialist--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now, to explain that, there were many Jews, Jewish boys, that were at school that were older. They formed a youth socialist party. Not a party, but--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
League.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Leagues. They were connected with the Polish [inaudible] that brought in the socialists. There wasn't any Jewish and Polish and so on: there was a socialist group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the Bund [General Jewish Labor Union in Lithuania, Poland, and Russia] then? Did that come in later or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. There were a few members of the Bund. There were some members of the Bund, but they were elderly boys, nineteen, twenty, twenty-five.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was going out of fashion by that time, was it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, it didn't go out of fashion. The Bund was very strong in cities where there were industrial workers. In our town, there were workers, sure. They were working in a shop, they were working-- But there weren't any factory workers. But there was still a Bund left over, so to speak, that came, and the Jewish group organized.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the difference, of course, I mean the Bund had a Jewish cultural component, and, of course, the Polish [Young] Socialist [Party] obviously wouldn't. So how do you explain that? Were these kids becoming more assimilated? Were they rejecting the Jewish cultural--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. They weren't rejecting. I say that, but I'll tell you the story right after. We had the fight with the school. But it worked out entirely different. We really had a fight with the teacher himself. You see, the teacher, when he was hit with the water, he fell down. He must have been excited or something, so he fell down. So two boys jumped on him. And I came into the room, and we had a fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We tried to hold him down so that he cannot fight us. So we threw everything. And we ran out of the school, we ran home. I came home. I lost my cap, the cap was lost somewheres. I came into the house. I didn't say anything until the evening, when the rabbi, with some citizens, came into the house. They pointed at me that I was the leader. I came out and said, "Yes, I was the leader. I organized that." My father and his people were stunned. But I said, "Fine. I organized because that is as much as I could take." And I told them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were eight?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was eight. But I spoke up, in my passion, in my way. I suggested, in that stundom that stunned my father, I suggested to my father, I said, "Don't make any noise now. But you call the teacher and us, me and the two other boys that participated, because nobody else did. We should go to the rabbi in the city, and we should have a session with the rabbi." So my father was stunned. He says, "Now you know what you said, boy?" I said, "Yes, I am absolutely interested to go to the rabbi to point out this teacher's action." They couldn't do anything else, but they just said, "Fine. We are going to do that." And that happened. We went to a hearing before the rabbi, the city rabbi.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now when you say the city rabbi, you mean in your city?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In our city. And we had a fight right there, because the rabbi began to tell us what we-- I said, "You didn't hear a word. You didn't hear yet from us what we have to say. You are telling us something that you don't know what you are talking about." And that was not right for me to tell the rabbi that he doesn't know what he's talking about. So he began to be very angry, and he told me off. I said, "That's enough. I won't hear any more." And I went out.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the outcome of all this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was mine. He couldn't do anything because I went away. I came home and I told my father exactly what happened. And I said, "No rabbi, nobody else, is going to tell me before he heard anything about it. I don't care if he disagrees with me, but he didn't hear even what I had to say a word." And that was-- My anger was-- Then I told him I will go to a school, but in our city there was a progressive school. They had pupils, but he had only pupils from parents that agreed. That was progressive. They taught you Yiddish, a fine Yiddish school. They not only teach you Yiddish, but Yiddish literature. The early Yiddish stories, even basically Yiddish literature.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who ran this school?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The school was run by a fellow, [Iche] Przetycki, who was a graduate, really, from a teacher school in the Polish school. But he knew how to teach. He was a very progressive--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And it was a secular school.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Secular school. There I fought until I went to that school. And that school I really loved. Not liked, but loved. I loved the literature, I loved the whole process of school. I liked it very much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You learned the whole Yiddish poetry, literature?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I learned a real Yiddish, a literary Yiddish, and I learned a great deal there about Yiddish literature that I followed later in my years. That was really a very fine-- In fact, my mother I even convinced that is the school, that that is the teacher. And she went there. She met him, she talked to him. And she was impressed too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the difference in the kind of kids who went to this school? Were they of a different social class or of the same social class, same background as--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, the social class was all middle-class kids, but from a modern type.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Those of a forward-looking, nonreligious--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Forward-looking, people that were forward- looking. They were not all-- There were some people that were very poor that the kids went there to school. In fact, there was a different-- What arrangements there were, financially, I don't know because I never knew. But they were there. But not many. Mostly were the middle-class Jews.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did they tend to come from parents who were more educated?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And who had connections with--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Quite.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there a political angle to this school too, would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no political angle. The kids were sons of Zionists and Poale Zionists, were mainly. And there were kids just from parents without any particular assignment of any political wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You mentioned the Zionists. Were you in any way influenced or did you have any particular attitude, your parents, towards Zionism and Labor Zionism?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, my mother was a Zionist. She was, in fact, the secretary of the Zionist [Organization for] Women. But I was not a Zionist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Nor was your father.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My father was very close with Zionists. He wasn't a member. My mother was. My father was not a member. But I was never a member of the Zionist movement. In fact, when I became-- When I was about eleven years of age, I was a member of the Boy Scouts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The Jewish? Polish?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Jewish Boy Scouts [Boy Scouts of Poland-Jewish Section]. But when we say the Jewish Boy Scouts, you must not make that as a Jewish--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No. It was just Boy Scouts, but you were Jewish.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Boy Scouts that were a Jewish organization. We were very close with the Polish Boy Scouts, we were very close with them. On hikes, on daily outs of exercise and so on, we were with them, quite close. There wasn't any animosity. There was a Jewish Boy Scouts and a Polish Boy Scouts. I was a boy scout until--I must tell you--I was expelled from the Boy Scouts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
[laughter] OK, why?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was a really funny and interesting thing. It was funny to me because I was expelled. I was a Boy Scout leader so I had twelve boys under me. So we had various assignments, exercise and so on. But I had also assignments to write something for the Boy Scouts. So at that time they were discussing Palestine. There were Zionists in the group, there were. And I spoke to them about the question of Palestine, whatever I knew and whatever I didn't know. So, however, I assigned them to write on Palestine, the type of state that they visualize. And I suggested that they should write, "A state where people work and they get paid but there is no money question of the state. There is money only to buy things." And that answer-- I'm sorry. I kept a book that I had all the answers from that Boy Scout--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, really.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Really, with me. But that is lost, like many other things.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It's so interesting that you say that they had to write something. Most people think of the Boy Scouts as out there camping. Only the Jewish scouts would have writing.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, the other scouts did too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They did too. Okay, maybe it's changed.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
So we exchanged that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of answers did you get that you remember?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were tremendous. They were so good that the fathers of the Boy Scouts-- They were teachers, they were-- And there was one fellow that was the leader of the Jewish school, the main school leader, and he called me to the committee of Boy Scouts. He made the issue, I didn't. He made the issue that I should withdraw. I should tell the boys to write a story so to withdraw this socialist-- So he gave me an idea that I am a socialist. Really.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Before that you had never thought--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Never thought. So I told them right there, now, "There will be no--" So he began to argue with me. He says, "You know, the next thing, we'll throw you out of the Boy Scouts." I said, "You can do anything that you are in power, but I will not go to the boys and I will not ask." In fact, I went to the boys and I told them that Winkler told us that we should withdraw. But I told them, "No, nobody will withdraw. We believe that it should be a new--" So it started a fight with the group, and they expelled, actually, about twenty-five.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really? On the grounds of what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On the ground that they refused to do anything that the fathers asked. We protested that they ruined the Boy Scouts. They did. And we formed a sports club of some thirty boys, because others came in. We formed a sports club, and we existed as a youth sports club.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were all what? Eleven, twelve, thirteen?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were, at that time, eleven and twelve and thirteen.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what do you see, looking back, as the significance of this event on you personally, of this expulsion?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I looked at it at that time, and still now, as a process of-- We developed and we got in it a sports club. The function of the sports club, we had socialists come in, young socialists. And we were influenced that we formed a socialist club. So they really forced us to go into the [Polish] Socialist Party [PPS]. Not they forced us, but it was a way. And very interesting. We got into the socialist club, and we were still what they call in Poland a Turnverein.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you explain that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A gymnastic organization. And we were. We formed later on, in years later--I have pictures of that--later on we formed really a very big club that we had a chorus and we had a Turnverein, which was a gymnastic--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of leadership? Was there a leadership? Was it you elected--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was. There was a leadership. There were older people that were interested in us to go ahead, and they also participated.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did the socialist party [PPS] itself get interested in you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Later on, yes. Yes. We existed already, at that time, perhaps a year or so. The socialist party sent us some lecturers. And we had connections with the socialist party, of course. I went to several conventions.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you start reading at this time a bit?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, quite a bit.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So your socialist education was underway by, I guess we're talking now about 1912, 1913, just before the war.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen fourteen.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So why don't we now get back to that question of the effect of the war. Or does that still come later?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, the war, it was on, the war between, at that time, between Germany and Russia--our town was only involved with the war-- It was a big station, an army station, and there was a big army that moved forward. They came, they stayed there a week, and off they went. The German army was always big in our town because near the city they built a camp, a very big camp for something like fifty thousand--maybe more--sixty thousand people. And they kept on delivering prisoners into that camp. They had Russian prisoners and French prisoners.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now who controlled your town?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Germans.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The Germans, immediately.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The war was only three days old and they came in. They didn't have any fight. The Russians moved away, and they came in and they took in Poland many, many cities. They didn't have Warsaw yet or Lódź
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But they didn't draft young people from your--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They weren't really interested in your town except--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
--for food and that sort of thing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, food was rationed. After a year, we didn't get much food, because the Germans were very much on the farmers' neck.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. But daily life, otherwise, was changed, or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Daily life was changed. It became very active. Social activities began to just blossom out.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How do you explain that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I really have no explanation with the exception of one, that people began social movements because anything else was prohibited. Not prohibited as much as was directed.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
For example, what sort of things were not permitted?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Germans would very restrict evenings.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. Curfews and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They had nine o'clock curfew. So people gathered around their nearest places that would have some kind of a hall, a little hall, a little place. They would gather, and naturally they would discuss. And they would not only discuss, they would have dances.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of things were being discussed? What was the impact of this event in terms of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This impact was, I'd say, the Poles. And I would say that I was just amongst the Poles just as much as any Pole. That we discussed the freedom of ours, the freedom of Poland. That began to be quite-- Not merely a discussion, but a turn to organization of military, quasi-military groups.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you belong to one?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I participated.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
These were illegal, I assume.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very illegal. And many went to the--at that time no concentration camp--but military camps. They were arrested. Youngsters.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you're saying that what happened was the war sparked this feeling of nationalism. And you didn't feel ill at ease talking about Polish nationalism? You felt yourself to be a Polish nationalist, despite being a Jew, despite everything else? If you were going to describe yourself, it would be Polish, socialist, nationalist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
As the war dragged on, you started getting rationing probably what, by 1915 or so?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We got rationing, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And then--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Then all restrictions. But somehow the youth, I would say, took it very, not lightly, but as a matter of fact that you cannot have this, that you only go out to have-- Let's say instead of buying a pound kolbasi, you bought a quarter of a pound.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But didn't things start to get a bit more serious as people started dying in large numbers and started seeing some of the--? Or was this all invisible to you in your town, as the war heated up?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The war heated up. You knew through the newspaper the great things that happened, the terrible things that happened. You saw more and more war prisoners in the camps. Some, you could speak [to].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
These were Russian war prisoners, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Let's say, the Russians. I learned Russian, because I didn't know Russian. I knew Polish very well, I knew German quite well. But Russian I didn't know. But I went and I learned Russian.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
From these prisoners. You would talk to them--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And not only the prisoners. I learned Russian so I could talk to the prisoners.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was permitted to talk to them? Or it was just a matter of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. It was permitted.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You could go to the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
To the camp, to the camp. We would meet some Russians.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And, no doubt, a lot of these Russians were socialists, and you started--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No? Just talked to them?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Just talked to them. By that time, they weren't. They became all sort of revolutionary socialists after 1917.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But before that there wasn't any--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. Not that we could see, not that we could hear.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Anything else you think of importance before we move on to the Russian Revolution, that you can think of? In terms of your past whole life? Your parents? No ideas, then, in terms of leaving Poland?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. I did not have any ideas of leaving Poland because I was very much there in the life, in all the life, social and other.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you never got into trouble yourself by belonging to this paramilitary youth organization?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I didn't. I was a very secret soldier.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you actually train in any way?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You did. But without weapons.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Without weapons. With sticks.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
With some idea in your mind of one day this becoming a Polish national struggle?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Or was there a feeling that this war was going to lead to Polish independence, ultimately?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was no question. There was no question. It was before the United States got into the war and before we knew about the Polish-American army that was formed in Chicago under General [Józef] Haller. Before that. We knew that we were going to have a Polish order under the leadership of [Józef] Pilsudski. That was the leader, and he was a socialist. He was, in a way, a socialist. He spoke to youth, to people, as a socialist. Speeches--and I heard many of them--they were always--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the other side of the Polish national--? What about the right wing? What about the Catholics?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were nationalists, but he didn't have much to do with them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. You were quite confident that your side was going to be the dominant one when the war ended?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, yes. We were young enough to believe that we can dominate the situation. [laughter]

1.2. TAPE NUMBER: I, SIDE TWO October 17, 1984

WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That is an outgrowth of the teacher Przetycki and the whole group, reformed, an organization that was a very large organization. The youth, the middle group, and the elder were in one organization. That was the city, Slupca, cultural club. And it was a cultural club.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Jewish?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Jewish cultural club.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was during the war?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
During the war. That was formed in 1916. It was in full bloom, in fact. It was sort of gathered before, but the full bloom came out in 1916. I have quite a few pictures of the group and so on, if you'd be interested. This had a dramatic group where we gave plays. Every month there was a play.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Plays of Jewish interest?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Jewish interest, Jewish life, Jewish drama.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And they would be in Yiddish or Polish?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They would be in Yiddish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You spoke Yiddish to each other?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yiddish only. Oh, you could speak Polish too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was your language of preference on a daily basis?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Polish. But the Yiddish was just as much. In that group, we also were Yiddish literates. That means you could only speak-- You spoke Yiddish badly, you were stoned, let's say. [laughter]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No slang, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
You had to speak Yiddish, literary Yiddish. In that sense, they were very fine. There was a Jewish, as I said, dramatic group. Then we had a chorus. It was a marvelous chorus. Then we had an orchestra, violin, flutes, and so on. An orchestra full. Then we had a Yiddish literary group that had lectures twice a week, but they had Yiddish literature classes every night of various kinds. That was a very active club.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you have any adult leadership or was it all youth?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Adult, mostly adult. Youth were too. In the youth there were youth leadership, but in the organization as a whole, there were adult.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Would you say that there was any particular reason why it would be in full bloom in 1916 as opposed to earlier? Was there something to do with the war with its blossoming?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I think it had something to do with the war too, because the war situation. So they got together and they worked and they had some form of [organization]. They formed the theater. In fact, our theater was a regular thing. In addition, people read about it. So that the great artists--they knew an artist (now these are professional)--came to our town, would be there a week or two, would also perform. But they would come to our club. They would help. It became an exchange. In fact, several [people] I met later in New York that became friends, as though we were life friends, and I only knew them because they came to our town and they were there performing and I was very close in the performance with them. So they were very good friends.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of course there was probably a much larger version of this in Warsaw, right, this cultural organization? There was an equivalent in Warsaw, I imagine, much bigger.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. In Warsaw--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There were all of the leading--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The leading people were there. But there was a leftover for our town, other towns, too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did you personally get involved in, in this organization? The literary side, the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The literary. I was in the chorus. In the chorus, I was quite a--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You want to mention some of the names of the people who were writing the music, writing the plays? Just for the record. What sort of artists were there? What sort of writers and what sort of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now, writers, there were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were the great writers of the day?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The great writers of the day were [Isaac Loeb] Peretz. Sholom Aleichem was quite big and great in our organization. But so were many other writers, even the young ones. And it so inspired that we, the youth, I and another fellow, wrote "The Turnverein Song." That means "The Gymnastic Song." We wrote the song; it was our song. But later, after about a year or maybe more, it was all over Poland when I came.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you still have it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. To Lódź they sang that song.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were the general sentiments of this song? What was the theme of the song?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The theme of the song was to exercise, how we exercise and how big we grow. [laughter]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Okay. Well, let's now move on then to the Russian Revolution and your first impressions, your first hearing about it. How did you first hear about it and what did you know about it at the time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, at the time I knew a great deal. We had already fights in the socialist party of a right and left wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was in the left wing. We went to a conference. The conference was held in L6dz. Vladimir Medem, that was the leader of the socialist right wing,important. He was a very great man, a leader. He worked quite a lot for the socialist movement. And I came and at that time I declared, with another few hundred young socialists, we declared that we are the left wing. They can do anything they want--that is, Vladimir Medem--anything they may decide, but we warned them not to decide to do anything drastic. If they want to expel us, we will not go so easily. We stay in the socialist party, but we have a right to be a left wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there a left-wing leader of similar station?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. There were quite a few. But Vladimir was the-- Vladimir Medem was the leader of the socialists. Strangely enough, his wife that is in America--I don't know whether she's still alive, but she was in America for years--she was in the left wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But these were mostly a Polish leadership. Were there any Jews in the top leadership positions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Jews?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. These were Jews. These were the Jewish section of the socialist party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Ah, I wanted you to make that clear. Okay.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I'm sorry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The national Jewish--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The national Jewish socialist [PPS--Jewish Section] party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was affiliated with the Polish Socialist Party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But separate.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was affiliation and that was communication, the right wing and also the left wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Okay. I wanted to continue with the local struggle.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The local struggle was, we were a left wing, a very small group. The right wing was much larger. So we fought as a small group, but we fought. As they used to feel it and used to speak quite often, that we are a small group, but we are big noise.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were the main issues of contention?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The issue of contention was the socialists, are they leading towards a revolution or are they--? Do they want to be socialists? That was our interpretation. Do they want to be socialists just to sit and be socialists but not go out and fight in the battle? They will be socialists all their lives, but when the battle will come, they'll disappear. That was our view. And it worked almost that way.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the relationship, then, of this Jewish socialist party to the larger socialist party, in terms of the nationalist question? In other words, what was the difference between the left and the right Jewish socialists on the question of Polish nationalism?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was a difference. Because the right-wing socialists--the Bund, the Bund as an organization, and the other right-wing socialists--they were with the Pilsudski government a hundred percent. Where we, the left-wing socialists, had always questions to Pilsudski, to his government, to his actions. Now let me give you something that-- When Pilsudski--sure, influenced by the right wing--with a fist very strongly turned against the Soviet Union at that time--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was when, now?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This was 1918.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The war coming to an end or at an end?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The war came to an end about the [time the] Polish war started.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Polish war started in 1917 with the Ukrainian War and then with the Russian [Revolution].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you explain just a little bit more? This was a war between Poland--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Poland and the Ukraine, the Ukraine that consisted of a number of countries. Lithuania, that was also under Ukraine. And Lithuanians, you didn't know what they are, but the Poles wanted Lithuania. The Poles began to suddenly-- They were just born. They too had an army that was organized before, in 1915, that is true, but they went out to fight without any training, without any experience.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was running the government of Poland in 1918 at the end of the war? Who was basically in charge on a day-to-day basis?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On a day-to-day basis, it was Pilsudski, the socialist leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The parliamentary.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Parliamentary.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He had a majority, did he?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He didn't have a majority. The church people had their party that was very strong. Then there was a right wing, extreme right wing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So he was ruling in coalition with their--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With coalition with some.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was in no sense a socialist--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The right wing did not support it. I mean the extreme didn't support it. They did support when others came in. When the American[-based] General Haller came into the government in Poland--and it was--then they elected the great pianist [Ignace Jan] Paderewski as president. He was the right wing of the rights; he was an extreme right-wing guy. He was a good pianist, and he should have stayed at the piano. In fact, at that time, I cannot forget the joke that we pulled on-- We went to a concert that Paderewski played in Warsaw and we stood up and applauded, "Stay at the piano, don't mix in politics." That was the great cry. [laughter]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was in, what, 1918 or '19?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, that was in 1919.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what were you doing at this time, before we get back into the public? What were you, personally, after the war was over? What were you? What was your status? Because you were now eighteen years old. Were you working, were you--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I was working at home. I was working in my father's store. And I was everything, but primarily I was out.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So, basically, politics was becoming your main life?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, but getting back to the Russian Revolution, which I skipped over.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. The Russian Revolution, I would say, primarily, had a terrific influence over Poland, over the Polish action. The right wing became very strong because they had also the socialists with them. And they were anticommunist, anti-Soviet. Poland had a very large left-wing socialist movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was in sympathy with the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They [the right] caused to say that they were the majority, a great majority. But the minority, the Polish Socialist Party, carried on a very heroic fight at that time. Both the Jewish and the Polish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They were fighting for what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were fighting against the war action of Poland. That was the primary fight. Then there were fights like, let's say, the railroad workers, the railroad union. The railroad union was dominated by the left-wing socialist party. They called a strike in time of war, and they were faced with guns. And they held out the strike until the government settled their strike on one point that they would agree. They went back to work. However, they challenged very often. Not with strikes, but they challenged the government. And there were other groups not as dominating as the railroad workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Other left-wing unions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Left-wing unions.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the revolution polarized, then, the socialist party, of course.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Tremendously.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Tremendously.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were very much on the left-wing side.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On the left with the socialists.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But there wasn't a communist party formed at that point? No. Okay.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was a left wing. The communist party came at the time-- And I left Poland.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, let's go back a little bit, then, to 1918, '19. You were still living with your parents?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were still working in the shop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In 1918 I didn't. I went to the army.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You went into the army. You were drafted?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You volunteered.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was not drafted, I volunteered.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you tell us about that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, there was no big affair. I mean, my parents felt very strongly about it, but to me, with my friends--there were many friends--that we decided to get into the army, that we can at least influence the soldiers, to some degree, not to get into these outlandish fights. We wanted a Poland. We wanted to fight for Poland, anybody that will attack us, but not to be an attacking force to be used, as we understood at that time. And it was correct.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the right wing was basically after a greater Poland, and the left wing--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A greater Poland to serve the interest that liberated us. Something to pay off.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So how did you go about using your position in the army to influence people? Just by talking to other soldiers?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Or did you have a little organization?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had a little organization. We had quite a group, groups within the companies. And I became an officeholder. I was in the army, I was there a few weeks, and I was assigned to an office.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, an office. So you never were in combat then. You never were sent to anywhere.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I was sent to places, but I was in the office, working. And also an army assignment; it wasn't a play office. But I was for a year in the army and I was wounded.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, you were wounded.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
But in the army and staying in Poland. We had an exercise thing that we learned to shoot. So somebody shot and shot my knee across. It wasn't bad. I mean, really. But I was sent home for six months. In six months I had to report to-- And that was the six months that I decided that I'm leaving Poland.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What caused that decision?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, that decision was the disillusionment with the work in Poland, with the left-wing socialists.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were you disillusioned about? The failure--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The failure of-- They took over more and more and more and more power, and more suppression to the Polish left-wing socialists.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There was suppression. What form did it take?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It took arrest. A dear friend of mine [Michael Ossowski] left at that time Poland. He was in the Polish army and he volunteered to go to the front. He was sent to the front. He didn't know. He was a left-wing socialist, he was a communist in the full sense of the word, and he went to the front. He went across the front to the Russians, to the Soviets, to tell them what not to do or what to do. And he came to the other side. His brother [Joseph]--that's an interesting thing--Ossowski's brother was in Germany an engineer. And he was a communist leader. He was arrested in Germany, and later, by exchange of prisoners, he was exchanged to the Russians. He wanted to. He came to Russia, and he became a captain of the artillery, because he knew something about, as an engineer, artillery. He became a leader of the Polish-Russian front. And his brother happens to come along on this front where he was. When he came, he found his brother. So he got into the Russian army and he worked with the Russians. I didn't know. I was told that he was shot. And only a few years later, when I was in America, he came to America as a Ford worker. Russian Ford people, they came in groups. And he was trained. He was an engineer. But what-- He was trained here in the Ford group with the Russians. He was here for a year and then he went back to Russia.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So there were people, basically, who were sort of going over to the Russian side. Polish leftists were going over.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. Quite a number.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But that was a very drastic step and you weren't going to do that.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I wasn't either in that mood or in that group. I would say that, primarily, in the group, the group was--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But still the decision to go to America must have had some-- There must have been some other factors too, in terms of you must have seen your personal prospects in--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I had two sisters and a brother that lived in Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. They had already gone when?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, they had gone to America years before.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. For economic reasons.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were already living here nicely, and they were Americanized maybe ninety percent or so. They wrote to us, and they wanted me to come. So I finally told them I am going. And I went just to Danzig, because I couldn't get the passport.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because of your what? Because they knew who you were?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My military--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, your military commitments, right. So you went to Danzig. Your parents approved of your going?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh! They were very happy that I suddenly decided that I'm willing to go. So we did not think through the whole thing very logically and very businesslike. But all right. You go away to Danzig. You are-- Help!
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. And then you hope for the best.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Then I went to Danzig. So I stayed in Danzig.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Until what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Until I realized that I cannot get a visa. I have to get it, I had to find out, from the Danzig American office. Then I went to Berlin. I found out there that they cannot get me a passport, they cannot get me anything. I have to go to Warsaw to get a passport in my town. Go to Warsaw, get a visa only by the American consul that is in Warsaw. That's the important thing. Well, that was quite a struggle, but I did. A friend of mine, a Polish fellow that was a captain in the Polish army-- But he was a very dear friend at school, and we grew up together. And he was a trusting guy. I felt that way. I spoke to my mother--my mother came to Danzig to see--and I spoke to my sister, too, that she should go and see him, because he is in our town and he is now wounded. He was very badly wounded. But he was functioning as a state representative. But they said, "What's the matter with you? You are a child or you--?" I said, "I want you to go to see him." So I wrote to him and then I sent them the letter that I sent to him. My sister went to see him. And instead of seeing the official and the man that will-- He was very much interested. He told her, "I'll see that the passport is issued. Now what will we do after that, I am not sure and I don't know. But let's get to work first on the passport." So he got me a passport. He took out, he wrote, he got everything. He got the passport and he had the gendarmerie-- It was a rule that the gendarme had to sign first the passport that you were clear. So he had that signed. He had all the things ready from the point of view of the home offices. Then he gave the passport to my sister: "You deliver it to your brother." My mother couldn't get over that. And I got the passport. I got the passport in Danzig. I began to go around again to get a visa. You have to get a visa. I had the American papers, I had all the papers that-- But the visa I couldn't get. I got again the same story that you have to go to Warsaw to get a visa. You cannot get in our offices. So that was dangerous.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Dangerous? Why?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Dangerous because the army has called me three times in my town. Not to take me, but to examine me, to find out. And here I am, not there. So to go to Warsaw, who knows? Well, I thought of it a great deal and decided that I'm going. That was not my wisdom, but it was my desire. And I went. Besides, I was a risky guy anyhow. I wrote home that I'm going to Warsaw. So my sister came to Danzig. For what reason, I really never could figure out. But she went with me on the train from Danzig to Warsaw. We went to Warsaw. We came to Warsaw. I had a cousin there. My cousin was at that time a member of parliament. He was a lawyer. He was an attorney, I mean, just like any other. But he was a socialist. He was voted by the socialist group, and he was a member of parliament. That was a very great thing. And he told me, "Look, young fellow, you stay in my house. I'll do all the things that have to be done." Because three offices had to sign my passport. He got them signed. But he says, "One place you'll have to go yourself, and that is at the ambassador." So I went, in the morning, to the ambassador's office there. There was a line that you could stay till four o'clock, and I stayed in line. My sister stayed right near me and watched me too. That's all she could do. I stayed in line, and I came near the fellow and he looked at my passport. He saw it. And he told me that "Before you come back here and you give me your passport, you have to go in here to the commandantura"--that is the commandant that is assigned to the embassy, a Polish commander--"and he has to stamp your passport. When it's stamped from there, I have no question, I will go through. Because you are a questionable guy, your age and your permission and so on." So I thanked him, and I went away. Yes, I told you that my knee was wounded. I still had a cane, and I walked with a cane. So I walked a little harder, and I walked into the office that I was told. In there, I met the soldier that sat near the desk. And I told him. So we went into the back room, and he gave the officer my passport, I suppose, and so on. The officer came out. When the officer came out, I saw a Haller officer from the Haller army. That is an American. He came over, he came on and saluted me. I saluted him very accurately and so on, and he shook hands very nicely. He says, "I see that you are asking to go to America." I said, "Yes, I'm going to Boston, Massachusetts." Then he began to discuss with me that he comes from Chicago and he was in Boston. And he began to discuss with me his American love and his great American thing. I told him that I was never there and I don't know. I know Poland. So he discussed with me Poland, where I was and what region and so on. We discussed the story, and he kept on dragging, actually. That was wearing on me. Finally he took the passport and signed it and he gave it to me. I thanked him. And he took my arm and he walked out with me from the office, he walked out and outside. We were saying outside good-bye perhaps ten times. He again wished me a happy journey and so on, and I finally walked away from him. That was a scene even in a comedy or in the movies they couldn't drag out any longer. I finally went away. My sister was standing [or] something there and she-- I just waved to her and I walked over to my-- And he looked at my passport, he saw the stamp and so on. He made a sign and he said, "This is tomorrow morning. At nine o'clock, you can come and get your passport." Then the next morning, I was there, nine o'clock. I can assure you, I was there before. I got my passport about ten o'clock, called, paid. It was ten dollars. I had the ten dollars, and I was glad. He didn't know how much. And I went away. I took my sister. We went over to my cousin. Later we finished it up in the upper house. We celebrated in the upper house, and we had a dinner. Together it was a great celebration.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That's quite a story.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you finally--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Finally went to Danzig. In Danzig, it was the early part of February.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Nineteen twenty?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen twenty. And the Danzig festival is on. There is a Danzig festival that isn't in Danzig, in Sopot. That is on the ocean. There the whole town is taking-- There is a big celebration that is a whole week celebration. That is the great Danzig--what do they call it--that's every year celebration. There is dancing in the street and there is [inaudible]. So friends of mine in Danzig-- I had quite a number, including a fellow that worked for Karlsbeck Shapiro. That is a Cunard line, and that is the line that I went to America with. So he was the boss. He arranged everything. He says, "We are going to the Sopot celebration. You are going with me. We'll get you on the boat." (Because the next morning I had to be on the boat to go to London.) "You don't worry. You send away everything today on the boat, and we'll be there." So I went to the-- I didn't want to rent a suit, so I took my coat with a scarf. I only took a cap that I wore differently and I took my shawl and I went to the affair. They were dressed up. But I came. The music played and so on, and I took a girl--just a girl from the street, really--and we danced. We danced so well that I got recognition. I got a basket of wine, I was called on and given a basket of wine for my dancing. So I invited the girl. My gang was there, and we drank that we forgot-- We didn't forget, but we started out late to run for the boat. And we came to the-- The only interesting part is that we had to go on a motorboat and go to the boat and then on the boat climb up on-- And that is because he was there, the fellow. Otherwise, they would have left me. We came on the boat, so they thought that who knows who is coming. So when I came, the captain was outside and greeted me. So when he greeted me, he came along and he introduced himself, Karlsbeck Shapiro, and introduced his gang. There were about six of us.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were like a celebrity on the boat.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were a celebrity on the boat. We were on the boat only two miles out, and then they went down and they took their boat, they left. So really, on the boat to London, I was a celebrity. And I came to London. The trip was very nice. In London, I'm supposed to stay three days until I go to Liverpool, and there I took a boat to America. So I had two uncles, my mother's brother and my father's brother. But my mother's brother was such a fellow that he says, "What do you mean you are going in three days? I'll go with you to Karlsbeck Shapiro. I'll go with you to the Cunard line, and we'll postpone. We'll find out when your boat is coming again." I looked at him. But we went there. We found out the next boat is coming in-- Four weeks will be the next Aquitania. I was supposed to go with the Aquitania to America. The Aquitania will be here in four weeks. So I looked at him. He says, "It's all right. It's fine." So I signed, he signed up, and I stayed four weeks in London. Had a great time.

