|Artifact Type||Labor Newspapers, Sources|
|Publication||Minneapolis Labor Review|
|Publication Date||September 27, 1927|
Headline: “Union Disavows All Knowledge of Stink Bomb Outrages Here”
Subhead: Interests Trying to Discredit Strikers Blamed for Rowdyism in Theatres
Stink bombs, declared to have been set off by interests hostile to the unions on strike at the theaters, have sent their fumes through the State and Garrick theatres at various performances.
This stink bomb activity is declared by the representatives of the unions on strike to be an attempt to discredit the unionists and endeavor to swing public opinion against the strikers. Union representatives are emphatic in declaring that the stink bomb occurrences are not due to any union activities.
They state that the unions have and will employ only peaceful methods to win the strike. They believe that once the public fully realizes that the one and only demand the strikers are making is for one day of rest in seven, that it will be impossible to turn the public against the strikers.
The only exception to this they point out will be if the theatre managers are able to make the public believe that the strikers are resorting to violence in any form. The strikers are on guard against this and are using every possible means to see that interests hostile to the strikers do not discredit the unionists by plants and frameups.
Theatres which are operating under union conditions have been invaded by gangs of rowdies hired to break up the performances.
Saturday night so loud and insistent were two of these bands of rowdies in moving picture houses operating under union conditions that it was necessary to dismiss the audiences. Attempts to induce these rowdies to stop their noise and permit the performance to proceed were unsuccessful and then the houses were cleared.
|Archive||Labor Review Archive Project|
|Read In Context||http://www.minneapolisunions.org/labor_review_archive_about.php|
|Citation||“Union Disavows All Knowledge of Stink Bomb Outrages Here,” Minneapolis Labor Review, September 27, 1927.|