Editing Knights of Labor (section)

==Decline==

[[File:Sovereign-J-R-1894.jpg|thumb|right|J.&nbsp;R. Sovereign, Grand Master Workman of the Knights of Labor from 1893]]

===Southwest railroad strike of 1886===
{{Main|Great Southwest railroad strike of 1886}}
The Great Southwest railroad strike of 1886 was a Knights strike involving more than 200,000 workers. Beginning on March 1, 1886, railroad workers in five states struck against the Union Pacific and Missouri Pacific railroads, owned by Jay Gould. At least ten people were killed. The unravelling of the strike within two months led directly to the collapse of the Knights of Labor and the formation of the [[American Federation of Labor]].<ref>Theresa A. Case, ''The Great Southwest Railroad Strike and Free Labor'' (Texas A&M University Press, 2010); [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/433283/summary online review]</ref>

In 1886, following their peak, they started to lose more members to the [[American Federation of Labor]]. The Knights of Labor's fall is believed to have been due to their lack of adaptability and beliefs in old-style industrial capitalism. Another large reason for their decline was the tension between skilled craftsmen and unskilled workers.  

===Catholic Church===
The Knights of Labor attracted many Catholics, who were a large part of the membership, perhaps a majority. Powderly was also a Catholic. However, the Knights's use of secrecy, similar to the Masons, during its early years concerned many bishops of the [[Catholic Church|Church]]. The Knights used secrecy and deception to help prevent employers from firing members.

After the [[Archbishop of Quebec]] condemned the Knights in 1884, twelve American archbishops voted 10 to 2 against doing likewise in the United States. Furthermore, Cardinal [[James Gibbons]] and Bishop [[John Ireland (bishop)|John Ireland]] defended the Knights. Gibbons went to the [[Holy See|Vatican]] to talk to the hierarchy.<ref>James Hennesey, American Catholics, Oxford University Press, 1981, page 188.</ref>

In 1886, right after the peak of the Knights of Labor, they started to lose more members to the [[American Federation of Labor]]. It has been believed that the fall of the Knights of Labor was due to their lack of adaptability and beliefs in the old-style industrial capitalism.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Future of the American Labor Movement|url=https://archive.org/details/futureamericanla00whee|url-access=limited|last=Wheeler|first=Hoyt|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2002|pages=[https://archive.org/details/futureamericanla00whee/page/n106 85]}}</ref>

=== Unskilled vs. Skilled Workers ===
Scholars pit the skilled and unskilled workers as another reason for the Knights of Labor's downfall. The Union worked for both groups, but since the results of the union efforts often benefited one or the other and not both, the tension persisted. <ref name=":22">{{Cite journal |last=Voss |first=Kim |date=1988 |title=Labor Organization and Class Alliance: Industries, Communities, and the Knights of Labor |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/657519 |journal=Theory and Society |volume=17 |issue=3 |pages=329–364 |doi=10.1007/BF00160843 |issn=0304-2421 |jstor=657519 |s2cid=147551660 |access-date=5 May 2023 |archive-date=27 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230327174422/https://www.jstor.org/stable/657519 |url-status=live }}</ref> Unskilled workers often benefited from equal opportunities. Skilled workers would become upset when someone took their jobs with less skill. Skilled workers benefit from better pay, but many unskilled workers do not receive those benefits. This tension discouraged new members and lead existing ones to leave the Knights of Labor and ultimately caused many members to leave.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Kaufman |first=Jason |date=2001 |title=Rise and Fall of a Nation of Joiners: The Knights of Labor Revisited |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/206859 |journal=The Journal of Interdisciplinary History |volume=31 |issue=4 |pages=553–579 |doi=10.1162/00221950151115089 |jstor=206859 |issn=0022-1953 |access-date=2 September 2017 |archive-date=25 April 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200425134321/https://www.jstor.org/stable/206859 |url-status=live }}</ref>