1.3. TAPE NUMBER: II, SIDE ONE October 17, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you arrived in the United States, what, in the summer of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen twenty.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You had spent a good time in Liverpool with relatives, and you arrived in New York.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I arrived in New York and I went to Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You went straight to Boston with your sisters.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, my sister and my brother.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And after a while, no doubt, you found yourself a job. That must have been just at the time of the Boston police strike. Or you must have just missed it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I missed it; I came right after the strike. They were still talking about it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, I can believe it. Now, did you find yourself a job immediately?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I had to sort of look around. I found in the millinery a job. So I became a millinery worker. I became a millinery cutter.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You didn't have any experience of this at all?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And your English was what? A few words or a little bit better?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Just very few words. So I had to do two things. One, to learn English. I did. I went to school right away, night school. And I got the job. I worked in millinery. I had to learn, and it was fairly good, because I was four weeks in the millinery, a cutter. I wasn't much of a cutter. I came to the union, I joined the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Straight away?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Right away. Because to me, it wasn't just to become a worker; it was to get into the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the full name of this union? Was it the Hat, Cap, and--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Hat, Cap, Millinery International Union [Cloth Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers International Union],
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Maybe you should explain it a little because the word millinery is not used much nowadays.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The millinery were the women's hats; the hatters were the men's, felt hats and straw hats; and capmakers made uniform caps and caps to wear. I mean, there was quite an industry at that time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now this union was an independent union of the ILGWU [International Ladies Garment Workers Union].
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nothing to do with the ILG.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was a separate hat and millinery union,
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Separate international union of hat, cap, and millinery workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were most of the other workers that you worked with in your shop? Of what ethnic origin were they? Was it Jewish or was it--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Jewish, the majority were Jewish. There were some English. They came from England. No, there were no others here. English and Jewish. That was the combination; that was the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And the ownership was American, primarily, was it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The ownership were American Jews.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
American Jews. What? The old--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The old type.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
German?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
German.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
German and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And also Polish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who had come much earlier.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were here. They were already established and in business. Some of them were very rich, successful.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you joined the union immediately, even though--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I wasn't much of a worker, but I joined the union and I became a worker. I really don't know how, but I became a worker. And I worked and I was in the union about six months. The business agent, which was the leader of the union, told me, "Please, you accept the secretary of the union." So I said, "Now look, I cannot write any English." He said, "You don't have to write English. You can write Yiddish." I said, "But we have members that aren't Jews." "Don't worry. They understand as much as you do." He was quite a fellow. He was a very interesting man. I became very friendly, even though he was at that time a right-wing socialist and I was a communist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were a communist by this time. So when did you join the communist party? How long after you arrived?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was here about maybe two months, maybe three months.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, you joined the communist party because that was the natural thing to do as a left-wing socialist.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because of the split.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The split was taking place. Now, did you join the Communist Party [of America] or the Communist Labor Party or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Communist Labor Party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Any particular reason? Because that was the one that was there or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I met some friends. That was the reason. There were no ideological reasons.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Most Jews were in the other faction, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. But later on we--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Joined up.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Joined up. And some went away, some didn't join. It is interesting, perhaps, to say that I was friends with a fellow and his wife for years later. They were outside of the party. They were Socialist Labor Party members. That's what they had even when they were three members. I used to joke with them a great deal, but that's all. But I used to associate with them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you go to regular meetings, or what? Did you have a fraction? Or did you have--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Fraction.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No. Outside the union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Outside.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But it was a very small party.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did your sisters think of this and your politics? Were they appalled or were they also left-wing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, they were appalled. Plain, ordinary appalled. My brother used to argue with me, and I would always, of course, win the argument. I won because I used to give him that he is just a little businessman, small. I said, "You can be blown away tomorrow." I used to give him that standard.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you living with them or did you--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No, you found your own place.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I found my own place in the YMCA in Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Okay. So the Communist Party [of America] and the Communist Labor Party were primarily Jewish organizations at that time, with a few others.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. No, in Boston we had quite a group of Irish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you had quite a few working-class people? Because people tend to think of the communist parties, at least at that time, as not having that many working-class people. More the middle class and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, the group that I belonged to, our faction, were almost--with the exception of a few women--they were all workers. Maybe that's why I grew up with them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were your main union activities and what were your main party activities in these early years?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the early years, it was primarily union activities.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there any specific task that you had to do in union work? Was there a sort of attempt to expand?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were always attempts to expand. There was always organization. It was so much of it that when I was about maybe a year, or maybe a year and a half--I don't recall exactly--in the union, I was assigned to go out of town and be away for three months or two months. "We'll hold the job for you, and you go away for organizing work." I would go into a shop incognito and would ask for a job and would get a job sometimes and be inside and begin to organize.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who sent you out on this job? The union itself?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Nothing to do with the party, the Communist Party.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no, no, no. The union organized it. The union represented it. The union business agent in Boston, he would ask me--in fact, more than ask me--he would invite me to his house to have dinner, and I would have dinner and he would tell me quietly that I should--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. It was done. Work again and again. And it was several times I had to do it. So that after three years, I became a regular organizer on the staff.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did they know you were a communist instantly?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They did. And that was OK at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They would kid at me, they would do a lot of joking.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the Trade Union Educational League and its program? Did that have any impact?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On what?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In terms of what the party wanted you to do in the union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, at times it was a very agonizing, very fighting effect that you are going into a field where you are taking workers, let's say. You don't know who they are, what they are, and they can come-- They can be church people or-- "What is this?"
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
If you convince them on one thing, that they should become union fighters, union themselves, that would be the greatest thing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what sort of success did you have when you went into these new shops? Presumably where? We're in the Massachusetts area?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Massachusetts, all of Massachusetts. I had some very good successes, some failures. But the fact is that successes that I had were taken by the right wing or left wing. I mean, I didn't consider them as--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By union man, that they were very, very appreciated and really-- They used to build me up. For example, there was a shop in Boston that we had a fight with. Suddenly the shop disappeared, the shop wasn't anymore there. After a few weeks, we found that they're operating in-- Near Boston, there is a fishermen's town-Gloucester. Fishermen's town. There the shop is open. So right away, the union organizer said, "Bill, you go ahead. You be out there and you see what there is to be done." I went there and began to look around and began to organize. Organize, talk to somebody.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
While you were working in the shop or as an outsider?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was working in the shop, but they sent me away from the shop. They told me not to worry about--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. But did you join and did you try and get a job in this town?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. There they knew me.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the management knew you too.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The management was boss. The management, they knew me very well. I even, in fact, hid for a few days not to be on the street in Gloucester--Gloucester, Massachusetts. I didn't have much success. One day a fellow walked down the picket line and sort of looked at me and was very interested. He asked me, "What are you doing here?" I told him the story: "I'm organizing. See these people on the picket line?" We brought even a picket line from Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A picket line protesting about having a union? Or was there a strike?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Protesting, being on strike.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were actually on strike?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was a very artificial business. Five workers, four workers from Boston walked down with sticks.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. You created your own--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And he talked to me. I didn't know who the fellow was, but to ask him, I didn't feel that that is the time. But he began to talk and I walked with him quite a ways. Then I say, "Now, what are you? Are you a fellow from Gloucester, Massachusetts?" He says, "No, I'm from Philadelphia. I'm a doctor." He is a doctor of the Philadelphia baseball team, and they are in Gloucester, really, for-- So he's there taking care of them. And we began to talk. So later he told me that his father was in the miners union. He was quite a leader. And he became a doctor. So we got into a conversation so that he invited me for supper, I should come. I went out with him for dinner and we talked. And he wanted to sort of help me somewhere, try to-- He was interested enough to come on our picket line. He came and he wanted to see more about it. He didn't really-- He saw more about it and so on. So we got in that-- Whether he spoke to it or not, he told me to go to the fishermen's union and appeal to the fishermen's union. He said, "You don't know that there is a union?" I said, "No." He said, "The fishermen's union here is a strength of Gloucester." So I went to the fishermen's union. I didn't know that the union have gone to the practice, to the meetings, to the ritual of the labor union. That they had a previous union that existed, but they were AF of L [American Federation of. Labor]. But their ritual was still there, old ritual.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Ritual how to hold a meeting there, elegance, their speakers. Union previous was the-- I've forgotten now, but anyway the union. Anyhow, there they elected a committee. The fishermen's union was the first time in their history that they were appealed to. And they came along, they came across. They had a committee of about thirty people, and then they would go on the picket line. They came on the picket line; the street was just black. After a few days, to my surprise, to my terrible surprise, actually the picket line-- It wasn't that the picket line had to be protected. But the bosses, the employers, had three gangsters walking around outside, in hiding, and they wanted to have a fight. Our pickets ran away. That's all we could do. But then they had that group. They were standing, and they, the fishermen, started a fight with these gangsters. There was [such] a fight that the gangsters went to the hospital. So we stopped the picket line, the whole thing, and the bosses came down and they wanted to see me. I said, "See you? You have to see the fishermen with me." And I took three fishermen down with me. I was lost with them; they were all big guys. They didn't know what we were talking about. But we talked, and they said they would settle the dispute. In fact, I arranged a meeting to be held in Boston. We arranged a date. We arranged everything. And the fishermen can come along, all three. Or if two want to come along, they will. Because they are the victors. They are the victor. I went to the telephone, and that was [inaudible]. I called New York, [Max] Zaritsky, the president of the union, and I told Zaritsky the story. He says, "Oh, please." He says, "You don't have to kibitz me. You don't have to tell me this story. What do you mean? That's a real thing?" I said, "Look, Zaritsky, that is what happened. I was shocked too, but that is what actually happened."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was surprised that the fishermen had joined in.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. The whole thing surprised him to such a degree that he kept on asking me, he says, "What do you try? To kibitz me?"
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This is interesting, because I'm trying to imagine you. Here you are. You've only been in America for two years, you've got a very strong accent, your English is not so--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you come along and you come into a meeting of these fishermen with Boston traditions going back years and years and you get a good reception. I mean, there's no ethnic--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was no. There was no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I mean, I'm surprised they felt any solidarity with people who were so different from them.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was such a solidarity that I was shocked.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. I'm not surprised.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was completely-- And I had to convince my president. So he says, "Now, what did you do?" I said, "I arranged a meeting in Boston. It's going to be held in two days." "I'll be there." "Fine, I said. "My god, that is splendid!" And he came. Zaritsky came.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was the head of the union and he was also a party member, is that right? Was he a Communist Party member? No? He was a socialist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was a socialist. He was a right-wing socialist. But a highly intelligent man. You could sit down and discuss with him any question in the labor question. He was the man that really liked young people to grow up in the union to be the leaders. He didn't give a damn what you are. He says, "You'll be all right." He was a fine guy; I have not enough to praise him. Because when he came to Boston and I came in with my delegation, with my fisherman delegation, [laughter] he looked at me. He says, made with his hands, "My god! Splendid!" So we walked in, we had a meeting, we settled the strike. I mean, it was no question. They were licked. The fishermen's union got letters. Myself, I went there to several meetings of theirs and hailed them. They should be, they were-- And that was the great victory. After that victory, I was sent to the Midwest. There was a strike situation that they couldn't deal with it somehow.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This is about what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen twenty-four.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Okay. We haven't missed anything vital?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. It was all this similar work. I went out there for three weeks and so on. But then after that, I should say, I was assigned as a union organizer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Full-time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Full-time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That means you didn't work in the industry?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They were paying you a salary.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, they were paying my salary and I was a union organizer. Then they sent me to the Midwest. There was a strike going on for several months.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you remember where?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, in Wisconsin. They wanted to know what there is so they sent me out with that-- That was the idea. "You go out, you find out what is there. Why are they sitting? Why doesn't anything move?" That is an important hatter--they made stitched hats--and there was a strike. The president didn't know exactly what there was. So he says, "You go on out, and then come back and tell me so we know what there is."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the kind of people who were working in this factory would be of a different ethnic origin, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were. But the organizer was not. The organizer was a real Polish-American Jew. He was Warshawsky.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they sent you out, and you found out what was happening?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I found out. But in finding out, I did not speak [with] the owner, but the lawyer. There was a lawyer that was assigned, and he was the boss's. Because it is important perhaps to say that this same company, the Crawford and Knapp Hatters, had two factories, one in New York and one in Connecticut. So why the strike goes on there [in Wisconsin] and so on. They had agreements with them in New York and also Connecticut. That is why the president was so much interested. "Find out. Then," he says, "I'll be able to deal with it." So I went to see the lawyer. I called the lawyer and told him that I'm visiting from New York and I'm just visiting here the town and I would like to know what are the conditions involved. He invited me right away for lunch. I had lunch with him: I sat down--nobody knew about it--I sat down, and we talked. We talked for quite a while. I listened to a great deal what he had to say, and I told him that from our point of view, from the national point of view, we would sit down and talk to him. At any rate, he should arrange a conference. So he says, "I'll see. I'll let you know." Then I went back to the union and I asked the executive committee, the strike committee, "How do you stand? What is the situation?" Well, that's all I heard is the fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Fight between who and who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The fight between the employer and the foreman. That's baloney. That is not [inaudible] interested. What are the issues in the agreement? Wages, hours, conditions? The personal fights, you can make peace. He will make peace, anybody makes peace. What are the issues? I found out more that they got into a fight, that they were fighting yesterday, they were fighting today, they were fighting-- And they are prepared to fight with the elbows.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were these people, incidentally? Primarily, what sort of people were they in this shop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In this shop there were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were they of Scandinavian--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Scandinavian, quite a few. Quite a few were there Polish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But was this a new experience for you, dealing with people like this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. But the question was the organizer. He was the bitterest person [who felt] that he was done wrong. So I said, "What the hell. That doesn't matter. I was done wrong a hundred times. So what? Am I straightening out my life within? You are a union representative. You can only--" And I began to give him a lecture. He began to say, "Oh, who the hell is talking to me?" He looked at me as a kid. Well, I couldn't get anywheres with him. I did not and I didn't care. So I had a call that the conference can be arranged for two days later, three days later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A conference involving who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Conference with the union. So I have to select, that I should select a union committee that would come and not abuse. Because every time we had a conference here, a lot of abuse.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
From who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
From the union. The union organizer was not-- Not only not invited, but asked specifically that he shouldn't be there.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So there was a dispute between the union organizer and the rest of the union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And he wasn't invited to this. So you held a--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He wasn't invited, but I insisted upon that he'll come and he'll sit there and I'll see that he behaves. And if he won't behave, I'll ask him to leave. So they agreed to that, and we had a conference. At the conference, we found that practically on everything that we had a dispute, there could be an agreement. You had to compromise, of course. We settled the strike in the first meeting. They went back to work the next week, Monday. And the union organizer was told--I told them in the executive board, the executive board didn't know and I exposed them--that "It is not a question of your job. You are your job, but you are going to keep your job." And I had a conversation with Zaritsky. I called him three times. He told me, "Go ahead, go ahead." The strike was settled, but here I have to give you a note that was very important for the union as a whole. The strike was settled and I went to say good-bye to the boss, the owner of the place. He was still there. Because he didn't live there, he was only there for a few weeks. Knapp, of Crawford and Knapp. Knapp was there. So I sit down with Knapp, and we said good-bye. I mean, we only had a conversation. He said, "My god! I never went through that with the union I have in New York," and so on and always-- So the question of the millinery union, particularly in the capmakers and all the hatter unions, was four months' work and three months that's out of season, there is no work. So I sat down. I talked to him, not to his shop, but to the industry. "Look, what do we win and what are we losing? We are losing because for months our people are hungry." So we were talking privately. That wasn't the union question. It wasn't a question that the union demanded anything. But in this conversation, he says, "I have an idea, but not in an agreement. How do we do if I will agree, only agreement between you and me, that any kind of slack and they are out three weeks of work, we will pay every week a certain amount. We will pay 3 percent of the wages into a fund." And that was just a conversation where he conversed. Three percent and then he will pay them $12 a week when they are not working. "And we'll go on and we'll pay them after three weeks."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Three percent on top of their normal wages or from the wages?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. It was on top of the normal wages.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was agreeing, in effect, to a 3-percent wage increase.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A 3-percent wage increase, but that wage increase is in a bank. It doesn't belong to the union, it doesn't belong to us. That is prepared to give the workers when they are unemployed after two weeks.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Almost like a pension fund.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It's a pension. I said, "Fine." So we signed an unofficial letter. He had my signature and he had his handshake. I didn't know what to say. That was a victory on the side. I came back to New York and I told Zaritsky. He grabbed me. Really. He says, "That is an idea, because I am going to [inaudible] that I have prepared for our convention to propose. We are going to pay $15 a week. But first we have to get the funds." And this became the fund for the cap, hat, millinery workers, a fund before anybody. That was in 1926, to be exact, that was paid the first pension.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was the first of its kind in--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
First of its kind in America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now you had the agreement only with this company. How did it then extend? Or did it not?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It didn't extend.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just this one company.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Only after the convention. The convention adopted that. It makes a proposal to the manufacturers in the cap and millinery and the hatters--that was of the men--and it was granted.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was granted without any concession?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, there were certain [inaudible], but it was granted. It was the first unemployment fund that was in America in a union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did other unions become interested in it, the ILG [International Ladies Garment Workers Union] and the other?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The ILG became very much interested. And other unions too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But while we're talking about this particular union, we should just bring in-- To what extent was the union--in fact the entire industry, the hat industry--was it already beginning to decline? Or did that come later?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That came later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
People were still wearing hats, in other words.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Still wearing hats. The millinery was flourishing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There wasn't the beginning of that movement for shops to move out of New York now, to Boston and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was the beginning already.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This went on, and shops moved constantly.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was one of the major problems you had, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was the major problem.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was the major problem. Because they would then break up the union when they moved, right? OK, well, you mentioned 1926. Did you have any connection with the 1926 garment strike in New York? There wasn't an equivalent in Boston?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. There was a strike. I know the strike, and I used to meet organizers, people in the garment workers union, but I didn't--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did it have any impact though?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
None. Okay. And you were still in Boston. Is there any other major event before you went to Brookwood College that's important? What about your connections with the Communist Party now? Was there any change in that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It doesn't sound like it was that big a part of your life, at least compared with your trade union activities.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were very much a trade unionist first, a Communist Party member second?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, basically I was.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And when the Communist Party asked you to-- Did they ever ask you to do anything other than union organizing? Or were they satisfied with the fact that you were prepared to work with this AF of L union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I would say they were. Because they could take a little bit of the color and say the same. When I think back, I didn't have a terrific basis. I did some party work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you read the Daily Worker at the time and the party publication?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you distribute the Daily Worker ?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about Sacco and Vanzetti, seeing as you were in Boston?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Sacco-Vanzetti [case], I had a very important part. First of all, the Sacco-Vanzetti, when the case came to a height and the execution was already on-- They were taken once, and the postponement for, I think, about two weeks or so that was postponed. We in the AF of L-- I was a member of the AF of L through my union, I was a delegate to the city council. In the city council of Boston--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The Labor City Council?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Labor City Council had a very divided attention. But we, I say not only the congress, but there were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The left wing of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The left-wing socialists fought at that time. The Irish, that represented sort of the left wing of the socialists in Boston, they were very active. I was active too. And there were others. We elected a committee, a strike committee, and I was elected as the general secretary of the strike committee.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Strike committee for what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Strike committee to call a strike in Boston the day of the execution.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did the right wing of the labor council oppose this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Voted against it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Voted against it? Even though they were opposed to the execution?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were opposed to the execution, no strike. But we won.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was the leader of the council a left-winger or a right-winger?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was a right-winger, the leader of the council. But the members--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, the rank and file.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The rank and file were so overwhelmed that they voted-- It was voted for. The importance of the day-- In the morning, I went into the office like any other day. Right after me, there walked a detective and a detective after [Jacob] Miller, who was the organizer of the Boston hat and cap and millinery. And he arrested us both, arrested us as we asked several times, "What is the arrest?" "You're arrested under your name; I have to take you to the police station." They took us to the police station, and in the police station, again, they didn't have any [inaudible] in the cell. In the cell, we were interviewed. I was interviewed all day by other committees.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They wanted information on the nature of the general strike?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
"Why did you call a general strike?" I was elected by the council as the secretary of the general strike to protest against the execution. That was open. And that was a question. They looked [at] the hands, if I haven't gotten any powder on it. They were accusing us that we were preparing bombs with powder. I knew it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were they very ignorant about you and the union? Did they think you were all anarchists and all communists, or were they quite sophisticated, the police?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, they weren't, they weren't at all. "You could tell them anarchists--they're all the same." But in the cell, all day, we were squeezed with questions. I was. And, the meantime, the union organized, the union committee went to our lawyer. The lawyer must have done a lot of things that he couldn't get through, but he got through finally. He came in the evening. Late in the evening, he took us out. We were released. We asked him, "What is the situation?" "You are accused only to be withheld for the strike. You can be now released. The day's over, you didn't call a strike; the strike wasn't held."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Their aim was to keep you in jail if the strike happened.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They scared. The union could see when-- There was no strike.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, the day they arrested you, was that the day of the execution?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, the next day.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The next day was the day of the execution?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The next day was the day of the strike.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, the strike. Was that the day of the execution too?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. The day of the execution was a day later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the aim was to strike before the execution.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Not on the day of the execution.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were released, and the next morning we were again on the street with thousands of workers. There were hundreds of thousands of workers. We waited a whole day.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So was there a general strike or just a big meeting?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There wasn't a strike call.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was just a general walkout?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
General walkout. And they were walking. Only people that were interested, that were really. The day of the execution everybody was out. You didn't have to call a strike; there was a strike. There were the people from New York, the writers. Everybody was there. They were all in the picket line. There was a picket line, there was a mess. And they were executed, as you know, and the strike, this was over. Later there was an apology in the paper by the chief of police that I am recognized free, that they're sorry that they arrested me and so on. On the twenty-sixth page, under Campbell Soup or something like that, there was a little note. That was done, and after that, a few weeks later, I was called to come to New York. There is going to be a meeting. The national committee is going to meet, that I should be present.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Of the millinery union, hat and cap and millinery. I went to the hat and cap and millinery union, and there I was told that I can take two choices. One is to go to Brookwood [Labor] School for two years or go to England for a year in the labor school [Trade Union College] to learn about the Labour Party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They didn't inform you that they had selected-- They just said to you, "We've selected you. Take it or leave it."
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
"We selected you if you want to go."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you have the option of not going?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The option of not going. "But you have Brookwood and you have England."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That's Brookwood Labor School in Katonah.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In Katonah, New York.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That's in Westchester County.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I can go or I can go to England for a year to learn about the Labour Party in England, to study the Labour Party and that thing that we want in America in the future.

1.4. TAPE NUMBER:III, SIDE One November 1, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Last time we talked about your political radicalization in Poland and America during World War I and the early 1920s. Now I ask you to get back briefly to the impact of the Russian Revolution. While you were living in Slupca, were you already a left-wing socialist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. I was just a member of the socialist group, and we were in fact studying Marx. And there came the Russian Revolution. That was a great thing. We knew only through certain channels that came through. Maybe they were true, maybe they were just fantasies of some people. It could have been. But we knew about Lenin and Trotsky. These two leaders stood out and we read about them. There was a lot to read about them. There was every day in the newspaper. Every day something was published by the communists, by the few communists of Poland. Maybe there were many. I don't know. But they published a lot. We knew that there is a fight within Russia; they have taken over. There was also the question where our education came. When there were the left wing under Lenin and Trotsky leadership and the right-wing socialist, there was our education. There were pamphlets, leaflets, and other material that would come of the right wing, that they defended themselves and they attacked-- They did not defend themselves. They attacked the Russian Bolshevik group that comes in to destroy, to disturb us, and they had the Kerensky revolution. Kerensky was the leader. Kerensky was to us--I'm speaking to us, to the youth--he was all right, up to a point. But then we looked at him as the dressed-up young man who parades around with socialist phrases. He parades around with socialist phrases and talks a lot until it stops at the door of socialism. That is our interpretation, was at that time. And it was correct. We felt it was right. He defended, and then when the Russians began to discuss their loyalty to the war, he stated several times that the loyalty to the war is to our allies: we must stand with our allies and we must have the army. And the Bolsheviks stated very clearly that we must abandon: we are free, and we have to see ourselves to abandon the war, to keep the army demobilized. That was a fight. Then when the Kerensky group started to fight and fought with the Russian czarist armies together, particularly in the deep Russia on the-- When we read about it, we felt that is the group that should be destroyed. That was our own interpretation of the Polish socialists, that they were supporting that kind of reaction. Not that we knew, but we felt that the Russian Revolution is the thing that stopped the war, is the thing that is aimed to stop the war. That was our great belief, and, therefore, we were left. We became left the more the fight went on between the right and the left in Russia and in Poland. In Poland, the socialists, the old ones, they also argued on the basis of the Russian thing. Daily, hourly, they argued. And they came out clear. The Polish socialist also, the left wing, formed, not a communist party, but sort of supporting the Russian Revolution, the Russian Leninist group and Trotskyite.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Where were you when Lenin took power in late 1917? Were you living in Slupca?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And what about--because the war was still going on--what about those Russian prisoners of war that were in your area that you mentioned last time? Were they affected by this? And did they in turn affect you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, very much, very much. They were affected that they formed their committees in their companies, they formed their committees and ousted the officers. They didn't have anyone to oust, but they condemned their officers. Some officers, however, joined them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And this was going on right near where you were living.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Right near where I lived, within three miles, and we were in there.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were talking to them and so on.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Because we were in there as the friends, committees, you can call it anything. In fact, we were contacted to speak to the Russians before the revolution.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were contacted by whom?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By the Germans, if we can talk to them. But we tried.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Talk to them about what? To persuade--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Talk to them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just talk to them.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Come and talk to them because they were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I see. Just to keep them stable until--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Keep them stable, keep them with some contact. So we were youngsters, we were allowed in. We could contact them, we could speak to them. And we spoke to them. In fact, I learned Russian.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So during the revolution, you started talking about these things, naturally.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And they had an influence on you because they--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They had an influence; we had an influence on them. They had an influence, but the interesting part-- They ousted all their officers and raised the red flag.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In the camp itself?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the camp. Oh, they were arrested, some of them. Right in there to put it down.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the Germans must have been quite pleased. Because if the revolution were successful, then they would be out of the war, and the Germans wouldn't have to worry.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, the Germans did not-- The Germans waited for their officers to command them; they were under command. They allowed them for a few days. They must have allowed them for some days because later they suppressed that. But then the suppression did not work anymore any wonders because the Russians began to-- You see, in the Russians we found out, we learned something. That there were Russian revolutionists. And they raised the flag, and they were leading. They became, in fact, the chiefs, the officers. They were elected and they put on the bands.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was happening in the camp itself, in the prisoner of war camp.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the camp, in the war camp.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And the German army allowed this to happen?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Did not allow.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Eventually they suppressed it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They suppressed it. But they had red bands. It was a revolutionary situation. You could see that there is no peace. In fact, we were asked not to come in, to stay out, because there is a danger.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about daily life at this time, 1917? The war had been going on three years. Rationing must have been very severe, I imagine, and there must have been just an absence of much government before. It must have been very chaotic, would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, it wasn't chaotic at all. The Germans held their force. They had a great influence on the city government; the city government was elected with their blessing. So the mayor of the city and its council wouldn't step one thing out of what they were told. And, therefore, they kept the city pretty well. And the hunger-- They were rationing for a long time, and we got used to rationing. But the difference is not in a country. But within the country, the area was farm area, rich farm area. So the Germans had a lot to take out, but we had a lot to eat. When it came further where more was taken or-- I don't know. They were leaving the people really hungry, waiting for a potato. Potatoes were the big thing. And our area, for some reason or other, we had enough to feed--not enough to luxurious foods, but to feed enough--the people.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When the war was over and the Polish nationalist war began, what happened? Your town was now in the hands of whom?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Of Poland. The border was eliminated because the other side was also Poland. The province Posen, that was the province of Posen, Poznań. That was Poland, declared right away. The Germans had to leave.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the impact of the Polish war on your area?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Polish was not a war, it didn't start as a war. It started as a freedom, and that had a very good-- The area was just joined. There were mass meetings, mass celebrations. We were in a mass celebration--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
For Polish independence.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
--of Polish independence for several weeks.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the war, or at least the battles to regain more territory or to incorporate more territory, started later on.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And that was really what you were opposed to, you left-wing socialists, the attempt to incorporate more and more of this old traditional Poland into this new state.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Traditional Poland we were for.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were for. What were you against then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Against the outburst of going further.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Into what areas?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The first question was Vilna itself. Vilna was claimed by the Lithuanians and Vilna was claimed by the Polish. We, that is, the leaders, the Polish socialists, stated again and again that that is all right. Let's leave it to an international commission, selected, and let them decide. Because all territories were mixed. Let them decide. We should keep ours, but let them decide of whatever it is in question. There was another part in question that was also considered is it Poland, is it Lithuania, or some White Russia, I think. That was the area which isn't a very large-- It isn't a city like Vilna, but it is a city--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It's OK. You don't remember.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I can't remember now.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
[Józef] Pilsudski, the leader of the Polish Socialist Party, he was in favor of, generally speaking, of getting more and more territory.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Generally speaking, yes. But he made triple speeches. He spoke that he agrees that there should be a party, an internationalist party, that should make decisions. But then he was forced--or he was pushed--and he went haywire.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He became more and more nationalist. Did he also start becoming anti-Semitic or started to put pressure on the Jewish socialists?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. I say no because he, as a general, came to a Jewish socialist group and he spoke. And he spoke very fine. So I couldn't-- Maybe there were some situations that people know, but I cannot-- I don't think that he became a-- But he was enough of a conservative to go with the government and with [Ignace Jan] Paderewski. And Paderewski, really, as much as I appreciated him as a musician and as a piano player, he was no leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now let us go through again, what was it that so disillusioned you about the situation, then, in Poland in 1919, let's say, that contributed towards your leaving? Was it the feeling that the struggle for a socialist Poland was getting nowhere? Was that what it was?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I felt that we will not, cannot, do very much, and I felt sort of disillusioned. That does not mean that the socialist party was disillusioned or the socialist youth was disillusioned. But I had some very bad experiences during that time. To relate to you, [Joseph] Ossowski, that I mentioned before, that was an engineer in Berlin, he was taken out: "Go to Russia." He was not taken out and go to Russia; he was volunteered to go to Russia. He had a younger brother [Michael], much younger than he. He was about my age. I was very friendly with him in town. He was living in town. So he went in the army too, and he went away. Now I may have told you that story that he disappeared.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was sort of reported, like many others, that he was shot on the front. But he wasn't. He went to Russia and he got across the border. But the strange thing-- When he came to Russia--on the border of Poland, in Russia, of course--he got across. And he was arrested. He said he wants to see the commander in chief of this group. They finally went in and told the commander in chief, "We have a Polish soldier that came, and that is his name--Ossowski." So he says, "Bring him over, quick." So they brought him over. It was his brother. So the two brothers met there. According to him-- Then he came to America later, years later, and he came to the Ford automobile factory as a Russian engineer. He told me that story. And there he met his brother. His brother-- He got into the army. He was wounded. And then he got into school and he became an engineer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But in terms of your disillusionment, what were the factors? You were going to tell us some of the reasons why you as an individual--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
As an individual, I became disillusioned because more and more of the socialists that were fighting within the army were either arrested or sent out front and were shot.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was basically repression against the left wing of the socialist party within the army.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Those were people who were trying to recruit within the army to prevent--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Within the army to recruit, within the army that I worked.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Basically to subvert the army, in a way. Or not-- Maybe that's the wrong word.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
What?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Subvert the army. I mean, that was the point of the socialists entering into the army.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. They took on a job that they could never carry out. Subvert the army, agitation within the army.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because they didn't have the power compared to the Polish nationalists.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, not at all. I had arguments with nationalists, with friends of mine. They said, "Look. We appreciate you, we like you. You are, after all, from our town, and you are a fine fellow. But you get lost. When you will not change, you'll be lost. Either you'll be arrested or shot or whatever." And that constantly coming to me from friends as well as--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In retrospect, you were correct. Because, after all, what did happen to the left wing of the Polish Socialist Party later on?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Later on they were in the communist--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. But they never attained that much power, did they?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They never attained any power. They were, mostly, were crushed. Once I got out, and I was out and I was around, thinking about that-- And I must have spent most of the time thinking and talking to some friends in town.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you keep contact with some of your old friends when you came to America?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And what happened to some of them who stayed in Poland? Did some of them die in World War II? Or did some--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very many died in World War II. They were arrested. They were taken to the concentration camps and died there.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about before that? Did some of them get arrested in jail in Poland for their activities, for their communist activities or radical activities?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some of them got out of jail through various means. In fact, one fellow got out and he got away to France, to Paris. He was in France for years. In fact, he just died two years ago. He lived in France. He was a painter.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But in general-- Quite a few of them later went to the United States, of course.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. Quite a few came to the United States. Quite a few went to England.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Any of them go to the Soviet Union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some of them went to the Soviet Union. Yes, quite a few. But many of them remained--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Many of them remained in the kilns, in the Holocaust.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A friend of mine [Bolek SluŹwski]--a very dear friend of mine, with whom I corresponded till the last minute--he was an attorney in Poland, in Warsaw. And he was taken to a prison camp, he and his wife. His wife was a doctor.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were corresponding with him during the war? Or just in the years just before the war?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, the years before the war.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Up until--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Up until 1940.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And how long was it before you found out that he'd been killed? Not until the end of the war?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, till the end of the war.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you just didn't know what--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Didn't know, I didn't know anything. I found out, to be correct, through a brother of his that came to Israel. He wrote to me and he wrote to me about his brother.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There must have been a number of people now in Israel, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
OK, let's move now back to the union, your first union in the United States, some of the things we might have missed out. Now, you mentioned that there were a number of other communists who were within your local. I think that was Local 7 [of the Cloth Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers International Union], wasn't it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Local 7, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Would you say that you and the other communist group in the union, basically, were the leadership of Local 7?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You must have had to do battle occasionally with [Max] Zaritsky, even though you admired him so much. Because he was, after all, a right-wing socialist, and you were a left-wing local.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, but I must say that at some-- There wasn't a miracle neither in us or in Zaritsky. But Zaritsky knew how to deal with us. He always dealt on union question with the union situation in Boston. He never raised any other question and he kept us down to the line of unions. "You can go out and go to any church you want to"--that is his language--"as long as the union is kept up." And if you keep it up, that's all he was interested.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But, nevertheless, there must have been some battles within the union. Now I've noticed the name Gladys Schechter as a leading communist in the union. What do you remember about her and some of the fights between her and the right wing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was very little-- Actually, the right wing didn't like her, and she didn't like them very much. They didn't get along very much. But they met on union questions and answered them. Gladys Schechter was hired by Zaritsky. When he took in Gladys Schechter as the leader, he didn't have a union of women. Because she went in to particular organize the young girls. Young girls were the finishers in the millinery trade, and there were a large group. He had an organizer in the youth for years. But at the end of the year, either she had seven members or five. That may sound like a joke, but that was an actual truth. And he came to a decision either to give it up or go into an organization. So at that time, Gladys Schechter came out of Brookwood [Labor School].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now tell me a bit about her, because you knew her. She was quite a charismatic figure, wasn't she?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I knew her after she was out of Brookwood; I didn't know her at Brookwood. I knew her then at Brookwood because she used to come very often to the school. In fact, [it was] there where we became very close friends, at Brookwood.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was she a very inspiring speaker?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very inspiring speaker.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, right. Because the girls were so strong followers of her. They would do anything.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, she had thousands of girls just at her--I mean, not at her toes, not at her hands, but she led them. She was a fine leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Funny, because I don't see any other references to her. I'm just wondering what became of her later on. She never was a major Communist Party figure.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, she was expelled as a Lovestoneite. She was expelled as a Lovestoneite when she was still in the union, when she was still a leader in the union. Later the union went down, was almost gone. Then when she left the union, she left actually for home. And she was active in other organizations, she was active in various organizations. She was a very good friend of Ben Gold of the furriers union [Fur Workers of America].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, yes. The leading communist.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
But when she was expelled from the party when she was a Lovestoneite, Ben Gold had to give her up. Ben Gold closed the door and did not speak to her, like to many others. That was the style, too, in the Communist Party. That was really ridiculous, but there was a style.

