LaborHistory, Vol. 41, No. 4, 2000 Blindin One Eye Only: Westernand Eastern Knights of Labor Viewthe ChineseQuestion* ROB WEIR Historians have beenquick topoint outthe ease with which theKnights ofLabor absorbedGilded Age prejudicesregarding theChinese. In praising theOrder ’s embrace ofuniversal brotherhood with regard toothers, Alexander Saxton writes,ª Only at accepting Chinesedid the Knights generally drawthe line.º 1 Clark Halker notes, ªMuchas the Knights pressedthe limits ofthemeaning ofrepublicanism ¼they could neverentirely escapenotions of racial inferiority ¼[N]on -WesternEuropean immi - grants remained second -classcitizens even amongst theKnights. Chinese workers remained beyondthe pale ¼º 2 Bryan Palmer andGreg Kealey claim that anti -Chinese hysteria wasso pervasive that it ªironically contributedtoward working -class soli- darity.º 3 Philip Foner bluntly wrote,ª The chiefblot ontheK ofL ’srecordon the issue oflabor solidarity wasin thecase of Chinese workers.º 4 Gerald Grobopined that the organization ªneverreceded from its anti -Chineseattitude,º while Catharine Collomp sawChinese exclusion as ª theonly issueabout which theKnights ofLabor andthe American Federation ofLabor constantlylobbied theFederal government.º 5 Since1986, mosthistorians have beenquick toadopt theformulation ofGwendolyn Minkwho argues that ªold laborºdeveloped a ªjobconscious unionism ¼ suffused with ethnicand race consciousness.ºFor mostof the period from 1875 through 1920, sheargues, new immigrant groups werethe targets ofracist andnativist hatredson the part of more-entrenchedworking -classgroups. 6 Leaving asideMink ’sbackdoor redux *Thiswork derives from a paper deliveredat the 1996Southwest Labor Studies conference.I wish to thank all ofthe participants fortheir comments, especiallyJudy Yung, RebeccaMead, Rudy Higgens-Evenson, and Dana Frank. As always, thanks to BruceLaurie, who readan earlierdraft and is everhelpful with his suggestions.A specialthanks toAndrewGyory, whose workon the Chinesequestion surpassesall othersin its nuanceand subtlety. Hisadvice and friendship wereinvaluable in revisingthis work. 1AlexanderSaxton, The Indispensable Enemy: Laborand the Anti -Chinese Movement in California (Berkeley,CA: Universityof California Press,1971), 40. 2Clark Halker, ForDemocracy, Workers,and God: Labor Song -Poemsand Labor Protest, 1865±95 (Urbana: Universityof Illinois Press,1991), 130. 3GregoryKealey and Bryan Palmer, Dreaming ofWhat Might Be: The Knights ofLabor in Ontario, 1880± 1900 (Toronto: NewHogtown Press, 1987), 150± 151. 4Philip S.Foner, History ofthe LaborMovement in America,Volume II:From the Founding ofthe American Federation ofLabor to the Emergence ofAmerican Imperialism (NewYork: International, 1955),58. 5GeraldGrob, Workersand Utopia: A Study ofIdeological Con¯ict in the American LaborMovement, 1856± 1900 (New York: Quadrangle, 1961),58; Catherine Collomp, ªUnions, Civics, and National Identity: OrganizedLabor ’sReactionto Immigration, 1881±1897,º LaborHistory 29(1988), 458. 6GwendolynMink, OldLabor and New Immigrantsin American Political Development: Union, Party,and State, 1875±1920 (Ithaca, NY: CornellUniversity Press, 1986). ISSN 0023-656Xprint/ ISSN1469 -9702online/ 00/040421±16 Ó 2000Taylor & Francis Ltd on behalfof The Tamiment Institute DOI:10.1080/ 00236560020007072 422 R. Weir ofa Commons/Perlman jobconsciousness thesis long repudiatedby social historians, Iwouldargue that her view andothers critical ofGilded Age labor ’sresponseto the Chineseis more neatthan accurate.Applying ablanket anti -Chineselabel tothe Knights lacks nuance,and ignores context.The further eastone traveled from the Rocky Mountains,the less anti -Chinesecampaigns mattered toKnights asmore than amere rhetorical ploy. Asa recentwork by AndrewGyory reveals, from the1870s onwardseastern workers showed considerably lessinterest in therabid anti -Chinese hysteria that soconsumed laborers in theWest. 7 The Knights ofLabor respondedto Gilded Age popular anti -Chinesenativism in various ways.These serve as another reminder that GildedAge ideology andorganiza - tionswere far tooelusive, complex, andelastic tobe neatly labeled. Manya commen - tator has misinterpreted theKnights ofLabor byassuming that its national leadership spokefor therank and® le.That wasseldom the case. To grasp what members felt,one mustusually look tothe local level. There,how the KOL viewed Chinese workers was oftena functionof the composition of one ’slocal assembly,political ideology, and regional identity. TheKnights and Denis Kearney By1877, California wasawash in aseaof anti -Chinesehysteria. Indeed,tensions had beenbuilding for quitesome time. The ®rstrecorded incident of Caucasian/ Chinesecon ¯ict datesto 1849 when Chineseminers wereforbidden to toil in theGold Rush region ofTuolumneCounty. 