The new national unions were not strong enough to establish beneficiary systems.  Moreover, at many points the establishment of local benefits conflicted with the success of the national organizations.  A local union was usually forced to impose certain restrictions upon claimants of benefits, either an initiation fee or a requisite term of membership, in order to protect its funds.  Such limitations on the full participation of all members in the benefits of membership militated severely against the carrying out of the prime function of the national unions—­the nationalization of membership.  The leaders in the trade-union movement of this period were interested chiefly in strengthening the relations of the local unions.  They saw, therefore, in the local benefits a hindrance to the accomplishment of their aims.  By 1860 it had become a fairly well accepted doctrine that a trade union should not attempt to develop beneficiary functions.  It was argued that since the expense of maintaining benefits made the dues of members higher, persons who might otherwise join the unions were prevented from doing so.  The leaders of the Iron Molders for years opposed the introduction of beneficiary features on the ground that the development of such activities was likely to interfere with the trade functions of the organization.  In 1866 President Sylvis for this reason vigorously opposed the introduction of a national sick benefit.[2] As late as 1895 the veteran president of the Iron Molders—­Mr. Martin Fox—­counselled the Union against developing an extensive beneficiary system.[3] The same views were entertained by the leaders of the other more important unions of the period.

[Footnote 2:  Iron Molders’ Journal, Vol.  I, p. 309.]

[Footnote 3:  Proceedings of the Twentieth Session, 1895, Report of the President.]

Shortly after the close of the Civil War the rapid growth of mutual insurance companies attracted the attention of many trade unionists.  The formation of insurance associations under the auspices of the national unions with a membership limited to the members of the unions was discussed in the most important organizations of the day.  In many of them voluntary associations of one kind and another were inaugurated.  The Granite Cutters, the Iron Molders and the Printers all experimented after this fashion.  Only in the railway brotherhoods did these insurance systems develop into a permanent feature.

The development of beneficiary functions by the leading national unions began about 1880.  The benefits administered by these organizations do not interfere with the nationalization of membership.  A new theory as to the relation between the beneficiary and the trade functions began about 1880 to gain wide acceptance.  It was argued and with much force that the benefits were a direct aid in the accomplishment of trade purposes.  While some leaders of the older school have seen in the rapid development of beneficiary functions a danger to the unions, the greater number who have come into positions of authority since 1880 have steadily advocated the establishment of benefits.