1.5. TAPE NUMBER: III, SIDE TWO November 1, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Getting back now to Brookwood, which we discussed the last time. You were given the option of going to England or Brookwood, and you chose to go to Brookwood in the fall of 1927. Why don't you give us your direct initial impressions of Brookwood? Because, after all, the environment there in Katonah, New York, was a very idyllic environment compared with the hard work in the shop or running around from shop to shop. So it was a very big change for you to have this leisure time to read and to be exposed to these intellectual types. Why don't you begin there?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was quite a change. When I came to Brookwood with many other students, first, we were welcomed at the station there, the railroad station, by a faculty member with a car. He came to take us. The day was Saturday, and Sunday morning we came all to school, the new students. The old students were already there. I could even today hardly express the joy of coming into a beautiful place, a countrylike. It looked terrific.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You'd never seen anything quite like it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I never have seen anything like it, and I was never near such an atmosphere. Then when you went into the halls--you visited all the halls--in the dining room, everywhere was something that you really felt great to experience. And that Sunday evening there is a banquet. It isn't just a dinner served, but the whole faculty was there at the dinner. The whole faculty, I'm speaking of about ten members. And A. [Abraham] J. Muste, the head of the school, it is hard to explain and have enough words for his idealistic approach [to] the students, [to] all students.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, why don't you try.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were, of course, other faculty members just as important, but A. J. Muste had the responsibility of being the leader. And he was an unusual leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In what ways?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In more than one way. He tried to, and he succeeded in most, to give the idea that this is a school where we have everybody that wants to learn, that is interested in joining the movement, that has the interest. We have these people. And everyone went through in his own way something that he wanted to reach, the point of going to learn. Not everybody is going to be the great student or the great man in the labor movement. No. But they all will learn something about the labor movement history, the labor movement tomorrow. And it will be of some use that he gave it in a hundred different ways to the students. Now this was A. J. Muste. [tape recorder off] Then came Dr. [Arthur] W. Calhoun.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was he? What were his credentials? What was his background?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
His background was that he was a teacher in history, a very fine teacher. But he came to Brookwood years before I came there. He was there. He was a fine human being, a teacher that you don't find often, that can devote himself to students that are not students, really, at their youth, at their very early days, out of school, into school. But they were away, most of them were away in the mines, in the steel industry, in the railroad, in many industries, in the automobile industry that wasn't organized yet, but they had groups.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So he could relate to these working-class youngsters from the trade union movement, from industry.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. He could relate to them as being part. And here is seen the love of, I would say, almost every student.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just as Muste did as well.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Just as Muste did.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about your personal interactions with these men and with other people, some of the other people? Who did you gravitate towards? Which particular faculty members did you personally--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I had Dave [David J.] Saposs.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you tell us something about him and why you particularly moved towards him.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was the trade union instructor. He was teaching trade union history. And we just bathed in it; we drowned in it very often.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You didn't know much trade union history, naturally.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. None at all outside of the Boston history of the carpenters and this and that. I didn't know history of the Knights of Labor, the whole history. When he gave history, he made it so alive. And he would drive us--he was a driver--he would drive us to read this part. He would always give it as a joke, in a Dave Saposs joke: "This is the assignment. But if you are interested, you can read it further." That was his closing remark at the assignment of reading.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was his background again? Was he Jewish?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was Jewish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was Jewish from the Midwest.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
From the Midwest, from Wisconsin.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now was he part of that whole Wisconsin school, the Perlman school?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. He was a very close friend of Selig Perlman's, because Perlman came to Brookwood several times. They were very close. And he knew other people. He was quite known. He was lecturing in New York schools and in all colleges.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were his politics at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
As far as I know, he was a Democrat. The Roosevelt days, he became very active.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But was he, generally speaking, satisfied with the leadership of the AFL [American Federation of Labor] in the mid-1920s?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. No, not at all. But he was very much accepted. He was respected, maybe as a historian. Even by people like the fellow that came from the AF of L that was--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Woll?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Woll, Matthew Woll. Matthew Woll was not very friendly to W. Calhoun, not at all. But to Dave he was respectful. Maybe not respectful as much as he appreciated his work. His great work, the trade union movements of France [The Labor Movement in Post-War France]. Every year, [not only] prior to my coming to Brookwoood, but after I was in Brookwood, he went every year. The night when we would graduate--when we would not graduate, but the school would close--he would that night have already passage to go to France. He studied, he wrote about the French labor movement, and he would be there until school opened. Usually school opened a week before he came back. So he was a very active--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did you learn from him? Obviously the revelation of America's labor history was one thing. But what did he instill in you that was so important in his lectures? What was the basic message of what he was saying?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The basic message was that we can do, that when we approach and we go into-- He did not select us as we should become the leaders of the American labor movement. That was his great teaching. But to be active, to be part, to be a part of a shop chairman, to be a part of a leadership, the highest in the labor movement, and to stand on our feet and to be able to speak against opposition. He didn't sell us anytime that we will walk in and therefore we will be welcome and "Here comes the Brookwood student. Let's give him a job. Let's give him something, give him activities." None of this stuff. He told us that you're going to suffer, you're going to fight for it. But that is what you have to have, the fight. In that respect, Dave really was a leader. He wasn't just a fellow that is a good teacher that lectures, but he more than lectured.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you became a friend. He was a friend too.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A very close friend. In fact, to tell you, now when I came back to Boston and I had to make a major decision whether I should stay within the millinery, hat and cap and suffer with many hundreds but try to overcome or I should get interested in-- The big industry was the shoe industry in Boston. I wrote to Dave, and I asked him these questions that I am confronted and so on. He wrote me back right away: "I'm coming to Boston Friday." He came to Boston Friday, and he was there Saturday and Sunday. He stayed with me and we argued--we didn't argue, but we discussed--the question all the time. He was, "Go in. If you can go in as a cutter, anything, go in and try. You are the guy."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the fact that you were, at this time, a member of the Communist Party, and so were a lot of the other students there? What were his feelings about that, if any? He knew, yes?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, my god. Everyone knew. He knew, and he knew even my differences with the Communist Party, because he used to discuss that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This didn't affect him?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. No, he could discuss that from a theoretical point of view, always broader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But he was in broad opposition to the whole narrow craft unionism of the AFL?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In favor of what, industrial unions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. He was very much in favor of industrial unions.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But that was generally true of all of the faculty.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
All faculty. I don't know of any that were even-- We had one young teacher--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I have some of the names here. Helen Norton.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Helen Norton was an English teacher. She was a fine-- She's still one of the finest human beings. She writes to me, I write to her.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And Mark Starr was a major figure.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Mark Starr really was a student when I was a student. He was a student from England. He came from the miners union, and he was in England, in the miners union, quite an instructor.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now what I'm getting at is the basic message that came through from all these teachers was that the craft unionism of the AFL was out of date, was conservative, was narrow.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, meanwhile, the school was being subsidized by the AF of L to some degree. And Matthew Woll came in 1928 and began his opposition, didn't he? He condemned the school, didn't he?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, he didn't condemn right away. He was a member for quite a few years of the leadership. But he constantly criticized that we took an anti-AF of L position. He criticized that very much. But he was the conservative. Now he and-- It was a good--not a question of story--but there is the opposition. Phil Ziegler and Matthew Woll were in constant fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you tell us who Ziegler was?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Phil [E.] Ziegler was from the railroad union [Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees]. He was also a conservative, so to speak, member of the conservative group with the railroad union. He was a member of the board.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of Brookwood.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Of Brookwood. And he was one of the fine members of the board. When I came there, I met him. He was really very great as a person. He was an understanding individual and really very fine for education. And he accepted. Left-wing, right-wing, wings without any particular, he accepted. It seemed that he accepted all. They were all people, and he talked to them the same way.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did he conflict with Matthew Woll about?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With Matthew Woll [Ziegler] was [in] constant conflict on the adherence to the AF of L policy. When it came to policy, he would declare--and, you know, he would always make a declaration--first his viewpoint, his policy, and participated.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What do you think Matthew Woll wanted Brookwood to be? Just a sort of conveyer belt for AFL bureaucrats?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Yes, he would like to-- Not that he wanted-- But he would like to have the power to select each one of the members that go to Brookwood. Anybody that has any different ideas, cut them out.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the role of Spencer Miller [Jr.], who was the educational director of the AF of L, in this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, Spencer Miller was later the head of Brookwood when A. J. Muste left. When he came into Brookwood, that was sort of a letdown. I came to Brookwood then as a visitor, and I met Spencer Miller and I spent with him some time. He was a fairly good man, but he let down Brookwood as a leader in the labor education. He didn't realize that Brookwood needed a leader like Muste, something like Muste's energy.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
An idealism.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Idealism in pushing forward, pushing against maybe some dead situations, but pushing hard.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Let's go back to some of the things you learned, some of the courses you took. Obviously trade union history was very important to you. What were the other most important topics? Because I know they taught you English, public speaking--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The English was to me great. In English there was a small group, students that were more that were born here, that came from the miners union and that came from the steel workers union and the automobile workers too. That we were in a group that we used to have special class with Helen Norton.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
For those people whose English was not fluent or what? Who was in this class? What was the purpose of the English class?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was part to help us out so that we can go along with the general class. Sometimes it was really very difficult.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How many other immigrants were there like you? Particularly Jewish immigrants. Were there any others?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A few others?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Eva Shafran.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Eva Shafran was there, who later became a Communist Party member.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
She was a Communist Party member there when she came. Now she was a communist that, really, she could work with noncommunists. When I say that, I am referring to communists who couldn't, who actually couldn't. They would burst out and they would condemn you after five minutes' relation. With Eva Shafran, you could never get that. Eva was a very fine human being in an educational sense.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
She was a fellow student of yours at this time, 1927 to '28?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Yes, for one year she was a fellow student, '27-'28.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you took the English class. This is actually to learn what? Speaking or literature or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Speaking.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
After all, you'd only been in the country seven years. So you still had a few things to learn.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I had quite a few things to learn. Also, there were members who wanted to get into the journalistic world that were also in that class.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
We'll come on to the students in a minute. That's very important. And the sort of economics you learned, an industrial economics.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Functions of unions, wages and safety, the general sort of things that a trade union--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The general classes. Every class, including the public speaking class that was under the leadership of Jasper Deeter. Very artistic, I should say, and primary good education and very hard. That was done marvelous, the education in public speaking, because he did experimental work with us. He did not just teach a class in public speaking, but he taught us. For example, he would give you a three-minute speech that you should make, I should make. He would keep us outside, we opened the door, come in and speak. We thought in the beginning that he is nuts. Why does he do that? Why can't I get up in class and make the speech? But he didn't want that. He wanted us to go through a certain-- As we come into a local union, that we are not allowed to speak, that we don't want to. Even if they already officially allowed us, "Aw, who in the hell is that? Why should we listen?"
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How to confront--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Confront. Come in, confront. Give them a speech in three minutes, but shoot. That type of speaking he would teach us. He was a master.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So everything was geared towards trade union work eventually, no matter what--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Eventually towards leadership.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Towards leadership in the trade union. Now tell me more about the daily life in Brookwood. You mentioned before when you first arrived how beautiful it was there.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did the daily life consist of?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The daily life was very intense. As we came along, as we learned and as we went to classes-- And after classes we had other things we-- For example, we thought, "My god, here's going to be a paradise. We'll have time." But it came out that the classes were through-- When we had to go, we were in a rush. Then the evenings we had to study. So dinner-- Oh, let me start better with the morning. We get up at six o'clock because some of us wanted to have a walk in this beautiful-- So we were something like maybe twelve or fourteen people. Or maybe sixteen people came on. But there were some that were steady, rain or snow, whatever.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were one of those.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was one of those. We got up in the morning at six o'clock. Then we made up that we should meet all to go for a walk at seven o'clock because from six till seven we have a right to get up, but study. So we studied that hour for classes, for class in the morning, for the later classes. At seven o'clock, we were down at the walk.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You're talking seven o'clock in the morning or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the morning, yes. Seven o'clock we took a walk. We took a walk, we came back about quarter of eight or eight o'clock, we came in to the breakfast room, and there was breakfast. Beautiful breakfast. Ham, bacon, anything you wanted. Eggs, bread, coffee, as much as you could--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was this something new to you, to have an abundance of food?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. Food was before. The students came from every dorm. We sat down, and we had stories to tell. Walk, this-- We had a hundred stories. Some already looked at the newspaper, so they had some-- Well, people were loud, were speaking and eating.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was the social interaction as important as the classes, ultimately?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. The social group was, in that, amongst our students and only amongst our students. We didn't have any connection with the outside world--that is, daily. After breakfast we just stretched out and we went out and with the books right to class, because we started class at nine o'clock. Nine o'clock we had to be in the classroom and it started. There was no waiting time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And what sort of a group did you gravitate towards socially and politically, if any? I'm talking now about the other students. Could you name some of the other students who later attained some influence in the union movement?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who, for example? You mentioned before Vera Weisbord. But was that later on? Vera Bush.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was later on. Yes, she came, really, the next year, the second year when I was--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
OK, well, you could--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, but I had met the miners group. [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The miners group was a very important group, weren't they? Some of them were followers of John Brophy, who was a member of the board [of trustees of Brookwood].
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Most of them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was the head of a movement to basically reform the mine workers union [United Mine Workers of America]
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. There were a number of people, but he and the other [Powers Hapgood] came in really as a lawyer in the miners union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yeah, I think I know who you mean, that later became big in the CIO [Congress of Industrial Organizations]. We'll come up with it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But, now, what was your reaction to this uproar? I'm thinking, now, here you are, your main experience is amongst--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Needle trades.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Needle trades, many of whom were Jewish, although not all. And now you're confronted with a completely different type of--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Entirely.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
These miners from Pennsylvania and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Illinois.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
--Illinois, and some of them from the South too.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some southern members from the textile union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did you relate to these people from such a different background?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Excellent. Good is not the word, but excellent would be more a description. I had in my group, that is, in my five-room bungalow, I had a textile worker from the South, a very fine fellow. He had all the prejudices that one can accumulate, he had it all accumulated. He would come to me and he would cry actually. He says, "I cannot sit near a black man." And there were five black students. But he couldn't. So I would sit down with him, and I would talk to him. I would talk to him a lot. Then he would hang on, he would go with me. And finally he changed. Not because I talked to him. The faculty members had an influence. Shall I tell you now, the early part of Brookwood were many students like him. There were quite a few that would protest against the black students. So the faculty took a fine position. That position, I didn't expect that. They said, "Fine. Now you I order to serve in the kitchen. And whenever you want to come into the dining room, you have a right to."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they reversed the psychology of--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. The students that didn't-- There were some northerns too. "We'll serve a table but serve in the kitchen. Whenever you want to, you'll come into the dining room." When this came out of the faculty committee members, I didn't have words enough for the faculty members. In fact, I expressed it many ways. It took two weeks for them to come back, and he, Jess, that lived in the house that I [had], did. [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were saying that most of the white students came back into the dining room.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Into the dining room and they made friends.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were going to say something about Jess. Is that Jess that's a friend, or is that Jess--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. That is Jess in our house that lived.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, a fellow student.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A southern student. And I made very good friends with him. Later he became very friendly with all, with the blacks, with all. Very, very nice. That was all right, that worked out. But I made friends with him. Then with miners, I had particular friendship with all of them. I cannot say just a few. All of them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the reason for that, that you gravitated towards these miners?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were fellows that I could speak to very freely. I could speak the same language, let's say. They were very close.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you were a Jew and you had an accent and your experience was in the northern, among garment workers. And they were--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were western and Pennsylvanians. I don't know, it didn't matter. We made very good friends. So that I was four weeks at Brookwood, and there was an election, an election of officers at the school. The miners came to me. They were the first. "Bill, I would like to recommend you and nominate you as president of the--" I said, "Why, why, why? I'm just here four weeks. Why me? I mean, you have--" "'Why me,' that's no question. We vote to select you." Then I had a textile worker, several, that came over, and they also said, "You seem to be the fellow that we want to be president." "Now wait--" I talked to them about it. Then came the meeting, and I was nominated and elected by a hundred percent almost, ninety percent. I was elected president of the Brookwood student--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why do you think it was that you were so popular? What was it that you brought them? Was it your ability to interact with a wide variety of types?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, that was the reason. That must have been the reason. I cannot think of anything else. I was friendly with most of them, I went out to know them. I became very friendly with the miners, of course, the first, and with the steel workers too. And railroad workers, we had quite a few. I wasn't very friendly, not particularly. I was friendly with them as members, that's all. But with them, I was in their room, they came to my room. We had some exchanges. The other workers--if we can call them at that time, they came from the other club--they were very fine fellows. You must take the exception that they were idealists. They were not just trade union; they didn't have any trade union. But they came, they volunteered, and they didn't know whether they [can] go back into the industry and go get a job. They were afraid that somebody might snitch on them if they went to Brookwood.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were they leftists? Were they party members? Because there was a very small party organization--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, they weren't. They were all close. Not what you would call that-- He was there. What is his name? The leader, the president--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Later the president of the United [Automobile Workers of America].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
[Walter] Reuther?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Reuther.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was one of these?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was one of the students.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was one of the students at the same time as you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. But they were all Reuther1s followers. They were friendly with him there because Reuther was the leader of that group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did he display a lot of leadership qualities even then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, quite a lot. He was a joker, he was very jolly. But he showed leadership. He showed a great deal of leadership. So did others show leadership, but not to the extent that Walter did. Walter Reuther was really a leader. He must have been accepted as a fellow that will not be at Brookwood, let's say, all the time, that will come, that will go away to Detroit, later come back. Because he was back and forth quite a lot. He was out of class.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Doing union work in Detroit, yes. Or trying to anyway.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Trying, mostly trying.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Mostly trying because there wasn't much of a union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. But he went back. He had to cover some field, I don't know.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there any separate cliques or groups of students who did not really mix well? For instance, the other Jewish garment worker people, did they generally interact well?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did they keep to themselves mostly or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, Eva did wonderful, Eva Shafran. Chava, as they called her at Brookwood. Chava is the Jewish name.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really? They all used the Jewish name?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They used on her. The Jewish name Chava. They didn't call her Eva, but Chava.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
She was quite a theorist, wasn't she?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. And she was friendly with all of them, with most of them. Very friendly. But the others, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So there was a sort of separation between the Jews and those with a completely different background.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
You might call it that the background had a lot to do, but the person had more to do with it than anything else.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about these five black members? Where were they from?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
From Massachusetts there were two. From the South, textile workers, there were three.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What kind of people were they? What were their backgrounds? How did they manage to get to Brookwood?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The southern were very back-- But they were good students. They were working students. They worked and they had to support them. What I mean by support, classes, special classes. The two students from Boston were excellent. One was from the mail carriers and one was from the elevator [operators]. The mail carriers' was a great guy. I became friends with him because he lived in our house. The only quarrel we had is that he would play his radio after eleven o'clock. I kept on telling him that, "Look, after eleven o'clock, that is the highest. We want to sleep because we get up early in the morning, and you cannot play." So he would say, "Well, I play when I want to." So first, once, I had a fight with him. Really. Not physical, but a fight out. I called him every name. After I was through, he looked at me and he smiled and he says, "You goddamn-- You really did the job. You have convinced me, but you convinced me that you are, goddamn, a very fair fellow." I said, "Fair. Good. Now you carry out. Play till eleven o'clock. You can play as loud as you want, but eleven o'clock, out." So he says, "I promise." And he did and we became very close friends. He was friendly with most. In fact, whites, there was no difference.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So this was a very unique environment--particularly in the 1920s--where racial barriers, religious barriers just didn't really seem to play much--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They didn't play any role, really.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was encouraged by Muste, wasn't it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, it was the Muste, Saposs, Calhoun-- Everyone worked in that line. And it was basically Brookwood that had that atmospheric influence that it was. Another great love for the institution, for the school, that we had. And I wasn't unusual. Most of them had that love that, here, that is the way we would like to have a world.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You mentioned Vera Bush. Was she already the wife of the leading communist Albert Weisbord when she came to Brookwood?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That would be, what, 1928 she came?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now this was at the time of the-- Was it the Gastonia strike? I forget which strike it was.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Gastonia strike.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The Gastonia strike led by the Trade Union Unity League, the Communist Party's trade union branch. Now what do you remember about her and her husband Weisbord? I understand you knew them.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, Weisbord I knew as a student at Harvard. I was very friendly with Weisbord when he came out of Harvard.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was when?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, 1925.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You knew him because he was from Boston?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. I knew quite a few people. I used to get together, at that time, in a strange way perhaps. We had some sort of workers education. We worked, and I was a member of the AF of L city council, so I helped them. But I really didn't know very much, I wasn't very much involved. But Weisbord I met. I met others too. But I became very friendly with Weisbord.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So he was an intellectual communist at this time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, very much so.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He never went to Brookwood, but his wife became a member of Brookwood? Or his future wife, at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
His future wife, at that time, before she was his wife. She was not actually a full member of Brookwood school. She came and she left. But she also had a special arrangement, I suppose, with faculty that she could come to work, reserve a seat.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you become good friends or did you--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I became very friendly with her because I knew of her, something. So I became very good friends.

