Hide Article Text (OCR)
1883 Cowboy Strike ChangedHistory Of Cattle IndustryBy PERKY FLIPPIN I Zeigler armies that the cow- mained the same, or even wnrs-Avalanche-.jiournal Staff boy’s trouble began when the enod.Cowboys on strike? L a b o r'ooon-rangos were fenced in thej Zeigler states that the strike unions on West Texas cattle.1880s and 1890s. and huge cor-|m!ght not have occurred if spreads? porations and foreign investors!ranch owners had remained inA Texas Tech historian saysbegan moving into the cattlejelose contact with their it happened in 1889 and changed j industry because of its potential i workers. or if the corporations, forever the American cowboy profits. Until then, working cow-1would have shared their wealth and the Texas cattle industry.Robert E. Zeigler, a doctoral candidate in history at Tech,boys had a close relationship with the cowboys.with ranch owners. They were Sheriff Quotedusually permitted maverick- The historian quotes Tascosn has written an article on theling” privileges, that is. claim-!Sheriff Jim East, who said in cowboy strike of 1883 to be.ing stray cattle and grazing |1884 that loyalty was breaking published late this year in theithem on the ranch o w n e r’sjdown among the cowboys. “The journal of the West Texas His-dand. Frequently, a cowboy was | cow business is not what it toricat Association. lable to build up a small herdjused to be, he said. “You takeOthers Recount Strike {of his own and begin his own' such men as John Chistim or Tanner Uaine and other ranch at the owner's encourage- Charley Goodnight. They were writers of West Texas history ment. real people. They got r:ght outhave also recounted the two-; Ranching Changes iwith the hoys on the trail didand-a-haif month strike in 1883, Ranching changed when cor-;just as much work as the hoys, bv co who vs on five Panhandle porations arrived. Zeigler says, ate the same kind of food. Thmrranches ' the LIT. T-Anchnr.'adding that they didn't have cowboys would have died in theL E. L S and the L X. But any personal interest in the saddle rather than have mm-f*-‘w have gone beyond a report.'cowboys beyond making the plained. See what we have n w.of the actual incident to analyze maximum profit. ;a bunch of organized remits significance on the future of I As long as ranch owners and panics. Some of them are forth e cattle industry. 1 cowhands were uniformly poor. eign and have costly managers“Until the 1880s.” 7 e i g 1 e r :Zeigler reasons, cowboys were I and bookkeepers who live on says, “the cowboy was a way;satisfied to work long hours forjand drink the best stuff money of life — independent, carefree.1 little pay and live the ragged can buy and ^ call their help enterprising and free - spirited, ilife of a cowboy. j‘cow servants.’After 1880, the cowboy became! It became evident, however,! Zeigler notes that besides the la laborer in big business. The that the owners and investors breakdown of loyalty, cowboys I adjustment was hard, and the were making enormous profits, resented the outsiders for pa-|cowboy lost.” twhile the cowboy’s situation re-'rading their titles and inheritedi U----- j wealth. As an example, JohniMcNab. a director of the Spur I Ranch, insisted that he be 'driven around bis ranch in a j buggy with an umbrella to 'shield him from the sun. In d:s-idain. some of his ranch bands jverv nearly shot his hat and buggy full of boles.Measure Stopped In the early 1880s. the cor-jporations sought to establish vnt-jing strength based upon the inumber of cattle owned, but the (measure was stopped largely j because of Goodnight's objections, the historian says.; Still, cowboys couldn't fail to I notice that the large companies I were more interested in power land wealth, than in the woil-jbeing of the “little man.”Thus, with no job security.■ with his economic condition worsening while investorsjgrovv rich, with impersonal ror-1 porations taking charge of his j personal future, the cowboy resorted to the only real weapon available the strike.Twenty - four discontented 'cowhands on three of the ranches finally drew up an ultimatum in early March and demanded pay raises to $50 a month, “or else. Tom Harris,■ r wagon - boss and owner of a J small cattle herd, was the real(leader of the strike, and gen-jerally respected by all of the jmen.j Most Stableji Zeigler notes that most of the 7 strikers were stable, hard-j working cowboys - - not mi-j grants wtio felt threatened by 'the change of conditions in the I ranching industry, and set out I to improve their situations like (other industrial workers of the’ | time.«As many as 375 other workers eventually joined the strike. Zeigler writes, but it was never jverv effective since much of the i ranch labor could be performed I by transient cowhands.Although there were numerous threats of violence, none j erupted, but later disruptions |were attributed to striking oow-;bovs.; Nevertheless, a newspaper reported at the time. “An ordinary cowboy is as explosive asa nitroglycerine bomb, and a good deal more dangerous. We shall watch the war with interest.. not caring much which side whips or gets whipped.”As it ended, some of the ranches did raise salaries somewhat, and many of the cowhands went back to work, but the strike was broken short of its goal.Zeigler concludes that the cowboy strike, though corresponding to several popular labor movements of the time,still doomed the cowbov to the rde of ranch worker. He was a victim of the progress that changed the complexion of the '■ofUo business.H* was losing Irs traditional nosition, vol he was almostoworless tn imnrnvp h*stion by labor action, the historian says.It may have been the cowboy’s stubborn insistence to remain independent and free that kept him from becoming a card-carrying organization man.
Newspaper Details
Lubbock Avalanche Journal
Lubbock, Texas, US
Thu, Jun 10, 1971
Page 69
Full Page
Clipped by
Del M.
Texas, USA 18 Feb 2019
Other Publications Near Lubbock, Texas
Lubbock Avalanche
Avalanche
Avalanche Journal
Lubbock Evening Journal
Lubbock Morning Avalanche