8 Asearly asthe mid -1850s, physical andrhetorical attacks against theChinese were common.By the1870s, theso -called Six Companieswere rumored to import thou - sandsof ª coolieºlaborers into theUnited States despite near -universal condemnation ofthe practice from everyoneoutside the business community. 9 Eighteenseventy -sevenwas the year ofDenis Kearney. In themidst of a San Francisco meeting oftheWorkingmen ’sParty ofthe United States devoted to the great railway strike,an unruly group insistedon linking labor unrestto the ª Chinese question.ºRebuffed by Party leaders,they quit thehall for three daysof looting, assault,arson and mayhem in thecity ’sburgeoning Chinatowndistrict. Kearney assumedthe demagogue ’smantle, andrallied workersto the cry ªThe ChineseMust Go!ºKearney thumbed his noseat theWorkingmen ’sParty USA,and formed the Workingmen’sParty ofCalifornia. Asthe year closed,he was undoubtedly one of the mostpowerful men in thestate. 10 Kearneybrought his vitriol Eastin July, 1878. But,as Gyory has shown,although 7AndrewGyory, Closing the Gate: Race, Politics andthe Chinese Exclusion Act (Chapel Hill: University ofNorth Carolina Press,1998). 8LorenW. Fessler,ed., Chinese in America:Stereotyped Past,Changing Present (New York: Vantage, 1983). 9GildedAge laborers often indiscriminately usedthe termª coolieºin theirremarks. Technically, the cooliesystem was longpast by the time ofthe anti -Chineseagitations in which most Knightsof Labor participated and they ought to have properly usedthe termª contractlaborer.º In truth, most Knightssaw any formof non -freelabor as debasedand usedboth termsinterchangeably and contemptuously. 10For moredetails see Philip Foner, History ofthe LaborMovement in America,Volume I:FromColonial Timesto the Founding ofthe American Federation ofLabor (New York: InternationalPublishers, 1982), 490±492. See also Gyory, Closing the Gate, passim [Note:Variant spellings of Workingmen ’spartiesappear in both primary and secondarysources. Sometimes it is renderedas asingleword, at othersas two words. For the sakeof editorial consistency I have chosento combine them as one.] Knightsof Labor and theChinese Question 423 workersshowed initial enthusiasm,they quickly tired ofKearney ’sboorish antics. Socialists suchas Justus Schwab, who had blockedKearney ’sattempts toenter the Workingmen’sParty USA,dutifully denouncedthe coolie system,but refused to accept theracist premise that underlay Kearney ’srhetoric. Amonthbefore Kearney arrived in theEast, trade unionistGeorge McNeill notedthat labor neededto organize ªwithout distinctionof race, color, nationality, politics, or religion,ºand the LaborStandard insistedthat class,not ethnicity, bethe centerpiece of the labor program for which Kearneyostensibly stumped. 11 Kearneysaid nothing that madeeastern workers repudiate McNeill. By all accounts,the East should have beenripe toembrace Kearnyite nativism. In 1870, 75 Chinesehad beenimported tobreak ashoemakers ’ strike in North Adams, MA,and several other importations ofChinese scabs had raised thefear of¯ oodsof cheap labor washing away East -coastwage structures.Nonetheless, in theeight -year interim betweenNorth Adamsand Kearney ’svisit, easternworkers had largely ignored therising tideof anti -Chineseagitation fomenting westof the Rockies. Kearneycaught theattention of the Knights ofLabor ashe toured. KOL Grand MasterUriah Stephenspraised Kearney.And Stephens ’ soon-to-bereplacement Ter - encePowderly wassimilarly impressed.During aSeptemberspeech in NewYork City, Kearneywas greeted with huzzahs,even if Schwaband company cringed.But the more Kearneyspoke, the less charitable theKnights felt.Even before Kearney ’sappearance in NewYork, Powderly con®ded to Grand Secretary Charles Litchman that hewas ªdisgustedºwith Kearneyand thought his shrill one -note anti-Chineseravings were ªinjuriousºto the cause of labor. Both thelabor andmainstream pressbegan toattack Kearney,and an October speechwas booed in Boston.By thetime Benjamin Butler, Massachusetts ’ Greenback-Labor candidatefor governor, spokein North Adams,he failed toevenmention the Chinese. The reaction against Kearneygrew sostrong that by thetime heleft theEast, he had droppedChinese references from his speeches. 12 TheMaking ofAnti -ChineseHysteria Easternreactions to Kearney reveal theextent to which negative sentimentswere manufacturedrather than intrinsic toworking -classideology. The Chinesewere orig - inally viewedthrough alensof exoticism, themesexploited in exhibits displayed by P. T.Barnum, andby theproprietors ofBoston ’sChineseMuseum. Overall silenceon the Chineseissue, however, suggests that mostantebellum workersgave theChinese little thought whatsoever.Occasionally, aprogressive voice