1.6. TAPE NUMBER: IV, SIDE ONE November 16, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Last time we were talking about some of the students and faculty at Brookwood, and I was wondering what happened to some of your old comrades at Brookwood in terms of their later careers. Did they become union officials or do something completely different? Or maybe just vanished? Perhaps you could talk about a couple of the ones that you kept in contact with later.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. For example, Edward Falkowsky became very active. When he was through with Brookwood, he took a trip for a bureau that was then the labor bureau of news, a news bureau. He went to England, he went to Germany, Poland, and then to Russia and studied the miners' question, the miners' situation in the safety, miners' safety, and so on. He somehow was very much interested in miners' safety.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was his background before Brookwood? Did he have a mining background?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, he worked in the mines. And the family was still in the mine fields, his father, his three brothers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And that was in where?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In Pennsylvania.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now who sponsored him to go to the Soviet Union to study mining safety?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That is Ed Falkowsky's creation. He created. He got from the press a certain amount, and he got somehow-- He went from town to town, as, so to speak, on a hitchhike. But he went to Europe that way and he lived through that way. He used to write to America, to the press, very interesting articles about particularly the English mines, the German mines. In Poland, he found mines, but very badly organized and the conditions were rather bad. In Russia, he became very much interested in the Russian mines. He went to several mines in Russia, and there he studied and he worked. He used to write primarily. Later he returned. He used to correspond with me. That's why I know so much of the details. Then, somehow, he went to China, and he spent [his time] in China in the mines. But there he found a very interesting situation. The miners did not have the conditions of the miners in Europe, but they were entirely different. It was sort of a paternal situation. But their safety conditions were much better than the Russian or the other. They took care. There was a different situation in the miners union, that is, in the union but in the mine fields. Then he came back to the United States with all his studies and he wrote a book on the mine situation, the miner. He called it The Miner International. In all these countries he described the conditions of the mines, and particularly in the United States. He became the assistant editor of the Mineworkers Journal, and he worked there with all his fights and his-- But he could get along. Maybe because he had that nature of smiling and getting along, saying to you really sincerely, "All right, I'll look into it." But he looked into it in his way, not in anybody else's way.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was his political orientation in the United Mine Workers [of America] union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the United Mine Workers union, he was a [John] Brophy man, straight. And he would argue. He would really take a stand on that, where many miners did not. But he would take a stand.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But he would work with John [L.] Lewis, would he?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He worked with Lewis because Lewis needed him. He and Ed [Falkowsky] wouldn't get along very well, but they did. They did get along somehow.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And then when Lewis became--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Then Lewis became the CIO [Committee on Industrial Organization, later Congress of Industrial Organizations] official. Then he was the miner. He was recognized because all of them became sort of solid with the miners' situation because there was a CIO in the AF of L [American Federation of Labor]. There were the differences.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you know what happened when Lewis moved away from the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
CIO?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yeah, when he moved away from the CIO during World War II, when he opposed the war initially and led the strikes. Which way was he oriented then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This was before. There was no CIO when Lewis moved away on the--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I'm thinking of in the early forties. Do you remember? When there was that split in the CIO.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, he was working in the journal, in the Mineworkers Journal. He may have had his [inaudible].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So he was loyal.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was loyal.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, who else? You mentioned early on Eva Shafran, who was one of the Jewish students.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Eva Shafran was a labor person. She was active in many fields in the labor movement. She would get into textile, not to the union, but to textile fights. When the textile union was on strike, she would get in somehow as a journalist or as anybody else, but she helped along. She could not fit into the labor situation as it existed.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What do you mean by that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, she could not fit in. Now, in the capmakers' millinery union, she was known too much. Not that she knew too much, but she was known among the leaders and they didn't want her.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why? What was she known for?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
She was known as a communist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Known as a communist, outspoken.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Outspoken communist. Maybe her name was more involved in various other fights, that they didn't want to touch her, not in the leadership. At that time, when she came out of school, they needed leaders in the millinery union particularly. Because they had several communists that they accepted and they made them as leaders like-- What is the name, that was the outstanding leader? [Sylvia Bluker] But they wouldn't touch her.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what did she do instead?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
She worked in the labor movement, in the Communist Party particularly. She was active in the Communist Party all the time. So she was in the labor section. So she would supply the labor section. She would go to textile or any other, wherever there was a fight. Wherever there was a situation where they needed someone or they didn't need, she was in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you kept in correspondence with her despite your political differences and your other differences? You kept up a relationship with her?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I kept up a relationship. I kept up writing to her once in a great while. Not as often, but she would write, she would tell.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Later on, didn't you mention that you met her in California when she came out?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In California, when she came to California, I saw her very often. We would there heartily disagree and argue over almost every question. We would have arguments. But somehow that was her nature, or her makeup, that it always ended with a smile. It always ended with a smile, and she would say, "You so-and-so, will you ever change?" I said, "I don't know. There may be certain situations that I change, and I change very often because the situation changes around." She says, "Oh, no. I don't mean that politically." And that was the end of the story. But we would meet again and again. I would meet her in Los Angeles near the party office where she worked. That was all right: with her I could meet, I could see her.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did this continue right up until the forties and the fifties?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, until the late fifties. Until she died.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When she died was she still in the party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I must say, I really cannot speak for Eva on that reason, because she would cleverly always avoid inner party questions that she was involved. But I know that she was involved in many disagreements at that time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, in the late fifties.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the late fifties, and she died. That was a terrible thing, because I met with her about a week before. I saw her and I walked with her and we talked. But she was very pessimistic, very down.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was at the time of the Khrushchev matter.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
All right. Any other figures that you want to talk about? What about some of those who didn't become active in the union movements?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, Ed Falkowsky, as I said, he was very active. Now, Josephine Kazer. Josephine Kazer was an active textile girl. She came back to New England, and there she was active as an organizer. And a very good organizer, because she was capable. She showed that ability when she was at Brookwood. Another thing that was her nature that she was very good-looking. She could overcome certain situations where people got in, let's say, very, very badly. She could give that famous smile, and that was almost a disarming smile. And she would then start up again, and she could maintain her standing and her leadership.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was her political orientation? And what union did she work for?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the textile.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, it was with the AF of L textile union or the communist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, not the communist. It was the AF of L [United Textile Workers of America]. But when we say the AF of L, we must really agree at least on one thing together--and many people who I believe--that the textile union was never too much AF of L. It was always on the fringe of being expelled or being investigated. That was the continuous thing of the textile union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. And they had some terribly brutal strikes there, didn't they, in the early thirties?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, they had. They had strikes. In fact, Josephine, when she came out of Brookwood in 1931, she went into the textile union, and she was always in a strike. I never received a note from her or a letter that she didn't describe a strike situation.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you ever go down and experience one of those strikes yourself? Where were they? In New Jersey I think there was one.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In New Jersey and in New England. In New England I went to see, to talk to them, but not very much. I knew many textile leaders, but there was no time, actually. But I knew, I knew that things [inaudible] through writing to Josephine.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What happened to her eventually? Did she remain in the trade union movement?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, she eventually, as far as I know, she got married, married a lawyer. She was still active in the union, but she got away from it litle by little. She is now somewheres in California. I don't know where.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now you mentioned once that there was a man at Brookwood who became an actor.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, Harry Bellaver. Harry Bellaver was really an organizer of the miners union in Illinois. He was a young man, but very active, a very good speaker. He was at Brookwood, and he was at Brookwood with a whole bunch of cousins. They were the Bellavers. Not a Bellaver, but they were the Bellavers. There were Raymond, and they were any name. He was the youngest, actually, in age, but he was the most active, a person that I became very close friends at Brookwood. So, therefore, I knew him later, after Brookwood. He went back to the mines for a short while, but he came back to New York. And he was active through the fact that he was very active in the dramatic section at Brookwood. He was a good actor. So our teacher-- He was not a teacher in drama particularly; drama was just a thing that he took on at Brookwood. Without any extra, he would train some people to act in a play, that's all. In fact, I was one of the actors there. But he saw in Harry great ability. So he took him to New York and introduced him to the New York-- What was the name of the group that--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The theater group, the radical theater group [Group Theatre], yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The theater group, not the radical, the regular theater group of the stage. The name was very familiar with that-- They were discussing to stage The Hairy Ape. The Hairy Ape is one of his plays-- What is his name? [Eugene O'Neill] It's a very fine, very good play. So he was given, not the place yet in the play, but he was given a test. And he was the best for the part in The Hairy Ape. So he played in The Hairy Ape. The Hairy Ape went on for something like a year, or maybe more. I don't know. So after The Hairy Ape, another play came on and plays. And he played in New York. Later he came to California and he played in the movies. He was quite an actor, he was very good. But he remained funny enough that I came to New York, I went to the restaurant-- There was a restaurant that there you could find all the actors, you found them all. So I looked around, I looked for Harry Bellaver. I talked to one. "Oh, Harry! He's not here today because he's in a play," and so on. "But when he'll come tomorrow, I'll notify him and he'll be here." I didn't even know his address. I knew in the theater section I'll find him, and I found him. Of course the next day, I came, I saw him, and we had a very nice time. But he kept up with the miners, constantly, in Illinois.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really? Did he become involved with the radical theater, the Clifford Odets group, Group Theatre?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. No, he was with the regular companies. He was in many plays. He was in many movies too: he was in the movies from a judge to a sheriff.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about those people, of course, who didn't necessarily become that well known? What about your black friend from Massachusetts?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, he was an active member in the union. But he never got out of the executive committee in the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you remember his name? I'm not sure if we remembered it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I don't, I don't. I will have to look up maybe in my--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In your scrapbook.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I may have to. And many others, there were many, many people that graduated Brookwood and came back. And they were in a union, they were active in a union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just rank and filers, unsung heroes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very active, more than a rank and filer. They were in the executive committee and various committees. They were active and they kept up very good. Oh, I came across some that were active in the workers educational movement, that became active. In fact, I was the encourager. I used to say, "My God, you are-- Never mind. Get into the educational field. There you'll find--I haven't got the time, but I still am active in Boston and doing a lot of work in the educational-- And there it is important." My opinion now and at that time, that that was a very important field that was neglected everywhere.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, one question that I forgot to ask you last time was when you were in Brookwood, you were still a member of the Communist Party, and of course there were a number of communists in the school. Now, did you have fraction meetings?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, we had fraction meetings quite often, every month, at least. And sometimes more than a month because communications would come from the party that were inner party struggles. Because, at that time, there was one struggle that the party carried on against [Jay] Lovestone in the Lovestone group. We found actually, in our fraction of six or eight, that there were four Lovestoneites and four-- They weren't actually-- They were party members, and some of them were really Fosterites. I couldn't call myself that, although I was very friendly with [William Z.] Foster and I liked Bill Foster even when I was expelled from the party. I liked Bill and his attitude when he sat with you privately and he discussed. He was entirely a different person. I disagreed with their stand, but that is another chapter of my life.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you would have discussions about inner party matters. And this was quite accepted, was it, by the Brookwood faculty that the communists would have fraction meetings?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now, as far as I experienced at Brookwood, you could talk to them about party existence. You can have a meeting about coffee and tea. You can have a meeting: "Do you like pork chops?" You can have your meeting, anything, outside.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Outside, right.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They did not interfere, they did not question. That wasn't interesting to them. They took an attitude, I think, of that sort. They did not play out this thing, and it never became an issue.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you try to recruit your group within Brookwood for the party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I think some members did try. I did not. I would talk to people. In fact, I did not. I was, at Brookwood, very active. I think I have mentioned before I was the chairman of Brookwood. For about a year and a half, two years, practically, I was the chairman. It involved me a lot in Brookwood work. And, therefore, I did not recruit or did not attempt to recruit.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the Communist Party's attitude towards Brookwood? After all, it did have its own labor school at that time. I don't know. It was not on the scale of Brookwood.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No, they didn't? Not really.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. They did have the evening classes. That was on party questions. And they taught, let's say, labor history and so on too, with the interpretations perhaps different than you would get at Brookwood. You would get there a study; you have to study by yourself. You wouldn't get the ready-made-up history that this was: this is the trend, or this was the main thing. No emphasis on that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
At this time, I don't think the Communist Party had gotten to the point where it was calling [A. J.] Muste a social fascist. That came a bit later, I think.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, that was much later. That became later because I was already out of Brookwood. In fact, I greeted, once, Muste with a letter. I greeted him that he became a counterrevolutionary. And he wrote to me a letter that was very funny. I must have it somewheres. It was really a joke, even to the party members that were the loyal party members. It was a joke to them to call Muste a counterrevolutionary or anything of that sort, because Muste was Muste, primarily. And he had that viewpoint years before at Brookwood. At Brookwood, we knew his explanations and his [inaudible] really study because he was a great student of the American labor movement. And nobody, I didn't come across anyone that would-- Especially when you talked to Eva Shafran. Eva Shafran would put something on her eyes. "Oh, God," he says, "don't start with that." I said, "But look, your paper, your pardon, your thing." "Look, don't start up with that." And she would right away finish up with something.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That's very interesting. OK, at the last session we came to the end of your time at Brookwood as a student. Now, then, I understand you continued working for Brookwood as a sort of a roving propagandist for workers education.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was for workers education. Really, Brookwood undertook a part in Pennsylvania and New York state and New Jersey and around there, around Boston, Massachusetts, and New England. Not only Boston, but New England. For workers education, some classes became very important. There I got familiar with the organizing of workers education within the workers, within a labor union. And that was no cinch; that was no easy job.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No it wasn't, not at this time. After all, this was 1929 that you started this, wasn't it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen thirty. And not only because the downtrend was in the labor movement. There was the crisis. No, I wouldn't say that, because before the crisis came, there was a hardship. And workers education, you have to recruit the most active workers. The active workers, perhaps you could, but there had to be something in the office of that union that should help or that should do the work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But how was this meant to work with workers education? It would work through the union? Workers would go to classes after their work?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, it was through the union, and that was very important. The people that conducted that work, they would insist upon that it must be through the local union with the local officers. You have to sell them first. You have to talk to them continuously. That is why the job is so difficult and so hard. But it had to be done that way. We learned later on in years that if the work isn't done that way, if the work is not done through the local union, it becomes a failure. So you had to do it. You had to have the miners or the-- The miners I shouldn't say, the miners were an easy thing in that field.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why was that would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I would say because the miners participated in Brookwood on a large scale. They had many local people that were former Brookwood [students] and there was no question the miners were for education in the field of labor. Where in the steel situation, you had to get in, you had to almost under disguise come in. Now, in other unions, it was the same thing. Now, in another union, in the Brotherhood of [Locomotive] Engineers, in the railroad section, there you didn't. Because the top leaders were Brookwood board of directors. You could speak to them, and they knew something about it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, perhaps you can give an example of an actual experience when you were going out at this time, in 1930, working with these unions, trying to persuade them to provide workers education. Give an example, give us a picture of the situation. This is 1930, the unemployed were out there--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And growing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were growing. There's unemployed councils, there's food riots, people are out of work. I mean, who's going to be thinking about workers education if they don't have a job or their job's threatened or they come home from work exhausted, this kind of thing.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Strangely enough, the crisis at that time somehow--I don't know whether before--but during the crisis, there was an easier way of talking to workers and relating them to their responsibility, to their class, if you want to call it that way. I think it would be, really, not just a name, but it is a working-class situation where you could talk to them and you could persuade them. [tape recorder off] In Pennsylvania, with a union, I came in and I introduced myself that I have spoken to several workers. I did not make it a secret I'd spoken to several people. "The question is that I came to speak to you as executive members, as the leaders, that you could induce, by participating in the city central council in the educational department-- There is an educational department, and you need there from you, the union, to send, not students, but to send someone representing your board, your participation in the education movement. Then, of course, to include workers, that is your job. Nobody should recruit your workers; you have to recruit." And this is an example. We use that as a point of making the union responsible, calling in the union as a whole into the educational work, other than capturing a student somewheres and I have an educational system because I have captured there a few workers. That was not the point. The point was to have an educational section of the labor movement to be part of the labor movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the difference between the dual unions, the revolutionary unions, and the AF of L unions? You worked within both.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's completely another, almost another field. That was a field that was very, very bad. Because at that time you used to run in--not so much in '30, but '31--you used to run into various unions that they wanted to participate, but AF of L unions would say no. There was this fight [which] came up very often in the educational field, as well as in others. I must say--why, I couldn't tell you why--but Boston had a situation that was different, because I organized the Boston educational movement again. There was an educational movement in Boston before. But in 1931, there were members of the educational council that they had in Boston years before. They were members, but they didn't have any classes and students. So I came in, and I really devoted my work in the educational field. That was not a question of the difficulty, but there, there was never a question of what union you belonged to. As long as it was a union, you could be the union anywheres: you are a brother and you should come in, and the union too. In the Boston situation, I found entirely a different category of those that were active from the AF of L in the labor educational movement. [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
OK, you were talking about workers education in Boston. This is 1931, and this was your biggest success in this area. You managed to get a decent workers education program going--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
--in this city, with the help of some of these people who have been active earlier on.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With the help of great people, of the people from various unions. Really from unions that I did not expect, but they did come in. And there were people that understood very clearly what there is about. I must say that this was a city that-- I have been there, I knew there, I have been in the AF of L, but I was received as a new person, as the guy that came to help them out, as a fellow that-- I felt very, very, very good. I worked, and I established, actually, an office--it was very fine-- outside of the AF of L Central Labor [Trade] Union Council; an educational place, actually.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who sponsored this and who paid for it and who provided the facilities?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The facilities were found by the local unions that donated, or they were taxed, so much per month. And we had money. We had money. When I say money, we had money to conduct that work. We had a secretary that worked, really, full-time. She was a graduate from University of Wisconsin. She came back to Boston, and she was very much interested. Alice Dodge. Alice Dodge was quite a person. Her father was a banker, and she did not live at home. All this because she had a struggle. She wanted to be independent; her father wanted her to be in a bank, that she can become almost the president. She was a bright, very bright person. But she was active in the labor educational field.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And the teachers, the instructors, were--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The instructors were from Harvard, from the various universities.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You had the best?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had very fine instructors. We had instructors that were really volunteers, and they appreciated us for creating the situation.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there a political orientation to the school? I mean, when you taught labor history or you taught about union democracy or whatever, was there an orientation, sort of a left orientation? Or did you try to avoid any kind of--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I wouldn't say there was a left orientation or a right orientation. The conservative labor leaders looked upon it as a left, but what it-- I would always say with a big smile and--no, really, I meant it--I said, "Look, why don't you come into a class. You choose the evening and just sit down. And you will see the presentation, how the subject is presented to the student. You'll know whether it is a right or left. We are teaching what it was before, let's say, but what the union has to work [on] now. We are more interested in the crisis now and interpreting that and giving the workers a chance to fight and not fall down completely than anything else."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But, as you say, in analyzing the crisis that was going around them, was the analysis one that capitalism is on the decline, or what? What was the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That capitalism was on the decline. That was the general. But, however, our teachers would not teach that it is on the decline. It is a crisis, and how we will get out, I don't know. But we have to be on the job as workers and attain our union so that we can answer the question when the situation will be better.

1.7. TAPE NUMBER: IV, SIDE TWO November 16, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I want to get on now to your trade union activities, which began, I think, in 1932, after you ended the workers education. You were propagandizing for workers education in Boston, and you were quite successful. How, then, did you get back into becoming a union organizer?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, you have to bring in almost a crisis of the year, of that time, that period. It wasn't the year, it was that period, 1931, "32, and it went on. The millinery union was practically down to the ground. Millinery organizers, really very important people in New York, were working for the Forward in order to get some wages.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In the Jewish Daily--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the Jewish Daily Forward. And in other organizations to maintain. There was no place. I knew that before I came to Boston. So in Boston it was a question I didn't know. But when I worked generally around, I came across that I met several shoe workers that were old trade unionists. One that was a very old trade unionist from England. He was, in England, very active in the trade union. And he came to America, he worked in the shoe field, a cutter. He was active in the union, but the union then disappeared. And that was George Wilson. George Wilson was a very fine man, a trade unionist in his body. He kept on talking to me. I told him that I have no particular connections now with any trade union movement: "I am in the trade union movement as a whole." So he kept on saying, "Why don't you get in? Can you get into a shop? I'll try. I'll speak to other people that should try to get you in. In what field?" I said, "A cutter." "Cutter." So I began to think about it and we began to make plans. It wasn't just thought. You had to make plans, particularly where you want to get in, in order to make some connection within the shopworkers so that they'll place me in, that I'll be able to be in. Because I had to have people on my side that should tell me, "You're wrong. This is the way to do it," and so on. So that was a problem. But I had to decide a problem: should I get into that field, to the shoe workers? So I wrote letters. I used to correspond with practically all faculty members at Brookwood. I used to write to them, not correspond. But with one, I corresponded almost every week. And that is David J. Saposs. So I wrote to David, and I wrote to the dilemma that I am in now. So I get a note: "I'll be in Boston next weekend, and I'll discuss with you the whole question." And he came; Friday he was in Boston. He stayed with me over the weekend, and we talked. We, in fact, were almost closed in the room on evenings, and so on, and day. We went through, and he opened up to me the shoe workers union. He knew a great deal about it. That there is no union, that there are six or seven branches. They organized at one time. They organized in '22, they organized '04, and they are left with a few officers. The officers also work in the shoe, but they are ready today, tomorrow to get in. But these are all dead unions. "If you can--" And he emphasized that point to me several times. "If you can organize a union and break up, bring in, all these seven branches into you, you have a chance to organize a union. That is the only chance," he told me, "because why the shoe workers are that split up, I couldn't tell you. In Pennsylvania they are by themselves. In New York and in Boston they have seven unions."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now was this in Boston? Or does this include Lynn or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, this was in Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Seven sort of moribund unions that existed only on paper.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Existed on paper only. They weren't in Boston actually. They were, at that time, in Haverhill, they were in Lawrence, they were in these towns. But each town had its own union practically, and they were dead at that time. So he says, "Now, Bill, when you go into that field, you must have that in mind. How you'll contact, always have that in mind. That that is only to bring in, to unite." Well, I must say to you now that fascinated me to a great degree. That chapter that he gave me of the history of the shoe workers that he knew, that he studied, was very important to me. Because that was the edge that I wanted. I didn't know what it will mean for me, I didn't know the troubles that I will be in. And even if I would know, I wouldn't consider it very much, I don't think so. Knowing today myself, the way I was, I wouldn't. So when he left, I wrote to him a week later, "I am in. I am in." I only had to be in in a shoe place and only begin to cut, and I got in. I met some people through George Wilson that were splendid guys. Irishmen in the full sense of the word, very Irish, grew out of them. They were splendid men. And they-- "You work, you work near me. Don't worry."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You had learned the skill of cutting leather, or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I learned there. I didn't cut leather to come in. I cut linings that was felt and so on. I knew how to put a knife into it and how to hold the pattern. That was a thing that I knew.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
From your hat--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
From my hatters. So I could get away with it. And how I got away is only because I had, on both sides, really, two Irish boys that were splendid guys, that had a laughter and had jokes, that everything was a joke to them. They could go along with a lot. And they worked, mind you. They worked two days a week, two days a week in that factory where they took me in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because of the crisis. Other factories would work three days a week. Some, not at all. This was the shoe work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there other things going on around this? For instance, unemployed councils, demonstrations?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. They were going on, demonstrations of various types, of various kinds. But this was a separate thing. This was separate, and it was practically a part, you might say, of the union, the union that didn't exist in the shoe workers. It was only among the workers. So some days we would go out. We would be in the demonstration, some demonstrations, but primarily the shoe work. George Wilson lived in Lynn. He worked in Boston, lived in Lynn. Then he would get a job in Lynn, he wouldn't work in Lynn. I mean, Boston [or] Lynn was practically the same situation. We got in in Lynn, and I began to meet people. I met organizers that were very-- People that to me were very amusing. One was a president of a union, the Lynn Shoe Workers Union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What kind of a union was that? AF of L? Independent?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was an independent, independent for years and years. Independent union. Now there wasn't any, but he still walked around as the president. He still would tell you in the first sentence that you met him that he is the president. There is no union, but he is the president. I looked at George. George winked at me. But we took it and we said, "All right. We are now trying to organize. That is our main thing." But Lynn was practically a better situation than Boston. Lynn had more shoe worker union men than Boston had. At least the ones I met. Lynn became very important to the work because we had connections. But then we found out that the mayor of Lynn was a former shoe cutter, was a shoe worker. He was a member of the union, was a very active member, and he became the mayor. So we went to him. When we came in, we weren't just citizens of Lynn, we were the shoe workers. That meant a great deal, and I mean it meant to him. Because he closed up any office. He told them outside that he is busy now, very busy, a very important session. He gave some name of the session, but I couldn't even remember. I didn't remember then. But we were in his room, four people, and he talked to us how we could start up a union. He'll pay for an orchestra to have a march on the field, and we should see how we can reorganize. He gave us a plan that wasn't bad, that really could work. Some outside, some help. Well, we had no other proposition anyhow. So we walked out with that proposition, and we say, "All right. You work, we will work." We worked, we got in. We had a committee of about twelve that worked on this plan: who's going to make the speeches, who's going to speak. And the mayor was behind us one hundred percent. He got the orchestra, he paid the orchestra. Whatever he paid, I don't know, but the orchestra was in the morning, and we marched. About twenty people started, and it was really-- If I would have to describe here today, I really don't know how we got into it. But we marched on the streets where the shoe workers had-- The factories were there, the union headquarters at one time were-- But we marched, and we saw that people came. People really joined. As we walked along the street, people joined. And we came around, we walked in the shoe district. Every factory, we almost walked slow and stopped and played the orchestra.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were carrying signs saying "Join the--"
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. "Join the shoe workers union." That's all we could say, because we didn't know what kind of a union they'll agree to. "Join the shoe workers union." That was in big letters with big signs. And it was almost, it looked in the beginning like a funny part of a paper. But when we came to one street, we looked around and we say, "God, that is a godsend. We don't know where and how, but we have a few hundred people." Well, to tell you the story, when we ended up, when we walked around the shoe workers' headquarters, we came to the mayor's office, to the city hall. We came with thousands of shoe workers. We came with thousands of them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Many of whom were probably unemployed shoe workers, yes?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Unemployed and employed. There were many. But, you see, the employed were unemployed. The employed worked two days, three days a week. That I had to learn in the shoe trade. And that is how it was. We had a mass of shoe workers. Well, the mayor came out and spoke. The mayor came out and spoke. That was one of the wonders. They didn't even know particularly that he was a shoe worker, that he had still the shoe workers at heart and that he joined, almost, the union, because he made a speech. Then we spoke. I spoke, George Wilson spoke, and Bradey spoke.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A lot of Irish, a lot of these people were Irish.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, the cutters union was practically 95 percent Irish. So we ended up the speech with a table. The mayor's office arranged a table outside the city hall, and we began, with paper, we began to sign up members. We made it very plain that a dollar brings you in the union, one dollar. We made that decision just by talking it over. "It doesn't matter. We want members." We took in $5,000. We didn't know what to say when we were at the end. We counted, and the names, we had five thousand. We rented headquarters. After that meeting, we came up to the mayor, and we wanted to actually lift him up and carry him. He said, "Boys, you have now work. Now you need really work." We agreed. We thanked him, we made him an honorary member of our union. The mayor of Lynn then became, really, our honorary member of the union. And that established the first union. We had a meeting and we established the National Shoe Workers of America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Independent at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Independent. We didn't look for affiliation. We didn't want to go to the AF of L near, because that would have been a terrible dilemma. So we had to stay independent. With the Lynn shoe workers, particularly, they were anti-- They didn't have any CIO, but they were anti what they went through years ago. And it was exaggerated, the stories were exaggerated. To me at least, it sounded exaggerated.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, there was a whole folklore of the shoe workers union in Lynn, going back until the nineteenth century.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. So you couldn't, and I learned already before I became a shoe worker that some things are not to be discussed too much. We organized, we began the shoe workers union at ten thousand members within a few weeks. And more came in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was actually the leader? Who was technically the president of the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The president was organized the same leader--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, the same one who had been the president before.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The president before.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your actual technical position?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was no position. In the Lynn shoe workers, I was a member of the board. I became a member of the board from a Boston shoe worker. But that was not because I work in Boston; there were many that work in Boston. But I became a member of the Lynn shoe workers union, the cutters local, and we worked. But then we worked in the Boston area and we pointed to Lynn: "Then we came-- The sign. Then we did that. And then we have a union. And the union is growing." And the union grew. Because we came back a week later--we had twelve thousand. At fifteen thousand we began. The thousands came in. One dollar brought you in. That wasn't raised. We threw it around just as in anything. As long as you become a member. Later it was a slogan almost. In Boston it was. "We'll take in members for a dollar membership initiation fee."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which is much lower than the average--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Initiation fee. Initiation fee was a hundred dollars or fifty dollars in most other unions.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really? Which was an enormous sum at that time.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Initiation [fee] of [one] dollar, you can join. That was not the question. Join the union. I learned that that is unimportant. That is how unimportant that this cannot be described. Whether you take them in for ten cents or a dollar, it doesn't matter. Once they're union members, the union will not care because you can take him for twenty, for thirty dollars. They'll give the last penny if they have. So in Boston we began to organize. And there we have organized already, organized individuals. That is from a shop, individuals into the--Unfortunately, because I was in the cutters, we had the cutters first as the union members because that is how we could talk. We talked to others, but not as--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was cutter a high position in the hierarchy?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was the highest?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not the highest, but as high as the lasters. The cutters and the lasters were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Those are the most skilled.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Most skilled, requires skill. It required skill to be a stitcher too, but we didn't have any connection. I had some that I knew, stitchers, but they were [Communist] Party members. And I did not touch anything of that sort because I left them. But they came in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you, at this time, still in the party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. We organized in Boston until we became-- We also organized--that is a very interesting fact--we organized a meeting. We were ready to have a meeting. And we organized on Saturday the meeting, because Saturday noon is when the shoe workers come out of the shops, at that time. The working hours were Saturday till twelve o'clock. Saturday at one o'clock we had a meeting. We hired one hall. There was a district that there were many halls. It was a dilapidated district at that time, that is in the 1930s. But there was the nearest to the shoe field. So we had a hall, and we packed a hall. By one o'clock, one hall was packed that you couldn't get in. So we went out and we rented another hall. And we packed the other. We packed about four halls. Now what do we do now? There were shouts, there were-- So we had no speakers. We organized. We had the Socialist Party leader at that time, [Alfred Baker] Lewis, became a speaker. We told him that he had to speak. We had various people that weren't in the shoe workers that spoke, that were in the labor movement that we knew. We had even people from the ILG [International Ladies Garment Workers Union] that I knew, that I pulled them in. I said, "God, you can make a union speech. You don't have to know anything about shoes." We had to fill the hall. I spoke to everyone. I couldn't say a word when I was through, actually. And the part that I should mention, that I was carried from one hall to the next, actually carried out in[to] the other one. I was put down, and I spoke there. Well, we ended up with tables to join the union. It was terrible. We took in about ten thousand members. We had ten thousand dollars, that's how we counted. The dollars were one group, and the members writing-- Oh, we had names. They didn't know what union they-- They knew a shoe workers union. They used the National Shoe Workers union. The name was already on it. It wasn't the Lynn name. It was the shoe workers union. We had a union. Now matter of organize a headquarters. We had a headquarters two days later and began to function with people that could give a few hours. We came to the organization, we organized, as the usual thing. At that time, it wasn't the usual. It was unusual because we organized a union in the midst of the crisis, and we were talked about. The newspapers talked about us. In fact, later on, we wouldn't get a tenth of the publicity that we got then. Then it was almost voluntary. Without asking, we got the publicity. It was terrific.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Early 1932 would this be? Or late--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This was in 1932. Nineteen thirty-three, we were already a functional union. We had already agreements with manufacturers, the first agreements. There was no strike in all our dealings at that time. We avoided strikes. We avoided strikes for two reasons. We weren't antistrike, but we avoided strikes. Everywhere we can organize a few manufacturers to come to a conference and have a meeting, that is the recognition of the union. And we'll get an agreement. No wages we'll discuss, because wages were so low that you could not ask for a raise of 5 percent or 10 percent. Even if you would ask for 20 percent raises, that would not--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And they couldn't afford to pay it either.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They couldn't afford to pay it, but it was a question of working with them. They were surprised at us. That took me a long time to convince the committee, the executive committee, that that is how we have to do it. We did it that way, and we were very successful. In Lynn, it was faster. Faster in that sense that we had an agreement, and we agreed through the agreement that we will discuss wages with them right after the organization was established. And we began to take up questions of wages. It was not any percentage, but the department wages, the peaceful prizes. There must be some responsibility. So we had a committee that worked, really, day and night. It took a few months. In Boston we did the same thing. We came to the group of manufacturers that joined, and we sat down at a meeting. We declared why we do not ask for any wage settlement. Some of the manufacturers that were very sympathetic--I would call some of them more than sympathetic to us--when the meeting was over, they shook hands with us and they wished us luck. They told us, "You did a job. Boys, you'll never forget that that was a grand job. Now we can talk." They appreciated, because now [inaudible] the meeting. So that went out in the shoe trade. That you sign an agreement with the union, the union doesn't even ask for an increase. They will discuss with us the question of wages, but there wasn't a question of increase.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So recognition was the number one--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The number one question. So many more manufacturers were easier to talk to through the manufacturers, through our manufacturers, that they talked to them first. We were called in, we signed them up. Within a short period, within a few months, we had signed up about twenty-five factories. And that was a good portion. It wasn't all. It was a good portion of the shoe factories that existed in Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This all took about a year?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A year it took that we organized already, then, Haverhill, Lawrence, Lowell, Massachusetts. All these towns had shoe factories, but we didn't go in in the beginning because we were so busy with the shoe work here. I didn't give up my job, I must say. I still had the job on paper, but I didn't go near the factory.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were basically a functionary of the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was a functionary of the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But not an official functionary? You didn't have a position?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No position. I was functioning as an organizer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Rank-and-file organizer.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Rank-and-file organizer, if you can call that. But I was a rank-and-file organizer, really.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But there were functionaries with official titles who were elected.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, there were already elected officers, this local or that local in there. We could not pay any attention to that. In fact, we were very sorry that we didn't. That developed by itself. It developed such a situation that, first year, one was rambling all over the state to answer organization. Because there was another fear that we had, that now, because of organization, the various unions that existed, the prospective shoe workers, the [inaudible] names will come up. But we organized a nucleus, at least, in Haverhill, in Lawrence, Lowell, in all these towns and many other towns. We began to organize shoe workers, being that no one else came in, but we were the name. So they all came in, and we had many unions in our-- That was a very big handicap of organizing smoothly, organizing the union with its basic thing. You see, because when you bring in people with former beliefs, that here I can be a president or I am this or I am that, or even if they do not do that, they speak of their union, because they controlled at one time, maybe historical. That was a great handicap and fear of the growth, generally. But the growth was on. In Boston, it became a tremendous shoe workers union. We had over a hundred thousand after a year. Over a hundred thousand.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A hundred thousand workers in the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Workers in the union. In Lynn, it was organized, practically, the city. Brockton, we decided not to touch Brockton. That is, we had many contacts with workers, but we told them that we are not going to organize. They were [in the] Boot and Shoe Workers Union of the AF of L. We did not want to get into a fight with the boot and shoe [union], and we definitely made it a part of the union. We'll discuss with the boot and shoe union, and we'll be organized a little bit that we can at least sit down with them and talk.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did the boot and shoe get interested in the National Shoe Workers union and start--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. They were afraid that we will go in and begin to organize in their field. So they began to be very much on their toes to organize strongly.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you, in effect, stimulated their own--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We stimulated their function. They're alive.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There wasn't a dual revolutionary union operating there? Didn't have any foothold?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had people that were interested in our-- "Let's get rid of this," their old AF of L, and they began-- Later, they were very active. The boot and shoe was very active in Brockton only--because they only had a foothold of their union--and they became very much alive. But we did not-- In fact, we used to meet them sometimes and speak to them very brotherly, not interfere. And they did not interfere with us. That was not an agreement. There was never an agreement of not interfering or not doing that, but it was done merely by time. I don't know what really kept-- We kept away with a reason, but they kept away maybe with their reason not to interfere. So we organized, and the shoe workers really became a factor in the trade in Lynn, in Boston, and in Haverhill, and in Lawrence, and Lowell. We had agreements. We were surprised that before a year ended we had agreements in Lowell, we had agreements in Lawrence, in Haverhill. And we had many agreements in Boston. And in Lynn, of course, it was-- Then we organized the national shoe workers. It was organized a national with a national board. We didn't have any New Yorkers. We didn't know anything about New York; we did not count on it. But after we organized the National Shoe Workers union and I became a national board member, and so did many--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was the head of the union at this time? Anyone that's well known?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
George Wilson became the general secretary. He was the general secretary for years.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You didn't meet with the AF of L people in the council, the local Boston [Labor City] Council? No form of connections? Independent?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. I knew many AF of L people through the organization of the educational field. I used to meet with them, and they used to be very much in favor of the work that we did. We did the impossible. They used to hail us as the only live workers that gained a union. Not only that maintain a union, but gain a whole organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you pursuing a workers education program in the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. In the unions, with the AF of L people, there was established that Alice Dodge became the secretary and she would work with the committee. Not a question of secretly, but she would work with me. Every Sunday morning we used to have a church session. [laughter] She used to be Sunday morning at my house, or I used to meet her in the office. We would sit down and I got a report, and we would discuss what is the main issue to discuss further [concerning] education. And important it is, we had from each local of shoe workers, at that time, a group going to the school. And they were not objected. I spoke to some of the members of the educational committee that I will send members and our locals will pay for it, but we cannot discuss anything else. They say, "Don't worry."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You can't discuss anything else? What do you mean by that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Anything else we do not discuss, any relationship with the AF of L at this time. So they understood, and they say, "Don't worry." They took in the members that came. In fact, they were glad they did. So we had some members [who] were educated, were in the workers school, and the nights that were the workers school were opened. But I was active in the workers school: that was a very strong religion on my part that I kept up. The main part is that Alice Dodge was the secretary, and during the week she would call me on certain things that came up. I was her mentor. With her leadership, we worked. There were a few others in the AF of L that we would meet sometimes quickly. We would meet on certain issues in the educational field. I don't know if it was our wisdom or my previous experience with working with groups on education: "Only sell one thing, education, regardless what your union may be. That is your part. I only am asking you that your workers should be educated as they come in your union. Come back, and they can be an active force." So that thing must have influenced them, because they kept that song going all the time with them. In fact, later I had some shoe workers that became members of the educational board, and they were very active.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Most of these workers were Irish, would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Cutters.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The cutters were Irish. But there was also a large English community there, was there not, and other people from Britain.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some English were cutters too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I'm just saying that there was a tradition of workers education in New England.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In New England, yes, yes. The tradition woke up so much when we were there. The educational field, compared to other sections, to other parts of the country, was far, far ahead. But coming back to the shoe workers, it began to crystalize the opposition in the shoe workers union that were independent shoe workers. The leadership kept on waking up that they should do something, and it became a problem. But we had to counteract. So we did. In Boston, we had a much worse problem.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was, of all the strangest things, that was playing the horses. We didn't know that there was such a tradition, that shoe workers-- In the factory, there would be a committee that would sell them tickets every week. And there were thousands of dollars--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Gambling on the races.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were other games, I suppose, that they played. There were other tricks, and so on, that we found ourselves surrounded by shoe workers. One was a leader, and he had committees in every shop.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Committees of what? What do you mean committees?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Committees that sold the tickets.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there racketeering?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was racketeering: there was the racket.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. It wasn't just a cultural expression of these--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, hell. No such thing. It was a racket, and the racket was a higher outfit. I didn't know anything about it, but I began to feel, to know, that there is something going on. In fact, strange as it may seem, I discussed that with the leader of the-- Paul Salvagio.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who controlled this racket at the top? An Italian?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the shoe workers, yes, Italian. Because Italians were the main shoe workers, the lasters, the mass of shoe workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, I see. So the largest mass of shoe workers were Italian. Irish were only in--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the cutters.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you had this--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had national.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. And there must have been some ethnic conflict between the Irish and Italian at that time.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No? Because the Irish had arrived there first, they were generally more prosperous. Italians were the rank and file, as you say.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Italians, they were in the shoe workers. The Syrians, there were thousands of Syrians. And the English were primarily in the stitching rooms. There were the English, and there were some Jewish. In Boston, there were quite a few, quite a few hundred. There may be a thousand Jewish workers. In New York, there were thousands, but we are not speaking of New York. In Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But your organizers must have had to be-- You must have had Italian organizers, Irish organizers.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Many of the Italians spoke only Italian at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, they spoke English. It wasn't a question of speaking. We had Arabs in the leadership, too, that spoke to their Syrian groups. All the languages were there and all the national[ities] were there. But we did not play up. That was a very strong point in the union. You are Italian, Jew, whatever you are, you are a member of the union, you are a brother.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I'm sure that was crucial.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was very crucial.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So getting back to the racketeering, what happened with this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Racketeering was getting worse and worse. As the shoe workers became more prosperous, as the wages increased-- And wages increased. Later they knew that the wages increased to about 50 percent [more].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was between when and when? 'Thirty-two and '34?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
'Thirty-two and '34. The wages were fairly good by comparison to other industries and to other shoe workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the racketeers, the gamblers, stepped in?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The racketeers were growing too, very successfully.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They wanted to get a piece of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And they got more than a piece. It reached to a point where I was taken for a ride. I was taken by the gamblers and I was told to shut up. And if I'll do anything else, I had to get myself out through talk with them. They didn't do me any-- They didn't. There wasn't any reason. But I was kept there one night in their headquarters. It was in the north end of Boston.

1.8. TAPE NUMBER: V, SIDE ONE November 16, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were saying that you were kept overnight by this group and released. They didn't beat you up but intimidated you.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. They intimidated me, and they told me in very plain language that I should keep down. I should not have anything to do with that, any talk about this. Forget it. That's all. Because we are still here. The general office knew about that. They knew about my getting into there and so on. The general office had their excuse that they cannot now interfere with that. They know about it through me, through others, but they cannot do a thing. Now is not the time because they are busy with other things. My opinion was that that was the time, actually, before the union began to be stronger. Because when the union will be stronger, they'll be of such strength that you will not be able to even come near them.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Some of these people were in official positions in the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was it one particular family, did you say, was the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Salvagio. The others were merely selling in this-- I didn't go around to find out, but I knew the head of it. And I spoke to him because I was very friendly with him.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you didn't know that he was the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. But later he told me, "Bill, you have either to shut up, quiet, and don't mention it, or you'll be shorter, a few feet down. Remember. I am your friend," he told me, "and I don't want to do any harm to you, but that will be done." So it was a very scary and very definite situation. I could not give up the fight against them, so I appealed to the general office, several times in fact, that they must do something. And I kept on, in a way. I got involved with other strikes that I went away from Boston, strike situations. But I came back to it, and it was prospering beautifully. I would not give up; I would speak to it. I would speak to Paul Salvagio. Paul Salvagio used to laugh. He used to say, "You are a fool. This is a very important business on my part. If I will give up gambling, somebody else will take it in, and you will not know much about it."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the impact on the union of this racket? Was it having a very negative impact in terms of the day-to-day functioning of the union, or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I think it had a very deadly effect.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was my opinion. Because more and more of union leaders, mind you, that were not part of the gambling before, became a part of this gambling situation.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they were being corrupted by it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were corrupted.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was the racketeering expanding into other areas of union activity, or was it just strictly--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. That wasn't. But the union began to function as though it was a hundred years old. It did not go with that tempo to organize, to--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The idealism of the union was--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The idealism of the union went down.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what was your plan? What was your strategy?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My situation was very bad because I began to think that-- In fact, I discussed with George Wilson that question with him alone. I discussed that. He advised me and I accepted, then, that I should get away for a few months from the situation in Boston. I should go to the Midwest to find out the situation for organization purposes. New York became a very important field. They organized. They wanted to, and they came in as part of the United Shoe Workers of America. That became the final name--the United Shoe Workers of America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So people from Boston went to organize in New York?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. The New Yorkers organized. The party there organized the shoe workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Then they organized it into their own--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Their own wasn't anymore in existence. They organized into the National Shoe Workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So we're talking about, now, 1934?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen thirty-three.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There was still a dual union; there still was a Trade Union Unity [League] at this time.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. But they organized into the United Shoe Workers of America: that was their organization. They wanted to be a part of this growing union. And Saint Louis and the Chicago area were not at all yet even evoked, even called the attention. So I came into Saint Louis. In Saint Louis, funny enough--to me it was--that I found shoe workers that were organizationally minded. I must emphasize organizationally minded, because they did not have any union. But they were thinking of it, and they were very glad that I came and I discussed with the group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there much of an industry in Saint Louis?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A very big industry. Saint Louis was the next big field at that time. Missouri, particularly, not Saint Louis alone. In Saint Louis today, there are manufacturers, big ones, living there and having their offices. Their shoes are produced somewheres outside of America. But this is another subject. However, I was in Saint Louis, and I worked there, and I got some very important information for the Boston shoe workers union. I sent them reports, I called them, and so on. And I worked around Saint Louis. I went also from Saint Louis to Cleveland, Ohio. There I found that there was an industry, somewhat. Not as big as Saint Louis, but there was an industry, a good industry, and I took some reports. Not as organizationally minded, but there was a field to work. I reported that. In the meantime, I made my plans to leave there and not to go back to Boston for a while, but move on, go on my own to California. I had an uncle of mine, my mother's youngest brother, and his son, that came a year or two before to California. They loved it. They wrote letters. So I wrote to him a note that I intend to come. So I got letters--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Not to settle this time, just to--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no, no, no. Just a four weeks' visit, vacation. I thought from all this thing, I'll take there, I'll take my mind clear and I'll think about it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you quite disillusioned with what was happening then in Boston?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was, but I was also not easily to move away. Because I saw a big field, I saw a big union. I saw the field is very big to work and to be a part of this great big center. And I saw Saint Louis too; I saw a big center in Saint Louis.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the effect, at this time, on the union of Section 7-A of the National Industrial Recovery Act? You know, what later became the Wagner Act.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It had a lot of impetus [on] relations, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You organized your union prior to this?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. But in the section of the early training of people, became the first section, the [PWA, Public Works Administration]-- It was not yet the [PWA], it became later the [PWA] on a big scale. We had government; it was a beginning of the [PWA]. That became, sort of, later it became a regular form. I was already away from Boston. But in the beginning we had quite a cooperation with the government officials that tried to organize that. We helped them to organize it. Not in the shoe workers alone, but in many trades.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So I'm just trying to establish what your views were of the future of the union at the time that you happened to go to California. You had no intention of going there to settle? You planned to go back to Boston eventually and to work against this racketeering and with this new upsurge of unionization throughout the country?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It became an upsurge, [with the result] that the CIO [Committee on Industrial Organization, later Congress of Industrial Organizations] came into existence, later. But I came into California, had nothing to do. I rested and I thought over, I mean, what my next step will be.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you come alone?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I came alone. I came alone. I had a girl friend at that time, in Boston, that moved to New York, that worked in New York. At that time, I didn't know-- I knew that I'll come back to Boston. So that was left at that time. I left Saint Louis in a very good mood with very fine prospects of organization. In fact, they started to work an organization drive, and they succeeded very well, later, when I was in California.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It wasn't just you--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I wasn't--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, you weren't alone in it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I wasn't-- I was alone in California. Really, you have to think of California in '34, the way it was and the way I came here. I began to rest up and I could think clearly of the whole situation. I really knew, at that time, that it wasn't an easy thing, that to go back to Boston means to go back to a fight. And the fight will be not an easy fight. The fight will be that I may be shot within a few days, within a few weeks.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was getting that vicious. When did you arrive in California? Was it the very early part of "34?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, it was the late part. It was about the end of September.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
'Thirty-four?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just after the general strike in San Francisco.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I came to Los Angeles. After six weeks, I began to think I have to go back and settle there in the office, but I'll go back with the idea that I'm coming back to California right away.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I didn't know what jobs were waiting because I didn't know about the industry, the shoe industry. I didn't know a thing about it. But I'll come back here and I'll work here. I will not go back to Boston.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you liked it in Los Angeles.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, my god. I liked Los Angeles and I liked the leisure type of life and work. I couldn't go back to that--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Intensity.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Intensity of-- Organization, I would go back. But the intensity of personal fights with this group-- While I was in Los Angeles, I kept on writing to the workers educational field. That became a very [large] part of my life. Not became, because it was.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When you say you wrote to it, what do you mean you wrote to it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I wrote to Boston. I wrote to the secretary, and she would write to me letters at least once a week.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Mrs. Alice Dodge, yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I wasn't out of touch with her at all. She would give me reports, she would ask me questions. I would answer some of them. I was still in contact, completely, with this field. But even this work that I cherished, really, the workers educational field-- Which was at bloom during that period, and it grew much stronger. I used to write, in fact, to some of the teachers, some professors from Harvard. I used to write letters now and then, and I would receive some letters from them about the work. But I could not see myself coming back to Boston, getting into that hassle. Because without the hassle, I had no way. I wanted to go back and uproot this racketeering. I used to write to George Wilson quite often, and he would tell me that "You were right, we were wrong. We made the wrong decision, because we are now in a fight with this. That is known. The group has grown bigger, and they challenge us." And with all this knowledge, I went back to Boston with a decision of coming back to California. I will look for jobs, I will look everything when I'll come back. I'll decide that. But I learned enough during these years that I will not take upon myself to look for a job and find out what the industry-- I went blindly, purposely blindly, away from Los Angeles. I came back to Boston. I resigned from my office. Some people in the general office didn't want me, at any price, to leave. To stay and work with them. But I had already made up my mind. I told them that if I'll come back, this is the fight that I want to take on first. And they realized and they wanted me. They would risk my life very easily. But it was a question of myself. And I couldn't. My mother lived in Boston and my sisters and so on. I did not want to involve-- I just wanted to be out. So I came back. I spent a few weeks, three or four weeks, and I went back to California. When I went back, I went back to stay in California.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Before we get on to your experience in Los Angeles, let's now just backtrack a little bit and talk about what caused you to leave the Communist Party [of the United States of America] in, I think it was 1931.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In 1931.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Can you describe what the issue was and what caused you to leave? not take on either myself or any other issue with the party. But that issue I didn't want to discuss even. In fact, I have letters that I wrote to Jay Lovestone, outside of the party to his home, because he contacted me in Boston. He wanted to have another Lovestoneite in Boston, but I told him right from the beginning, "I'm not ready. I have these difficulties with the party, and I will settle them myself. Because I am going to be out I know." Because the party took only one stand.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was it? And what was it that you disagreed with?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Disagreed on the trade union question. An independent union I was for, but not there. The shoe workers union of the party-- The name didn't matter. They had some name, but that didn't matter to me. Because names in the shoe workers, I found out that there are a dozen names.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They wanted you to organize what union? What was it called?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The shoe workers--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Industrial union or something?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Industrial union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They wanted you to organize a branch of that. You thought it was impractical?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was not only impractical, it was an impossibility.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The issue was really trade union work. I did
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was impossible because there just wasn't the interest.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because you there had to go into the question of the Communist Party. You couldn't organize two hundred shoe workers under those circumstances.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there any other disagreements that you had with the party? For instance, what about the question of the party's position on Jewish questions? Was that at all important to you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Not at all. You still were reading the Daily Worker?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You read the Morning Freiheit? Not the [Jewish] Daily Forward?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I didn't read the Daily Forward. I didn't read the daily Freiheit.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You didn't read either. So you weren't really involved in anything related to the Jewish--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So your only disagreement with the party was on the question of--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Officially. Unofficially, I could have disagreed with the party on the party issues that they are taking up that I disagree. But officially, I didn't take. And that I explained to Lovestone. That I'm not taking on any other issue. You have issues, I have also other issues, but not at this time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, what were these other issues, unofficially, that you disagreed with the party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The unofficial issues were that the party took various stands with other unions or with other situations that I disagreed. But I did not make it as an official disagreement because I didn't go into it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you did meet with some of the leadership to discuss this. They called you in, did they? Or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They called me in. I was still in the party. So I would come in, I would fight. Every party in Boston was a fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You'd go to the offices of the party and discuss--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I would go to the office and go to the party meetings. I would go to a party meeting and I would raise a question. I was just hailed down, to shut up, to keep quiet or to be out of the party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were in broad disagreement with the whole dual revolutionary union idea?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With the dual revolutionary union I was completely in disagreement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So were a lot of other communists, but they stayed nevertheless. Like William Z. Foster, for instance, was privately against it, but--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Privately against it. There were many party members that spoke to me. Let's say, "Yes, I agree with you on this and this and this question. But the party has decided, and the party--"
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you weren't really very loyal to the party as a political, revolutionary organization. It was very much the practical side of the party's work that had initially attracted you.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. That is correct.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it wasn't a big thing for you to leave the party, in terms of your whole ideology, in terms of your friendships.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, it was. It was. It was rather a big thing. But in my daily life it was bigger, my daily union, my daily connections. I could not speak to my friends or to a worker and tell them, actually, a story that I did not believe in, that I could not believe in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
At this time, 1931, did you, in any sense, believe that revolution was possible in the United States? Or did you think that was a fantasy at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The revolution?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In other words, did you believe the party's official ideology, namely that, you know, the United States could experience a revolution in 1931?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You didn't?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I didn't. Even under dreams, I never did.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Even with the mass demonstrations?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Even with the mass demonstrations. Even when the party members were so taken by that, I should say, "My god! How can you be fooled like that? Even participating in the demonstrations and being a leader of the demonstrations, that is not a situation for a revolution."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about questions relating to the Soviet Union? Were they important to you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. In fact, I even wrote a twenty-page appeal against the party decision to expel me. I sent it to the publication of the Times in Moscow. A friend of mine [Margaret "Peggy" Greenfield] was the assistant editor at that time. I sent it to her, and she wanted to give it to Stalin. She did not give it personally, but she wanted her editor-- Because he was a big shot in the Communist Party in Moscow.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did you know these people from before?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I didn't. I only knew her because she was an American. She was a New York girl, and I knew her very well. So I used to correspond with her, and I told her my story. She says, "Send me an appeal. I'll get it to--And that may help the whole situation." It didn't because it never got to Stalin. When he [the editor] got the appeal, he read it--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How do you know he read it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because he spoke to her about it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Certain parts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just your individual appeal?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My individual appeal.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Really? How come your appeal would be so important that Stalin would read it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because it dealt with the whole party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the gist of your appeal?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The gist of my appeal was that the Communist Party of [the United States of] America is in the wrong. I did not speak of their party decision. That they order, that was not in my appeal. In my appeal was the description of the labor movement, the labor situation as it is, and what is necessary to speak to the worker. The minute anything of the party would be mentioned or even any such phrases, you would drive away the worker, even today, under the present pressure. And that dealt with the whole story. It got into details. Not only the Boston shoe workers or the Lynn shoe workers. The shoe workers union was a big part.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was a whole attack on the dual--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Attack on the dual unionism. And that attack, when she gave it to this fellow-- And he was a very-- In fact, he got the ax two years later. But he was careful enough. He read it and he says, "I fully agree with it. But I can only tell you this is out. Because the whole question of the dual union is dual unionism in general, in France and in Germany--"
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they can't alter it just for America.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were basically arguing for American exceptionalism.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Exceptionalism is the word, because that I used, in fact, in my appeal. The word exceptionalism was all the time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was Lovestone's position.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Lovestone's position too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So naturally you would be branded a counterrevolutionary.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, I was branded as a Lovestoneite. I wasn't. I used to write to Lovestone, I was very friendly with Lovestone, but I wasn't a Lovestoneite.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were actually expelled from the party--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On the trade union question. They didn't have any other. They expelled me as a general counterrevolutionary: ideas, I had already ideas of counterrevolution. And the whole policy of the party that I disagreed with, of course. But I only had one question in mind in the party, the trade union question. On the trade union question, I merely proved in 1931, '32 that the party is out on a limb. And it was. On that question, I was expelled. When the expulsion came, it didn't mean anything to me because I knew that I'm going to be expelled long before. My appeal to the Soviet Union, to Stalin, was an appeal for his party.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So that more or less was the end of your formal connection. Did you still read the Daily Worker?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you belong to any party later?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.

1.9. TAPE NUMBER: V, SIDE TWO November 30, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The last time we talked, you had come to California on a permanent basis, to Los Angeles, and I think you had an uncle here.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what was the first thing you did when you came here, as far as getting set up and looking for work and resuming your activities?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I did not look for work at that time. I came and I had really lived around in Los Angeles for almost two months. Then I had to go back to Boston, where it was a question of resigning officially from the general board. It was a matter of getting cleared with the office and that I am leaving and so on. So I came back and I was there two weeks. I had my mother there, in Boston, and sisters and a brother. I cleared myself, primarily with the office, and I left for California. Then I left permanently for California, I came here. That was about January. And then I began to look around: is there a shoe trade here? I didn't know that there was or there wasn't. I did not bother about it when I was here visiting the two months. I enjoyed Los Angeles, and that is why I really decided to come back here.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your impression of the city? What were the things that struck you most about it as far as the labor movement and, politically, what was happening? You came at a time when--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The election.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, the election in which Upton Sinclair ran.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Upton Sinclair ran for governor. I merely listened to the various-- It was the last week of the campaign; the election was held. And I listened to it. I did not get acquainted with any labor people here because I was visiting, so I was just around. Then in January, when I got back, really, to look, I found the industry was growing here. There was an industry already with about five shops, shoe factories. They were small. They were very small. In fact, one shoe factory, the smallest in Boston, would take in all the five and maybe they would have left space. They were very small.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what would be the total number of people employed approximately?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Approximately, there were maybe three hundred or three hundred and fifty. But that was not the industry. That was the industry at that time, but it began to grow. For example, the Fern Shoe Company, that grew up to three hundred and fifty people in their own shop within a year. The Joyce [Inc.] shoe factory--there was a very small one-- they grew up to four hundred.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the reason for this growth? Was it something to do with the open-shop conditions here?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. Not at all. In fact, it was a question of California working into the industry. Using California, the actors, actresses, and advertising. Advertising in Pennsylvania, New York, in Boston. Then, in addition, there came in a different industry. They made shoes that were only worn, let's say, in California, the sandal type of shoes. The sandal type was not made in Boston, New York very much. Oh, there were some sandal factories. They were exclusive, small, and so on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Sandals were just not worn in those days, then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. But here, California began to develop fantastic ideas. And that is what they began to develop an industry on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were they employing? What was the makeup of the labor force at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The labor force at that time were people from Chicago, people from Boston--there were only a few--and people that came from Saint Louis.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So predominately whites, non-Jewish, not Mexicans or--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no. Mexicans were in the industry. Mexicans came, shoemakers that were shoe, perhaps, production men in Mexico. But here they took in Mexican kids, Mexican youngsters, that they learned the shoe industry. They learned from the beginning and they learned, really, on a California basis, which was entirely different. That is how the industry grew. The industry grew with predominately Mexican workers. They were really in the hundreds coming in. If a shoe worker came from Boston or came from New York or came from the cities of shoe industry, then they were experts. They came all as experts, even if they weren't. They came all as expert shoe men and they could get jobs in Los Angeles.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were the wages like? Was there a differential between the whites and the Mexicans?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, there weren't. The whites worked for as low wages as the Mexicans. [laughter] They didn't know anything else. When I came in and I was hired on a job as a cutter, I was offered $12 a week.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did that compare with--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Compared with Boston at that time, in Boston there were at least $40.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Forty dollars? Really?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Even at a time of high unemployment and everything?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What would you attribute that to? Because of the union? Or because it's a long-established shop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, that was already the union increased wages in Boston for the average crafts. To $30, $40--that was the work week--that was increased. In 1932, the most they would earn would be $20, $25 maybe. But the wages were increased when the union came in. They were doubled, practically.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But in Los Angeles they were just $12, which was very low.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very low because there was no organization, there was no talk about even. There was not thought about the industry being organized and so on, or a few shops.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about unemployment at that time? Was that a factor? After all, it was still very high.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The unemployment was still very high. In the shoe work, the shoe work increased. The shoe workers here, locally, increased. A factory, their little, little factories, when they were making, let's say, two hundred pair a day, they increased to five hundred pair a day. More than doubled. They doubled production. So they increased constantly, and constantly they would hire workers, workers from the East, the Midwest mostly. That is, [mostly] from the Midwest. When I say the Midwest, I'm referring to Ohio and Missouri: they were the two centers that really gave a lot of workers here. But in addition, you mustn't forget that the major part of the workers were Mexicans.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the relationship between the Mexican workers and the rest of the labor force? What sort of relationship did they have?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very good. Very fine relationship. In fact, that is a point that was very interesting to me, that when I came into the shop, there were no differences of Mexican worker, this worker, that worker, wherever he came from. It was practically the same as in New England. There were no racial or any other questions or hatreds. That is in somebody else's book maybe or in somebody else's mind. But it wasn't in the industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there a lot of dissatisfaction with the low wage? What was the state, if any, of the trade union movement in that industry? And in general, what were your impressions of the labor movement in Los Angeles?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, the labor movement in Los Angeles was really a trying group. It became very active in 1935, '36; it became, really, an activity. I went down to the labor office, where I met Bazelle and the whole-- I just met them. I just wanted to find out what are they going to do.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This is J. W. Bazelle, the head of the Central Labor Council at that time, right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Bazelle, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of impression did you get of the AF of L [American Federation of Labor], of his leadership?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very poor impression. He was really the backyard of the labor movement. I did not find that in Boston. In New York or in Boston, I knew the people very well, and the Bazelle type-- The labor movement was a question of we have the carpenters, we have the trades, the building trades. That is enough for us.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So he was basically only interested in skilled--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Skilled workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Highly paid.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Highly paid. The rest, "Oh, let them go." In fact, when I came and I told them that I'm interested to organize the shoe workers, they say, "Who?" I said, "Well, there are shoe workers here in town. There are six factories and there are growing more." They didn't even bother about it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what did you resolve to do without their backing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Without the AF of L backing? Oh, we went our own way. We tried to work with them, but being that we received such a cold reception, we went on with the organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you became a cutter in-- Which company was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Fern Shoe Company.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And right from the very beginning, did you start organizing? Or was this a gradual process?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I did not start. I first got acquainted with workers. I first got acquainted with the lasters, with all the sections. And I was just a worker.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were just learning too, because you say there's a different structure, the factory worked in a different way.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The factory worked in a different way, but the cutting wasn't any different. It was the same. I became very close friends-- Because the foreman here was a New Englander, so he sort of made very good friends with me. He was also a union member. He worked in Haverhill and various towns. He was really, originally, from New Hampshire. He was a very nice fellow. I was just a worker with anybody else, and he told me that that is what you can earn, that is what you can get. You either accept it or not. Well, I was interested to accept and to get into the factory, to find out.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Even at $12 a week.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Twelve dollars a week. I worked, and I worked a few months there when the foreman came to me and asked me would I be interested in cutting samples, a sample cutter. And I thought-- Like in many shops, there are sample cutters. They may be on for a few weeks, and then they're off. He told me that that job is just starting. That will be quite a job for any worker all year round.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there a lot of people who were working seasonally at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. But sample cutters are not working all year around; this is a seasonal sample. But here the season was all year round because they developed constantly new ideas, new things. They were a small factory and they wanted to become a very large one. And they became a large one, the Fern Shoe Company. I began to cut samples. Unusually, he agreed on piecework. We had to agree on something that we didn't even know how this will work out. So I figured out how many samples can I cut a day. So I figured out something and I gave him a price. Because he also told me that I will have to select leather myself. He won't participate in that because he is busy. I'll have to cut the complete sample, that is, lining and all the other assortment. I have to work out that. So I asked him a price, and he agreed to it. But later, I could develop. And it wasn't really that I developed the lining. The other things that I could cut differently I used to prepare. My price that I gave him, he didn't argue with it. I began to make as much as $40 a week. And he told me, for the sake of the-- Not to disturb him, I shouldn't give in more than $35, at the most. Thirty-five dollars a week. And I did. I kept many numbers of the sample that I cut, and I gave him $35, $36, $34, in that area I gave him. And I maintained so that I could take off Friday and Saturday.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So meanwhile, what were your plans? Did you have an idea that organization might become possible?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I never gave up that when there are workers, when there is a shop, there were always-- But I had to find a few people that will help, that will work, that are convinced that we should have a union. Once I get that in this shop, I'm going to find out people that work in other shops and get ahold of at least one, two that can be the agitators in the others. We didn't have anybody else. I, however, was active already at that time in Los Angeles in the workers education movement. That was part of anything. Because I came here-- Well, let's leave out, for the time being, the question of the educational movement. I'll speak about it later. But this work, it started in the shoe workers. I began to find people that were very receptive, that were very good. I did not speak wages: "We have to double them or triple them." I didn't have that idea of talking, even, to them. I said, "Wages, I mean we are not getting anything. This will be taken up when we are organized, not just slapping around the question of wages. When we are organized, we will demand, naturally, wages and other conditions that have to be met that are not in existence here." So we began to organize and, to my surprise, the Mexicans, particularly, were very, very good. I have still a very close friend of mine here, Mexican, that became an outstanding leader in the union. And there were many, quite a group. They were workers, but they were very active in the union. We organized, in the Fern Shoe Company, at least fifty people that became very active.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When was this? Was this in the middle of 1935?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the middle of 1935. By 1935 we did not expect to go out on strike or go out, do anything of that sort. I wanted only to see the shop merely have a voice organized. Let's say the [inaudible] is a hundred people, that'll be quite enough. But we were forced, actually, into it. There was so much talk in the shop that the bosses called me in the office and asked me that I am known as the organizer, [that] I started the whole thing, and what do I think to do? Well, I felt, first of all, I respected very much the two fellows that were running the shop. Especially the younger one was a very intelligent young man.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Otherwise they might have fired you.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
If they wouldn't know, they would have fired me. But they knew at that time-- The Wagner Act wasn't yet in shape, but they knew there was a law, there was sort of the N[I]RA [National Industrial Recovery Act]: you cannot fire a worker for union activity.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Although people did.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They did it in the thousands. But they [Fern Shoe Company] were honorable. I told them, "Look, yes, I am active, I am soliciting, but this has nothing to do with you personally now. We are not coming to you. We are not asking for anything, we are not asking for recognition, but we are organizing. When the time will come, we will talk to you. Now you, as the boss, can fire me." So they say, "Now look, we don't fire anybody. You have the job, but we want you to know that we know what you are doing." So I went back to work after the session with the Fern Company. Went back to work, I worked, and that's all. But we were pressured. It was talk around in the shop. It was terrible. So we decided, Mike Padgett, particularly--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you say something about him?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was a worker, he was working in the shop. But he became very close friends with me, and he was very active in the union. He had practically organized his staff, his people that worked nearby in the factory. He had them all-- Not signed up. You didn't have to sign up anybody, because you didn't sign any worker, you didn't have any form. The only thing I did, I wrote to Boston that I am trying to organize and can they send me some material or something in the latest thing. So at that time, by the way, there was also a discussion on in Boston to change the name from the National Shoe Workers [of America], that they started with, to the United Shoe Workers of America. And that went through in Boston. That we had nothing to do with.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the reason for this change?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was a reason for the change because the national-- Somebody else asked the name. That is their name they had. And there were some local disturbances between Haverhill and Boston and other towns. So they decided to have the name changed and they changed that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they changed the full name to the United Shoe Workers?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
United Shoe Workers of America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
AF of L?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, they were--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Independent?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Independent. Because the AF of L had a shoe workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They did?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, they had in Brockton. In Brockton there was a shoe workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But nationally the AF of L shoe workers union wasn't anything.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Wasn't in existence. But in Boston they had the local and the local of men's shoe workers, and they were all skilled. They had them and they did not-- Not [that] they did not want to take them in, that is not so, but the Boston shoe workers, the Lynn shoe workers, the others from other towns, they were always in an independent union, either one or another. As I think I told you, four or five unions existed. Now to come back, I received some communications, but there wasn't anything particularly established. But we were forced because of the talk. We didn't want to lose that, that spirit, that talk, that momentum. So we called a meeting. I went out and got the high school there, and the city gave us a permit.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Where was this? The factory and--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The factory was on Thirtieth Street and Figueroa, Thirtieth and Figueroa. There was the Fern Shoe Company, the high school right around there. We got the permit and we called the meeting there, right after work at five o'clock. Five fifteen they'll have the meeting there at the Fern Shoe Company. To the surprise of everyone that is in the activity, the whole factory came. Not one was missing. And we knew that quite a few there will be the ones that will raise questions that will try to break [it] up. We were prepared for that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of people would do that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Workers. But they were more for, not for the boss, but they were acted by the foreman, created: "You object." And they came with that objection.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There was no company union though.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. The meeting was held. At the same time, let me tell you-- I don't want to go into the workers education, but the workers education had a representative in San Francisco. He represented the school, the faculty there. But he came here to discuss with me and with a few others the summer school. They ran a summer school in San Francisco at [University of California] Berkeley. It was a very fine school. There was started the third year, and it was going.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, we'll come on to that.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
So he was visiting me, and I asked him, "Please come to our meeting." So he, a very good fellow, came to the meeting. So I said, "Now will you speak at the meeting?" He says, "Yes, I'll speak. Sure, that's fine." So the chairman, who later became the chairman of the local, but he was the chairman of the shop, we made him the chairman, Mike Padgett--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Mike Padgett. What was his background? Where was he from?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
From Texas. Yes, he was a Texas guy who came here and became a shoe worker. He wasn't a shoe worker before, but he became a shoe worker, worked at the Fern Shoe Company.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was the chairman of the meeting.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was the chairman of the meeting. As a new chairman, as a person that never had experience, he was excellent. He was the chairman, he introduced speakers. We also had a committee from the shop organized by Mike Padgett to keep the meeting in order, under the name that this is a school and it's a city school and we cannot have any disturbances. If you have anything to say, you ask for the chair. He'll give you the floor, you'll speak what you want. He made that speech before he got started with the meeting. Then he introduced speakers. We spoke why we are here, what we are organizing, a union. We did not propose any conditions, what we'll do, but a union to take care of workers, to have shop committees, from the inside to take part. Then a second speaker that was very excellent in fact, [Fred] Dullworth, a Missouri guy, made a good speech. And I spoke, and then our professor spoke just generally on the union and so on, that he is glad to be here a visitor. He made a fine speech. He made like an outsider greetings and so on. He greeted as [if] the union exists, but the union didn't. We had tables after the meeting to sign up for the union, and we had actually over 80 percent signed up. I had the old slogan: we took in Boston a dollar per member, we will not change the policy here. A dollar a member. Actually, 80 percent paid. We had enough money to hire a hall, pay even two months' rent. That was fine. We had an office but no organizer, nobody. The office was to come in there after work and have a place for other workers to come in.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you remember the dates of this, incidentally? Just so we can get a sense of when this was taking place. Was it late 1935?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was in the fall of '35.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you now had a rudimentary union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had a union. I did come to Fern and I told him the next day.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your position? You didn't have one in the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no union position. No, there was no election; we only had membership. Now we need an executive. We didn't have anybody, the chief. Mike Padgett was the only one that was chairman of Fern Shoe, and we called him the chairman.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But that was it. Your position was just as a--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A worker. So we kept on working, we kept on pulling in. The other people heard that the Fern Shoe Company-- It was highly exaggerated, but it was played up in the trade, and we could actually call other shops to meetings. They demanded it. So we called meetings of the other shops. The percentage wasn't as high to come in the union, but the workers weren't-- Let's say we call the California Shoe [Company]. That was the next one. Well, they had about a hundred workers. Well, we got fifty, or about fifty. That was good. The others didn't make any noise within the trade: they first had to be sure of our organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There wasn't any major opposition at this time? I mean, what about strong-arm tactics?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Strong-arm tactics by who?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
By the management.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Everything was behind the scene? You were just organizing, you hadn't made any demands.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We didn't make any demands at all. According to them, what is the matter with the union? But we did not make any demands. I had the influence of the people that were active. They weren't the executives, there weren't any. But of the people that were active. Then we called a local meeting where we had at least fifty members of the California Shoe, the Los Angeles Shoe [Company]. Some people came, and we had a few shops, and we elected an executive committee. The executive committee was elected and installed properly, and they were meeting regularly. Then we worked out a plan. Then they elected an organizer, the executive elected me as the organizer. There was no pay, so I worked in the shop and I was the organizer at night. We called and we decided when we are going to tackle the employer. The first one was Fern Shoe Company. We called a conference with them. Mail was sent, a letter. Our name was already on it: we already were affiliated with the Boston United Shoe Workers of America. And we send them the letter asking them for a conference. Not any demands, none at all, but a conference to have, to announce. We came to the conference. Surprisingly to us, we left the conference with an agreement. We had an agreement, a signed agreement, recognizing the union as the only collective bargaining agent. That was a very short form of agreement, but we had it signed, and that gave us a standing, that we had an agreement. Then we proceeded with the question of wages, the question of conditions. The first thing we took up is conditions. We established union conditions: there is a union chairman of the shop and also each department [is] to have a representative committee. And they are dealing with their committees. When these committees cannot agree on something, then the union representative comes in, not before. That was right away established from the first agreement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And were the conditions bad, generally?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very poor.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In terms of what? Sanitary? Speed-ups? Or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The speed-up. The question of distributing work wasn't done at all in any order. He had his boys or his girls that he would give certain work, the foreman. The foreman ran the shop.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The foreman ran the shop and he had favorites.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Favorites were all the time. So we had to establish work, how it is done, how to proceed. We established working conditions. That was the first, and we established that. The talk in the town and the shoe industry was highly exaggerated, highly placed, but it wasn't bad.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Exaggerated about what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
About the conditions. Almost from nothing to something. But it was from nothing, from very bad, to a new order. Actually, it was only to place an order, that you cannot just do these things. There is a shop, there is a shop committee. The shop committee has to react, and they do. In the beginning, the shop committees were very serious. They would at least come telephone the office, and I was in the office at that time. [tape recorder off] It is important to state here that the organizing force was going ahead. In fact, I would say faster than I could keep up with it, because everyday, practically, I was in a different place.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Even while being a full-time worker?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I was at that time a full-time organizer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, when did this happen, about?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This happened about two months later. Yes, it happened really in January in 1936.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
At which time a lot of similar things were going on in the rest of Los Angeles. This was a real expansion period for the labor movement.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The labor movement went on because the CIO had already people here within the automobile industry, within the aircraft industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Although there wasn't an official CIO at all.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. But people were here to look the grounds and begin to work. Because I used to get them-- First of all, I knew some people in Detroit from the automobile industry. So they came. It was all in the YWCA, because there we had our workers education center. So they would come there. And there we would discuss workers education in a different way, but it was all practically working within that form.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were a full-time organizer for--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
For the shoe workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you were interacting, by this time, with other people who would later form the nucleus of the CIO?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. I worked with them. I had a permanent job.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you install an independent union, no formal connection with the AF of L, no real dealings with the AF of L.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not at all. We were an independent union, connected, however, with the Boston central office of the United Shoe Workers of America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But weren't there moves within that union to affiliate, with the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
AF of L? No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And the AFL wasn't interested?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
May have been interested, but-- When the CIO came in, they were right away United Shoe Workers of America, CIO.

1.10. TAPE NUMBER: VI, SIDE ONE November 30, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were talking briefly about workers education, and you mentioned that a member of the workers educational committee came to speak at the opening meeting of your union. Why don't you talk about your activities with the West Coast branch, if you like, of the workers educational movement. Who was in it? What kind of people? What kind of political background did they have and how did it affect your work in the trade union movement?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
San Francisco had a great workers educational movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were the people that were in it? Who organized it? What kind of political background were they?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Political background: they were all AF of L [American Federation of Labor] people, AF of L trade unionists. But most of them that I came across and I met later-- I became friends with some that were very progressive AF of L people.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So they were sort of people, in many ways, in opposition to the mainstream AF of L leadership. Because there was an ongoing battle between the progressive-oriented AF of L and the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes, yes. However, they were in the leadership in San Francisco; San Francisco was their ground. And they were very much interested in a workers education movement. When they came to Los Angeles, some of them, they were really terribly surprised. They came down, they came to the AF of L. They spoke to [J. W.] Bazelle. They spoke to all the others. And they didn't find any voice, any particular resemblance, of a workers education movement. So in here we were organizing, and we actually had to capture, get, some workers from the AF of L into--not into any union of the CIO [Congress of Industrial Organizations]--but into the education movement. Some were interested, and some went to Berkeley. They went to Berkeley. But when the CIO started, in the first year, we sent from the CIO about sixty workers to the educational school.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did it consist of? A school?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
School.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because there was a California Labor School at this time that was run by the Communist Party [of the United States of America].
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no. This has nothing to do with the California Labor School. There were maybe some, but I don't know of any conflicts here. This was a trade union school that was held in Berkeley, and it was run. At that time, it became, really, greater than we could anticipate. Because there was a workers education movement in Washington, in New York, that was very great, really, in its work. And here, too, it was quite a-- I was very active in that group. I was active that I had to go there for several weeks, for two weeks, three weeks, to Berkeley and work with the teaching matter.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There were the professors, were there, from the University of California, Berkeley?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Do you remember any of them? Was Paul Taylor maybe one of them? Perhaps not. I'm trying to think of some of the professors of labor history at the time, but it doesn't matter. But it was the same kind of people who had been active in Boston in the same kind of academic--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, academic people, very fine. There was a group. I don't remember their names, but there were a very fine group of teachers. We finished one year, we started the next summer already recruiting, and so on. And people applied. The AF of L, strangely enough, had quite a group of workers that came through the local unions, because Bazelle and the AF of L leaders did not control the local situation. The local leadership would send workers to the school. They didn't have that antagonistic feeling that they are CIO and so on. I didn't find that that way. Only when you had to do with some metalworker, where they organized into the CIO and they had AF of L unions. Then the battle became, really, very great.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now the CIO actually wasn't actually officially formed until early 1937. So during the course of 1936, you were active in the workers education. You were the official in the union and you were signing up people at a fairly fast rate. So what happened during that year that helped move your local into the CIO? What happened nationally and locally that led the union into the CIO?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was one that contacted the Boston organization that I had contact with. I had confidence in some of the leaders. Some of the leaders were very fine people.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You're talking about the local leaders?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Local leaders in Boston, Lynn. They would inform me, by that time, that the CIO is beginning to organize, the CIO is getting out of the AF of L. I mean, in the beginning, there were some--not here in Los Angeles, but in Boston--there were some old unions, the Amalgamated [Clothing Workers Union], let's say, and the ILG [International Ladies Garment Workers Union], too, were in a fight with the AF of L and the CIO. They kept me informed what is going on there. And then they were accepted in the very first beginning of the CIO. They were part of the CIO, and we became part.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, in Los Angeles there were a number of CIO organizers. For instance, George Roberts, who later became a high official in Los Angeles.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Roberts was from the rubber workers union [United Rubber Workers]. He came here, he organized. He organized rubber workers. But he knew that that is a CIO organization, he hoped for it. He used to go to the AF of L Central Labor Council, and I used to go with him sometimes
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What would happen at these meetings at the Central Labor Council? They were very stormy meetings, weren't they? Because Bazelle ruled them like a dictator. Why don't you sort of describe what sort of things would happen at a meeting where the question of the CIO would come up.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I was there at two meetings where, at that time, the CIO came up. Bazelle merely ordered that this is not the question for us to discuss. He ordered it out. But the question was discussed anyhow, in spite of his voice raising. He didn't have much of a voice to raise, but he raised it enough, with his group, that he could. So, I mean, I did not have any hopes that there can be a unity with this new group. The real issue that came up here, and everywhere else I'm sure, was to organize some industrial unions on [an] industrial basis. And that was out as far as the AF of L is concerned. They were furious.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now there was a sort of a progressive caucus within the AF of L that included people like George Roberts and also included a number of communists. They weren't public communists, but they were known to be communists. And they were the people who formed the nucleus of the CIO. So you were, in effect, allying yourself with this progressive caucus.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Roberts wasn't an old AF of L person here; he wasn't even in his hometown. But he came here to organize the rubber workers union, and he did a splendid job.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about Slim [Philip] Connelly, for instance, who was beginning to emerge, maybe a little bit later? But some of the other left-wing and communist leaders who became prominent in the CIO? Particularly the longshore-- That was basically a left-wing--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The longshoremen? Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They were perhaps the most important single union [International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union] in--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In existence.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
--in Southern California.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In existence in Southern California, yes. But there came other unions that were just as-- The rubber workers became a very big union and the automobile workers union [United Automobile Workers of America].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What I'm getting at is the political aspect here. Because you had once been a member of the Communist Party. You now were fairly strongly anticommunist as far as trade unions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Trade union, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You'd been a very strong opponent of dual unions. Now you had a situation where these dual unions were beginning to dissolve themselves and enter into the AF of L, where possible, and then later become--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
CIO.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your attitude toward all those? Did you find the communist position to be hypocritical?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I personally didn't. Other former communists and so on said, "Oh, this game I'm familiar with." I did not think that it was a game, particularly, played by communists locally, because I didn't think that locally they would decide any game to play. They couldn't. There wasn't the structure for it. When they were given the permission to live within the CIO, they tried to get in. But it had to begin as leaders, capture the union. There was a fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In the early stages of the CIO in Los Angeles, the communists were not really the main moving force then, would you say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was it then? What sort of people? You mentioned George Roberts, the rubber workers. There was yourself.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The automobile people had here excellent guys. They came here. The youngest Reuther, [Victor], was here for quite a while. And there were other very fine people from Detroit, they were very capable.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the auto industry here wasn't really that much of a factor until '37, '38. I mean, you had the Douglas [Aircraft Co.] strike.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, we had the Douglas strike. The automobile industry was involved in it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That more or less coincided with the formation of the CIO Industrial Labor Council.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What do you remember about that strike? Because it was one of the seminal events in Los Angeles labor history. In February, 1937, the first sit-down strike, really.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The first and practically the only one that got the real advertising. Yes, I actually went on the picket line. I was in their meetings. There were quite a few very fine leaders that came here only for a short while, that came here for a few weeks from Detroit. They realized that that is a very important part. And they took the strike, what it was. Most experienced fellows couldn't have done a better job. It was maintained. They were in the factory; they were there. We were outside; we marched. There was a connection. It was really a very, very, very fine, lively strike. They answered very harshly, very brutally, but really they didn't accomplish.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They arrested the whole, more or less the whole--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The whole group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of three hundred and something people.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about the political question? For instance, the AF of L was pretty much allied with several politicians in Los Angeles, particularly Mayor [Frank L.] Shaw. I'm sure you remember Mayor Shaw.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Basically, he gave patronage to Bazelle and to the AF of L. Meanwhile, the CIO, together with the Communist Party, was launching continual struggle against the red squad. How did this kind of battle impinge upon your activities? Was your union involved in a strike at all in '36, '37?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We had some very-- I wouldn't call it even a strike. We walked out. We were out about three days, four days, and we were called into a conference. And they capitulated, they gave in. There was the L.A. [Los Angeles] Shoe Company and a few more of the very small ones. In fact, the main ones, Fern Shoe Company, Joyce shoe company [Joyce, Inc.], gave us merely trouble of strategy. There was a question of I didn't know much about Joyce and his company. But I knew only a few workers that came, and they were taken into the union, and we began to set up to speak to other people. We did not set up any strike conditions or anything of that sort. But we contacted the people and we spoke to them, we spoke to them at their homes. We visited them, important key workers; we spoke to them. And we got fairly good results. It took us longer than other shops because it was in Pasadena. Pasadena was out of the reach. Finally, I received a call from Mr. [William Henry] Joyce [Jr.]. I called him back, very nice the first time I spoke to him. So I spoke to him very nicely and so on. We made an appointment to meet. We met, and I spoke to him. I did not come with any demands, with any particular thing, because I didn't believe that demands come personal. That will follow. But I talked to him about the union that we are organizing. He says, "What of it if I will not sign an agreement?" I said, "Well, that is your privilege, and our privileges are not stopped and not taken away." "Then you mean that you-- You don't want to have a closed factory." So we had a very rough session, and we parted. I parted with him very nicely. I said, "I hope you'll think it over, and when they'll come to you with a letter of a conference, then you will approach us and you will speak to us and we will find out where you stand. Maybe we will agree, maybe we won't." "Do you know that I am a member of the--?" What was the name of the organization? They had an association of bosses.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. The merchants and manufacturers.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. The manufacturers association [Merchants and Manufacturers Association of California]. They promised that they pledged not to sign an agreement with the union. So he says, "Do you know that I'm a member?" I said, "I didn't, but it doesn't matter what you are a member. I cannot control you; you have a right to be a member of anything." He says, "But if I am a member there, we don't sign an agreement." I said, "That is another question. That you have to discuss with us, whether you will or you won't, or whatever will be the question." And he was really, I don't know, he was stunned. He was taken off. Because he had expected to have the battle right there, and here he has no battle. I discussed with him the question. To me, it was a very good game.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were very subtle in your approach to management. You didn't go in with a set of demands.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. You see, there was a question here of the shoe workers. They didn't have any-- And to go with a demand-- I discussed it with our group, as well as with outside groups. What demand could I make? "Raise. I want a raise of 80 percent." That would sound terrible. So you don't. You take up wage questions as they come on; you discuss with them the reasonable part of wages. And we have to try it. If we don't succeed, then it's another step. But we have to try at that. The Joyce case is interesting because he kept up. I worked out a letter. We gave him a letter: "Give us five days to notify us of a day for a conference." The conference is with the management and the union. There are no demands. That is the first conference. So we held the first conference. In the first conference, he came out and he said, "Well, I appreciate your asking me to confer. We can confer about the question of my people"--"my people" were [those] that worked at Joyce--"but no further discussions can be held, because I'm not going to sign any agreement." So he gave us the opportunity. I said, "Mr. Joyce, now I did not come to ask you to sign the agreement, or sign or whatever, but discuss an agreement. It has to be discussed. It has to be agreed upon. Then, of course, it falls one way to sign." He said, "That's the point. I don't want to discuss any agreement." I said, "Then if you refuse to discuss an agreement, there will be a day set. It will notify you that the workers will not appear at work." "That means you are calling a strike!" I said, "That would appear." For two weeks, we didn't hear a thing from him. We decided then to have a strike at the end of this, given a date. And it was a date given-- Somehow it was considered with his orders, that he gets a certain rush. So we decided to have a strike. I notified him in a letter that we have to have a conference [as] his workers decided. And if we don't, we will have to declare a strike. A few days passed, and I received a call from Mr. Joyce: "We will have a meeting such and such date." I said, "Fine. That's splendid. We'll be there." That was before the end of this period. And there we played the date. He came to a conference, and he declared at the conference that he had to resign from the Merchant [and] Manufacturers Association. He resigned because he is negotiating with his group. And he gave us compliments that were terrific. He meant it or he didn't, it didn't matter to us. The fact is that at that meeting alone we have concluded the whole questions. There were only a few questions that we discussed. And the signature of the agreement, that was followed by examining his conditions and wages after the agreement is signed. So he says, "Now what will it be?" I said, "It will be on the question that you will agree and we will agree. That is the point. Because to come to you with a demand of wages--" I explained it very clearly: it wasn't a catch. I explained to him. He says, "Well, I agree." He agreed, and later we had the finest relationship, really, of a union agreement. If a union agreement, if anything wasn't agreed, you could leave the agreement: it would be carried out. He was the shop chairman.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you had really to become quite an accomplished negotiator and arbitrator. This is what perhaps led you later on to become an arbitrator.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. And the Joyce question I consider, because many in the unions, they consider, and I wrote it up in the journal of the shoe workers. It was quite a question. Because even our leaders in Boston couldn't see that: how did it happen?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes. After all, this is a period of time when there were very few amicable agreements between management and unions. This is a period of great upheaval and violence and struggle and picket lines and police. And you're getting a very amicable agreement. So I'm sure it was very unusual.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I knew that that will mean work, that that is unbelievable and impossible to describe. It was work later. It was work full-time. Not only full-time, but full-time at night. That was to work out the various sections of wages, the various sections of conditions. After the agreement was signed, that started, and it was full. The days were so taken that every day-- And I had agreements with manufacturers to let the workers, the three workers that were in the wage question, in the piecework question or in the timework question, they were off work. They would come to the boss, in an office, and we would work out, really worked to work out these wages, because there were so many crafts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I see. It was a very complex division of labor and different tasks. It was quite an agreement. When you wrote about it, it got quite a reception from the national union.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, the national union was--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which by this time was CIO. Who was the head of that union nationally at that time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The shoe workers? What is his name? From the miners union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Hapgood?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Hapgood. Powers Hapgood. He was the president.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And a fairly radical guy, politically.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes, yes. He was put in because the shoe workers were getting a few from the prospective shoe, a few from this. They were uniting under the CIO as one union. So that was a very fine decision--excellent decision, in fact--that a president was not a shoe worker. So this was the reason for a time. Not only for a time. Until they would work out, somehow, to work together.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Powers Hapgood, whose background was as a what? In the mining?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the mining. He was a lawyer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And was very close to Brophy, John Brophy.

1.11. TAPE NUMBER: VII, SIDE ONE December 19, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
At our last session we talked about your early organizing in the shoe industry in Los Angeles and some of the problems you had. I want to get back to something that we've omitted now, and that is the question of your political affiliations and interests in the years after you left the Communist Party [of the United States of America]. Now in Boston, I understand, you were, in some ways, close to the Lovestone group. How did that develop and why were you close to them, as opposed to the Socialist Party or some other organization?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, in the first place, there were a few members of the National Shoe Workers union of the Lovestone group. There wasn't any mass, but just a few members. Lovestone took an interest--I'm speaking of Jay Lovestone-- he took an interest in his comrades, what they are doing. So he folded up himself, he came to Boston. I knew Lovestone before from the party. I had, not a close relationship, but I had a relationship with him. I used to discuss with him, sometimes, certain things, and we were very friendly. So when he came to Boston, he came right away over to me and he was extremely friendly. After a few times I met him, I had to make clear my position, that he shouldn't consider me a Lovestoneite or a follower of Lovestone, because I'm not. First, because I didn't know very much about Lovestone. Even his expulsion from the party was sort of not clear to me. Because I never paid any attention to it, so it wasn't very clear. But I told him that we can work together, because I work with a variety of people here in this area, and I am glad to get his opinion and his views upon things. He had quite a few comrades that were very active in the union, and they were very helpful. So I used to meet, not with them separately, but I used to meet with them quite often in the shoeworkers union. So that was my relationship with Lovestone. It was a very fine relationship. He respected--it wasn't a political trick or a political game--he respected my attitude toward him, and he was very friendly. But we never discussed Lovestone this, that. I mean, the political side of Lovestone.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But in terms of his critique or analysis of the Communist Party and of its changing position and its line, you were in sort of broad agreement, were you, with the Lovestone--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. I was in agreement because he expressed the same on the trade union field. That is where we agreed practically completely, almost, because of his position on the trade union movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the essence of that position on the trade union movement that you agreed with? How would you summarize that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I would summarize it this way: that we did not agree with a left-wing trade union movement in America. That was in 1933 and 1934. That was very definite, because they were forming unions. They were very insignificant groups, primarily in the needle trades. In the miners, I know they didn't. They had connections they tried to develop. I don't know very much about other unions, whether they did or they didn't. But in the needle trades, they did a tremendous job. In the furriers union [Fur Workers of America], they controlled the furriers union. In the needle trades, in the ILG[WU, International Ladies Garment Workers Union], they created a tremendous amount of trouble. There were fights.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now you say they created trouble. They were accused by the ILG of strikebreaking. Would they go as far as that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I don't know, and I don't think so.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what do you mean by trouble?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Trouble within the local unions, within the organization to break up. They wanted to break up sections that would organize into an industrial union form. They were for the industrial union against the ILG's structural form. In that sense, they carried on quite a fight. I don't know the details about their work in the ILG, but it now and then came out a big deal.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were highly critical of the AF of L [American Federation of Labor], but yet at the same time you were also highly critical of the dual unions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now I was critical of the AF of L--of its people, of its structure, of its conservative attitude--but I believed in working within the AF of L as far as possible, and directed the work into a more progressive line of thinking. But I would always oppose--and I oppose--a dual union. Whenever possible, not to form a dual union. I was contradicting, that may sound to a degree, when I formed the shoe workers union. But we tried to form within the AF of L the union. We tried to organize. I went several times to the CLU [Central Labor Union] in the Boston area. Because I had many, many friends in the Boston AF of L organization, so I went down. And they were applauding me, they were sympathizing. But the line came where the boot and shoe union [Boot and Shoe Workers Union] said, "If you want to join us, you have to come in member by member." We wanted to come in as a group and then perhaps form, not inside the group, but get into the executive committee in the Boston area and be able to influence directly the organizational structure. It wasn't a question of personnel to get in. That was out of the question. That was not allowed. The Boston area, I must say, was not AF of L minded. For the past thirty, forty years prior to the 1931, '32 crisis, they were independent unions that couldn't agree with the AF of L. So I dealt with a very good trade union group, but anti-AF of L.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, when you came to Los Angeles, you were not a Lovestoneite, but you were close to that position. You came and you confronted what? When you started becoming active in the shoe workers union, it was around mid-1934, '35.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, '34.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A lot of things were happening at this time. For instance, the Communist Party put forward the idea of a labor party in early 1935. This is just prior to the beginning of the popular front thing. Now what was your position on that? I gather you were quite cynical about the motivation of the party to form a labor party in America.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now on that, I was for a labor party. Let's say in the Boston activities I was for an organization, a labor party. But when I came to Los Angeles and they spoke about the labor party, it was a fake thing. It was, somehow, the communist group would get together and they would speak about a labor party forming. That was nonsense. I criticized that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How was it nonsense?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because they formed right away within their own group. That was not a formation. To form a labor party, the way we worked for it--and we failed--was to get into the AF of L unions, to get into any other union outside of the AF of L, if there are such. In Los Angeles, there weren't. In Los Angeles there was a very poor trade union movement at that time, in 1933, 1934. But whatever it was, we had to get in there and agitate. It was the question of forming a labor party and having a labor party with some executives that are straw executives. That was nonsense. I believed and I used to discuss, by the way, with some of the leaders as a-- They called me a counterrevolutionary, but I used to discuss, nevertheless, and force upon them a discussion. Not officially, but unofficially, in meeting them, I used to say, "What the hell are you talking about? I mean, it's a lot of nonsense. Get into the AF of L union. Try to influence the labor movement so that the AF of L executive council must take a stand. If we reach that, we have reached somewheres. But otherwise we are just talking nonsense."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But, meanwhile, you were confronted with this very, very conservative AF of L leader, [J. W.] Bazelle.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now how could you have expected to get anywhere in terms of a labor party or moving in a progressive direction?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My answer to that is very short and clear. I did not speak to Bazelle on it, and I would not suggest even to talk to Bazelle on the labor party. But to local unions, unions in general-- [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were saying that you would never have discussed the idea of a labor party with Bazelle.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no. I couldn't discuss with him straight trade union questions. That was a very hard thing. When I came-- No, I don't want to mix that. The question of the labor party I discussed with leaders of the local unions, of several local unions. Let's say here, the building trade union had at that time some people that were very sympathetic, but they tried to explain to me, which was a waste: "Fine. I agree with you. But I cannot bring it to the council because Bazelle--" I said, "Bazelle, forget Bazelle. You have to bring to the council at that time, at any time, a situation where you know that you can get a large group supporting. Challenge him. He can only be challenged by a large group in the AF of L that speak [for] labor unions." But I wouldn't discuss with Bazelle. That was very clear.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, with the gradual change in the line of the international communist movement towards the popular front-- It was a gradual process, and the effects of that change on the way in which, say, the Los Angeles Communist Party operated were very slow. But, nevertheless, they were beginning to move towards a position that was closer to yours. What was your reaction to this? Did you take them seriously or did you think this was another--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, I did not.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And why was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Because of their past activity. Because of their past work. I said, "Now, there is a new maneuver." I thought it is a new maneuver because they saw that the trend was toward organization, towards an AF of-- Not the AF of L height, but towards-- At that time, it wasn't clear CIO [Congress of Industrial Organizations]. That was not. But toward a trade union movement. And they did not change until the CIO came into existence. But the CIO was not here any force. There were only a few CIO organizers that came here for the automobile industry, for the steel industry, that they came here to organize primarily the rubber and steel and automobile workers. That was the force. So I thought, "Aha! They're trying to flirt with these organizers that are coming in, because that's the only people that they could speak [to]." [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, you were saying that you had to approach some of these organizers sent by the AF of L to start up preliminary CIO unions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was the automobile and the steel.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, but this is already in 1936, '37. They wouldn't start to appear until about '36.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
'Thirty-six, yes. In the very end, '36.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now what about the larger political movement represented by the EPIC [End Poverty in California] organization, all of those groups associated? You know, the Upton Sinclair election and the EPIC organization that was-- What about the idea of a political party revolving around groups like that? You didn't think that was possible, did you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was not. That was not possible. It wasn't possible because you have to consider the EPIC organization as it was constituted at that time. It was an organization of everybody. Just individuals, and a lot of them, I must say. I was in the EPIC organization quite a lot. I went in there to meetings and I was interested. Therefore, I knew that that was not an organization to organize a labor party. The idea--and I do not claim that that is the only idea--but my idea at that time, being a trade unionist, that a labor party, if it has any value, if it should have a value in the American scene, must come from the labor movement, AF of L or some trade union movement that has an impact. I do not say we don't take in people like any group. So of course we would take-- They should belong, and we would educate. But to start. That was a failure because the AF of L organization, the trade union movement, would not join any group. That is quite a fundamental thing. Because we saw, again and again, even when later on in the CIO there were agitations for a labor party-- Walter Reuther didn't leave any convention out when he did not make a speech for a labor party, but he always got the minority vote.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about the New Deal and all of its agencies and the whole Roosevelt thing? Were you coming to view the New Deal in a positive light at this time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, very positive.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why was that? Or in what way did you see that as a progressive--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the sense that it came out, right from the beginning, towards an attitude and an outlook towards the labor situation, towards a labor movement. They began, right from the beginning, to begin to stimulate the work for labor organization, for trade union. That was one.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Section 7-A was interpreted by many as a green light for company unions in early 1934. It was only when the AF of L responded to the National [Industrial] Recovery Act, section 7-A, that you started getting new membership in the AF of L.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I did not view it from that point of view. Not that I did not view it, but we as a group-- I knew quite a number of people at that time from the trade union movement. Our outlook wasn't at all that way. We did not think of it as a trick towards any company union. We saw that they were as flat as we were outside. There was no organization. You had to find a way of trying to organize something.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you saw it as an opportunity.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I saw it as a great opportunity.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, getting back to your trade union work, let's say we're now in 1935. We talked last time about the Fern [Shoe] Company. Where were you working by this time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In 1935 I still was working at the Fern Shoe Company. I was working and being partly out, partly out helping to organize. Somebody had to direct, so I took off a day or so. That was not convenient, but it was all right. It was all right to get away with it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was happening in the union with the passage of the Wagner Act, with the general growth in the AF of L in the city and the beginnings of a CIO organization?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
What was happening where? In the labor movement?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, in Los Angeles. Did you see great potential? Was there a possibility of breaking the open shop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Tremendous potential. That reminds me of a very interesting phase. It was so potential that we looked for anybody that had any kind of organizational experience value. In fact, at that time in Los Angeles, a few active Socialist Party members that were active here in the Socialist Party-- What kind of workers they were I didn't even know, and I didn't particularly care to go into it. But they became organizers. We used them as organizers within certain trades. They weren't in the trade; they didn't know anything about the trade. We brought them, we talked them. That is how. We needed somebody that can speak to a worker. There were very few. In Los Angeles you had to look for them. In Boston it was a different story. There you had some old trade unionists and so on. But here you didn't have any.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you drew these people mostly from the Socialist Party?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Mostly we had here is from the socialists, because they were sympathetic and they were interested.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now a lot of other things were happening at this time. We'll come back to the union question. For instance, were you involved in the anti-Nazi movement in Los Angeles at this time, which was beginning to become quite strong?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was involved, but through entirely a different phase. I was involved through Melvyn Douglas in his group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. That was a little later though.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was a little later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, the Hollywood Anti-Nazi [League for the Defense of American Democracy].
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But not before then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not before. Before, I was active and interested in the shop that I worked, and outside of work I used to spend practically seven nights a week in the organizing. That is, I worked with the people that came here from Detroit, several people that I knew.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
People who were sent to start work in the auto industry here?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Organize the automobile industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was mostly at Douglas [Aircraft Company] and the South Gate plant.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were organizing. They caught the Douglas people. There was an issue. They caught them, and they began to organize. They had a larger group they organized. But they were some people here, and I used to work with them because I knew them before. That wasn't the question, how I knew them, but the question was the labor movement, the trade union movement. The same thing with the rubber workers. I didn't know before, or I only met him here, Roberts, George Roberts. I became very close friends with him through the work. He was very thankful, because I was the local guy. I was already here two years, so I was the local guy that could direct him, that could go with him.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you and a few others basically had a progressive but noncommunist caucus within the AF of L and sort of a group that would later become a nucleus of the noncommunist wing of the CIO in Los Angeles.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That would be a good description. Yes, I would agree with that situation. Although we did not formulate in our minds that way, because we were too busy with the AF of L, really, because we were trying to get into the AF of L. In the beginning of the organization of shoe workers, I went down to the AF of L. I spoke to Bazelle. Because I didn't know him very well, so I spoke to him. And after a few conversations, I said, "My dear fellow, I won't come down here, and I won't waste any time." Because it was a waste
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was just only interested in the skilled craft unions? He was basically a local version of William Green?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, very orthodox.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He just wasn't interested in the shoe workers? He wasn't interested in some of these new unions, or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He would be interested in the shoe workers if I would follow his point.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
When I told him that we are taking in workers, shoe workers, no matter what they work in-- We cannot form a cutters union. We cannot form a stitchers union and a lasters union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it's the same question you get in the industrial--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Form of organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was just against that, no matter what.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No matter what. Even in a union where you work in a shop and they are interrelated, where people are transferred, really, from one group to another. That was the question, whether they are transferred or not. We thought, at that time, that this is the time that we should speak about an industrial union. And he couldn't. I mean, there was no--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what was happening at meetings of the [AFL] Central Labor Council now in 1935, '36? You had Bazelle, who was dominant, who had these cronies, who was able to more or less control it. And then you had a fairly vociferous caucus of communist members who were always trying to undermine Bazelle and who were in certain unions. Then you had your group, who were also pro-industrial union, but anticommunist. But the two of you didn't join up.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You did on occasion?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes, on occasional votes. They didn't care and we didn't. As long as we had some people that would raise their voice, would raise their hand.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you see any prospects of the two groups getting together on a more permanent basis?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On certain issues, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Only on certain issues. But you didn't foresee a CIO which would bring together the two groups, even though they wouldn't exactly exist in harmony?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. We did not even think of the political side, the political issues. At that time, if you were a worker in a certain industry, you came in, you worked. You didn't ask any questions. As long as you wanted to work. If you were capable, if you were able, you did not ask whether one was a communist or anticommunist or part communist or whatever or socialist or anything else. We pulled them in. As long as you can speak. As long as you can go out and do something in the shop or outside the shop.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what sort of progress did you make in the shoe workers union at this time? Were you making good progress?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very good.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of membership, what sort of numbers did you have?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, we had already, at that time-- You see, I must state that very clearly, that the industry, as such, grew tremendously. When we came in 1935--when we began to organize, we began to see expressions--there was not the question of CIO or AF of L. We tried to organize a union, and the only connection I had is the Boston shoe workers union [United Shoe Workers of America] that I used to write and I used to get connections with. So we did not bother too much about the AF of L because we wanted the affiliation with the independent shoe workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So that wasn't a big issue.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was the issue. And that wasn't an issue even here to affiliate, but it was a question of-- I knew that I cannot expect Boston, the general office, to send us even a dollar to help. We knew that we have to get our funds here. We knew that we have to deal with it locally. I knew it and, therefore, I did not really bother. But we succeeded very well. We succeeded, first, because the membership grew, the membership was taking in new members.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Are we talking in the hundreds?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the hundreds, in the hundreds. We had, at that time, let's say when we organized in '35, we had something like five hundred members in the union. We knew already at that time that the thing may grow to some numbers that we are not even interested to count. We are interested to get in members and get them into the union, and that is what we did. So we were busy taking in. And 1936, we arranged-- Mind you, our arrangements were working at that time. That is how the bosses were dependent on that we got workers from Saint Louis, skilled shoe workers. And they wanted some. They needed some leaders in the shoe industry, stitchers, lasters--mostly lasters--and cutters too. They needed people to come in that have some skill. They didn't want to spend money in just training. They were not organized like Joyce, Inc., to train people. And even they hired many skilled people. But they did not bother. If they are not, there are people here who will train them. That was their outlook. Now that was not the industry's outlook. The industry grew each shop individually, and when we did not have any agreement with all the shops, but we had only connections, we used to call them, talk to them. And the workers would tell us, "If I could only get a few lasters, this type or that type of work." Well, we did not have them any, but we used to write to Saint Louis, "If there are any people coming, let them come to our headquarters. You give them the address, we'll get them jobs." So they came. They came so fast that we only had to transfer them to this shop. But we didn't have any trouble. Once they came, there was work. And we could [inaudible]. So that is a unique, different situation than any other district in the shoe workers had at that time or previously. We were in a different situation. And we used to grow. When we had ten workers from Saint Louis, they were, right away, they were in the union. They came into the union, and they brought in anybody that wasn't a union member into the union from the shop that they worked. So, really, we had an easy job, as far as organizing is concerned, once we broke the ice, once we got into the shop.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, what was the process, then, by which your independent union gravitated slowly towards or became, what was it, the United Shoe Workers of America of the CIO? Right? Your union eventually went into the CIO. How did that process become--? Because at this time you were still an independent union. You weren't connected with the AF of L.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were still independent, but I was connected with the CIO over my head.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I worked with the shoe workers. And the Boston organization also, at that time, negotiated with the CIO.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the CIO was just a committee.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. It was a committee, but we made it a central union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, how did that process take place, as far as your own union was concerned? How did you go from being an independent union to becoming a CIO union? When did it take place, and what were the struggles over that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was no struggle.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There was never any question of you going into the AF of L?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. Well, I shouldn't say that. There was a question when we had only a small group, when we had the Fern Shoe Company organized alone. At that time, we went again to the AF of L with a committee and presented to them that we organized a shop, the biggest shop in Los Angeles-- which [it] was--and we are ready to make application. So again we were confronted with Bazelle and his organization. Not the membership, because the membership were applauding, they were very greeting and so on. But Bazelle, cold turkey, began to discuss with us the structure of organization. So I told him, "Structure, what are you talking about structure? We have three hundred workers. Do we want to divide it? Nonsense." And we walked out. We never went again. We were an independent union until the organization actually combined with the CIO and it was a CIO organization. They sent out letters, and we greeted them, too, as a CIO organization and we joined. We joined the Boston-- Not the Boston union. The Boston union we were connected [to] because we used to get communications from them about the trade, about certain details that were important to general information.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now if it wasn't for Bazelle, is it quite possible that you would have actually joined the AF of L? Because, in many ways, he didn't really represent the majority now. I mean, there were lots of other people with similar perspective to you in the AF of L by this time, weren't there?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the ILG? What was their opposition towards you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The ILG was, at that time, in a very-- They went with the CIO, and they did not step out of the AF of L. But when it came to us, to the shoe workers, they did not ask us whether we are going to the AF of L or we are not. They knew, and they gave us headquarters when we didn't have a hall to meet. They said, "Come in. You only have to notify us a few days before you have the hall." The ILG gave us the support that we couldn't ask for, and the Amalgamated [Clothing Workers Union] too. The Amalgamated was much more friendlier with our ideology.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
These were socialist leaders of the ILG and the Amalgamated, primarily?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No? Just trade unionists?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Primarily trade unionists. They had some old Lovestoneites that were in the union, they had some socialists, yes. They had some socialists that were in the union, but not in the leadership.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were the leaders? Was [Israel] Feinberg one, or was he an international leader?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Feinberg was an international leader. At that time, it was [Isadore] Ludsky was the-- He was a former communist member. He was out of the party for some reason that I don't know. I was very friendly with Ludsky. Ludsky was a very fine trade unionist, by the way--that is outside--but he used to embrace anyone that was interested in trade union work. I met him as the leader of the district here, and he was very friendly, organizationally and personally too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was also having a battle with Bazelle, was he, constantly?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, [laughter] constantly is right. But he had to stay because his organization--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your opinion, then, of Sidney Hillman's position on the question of the AF of L and the CIO? Would you--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I was very, very favorable towards his view. Sidney Hillman had a very organizational, structural viewpoint. Even locally here, they-- Of course, they got the central office viewpoint, and they advocated, they came out with, the same viewpoint here in the AF of L. But they were definite. They were not a question of do we walk fast, do we walk slow. "That is where we walk." They made very clear their position.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about [David] Dubinsky? He's the one that took the ILG back into the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. He supported the CIO. He was not anti-CIO, by the way. Even later, he was very much pro. But he did not leave the AF of L. Where the Amalgamated had a different attitude.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So your union, then, was closer towards the position of the Amalgamated than the ILG.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was very much pro-CIO and almost unreservedly.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Unreservedly is right.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Regardless even of whether communists were in leadership positions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
At that time, when we joined, there was no question. There wasn't in the leadership, there were in the leadership, that wasn't the question. Because the local leadership was trade union, primarily.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But it did become a question. It became a very big question.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. That is later, a few years later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, we'll come onto that next.

1.12. TAPE NUMBER: VII, SIDE TWO December 19, 1984

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
OK, let's talk now about how the CIO came into existence in Los Angeles. There still wasn't much of a CIO even as late as 1936. In fact, the first committee or council of the CIO was set up in early 1937 shortly after the Douglas strike, which I'm sure you remember.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, what was your role in the early negotiations that led to the formation of the CIO Industrial Council, as the leader of the union? What was your position in the union by this time, in the shoe workers? What was your full title?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My full title was organizer of the shoe workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And Mike Padgett, who was your--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was the chairman.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the difference in roles? Who was the real power?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was the chairman, and he conducted the meetings of the executive committee and the membership meetings. I was the organizer, the man around in the trade, and kept on organizing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was your title the secretary, actually?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Secretary/organizer.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, as you say, you were recruiting by this time in the hundreds, by 1936.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did the movement grow that led to the formation of the CIO in Los Angeles? Who were the groups that were the nucleus of it, and what was your relationship?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The nucleus were actually people that came here from Detroit that were organizers, that tried to find ways. They were organizers in the field; they tried to get the local group to participate with them. They brought the message, so to speak, from Detroit, discussing with them to organize some. The organizer in the rubber workers union was George Roberts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was there in the rubber workers when he came? Nothing? Company union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nothing. Nothing. There was no company union either. He organized the rubber workers worker by worker, actually. This was only the beginning. Later he got in a lot of workers that were important, that became the executives.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And this is Goodyear and various others.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Various others.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now the AF of L wasn't interested in any of these workers or had made--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He [Roberts], however, used to go constantly to the AF of L council. And he used to come back and he used to be so discouraged, so down that they don't give him a hand. He was the only one. He was one organizer. But later he got in quite a group of people, local people.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Rank and file.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Local people that were rank and file that were for an organization. So they worked with him, and they appreciated his work. He got great success. Now, he was one. The automobile industry had some people from Detroit. They were doing very fine work. They were already experienced in the labor field, where Roberts came from the-- He was a worker. And he was capable as a speaker and as a joker. He was a person that you couldn't help liking him when you met him: he joked about everything about himself. He was very good. Through the work here, he became an organizer. He knew the language. We used to call him the actor in the organization group. He was the actor. He was always acting something out, and it was very good.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the impetus for the organization--this was in rubber and auto and a couple of other industries--were these outside organizers. Although there were nucleuses of workers who were-- For instance, I know in the Douglas plant there was a nucleus of left-wing rank and filers who became the nucleus of the CIO.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. I know when we met in the beginning, I suggested that we go to the YWCA. There we had the headquarters for the educational work. So I invited them to come there, and they came and they had meetings. We had several meetings there before they had a headquarters of one room. So we used to have meetings there. So we used to get some of these rubber workers and some of the automobile workers. On the automobile, we really moved ahead.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So let me try and understand who these organizers of the CIO were. You had a few people from Detroit who were sent in by the national CIO committee. Then you had people like yourself from the shoe workers union, which was an independent union. Who else? Were there people from the ILG?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
People from the ILG participated in that. Particularly Ludsky was a very active individual.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was basically, again, that same group of people who were noncommunist but anti-Bazelle, anti-AF of L establishment.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
You may call them they were anti, but actually he was anti-them more. Because they kept on appealing to him.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who kept on appealing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
These people, the ILG and the other. The rubber workers were very, very much-- They wanted something, some protection. Some protection. Not protection in their personal life, but protection of the union through some larger group to come.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you would meet, periodically, these organizers.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, quite often.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there any Communist Party members at this time? Or they came in later, did they?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I really don't know. There may have been communists, but there wasn't any communist distinction. It was CIO. [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, one of the seminal events for the labor movement in Los Angeles was the Douglas sit-down strike at the Douglas aircraft plant in Santa Monica.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, that was the great thing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was the only big sit-down strike here.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The only big sit-down strike and the only big organizing center that this called upon. This strike was later analyzed by people in the automobile workers and locally that we had a center to speak of. That was such a powerful thing that the strike was even exaggerated to twenty times that big.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What do you remember about it? It was in February, 1937. I think it was about four hundred people who stayed in the plant, surrounded by police.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Stayed in the plant. And we were picketing. I was on the picket line quite often. We walked around, and we used to--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was we? What kind of people participated in the picket lines?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Trade union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
All trade unions? You mean building trade workers, everybody, or just--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not building trade workers, no. But only CIO, those that were connected with the CIO, I saw. And I went there several times.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, what do you mean by connected with the CIO? Because the CIO hadn't actually been officially founded.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, founded it was. Because these people that came out here, that organized, were CIO. They were CIO, part of the AF of L at that time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right, right. But the actual council was only actually created, I know, later in 1937.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. There wasn't an organized [body], really. Even our committee that we reported to were individuals that we reported to.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I see. So people from the unions and those people. So they would be like rubber workers there or some ILG workers.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Rubber workers, ILG, automobile workers, and there were other workers too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about political organizations? I know the Communist Party was definitely there, probably some socialists, probably some other left wingers' support. But, primarily, these CIO-oriented unions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, there may have been quite a group of people that came from the various political organizations. But when we sat down at meetings to discuss the next thing, what are we to do to maintain this, to work-- Because we were experienced enough to see in the labor movement that this strike, this sit-down strike, was a godsend, was a tremendous thing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why was that? What was it about the sit-down strike?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The advertising of the union, the newspapers, the daily-- Wherever you went, they spoke about-- [As] though it would involve thousands of workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Plus the actions of the police, mass arresting all of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. All this was directing a big thing. And it was much bigger, it was ten times as big as the strike actually was as we went there on the picket line. The picket line was merely dramatic. Because the guys through the window would greet us, we would shout, and we-- It was the greatest thing that Los Angeles had in the organizing field. The point is that we used it that way. It might interest you that the strikers-- How many? I think it was something like 30, or maybe more, strikers were indicted.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I think 350 were indicted, actually.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Or 350 may have been indicted. They were given sentences from six months up. They defended them in three sessions, three courts, and the penalty was given the same. I think in the last one it was even made tighter somehow. But this is a part of the lawyers. We had at that time, I think, six lawyers in the various unions that were involved. It may be interesting to point out that Jimmy [James Marshall] Carter, who later became a federal judge--at that time he was a practicing lawyer--he maintained that it is time for us to go to the Supreme Court with that case. He was against the indictment of these people from the picket line. He proved, with his--Later to the Supreme Court. To us, he didn't have to prove this thing. But his main point was that this was not a strike to go in and destroy the property or touch anything inside. In fact, they were excellent, these workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. They maintained everything.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They maintained everything in order. So he made this as a point of law, that this is important to point out. He won the case in our committee. Five lawyers weren't against, but they questioned. They did this. "Why go through with such a--?" The five lawyers were opposed to it, but Jimmy Carter was set. And he won. Because the national office in Detroit, when we told them on the phone what the debate is and what we feel, they said, "Yes, go ahead. We'll support." They sent money, the Detroit office, and we gave money. And we told Jimmy, "Go ahead." Jimmy presented this case. A year later the case came up in the Supreme Court. Jimmy went to Washington, and he won the case completely. When he called us from Washington, the minute that the case-- He couldn't even talk straight, he was so excited. I talked to him, and several of the-- Naturally the automobile workers, they were the first. He came back as the great victor; he won the case. And that was quite an important date. We thought so. It was very important. But later it became the important thing for the whole union, for the picketing. And the whole question came out clear.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now getting back to your union, was there any opposition in your union to supporting the CIO?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, there was no opposition. We joined the National Shoe Workers union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So [Powers] Hapgood was, at that time, the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
At that time. Later on, a few months later, Powers Hapgood was appointed as the chief adviser to the president, to the whole union from the CIO. I, that came from Boston and that knew the Boston situation, that-- The executive was formed at that time, before the CIO-- [It] was an executive of the independent shoe workers union. There were six different groups of shoe workers. They were all in the National Shoe Workers association. Then it became the name was given as the, not the national, not this, not that, but the--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
National Shoe Workers--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, not the national. The--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
United Shoe Workers of America.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The United Shoe Workers of America.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So who, then, was the person that was primarily responsible, on the national level, for bringing the shoe workers union--this was still based in Boston, right?--into the CIO? Was it Hapgood?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Hapgood came in later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So who--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was the secretary, Wilson.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Ah, your old friend, George--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
My old friend George Wilson.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The Englishman.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He was the power, really, the power behind. He carried it on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you went into the CIO without any real dissent.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, we applauded the United Shoe Workers of America that they went into the CIO, because we were practically in the CIO. Because I was active in the CIO.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were the representative, then, of your union to the CIO local council?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what happened in that council? Because gradually it came under the control of the Communist Party over the next year or so.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
More than a year.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, it took about a year and a half. When Slim [Philip] Connelly became the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And Harry Bridges became a CIO leader. How did this process take place?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were members of the CIO, and naturally we opposed that, the shoe workers and many others.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were the unions which were communist led?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were not communist led. There may have been some communists there, but they were supporting--We supported, too, the central office of the CIO. But we opposed. We voted against them, voted against Bridges.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was Bridges considered by you to be more or less a communist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not more or less, but he was a communist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was your view going back to his role in the general strike?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about Slim Connelly, who was head of the newspaper you--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, he was known as a communist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
He was known as a communist.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
To everyone?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because he didn't acknowledge it; he wasn't publically. So now how do you explain the fact that they were able to assume control of the leadership?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
To assume control? Well, they worked. A year before, there was the streetcar union. The leader of the streetcar union [Jack McCarthy] was a Boston fellow, and he was a communist. I knew him for years. He was a good organizer, very capable. He was an organizer in Boston, in the subway stations. McCarthy was quite a fellow with ability. He came here and he became, right away, the leader of the union. I don't know whether he came here as a transferred leader. I don't know. But I know that he became the leader here very soon. I used to see him quite often because we were very old friends, good friends. He and a few other unions-- I suppose they organized and they got control.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How? Was it by hard work, by maneuvering, or what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By hard work. By hard work and organizing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you were also working hard. How come they were more--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We were working hard and we were organizing. We were organizing our union, and each one was busy in his field. And we participated in general work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, for instance, what would happen in the council when one of the communists would call for the CIO to make a donation to the American League Against War and Fascism or some other communist-led organization? Would your group oppose it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
On the grounds of what? It's a wasteful spending of money or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We opposed it because it is a communist-supported organization. We don't want to participate.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you said that? You would say that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Then what would be the response of the communists? How would they respond to that criticism? Because they would not acknowledge that they were communists.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They would not acknowledge they were communists, they would not acknowledge that this is a communist-supported organization. But we had some facts to support it. It was discussed--not in a very heated form--it was discussed as a proposal to support something, and we voted against it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When your group more or less lost control, if you like, of the CIO council, what was your attitude? "Well, that's OK; we'll just carry on working, and if they control it, well, there's nothing we can do," or what? I mean, you certainly didn't withdraw or anything like that.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But what about in 1938, when the state CIO was formally set up with Harry Bridges as the state leader and Slim Connelly as the local Los Angeles leader? There was a sort of revolt of certain unions. I think a couple of locals of the UAW [United Automobile Workers], I think a couple of rubber locals. And Bill [William] Busick, I think--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Bill Busick wasn't at that time secretary anymore.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No, he wasn't secretary, but I think he was connected with one of the unions that was in revolt.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you involved in that revolt?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the reason for it and how did it develop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In 1938, did you say?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, it was in 1938. There was a big convention of the state CIO in Los Angeles in which Harry Bridges was formally--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He wasn't at that time. He was formally the leader, not of the CIO--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The state CIO, yes.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He influenced in the state to become sometimes, but he wasn't elected the leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No, he was appointed, I think. I think he was appointed by [John L.] Lewis.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By Lewis.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, so we opposed that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
On the grounds, again--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
On the grounds that he's a communist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now did you feel that this was perhaps not red-baiting, or what were your reactions towards that question?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Whether it was red-baiting or not red-baiting, we did not consider that. But we opposed them. We opposed him as a communist, but we did not denounce him as a communist at that time at the meeting.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now what was your alternative to this? You basically wanted the CIO to what? To get rid of its communists or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What then? Why shouldn't communists be in the leadership positions of the CIO? For what reasons?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
For the reason for their previous work. That I as an individual could not trust Bridges to be the state representative. I wanted someone else from the rubber workers, from this worker--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
For what reasons? On the grounds that the communists did not have trade unionism as their first priority? Was that the essence of it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. That's right. The essence of it was that the worker, the trade union work, is very important: you have a source of gathering material, of being the leader. But the trade union work is not primary. That the party is primary. This is a secondary thing, this is to be utilized. That was our position.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But now the Communist Party, I'm sure, in some ways wouldn't deny that they were utilizing it as part of a larger overall political movement which they considered to be a progressive movement to support Roosevelt, to oppose fascism, to ultimately encourage their own propaganda, create, perhaps, a labor party in America. How could you divorce your concern with the trade union questions, with all of the larger issues of the day, relating to the onslaught against the CIO by the AF of L, the growth of fascism in America, all of these large questions that were becoming--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That we participated. That we participated and we fight in these groups. That we are trade unionists, but as a group, as an organized force, we can participate. In the antifascist movement and all the other movements, we send delegates, but we are not going to be taken, squeezed out and taken over by some organization. This is the priority, and this is the secondary.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You, at this time, did not belong to any political organization since you left the Communist Party.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the closest you came was to be associated with the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The Lovestone.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Right. But by this time you weren't--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, you got married in 1935, was it, the first time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And your wife, I think, was a [Communist] Party member.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
She wasn't a party member, but she was very close.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
She was very close. Now did this lead to arguments?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, it led to arguments, but very intelligent, very nice. We did not permit--she didn't, I didn1 t--permit that the political party-- I would express certain opinions on this political issue or that political issue, she would express her opinions, and that's all. I got used to it, I would say, to have a whole sort of review on the thing that happened during the day or last night.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now were you keeping up? Did you still read the Daily Worker at this time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you kept up, in other words, with all of the political developments.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That I always kept up, somehow.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were very intimately involved in all of the major political and trade union questions of the time.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Mentally I was. In activities, not particularly. I used to have many friends in the Communist Party that we used to meet and we used to have arguments over any question, over most questions. I used to argue about various questions, so I had to be, somehow, up to them. So I used to read the papers. And I read it for information too.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, on the question of the antifascist movement, I think you mentioned earlier that you were involved with the Hollywood group--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With the Hollywood group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
--led by Melvyn Douglas [Hollywood Anti-Nazi League for the Defense of American Democracy]. What was your role in that? Was it as a trade unionist?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Trade unionist. There were quite a few trade unions there represented. There were at least six, eight trade union leaders from the steel workers to other were represented.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your role? Just sort of a coordinator?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was in the executive committee. There were about ten members of the executive committee. We used to plan, we used to do the work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was going on in your mind with the rise of fascism both in Europe and in the United States? Did it have any effect on your attitude toward your Jewish identity or anything like that? Were these questions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
These questions, of course, came up, but they weren't the important thing. The important thing [was] that it is the working class is being out by the fascists and the whole group of people are destroyed. I believe it was not only the Jewish question. Jews and non-Jews were prosecuted and were driven.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the Nazi-Soviet pact? What was your reaction to that? How did that disturb the CIO in terms of splitting it between communists and noncommunists? What was the impact of it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The impact was a very bad one, for the communists particularly. They had to find any kind of hiding. I didn't even listen to them, even to my friends that were very close friends. They began to excuse and to do-- I said, "The best way is let's not discuss that." And we didn't.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was it a surprise to you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, very much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you weren't surprised that the Communist Party was justifying it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no. The justification, I understood that they have to find a way of justifying. And they did. But there was a very poor justification. The main thing is that [it] was outrageous.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did that affect the workings of the CIO? Very damaging, was it, for the communist-led CIO unions and for all the alliances like the antifascist alliance? Melvyn Douglas then came out against the communists, who had been more or less the leading figures in the Hollywood Anti-Nazi League.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes. I mean, that was their part. That was my part, let's say, in the antifascist movement. We came out. This is nothing to do with my union work directly.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which continued just as normal?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about the role of the communists as far as your union was concerned? Did they try and get some of their members who were in the unions into leadership positions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did they do that? How did they try and undermine your position?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, they did. They tried to get in an election to run as union members. They were active and they had some.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were their criticisms of you? What did they say?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, their criticism wasn't a lot. Their criticism was that I don't conduct a militant union, that I am too much with the bosses, which was a joke, really. I used to--not answer them, or answer anything--but we used to publish an annual report, that is, tell them that our wages are higher than even in New York the wages. The average worker in Los Angeles are higher waged than in New York.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This is remarkable, given that it used to be much, much lower.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
This was remarkable. It was also because of the utilization of the work, the way the work was utilized. You couldn't make a blanket comparison because the work was organized differently here. That is not that we were organized so much better, no. But the work handing down, and being that there was a union and being that we watched the part and we knew that they can pay a certain amount. So they paid, and the average earnings went up much higher.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So your union not only had expanded greatly, but you had won without actually any major--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Any major strikes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You had won a lot of agreements for wage raises. Improvement of conditions, too?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We worked on a certain basis that worked out in our favor. It was also in their favor, because they didn't overpay their worker the work, what they did. How to explain it more accurately would be, let us say, taking in Joyce, Inc., and the Fern Shoe Company, the two very big ones. There were two different situations; different shoes were made and different systems. But in Joyce, Inc., I can illustrate: let's say, you would say a cutter or a stitcher or a laster in the lasting. The lasting was done entirely different than the usual hand machine laster. He did it machine work, but the way they worked, the way the shoe went in, the laster only had to do one particular job, pulling.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So it was a more efficient division of labor?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A more efficient. It could only be done in our type of work that it was adopted. The union had nothing to do with that. That is, the manufacturer had his experts and they devised the work. We really had no opposition or no recommendation.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did you more or less get over most of your grievances by this time? Or did the union still have a lot of very basic--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, we had grievances.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were they major ones?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some major ones.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Like what? What remaining grievances did you have?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By departments. Let's say in the lasting room a new type of work would come in. We had, at that time, to measure and-- Finally--and that was a few years later, it wasn't just in a year later and so on--we developed a committee in the department of worker and management that they had to come together. If they couldn't come together, then the union came in, not before. They could come together and decide the method, the price for the method of work. Because they changed constantly; these changes came on. Some were very good, but the question of earnings were always involved. Let me give you an example of this that was very outstanding. The heel put on, a wood heel or another type of heel, mostly wood heels, would come. They had to fit them on, measure, fit them on, work it. Once they were measured, once they were fit, the next fellow tightened them. Now, this was done entirely different in the East by workers, shoe workers, for years. Now, this was a new method, and there was also a certain machine developed that the heel couldn't move. He had to fit in the heel: once it was fit in, there it belongs. So this new method of putting on a heel became quite a big question. We got in, we had quite a dispute, and we settled it, of course. It took us a certain time. It took us two, three days. We met three times or four times and we settled it. But we finally agreed that on these methods the whole union doesn't have to be involved. The shop committee with an expert from the management, they could finally agree on this new method and the new way and the new effort. Because the worker had to exercise a certain measurement, almost with his fingers, to fit it in. Then it was done. Now, all these new things, they had to be settled. And there was a union and there was a management.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But compared with when you first arrived in Los Angeles in, say, 1934, by 1939 how much better were conditions? Immense improvements?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It wouldn't measure. If I would say immense improvement, that doesn't tell the story.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Transformation.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Immense, immense, immense improvement. There was a transformation of work. The union was in there on every step, and we always succeeded in arguing out, in working it out. In the East, there would have been a dozen strikes, but we learned how to work it out within the shop. The employer, he appreciated that. In the Fern Shoe Company, we had enormous arguments. We argued. The arguments were almost like "We are dividing, we are going out on strike." We never threatened that. But we explained why, and finally we agreed. We agreed on compromises. Of course there were compromises, but it worked out very well.

1.13. TAPE NUMBER: VIII, SIDE ONE January 16, 1985

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How about a little bit about the day-to-day workings of your union? That's Local 122 of the United Shoe Workers [of America], which by 1937, '38, '39 was a pretty established CIO [Congress of Industrial Organizations] union in Los Angeles. We've talked quite a bit about that. But what about the day-to-day negotiating? What was your role? How would you describe it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was the secretary/organizer, as we called it, in our district. I set myself up as the head of the union. That means that the shop function-- And that was not only because I was here as the head of the union. That was my advocacy in trade unions, in function: that the head of the union should direct, but direct and not participate in these little details of the shop. I had setups; I had shop stewards and chairmen of shop stewards within the shop. I instructed them. I used to arrange schools for teaching these shop stewards how to function as the representatives, as the fellows that deal with details in the shop. There couldn't be any great grievances. There were grievances within a shop steward's [jurisdiction] that would come up. They could be solved within the shop, and they were solved. It was a difficulty, of course, to train these people, but they were excellent.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who were these people? What kind of people were working in the shoe industry at that time? What was the sort of composition?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The composition was shoe workers that were experienced shoe workers from the Saint Louis area, from the Chicago area, and from Boston, Massachusetts.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Then what about the local--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That is true, they were. But we had a great majority, the great majority, that came from Los Angeles. They were Mexican workers, and they were excellent. These people, they learned so fast, they learned so quick, and they learned exactly what we taught them. Then I really felt great about the conferences that I used to arrange weekends, Saturday and Sunday. I used to spend days with them of conferences. Not every week of course, but every four weeks there was a conference. We used to gather and we used to discuss shop matters. But these shop matters were thought, and they carried them out. When I say carried them out, I mean in all shops, in all the factories that we controlled.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of numbers would that be? How many workers are we talking about at this time?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
At this time, if it is in 1937-8, we are talking about 2,700, 2,800 workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Of which a majority were Mexican.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A majority were Mexican.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But the Mexicans were not in the leadership positions were they? That came later, did it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. In the shop leadership they were. They were in the shop leadership. There was also a large group in the executive, in the overall executives there were.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And there were no conflicts, ethnic conflicts, between these old-timers from Saint Louis with an English background and the Mexican workers? They didn't have any ethnic conflicts?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were really no ethnic conflicts, for some reason. I don't know. I wouldn't make any statements now. But perhaps it had to do with the integrating, with working together. That was never pointed as a point, as to argue with a worker that is a Mexican or that is a Saint Louis or that comes from New England and an Irishman-- because most of the New England shoe workers were Irish--or a New Yorker or anyone else. I mean, we didn't suppress it, by any means. It wasn't suppressed, but there wasn't made a feature of it. So it wasn't in existence. I did not come across any time in daily work that this was a Mexican worker or this was another worker. It was a worker, and that is his point of view. His point of view may be wrong or his point of view may be right, but we argued his point of view. I don't know if it was such a unique situation. I don't think so, at least I don't, but I'm not familiar with the inside of the other unions. I knew the union leadership, many union leaderships, and I worked with them. But I'm speaking of the shoe workers inside. We had a very excellent, actually, relationship. And it worked out that the shop took care. Now, that kept the office so busy in follow-up, in follow-up the situations. The shops took care of most of the grievances; most of the grievances did not reach the head union to come in and solve. We sort of gave it listening point. We would discuss with the stewards. Very often, yes, it came that a shop conference would take place at least once a week (a shop, that means another shop). The conference was how they handled their grievances, their shop problems. And sometimes, very often I would say, it came up that a new thing, a new phase of shoe work, a new phase of it-- [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You were talking about how grievances were settled on the shop level.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Let's say we would go over the shop and review the grievances and merely agree. Or some points could have been taken up, but on the whole we agreed. Not that we had to agree, but we agreed with the shop stewards. The shop stewards were able men. They learned and they were part of this work, part of the daily technique.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, tell me, if you could answer this question--which is a sort of a broad question--if you could characterize the difference in the working conditions in the shoe industry in Los Angeles when you first arrived, let's say in 1935, '36, and compare that with the shop conditions by the time of World War II or by the time that you left the union in the late forties. How would you compare them? I know it's like night and day.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It really couldn't be compared because it would sound so terrific. I would say from the wage question, which is a very important thing, from wages let us give you a number of skilled workers. Cutters are skilled operators. From their wages, let's say, of $16 a week--that was the best--and only about three years later we spoke of $60 a week.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So about 400 percent in three years.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
You see, that is why I could make comparisons for the past. I mean, there was no comparison. A machine laster--which is a very important job, which is quite a technique, which is quite a handling--he made $17 a week, $16 a week, and so on. He began to make $60 to $70 a week three years later.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Even though it's three years later, you still had high unemployment. Three years later would be about 1938. You still had high unemployment in Los Angeles before the war.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, high unemployment, but not in the shoe industry. You see, I may have mentioned that before: the shoe industry grew up only in a few years. Which I recognized at that time, which is an unusual situation for an industry to grow that way. But that was Los Angeles. Because I came from Boston, Massachusetts. In Boston, in the best days, we had at least several thousand unemployed, and there were always trained workers. Here there was a question of getting a worker and train him and work. So we had all shoe workers and non-shoe workers that were taken in constantly into the line and they were working. So there was a different situation, and I recognized it as such.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There wasn't really unemployment here at all?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was always full employment. I say full employment because we always took in other workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now, tell me more about your own day-to-day work. You worked in an office, did you? You had an office and you were a full-time, paid--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Full-time paid and full-time work. And I mean full-time by not eight hours a day, by--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How many hours did you work?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Eighteen hours, so on. It was a full day's work, including weekends. I had conferences on weekends. It was a union that had to function well.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You got a salary paid by who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By the local union, by the local union only.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And most of the gains that you've talked about came about without any really major strikes, didn't they? You managed to win all these things through negotiations.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was without a strike, but that wouldn't really tell the story. There were a lot of threatened strikes. There were threats and there were almost out--There were stoppages of some sort, and we settled these things. Somehow, because of the Los Angeles situation in our trade, in the shoe trade, there was such a tight situation-- We had workers, we had a lot of workers, but there weren't any too many, and they knew it. The bosses also learned one from the other, not so much from us as from one employer to the other. They used to meet together, and they used to discuss. There were some that were great educators that would tell, "My god, you cannot agree. Let me participate in your comfort." They were interested, let's say, to keep it going. Because one did not compete with the others so much, because they were in particular levels. And maybe the levels weren't so diverse as their interest as a trade, as a membership, to keep together. So they would tell them, "You can find a way of settling." Because they will talk no matter how extreme the situation is. They would call and I would sit down. I would have the committee-- There was always a shop committee; the shop committee was the stewards from each department. They would sit down, and I would sit with them. And that is what was also a thought to the employer, to his foreman, because the main fight was with foremen.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were the main quarrels about? What were the single most important issues that almost came to--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The issues that brought on, let's say, to a strike: A foreman would order or would enforce that this is the way they should work, this is the way. Well, the workers had their, not their new, but their interpretation of the law, of the agreement that work should be divided properly, equally, and the foreman would not carry it out. That was always a fight between the foreman and the worker. And when the worker did not insist, the foreman would get away and would get away with more. But I could say that: that in the shoe industry there were very few that could get away with the steward that far. The steward called his attention very nicely, and particularly even the rough guys would train themselves to speak nice to the foreman. They would come to me at the conference. They would say, "I spoke to him as nice that I would never speak to that son of a bitch." That way. "I spoke to him nice, but I got the answer-- Finally we had to tell him, 'Look, you either are going to settle or we are going to have an issue.'" The issue was to take this case and bring it to the employer. The employer had a higher setup, a committee also that worked. We set it up that way. Some of them were afraid so they began to settle. They settled it by one way or another, they settled. It depended upon the steward. Some stewards would go along as breezy as could be; some had a tough time and we had to help him. But the union stood behind the steward and we helped them, we helped them work it out. That was my major business. The organizer had to be part of it, he had to urge. Very often I would get a call and I would come down to the shop. I would only speak to the steward, that's all, correct or discuss with him the question. I didn't have to make any secret, because I would take the steward off his job and would go into the office and sit down and discuss with him properly.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about your relationship with the rank and file? Was there ever any tendency, do you feel, for your union to become bureaucratic, like some unions in the East had become, where the organizer of the union only dealt with the shop stewards and didn't have much contact with the rank and file? Or what was your relationship?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, that did not happen, for the reason that I was very conscious of it. I was not just an organizer or a field man or a high officer. That was a thing that I carried on. But the rank and file, the worker-- Not only the steward. The steward was the leader; the steward, I respected. But I always had contacts, very close contacts, with the rank and file of the shop. In the first place, there wasn't a shop that-- At least once in three months, we would have a shop meeting, on the shop basis. I spoke to them, and they knew enough to come and speak up. There was no question in their mind. When I left, in fact, the union, the rank and file was excellent in our friendly relation, in our friendly attitude. Oh, there were opposition groups. There is no question.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were they opposing?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It doesn't matter. They were political. They were organized by the party members and just general opposition members. And they looked for it. I would not allow-- [tape recorder off]
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You mentioned something about opposition within the union. Do you remember what you were going to say about that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. I wouldn't allow this to become a question of trade union local matters, because there were some questions that could not be answered on the matter of local issues. There were political or other opposition issues that I wanted to engage in, and I did speak: "If you want to discuss this matter, we can. We can have a forum and discuss this question. This question is general. This is nothing to do with the local union, with the business that we are conducting."
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you kept a separation between local union affairs and sort of external.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The local union affair and the external political situation within the CIO, within the local. Even though it may have been local, as far as local is concerned, it may have been a Los Angeles greater problem.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, we'll come to that. But let's keep now on the shop floor, if you like. Why don't you say a little more about the way in which work was divided up and the different skills? I don't want you to give a whole history or description of the structure of the shoe industry, but you had these skills, lasters and all the other positions. How was work divided up and how were wages determined? Was there a big differential in wages between workers?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, there were always differentials in the crafts. The shoe industry has many crafts. The industry was divided in the East differently than Los Angeles. However, there were still divisions. But the divisions were not as crafts divisions are in the East in most centers. Here we had more of a line production. Some factories, about, let me say, 80 percent of the line worked. Some had lines shorter, but they were also broken down, so that crafts were not as identical as they are in the eastern factories.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you explain the line? What do you mean by line?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The line was from lasters to maker. That takes in about six operations.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
All of them with an individual skill.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were individual skill, but in Los Angeles, they were interchangeable. The six skills were interchangeable. Therefore, the wages were usually at the high level of a laster that did the main work.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Which was what? What is the main job of a laster?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Which is pulling the shoe over the last. That is quite a, both skill and also the work, the work finished and the start. A lot of damage can be done between the machine and the handwork. So it requires a technique. It requires, really, knowledge. Usually, the laster has a few more things that he does. This was taken away. He had the line. The shoe moved over on a line.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So, it was really more modern here, more up-to-date.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was modern so that the second one did a lesser. But we considered the highest [to be] laster and the puller. The puller was equal to the laster in our interpretation. So there were three different categories of jobs. There weren't as many as ten, twelve, as in the East.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there a big difference between the three in terms of wages?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of difference? What would be the difference between the lowest-paid worker and the highest-paid worker in the shop?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, by the hour at that time, it was a question of $4 an hour to $8 an hour.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That much?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That's a very high wage.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you said the top wage was about $60 for about a fifty-hour or a forty-hour week.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Forty.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Forty hours. That's $1.50 an hour. How could it be for $4 to $8 an hour?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I'm mistaken. My mistake. It was $60, $80, well, $80 a day.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
A week.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
A week. Sixty dollars a week, and perhaps $50.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What would be the lowest wage for someone who's just beginning?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The lowest, when somebody came in and had to be broken in and so on, that was $16 a week.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So the top people made about four times the beginning.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Sixteen dollars a week was the beginning. That was only for three months. A learner.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what about piecework, then? Was there no piecework?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were some shops had piecework. But, let me say, some factories-- Joyce, Inc., that was at that time a growing big factory. When I say growing, I don't mean that it was set. It was growing all the time, adding departments, adding sections. That was practically a factory that wasn't any piecework at all. Or piecework was eliminated constantly because they had to have week work because the work was so divided.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
It was very much a conveyor belt.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, it was a conveyor belt completely. In fact, even in Fern Shoe Company--that would be the two differentials--there were piecework mostly.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Did the union have a position on that? On piecework? Was it against it or--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. The union did not take a position on piecework or week work. It was only a question how it is agreed upon. Because piecework was in the trade nationally, and it was a practice. So we couldn't take a position why against piecework, but piecework had to be compensated properly. In fact, let me say this. In piecework, no matter how good or how it is agreed upon, there is always an issue. The issue is that in the beginning of a season you agree upon prices. At the middle of the season, the workers are making too much because the work gets, they get used to it, they find different ways of accomplishing that. It always creates a situation. So we always had adjustments. Either we agreed upon an adjustment down. The workers sometimes agree that this is out. Or we agreed they held back certain tickets, and there was always a question of-- So we finally agreed upon that wages must be a certain amount they can gain. We agreed upon what they can gain in the middle of the season or the end of the season. [Inaudible] is natural because skill and practice and so on that they are not paying on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you're talking about the regulation of the--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
We sort of regulated that toward agree[ment]. Where[as] in timework, there was no question.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't we move on a little bit now into more historical detail. Let's talk about the larger question of the CIO, which you had been a founding member of and you were on the committee, the original committee. Now by 1938, when there were already big political changes in California, election of a Democratic governor and so forth, then the CIO was split on the question of communism. And the several unions, amongst them the shoe workers, sort of temporarily split off from the CIO. What actually happened? Did you come back into the CIO?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Split up, never.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Never split off. It was just sort of a small-scale rebellion?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was a rebellion, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Over the what? Over the appointment of Harry Bridges as the state--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
As the state secretary. It was not only Bridges. I mean, when we say Bridges is the one-- It was a whole group that came in as the new leadership, and the established leadership--it was until then--protested.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who was this established leadership, would you say? You're talking now about, specifically, people like yourself, Mike Padgett from your union or George Roberts?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How would you characterize them? Politically, they were unaffiliated. They weren't members of any political organization.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. There was no political organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They were basically, you're saying, displaced by the left in the CIO.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
As a result of what? The communists' better organization?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. The communist organization that took on more power. The Bridges group that came in, that wasn't just an isolated group. They came in and they established a certain order.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This was in August 1938 that the thing occurred. There were delegates from the ILGWU [International Ladies Garment Workers Union] , UAW [United Automobile Workers], United Rubber Workers, and the United Shoe Workers [of America] ; and a few lodges of the steelworkers organizing committee left the CIO council in Los Angeles.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, the CIO council in Los Angeles. Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Among the leaders were Bill [William] Busick, Richard Coleman, and George Roberts. All of them you've worked with.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Richard Coleman of the automobile workers, he was quite a leader.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What did this group resolve to do? What was the outcome of the walkout?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, the outcome was not very much. We met, we discussed, and we participated again with the new CIO leadership.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
There wasn't any talk or question of going back to the AFL [American Federation of Labor]
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, no, no, no.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They wouldn't have taken you anyway, probably.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It wasn't a question of going out of the CIO and so on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So what was it that you hoped to do in the CIO? Did you consider the communists to have done something underhanded?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. They did.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How could this have been resolved?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Corrected? No way. We just sat down and discussed and agreed upon certain work, and we worked again together. But it wasn't that leadership, it wasn't that voice. No. Bridges went along his way. We went along, not our way, but we went along with the union. We particularly took care of our own. But this was not a solution because the CIO did not stop at that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Meaning what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Did not stop that there became peace. They worked, they worked hard. They worked, and I felt that, let's say, in my opposition, in the shoe workers' opposition. They became stronger and they took a stronger position. That would be the real-- They took a strong position.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Just explain that again. Who took a strong position?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The opposition.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Meaning who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The opposition that worked together with the Bridges group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The communist-led inside your union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
They were attempting to displace you.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
To displace me or anybody else but to take more position in the union. It became a fight. It was not a fight that had to be solved right now, but it was a long, drawn-out fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But they didn't really succeed, did they? Not in the shoe workers. Not while you were there.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not while I was there and not even a year after I left. There was a leadership left; [Fred] Dullworth took over the leadership. In fact, took over the leadership while I was resigning. They were very fine trade unionists. Left, right, there weren't any-- But they were fine trade unionists.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But, now, you were experienced as a former communist yourself. And the connections with the Lovestone group and your very strong attachment to rank-and-file democracy and, also, you were a supporter of the labor party concept, which was also promulgated by the Communist Party by this time. So you were very experienced in dealing with the opposition that you faced in your union. More so than someone who was just a--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So is that how--? How would you explain your ability to maintain your position in the union against this opposition?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, to maintain my position in the union, that was not a particularly big fight.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You basically had the vast majority behind you?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes. The vast majority in the union function, as such. As long as I was there. But you see, let me point out, I grew very tired of this constant haggling. I couldn't see myself constantly bickering over little things, over nothing, actually. So I got in more and more to the arbitration question.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why don't you continue on that theme?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
To the arbitration question. Not only of the shoe workers, I mean, now. In fact, my work was more concentrated on the automobile industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How would that be? How could you be involved in that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
As an arbitrator.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
When are you talking about now? Are you talking about later on, when you left the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
When I left the union.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Let's sort of work our way up to that. Because on this question of arbitration, when the National Labor Relations Board was functioning in Los Angeles, you were a big supporter of that. Right?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You saw that as a way to stabilize some of these disputes. But you stated that you stayed in the union right through World War II.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not through World War II.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Until nineteen-what? 'Forty?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
'Forty-one.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, you just stayed until 1941. Why don't you tell us about the way in which you changed your mind about staying in the union and became an arbitrator? Because that's quite a jump from a trade union leader to an arbitrator. Or maybe not, given your--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, it wasn't such a jump. First place, it was a jump because I went to work for Joyce, Inc. There I became the labor relations man. By that time, they grew quite a bit. In fact, they already had, not built, but contacted Columbus, Ohio, as another shoe center for Joyce, Inc. It was the same.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But had you built up a relationship with the management of Joyce while you were the organizer of the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, how was it that you were able to--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
He knew me, I knew him. So when I actually resigned from the union and I went away, he contacted me: "Would you consider a job with Joyce, Inc., as the industrial relations man?" That became quite a question, because by that time I had contacted only the arbitration group that I was very well acquainted with.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What do you mean by the arbitration group? Do you mean the National Labor Relations Board?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The National Labor Relations Board.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
The representative in Los Angeles, Town Nylander.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Representative Town Nylander. I was very friendly with him by that time. We were, a year or two before, very friendly. We used to exchange ideas and so on.

1.14. TAPE NUMBER: VIII, SIDE TWO January 16, 1985

MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
OK, we're going to get on now to your career as a negotiator, as an arbitrator in industrial relations. Let's try and trace the origins of your decision to move into this area. You had worked, of course, as a negotiator for the United Shoe Workers. Now, in your capacity as a member of the CIO Executive Committee, CIO official, did you have any experience as a negotiator arbitrating agreements with other unions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, quite a lot. That is, in discussing with union committees, with preparing the forms, I worked a lot. But officially, in participation-- I discouraged, in fact, an outsider to participate because I believed in the principle that negotiations should be done by the representative of the union, of their union. But the committees are important, the trade union committees--that is, the trade union people that they should select and have. Outside, to sit down and take it apart and discuss it and advise. In that capacity, I participated an awful lot with the automobile workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So could you give an example of that? What sort of negotiations you were involved in with the UAW [United Automobile Workers] and what capacity?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With the UAW, I was only involved mostly in discussing in the outside, in the union headquarters, where we discussed with the committee. We discussed with them the situation of the agreement, the strength of the union, particularly, and, in that sense, we proceeded with the program. In that sense, I participated a great deal with the automobile workers and with other workers, with the steel workers too, in that respect.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You, of course, had to deal with the National Labor Relations Board and the head of that board in Los Angeles. That was Dr. Nylander, Town Nylander, who was an academic with a labor background, I think from Berkeley.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In some ways, he must have fitted in with some of your early experiences in labor education, sort of like coming full circle here. How did your negotiating with the board and your relationship with Nylander affect your later decision to become an arbitrator yourself?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was, in fact, part of it. It was part of working with Town Nylander. When I worked with him, he was the representative, really, of the National Labor Relations Board. In that respect, it was a privilege, really, to work with him on situations, generally, in the labor movement, in the trade union field particularly. Later I took certain positions, let's say. I was sent out in the automobile industry in a dispute and I made my first decisions. It wasn't easy. From there on, I had many cases, cases not only with the automobile. It was cases with the workers in the shipyards.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What exactly did you do?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
In the Kaiser shipyards.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your official position in this? What was your role?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
An arbitrator. I was called in--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
By who?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
By the workers of the union. The employer had to agree, because there were a list of arbitrators presented to them--I don't know if it was something like ten or fifteen or so--and they selected.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who employed you actually as an arbitrator?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nobody employed me. I was a member of the National Board of Arbitrators. There were something like, I don't know, a hundred or two hundred or so on.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How did you get onto this board? How was that done? Who nominated you or who voted for you? Was that connected with the CIO or was it--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. It was connected with the CIO that I was a union representative. In many cases, I came across the arbitration committee. That was a committee here from the American Arbitration Board. The American Arbitration Board had here a committee. And the committee worked and the committee interviewed many people that are potential arbitrators.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But was this a government agency, the American Arbitration Board?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no government.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was it then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was a private agency, the American Arbitration Board. That was originally formed in New York many years ago, and it also became here when industry developed, when situations developed. They had here, on the coast, a board. I was interviewed and so were many others interviewed. I was given-- The first case was really in the automobile industry. The second and third and fourth case became a matter of regular cases in the shipyard.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Who did you arbitrate between? The ILWU [International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union] and the employer?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. [Henry J.] Kaiser was the employer. Kaiser himself I met later at a meeting at the-- Not an arbitration meeting, but a meeting of the-- The Biltmore Hotel had the headquarters there. That was the American Arbitration [Board].
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How were you expected to be impartial, having been a member of the CIO top leadership in Los Angeles? How could you have been neutral arbitrating between the CIO and Kaiser?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I didn't think that I could arbitrate a case that is not more than the case involved, what is right and what is wrong in arbitration, in the procedure of labor relations. I could make a decision and I did.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But there were many employers at that time who were against the whole concept of the National Labor Relations Act and who opposed it and tried to get around it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Obviously you supported the act.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, I supported it. Very much so.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But you had to deal with employers who wouldn't even recognize it.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right. That's right. Well, employers wouldn't recognize it and also there were union representatives that wouldn't recognize it either. But I recognized the arbitration procedure many, many, many years ago when I wasn't connected with arbitration as such. But from then on, I participated in very many cases.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now when you were a member of this board, you were at that time working as an arbitrator for a shoe company? Or was this while you were on the CIO? When are we talking about? What years that you were on the board?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The years when I was a member of the CIO, I participated in the arbitration commission. I wasn't an arbitrator; I didn't get any cases. But I participated in their board meetings quite a long time. More than a year I participated. Later, when I went out, they gave me the first case in the automobile industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Later when you went out of what? The CIO?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Out of the CIO.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
This is 1941.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Nineteen forty-one, '42.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you went to which--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I went to Joyce, Inc.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
To work as a--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
As an industrial relations man. There I established-- The first thing is that I say I established, because there was no industrial relations department at Joyce, Inc. But I established a department and I established a complete setup, not only here but also in Ohio, there where they established a factory. So I established right from the beginning an industrial relations section where we took up the things in full. After I was with Joyce about a year or so, it was a functional thing.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was the effect of switching from one side of the table to another, so to speak? Having been a trade unionist all your life, having been involved in left-wing politics for a long time and so forth, and now you were working on the management side. What was the--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Where I worked, really, it was a, call it a lucky situation or it was an understanding situation with Joyce, with William H. Joyce, Jr. He wanted somebody to take care of the labor situation. He didn't want to participate, and he made it very clear. His chiefs, his executives, at Joyce, Inc., were not particularly sympathetic toward labor or toward any phase of his union contracts. But he was, he himself was. So we had to have the understanding that I am working and he gives me independence when it comes to industrial relations and the question of running the factory. The management of the factory wasn't an easy thing to be convinced. So we discussed it long before I took the job.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you made it clear to him that you wanted to have relative independence as an arbitrator. Would you have done something antiunion?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And you made that clear?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Joyce knew that and Joyce did not expect anything. In fact, we discussed it from the point of view from the beginning. But later, when I had to meet the fellows within his organization--and I knew some of them very well, within the organization, within the shop management--we ran into some very difficult times. Because I kept them out of it. I could keep them out of it because Joyce agreed with me. And as long as he agreed with me and as long as he worked, we could carry it on. But it should be understood right here that when I worked for a few years at Joyce and I established both Columbus, Ohio, and here--They were functioning extremely well. Joyce himself went away from the organization, from active participation in the organization. He went into political situations and he became very active in politics. This was when he made sufficient success with his business. And his business was successful, there is no question. It became a tremendous success. He participated in a great deal of political organization.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was that? Republican?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. The Republican turned into a good Democrat. In fact, he was the chairman of the committee for [Adlai] Stevenson on the coast. He was in various politics. This was not the only, this is an outstanding, but in various political situations, he was involved.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
And while he was away--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
And while he was away, it was a terrible situation.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because the rest of the management was much less sympathetic.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The rest of the management. When I say the rest of the management, we have to say that the top of management, of the sales department, of the factory, they were reactionary, they were the old line, and it was very difficult to work with. I did and I connected with Joyce, but finally it was very hard to get along. And that was not the only thing. A manufacturer that was much less, principally, I didn't know, principally, than Joyce ever was, even when he was a conservative member of the [Merchants and] Manufacturers Association [of California]. He wasn't as antiunion as they were. So it became a very difficult time.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
I forgot, really, to ask you what the real reason was for you leaving the union to work as an arbitrator. Was it sort of a career thing? You just wanted a change or a better-paying job? Or what was the real motivation?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The real motivation, when I thought of it then and I thought of it now, I'd reached a point where I could not function anymore as freely as I did for years in the labor movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Why is that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There were the pressures of the local situation generally. They pressed and they kept on, carrying on a work that I refused to really play with.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What were these pressures?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Opposition.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You had to play too much petty politics.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was petty politics all the time. So I wanted to get away. I decided to get out, anyhow; I'll get into a different field. But I was out, actually. The Joyce thing came along, and it was very attractive.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You worked for Joyce until, what, late forties?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Till 1952.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh. You worked with him for about ten years. What about World War II? What about things like the War Labor Board? Did you have any connection with that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, my connection was that Joyce had established a factory during the war: a gas mask factory, a very big one. I was assigned from the shoe factory to the gas factory to organize, and I was working there for a long time. I was taking care of the shoe situation too, when it came. It worked along. But I worked in the gas factory.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the War Labor Board?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The War Labor Board I came in contact through the gas mask.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about your reception amongst your fellow workers when you were an arbitrator in the shoe industry, in your own union? How did that work out?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very well. Very well.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because they felt they could trust you? They didn't feel like you betrayed them or anything like that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No. Although the leadership later, not the beginning, but later, when a communist group took over the union, they created a situation that was-- But it didn't work with the rank and file and so on. The Joyce workers were very, very fine, and other workers too. Whenever I came, my god--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because the leadership eventually was communist.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Anything else you want to say about World War II and some of the experiences you had with the gas mask factory or anything else? You were exempt from the military service by age or by--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not by age.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
By health?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not by health. By the job. That [deferred] me; several times I got [deferred]. The work was very interesting, especially the gas mask.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What union was that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
There was no union. There was workers, and it was a very interesting job, the production, because nobody knew what the production should be. We got instructors, of course, we got the army. The gas mask people came in, and what they wanted to test and so on, they proceeded with. But the whole organization was very interesting. After all, there were about two thousand workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were there ever any strikes or major conflicts? No? The CIO then had the no-strike pledge, of course.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That was generally [true]. But this factory, particularly, was very well from the beginning on. Everything was in committees and forms. It was a terrific information--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Was there some more you wanted to say about Town Nylander or the National Labor Relations Board? Was he still around at this time, and did you have a--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I knew him after he left. He got into the navy. When he got into the navy, he still used to correspond with me. Whenever his boat would come through Los Angeles area, he would call me. He says, "Commander Town Nylander reporting." [laughter] That was usually the joke. That was laughing. And I said, "When will I see you?" He said, "Well, I'll be down to see you at this and this hour. I'll come down." And he always did come to the house.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
By this time, because it's been a long time since we talked about workers education, was this now a thing of the past? The workers education movement had really declined, hadn't it, by this time, by the forties?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No, no, no. By the fifties it was still moving ahead in Los Angeles. Also in Boston. I still would receive letters from the Boston. They kept me informed. They kept me as the member; they kept me on for years. As long as-- What was her name?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Alice Dodge?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Dodge, Alice Dodge. Alice Dodge was connected with it. She worked with it, and she worked with it for years. Later she had a secretary. She had two, in fact. But she still directed the work. I was informed, but I informed her also about the Los Angeles. And Los Angeles was a marvelous group. Also to the YWCA.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of workers were involved in this? How did it differ from the Boston movement?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, it differed a great deal. There you had the old gang that were workers education and they knew. Here you had, even from Bazelle's AFL [American Federation of Labor] we had some people that were very good. And the CIO group, they maintained a very fine organization. The organization existed for a long time through the 1950s. Till about 1960 it was a movement.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Now what about politics for you? By this time, you no longer had any connections with the Lovestone group. You had no political affiliation.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You never rejoined again. But you kept your ties, did you, to those things?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I kept my information, yes, with the surrounding labor movements and so on. But I wasn't active in any group or very close with any particular group.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about in the 1940s when Henry Wallace was the left-wing candidate? Did you support him?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Oh, you supported Henry Wallace, even though that was communist led, to some degree anyway.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Some degree.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were still very much on the left wing of the Democratic party. You voted for Wallace against Truman?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you stayed with Joyce until 1952, and then you did what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Then I didn't do very much.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Didn't you go back to the union?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I went back to working within the industry, but for about, maybe, six months or a year. Then I couldn't somehow-- Yes, it came up, a job that I took with the liquor industry.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
As a what?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Organizing the industry into a membership. They had an organization. They had a lobbyist in an organization that they would run maybe twice a year or so and collect money. They collected a great deal of money. But they had no steady organization. So it was every few months they had a big run, and they would do a lot of things that I don't even know very much about. But I was called in by some that were liquor retailers and that knew me from my association with the shoe workers, with so on. They were also shoe workers at one time, yes. So they called me in and they said, "Can you do anything?" I said, "I don't know. I mean, I'm no miracle man in organization, but we can look up, we can see, we can try, we can organize." We tried for a long time, and we organized finally an organization throughout the state. It functioned, too, for a few years.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
You did this in what? Mostly in the 1950s?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Mostly in the late 1950s and sixties.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What sort of connections did you maintain with labor, with trade unions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Very close.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
In what capacity? How did you maintain that connection?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No capacity. It was personal, people that I knew. I always somehow came back, and I was at some of the affairs. Let's say, with the automobile workers, I had for years [been] in their affairs; I would always come to them. And also quite a few other workers. With the rubber workers.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Were you disappointed with the way the labor movement developed in terms of the fact that you had once been a strong proponent of the labor party? Wasn't that one of the main themes of the Lovestone group and then the CIO, too, in the late 1930s? That sort of faded out, didn't it, by World War II?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes, with Walter Reuther gone. As long as he was alive, the issue was still alive at conventions. Otherwise, it was a really--
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What was your position when the CIO expelled a lot of unions? Did you oppose that or did you think that had to be done? When they expelled the left-led unions?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
It was a very, very sad situation. It was a very bad situation. It did not resolve in any organized form. It really divided, it divided them apart. And nothing came of it.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So you were against it then?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Because I was against expelling any group for its political reasons, whatever.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was a consistent thing in your--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Because you've always opposed expulsions.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I always opposed expulsions and divisions. Divisions can be only as local situations. At the international, you can discuss it until the outcome is made. There are opinions, there are different opinions. So what?
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about the right-wing drift of [Jay] Lovestone and some of those people? Of course, you didn't go along with that. How do you explain that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, very easy. It is an explanation that I lived with. That's why I had such an easy time. I lived with the Lovestone group when they were one [inaudible] opposition. At that time, I came as sort of an outsider, and I knew them. I found that in the Lovestone group there are ten groups. So how far can they go? They drift apart.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But what about their right-wing drift and Lovestone becoming an advisor to Homer Martin in the UAW? What's your view of that?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The view just like in other groups. Within the group, within the ILG [International Ladies Garment Workers Union] itself, there was one group led by a strong man--that is true--by Sasha [Charles S.] Zimmerman. Very strong and very able. But there were six groups that were right wing. They were surpassing the right wing. So what could you expect to have? Lovestone finally went his own, with maybe a few people. I don't know how many. They went into the AF of L, and he became a chief there. Others were chiefs in other unions. But it wasn't anymore a group that had a voice of its own. They didn't.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So where did you find yourself, then, on the political spectrum by the 1940s? Because you were no longer with the Lovestone, you'd long since dropped the Communist Party--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Now, I wasn't with the Lovestone even ten years before.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Well, you were never with the Lovestone, but at one point that may have been the closest group, for a couple of years in the thirties.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Then you were a member of the CIO. You were an anticommunist CIO member, but you also were not a socialist. So you were sort of an independent CIO--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
That's right.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
That was more or less your position, pro-Roosevelt, but then later on you support Henry Wallace. So I'm just trying to find some kind of pattern. Because it's very interesting. Because you've remained very consistent, really. While other groups have gone left and right and switched and move, your position has been fairly consistent, but hard to categorize.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Not very hard to categorize because I wasn't so alone. I had guite a group that weren't communist. That weren't anticommunist, that weren't pro. To say Brookwoodites, that would be-- But it was somehow, it was somehow to do with my Brookwood connections.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about [A. J.] Muste? Did you remain close to his general political outlook?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I was close to him, but with a lot of fights. There were situations that we didn't agree, that when he went out and he began to go-- When he formed his-- Well, he didn't form, but he was connected with-- A lot of international situations, I agreed with him. I supported his views and him a great deal. We used to meet guite often on the coast too, and we would discuss things. Muste, I did.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, you were in general agreement with him. So what was your view of the Socialist Party, the Norman Thomas wing of the Socialist Party? Did you have any big disagreements with them? How were you different from them?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Well, I disagreed with the socialists, let's say, on certain issues. But, generally, as far as Norman Thomas was personally concerned and his leadership, it was very good. I agreed with him on some things, but I wasn't a member of the-- There was a question of joining and being a member, and I didn't reach that.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about Walter Reuther? Was that closest to your position as far as your--?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Reuther? Yes. In the trade union movement, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
How would you describe that position? I know it's on the record, but how would you personally describe it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I would describe it as progressive trade unionist.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But isn't that a little bit simple? Can you give more than that? Because they were very anticommunist, weren't they? But they were also progressive.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
They were progressive. They were active trade unionists. They were somehow connected with the socialist group. I don't know how far they functioned in the union with their socialist-- They individually functioned as a socialist, I would say.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
Yes, they were individual, but not actual--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes. Individually, they were socialists. But on trade union matters, on various philosophy of the trade union movement, I didn't find any fault or any hesitation with them, not only to vote, but to go along.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But I'm not certain that they supported the expulsion of the left wing in 1948.
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
No.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
What about Philip Murray? What did you think of his leadership?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Philip Murray was a very good leader. He came from a very good background. Anybody that wanted to assign Philip Murray to something else is another story. Philip Murray was a trade unionist, a typical progressive brought up with ideas and ideals that he believed in sincerely. That is what he was. It could be, one day, people connected him that he is a communist sympathizer; the next day he was not a communist sympathizer. But that wasn't Philip Murray. When you knew him, you followed his leadership and his disagreements and agreements, you found that he is a very honest left-wing trade unionist. Because against whom he stood and he fought.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
But what about the whole support that he gave to the whole cold war position, basically supporting Truman down the line against Wallace? Supporting the expulsion? I mean, he came around to the expulsion of the communist-led unions. And then what about the whole change of the labor movement when George Meany came to power? Do you see it as a decline? Do you see the American labor movement as having gone into a serious decline?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Oh, yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
To what do you attribute the decline?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The decline cannot be attributed to a man, whether it is one or the other.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
No. But to what do you attribute it?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
I attribute it a great deal to the past of preparation. You see, we have to agree, at least generally, for theoretical reasons, that these things happen for years and years, they develop. You either go up, you either are in a labor movement that is up, or you allow certain things to enter and you don't fight against them. If they enter, that is one thing, but you don't fight against them. You don't fight for a principle. The left wing participated in that, the right wing. It was a matter of defeating one another in local situations, in undetermined things, that it works down. And mainly you don't develop a new cadre of leadership.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
So are you saying that the AFL-CIO sort of got frozen?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
Yes.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
With no renewal of--
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
With no renewal.
MICHAEL FURMANOVSKY
To what do you attribute that fact? What caused it to slow down? What caused the loss of idealism in your view?
WILLIAM SELIGMAN
The leadership took over and held it so tight that they didn't allow any young ones to learn. They eliminated the schools. There was no forum for them to study, to learn, either within the union-- You don't have to have them in a college, but within the union, you have to establish a training part, that you are going to train young people with some ideas to carry on the work, to carry on new, to study new situations.

Appendix A INDEX



William Seligman . Date: 2008
This page is copyrighted