The workingman's advocate. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1864-1877, 1874-02-28
IMrbRrANr TO woRKrNGMEE


4 uot4 G8tOnuout VI tnc ~. k@OuA1 1ee-
p,sblicst has the following
SPKfNePrRLD, LIS, Feb. 7.-When
the maeh-worked and well-read clerk OF
the Senate yesterday evening pulled ssic-
cessfully through the last section Of the
criminat code, with inst enough energy left
] 10 hea& sigh OF relief, the hope pre-
vailed Oct the Senate would be able to
turn tho elephant over upon the playful
and unsnspecting House without further
waste of music or time But the question
of Its passage was made Especial order for
this morning at IL o'clock, and promptly
at that hour Mr.. Hinchcliffe organized
commotion most notable He started out
in very able speech with statement that
the bill contains features or provisions
whicA pstnt rather to rctrogression tfWn
Progression, as does all sumptuary legisla-
rIon. Referring to what is known as the
LaSalle black law OF 1869, he stated that
It's most Infamous features are reproduced
but made Of more extensive application in
section 1858 Of the bill under consideration
which section reads as follows:
1868 Upon coal mines, manufactures, etc
Whoever enters the coal bank. mine, shaft
mandatory or place where workmen are EN-
-nl lied consent vi the owner or manager
theief, after notice that such entry is tor
hidden, shall be fined not exceeding five hun.
dred dollars, or confined in the county jail not
exceeding SIX months, in the discretion of the
court
Then follows a very elaborate report Of
the discussion which ensued, substantially
as follows
Senator Hnchcliffe said: Mr.. President,
l ask the indulgence Of the Senate for
few minutes before taking final action on
this bill. 1T will be reoollected by most Of
those now present, that when this bill was
under conslde ration by sections, | endeav
ored to amend by striking out what, in the
revision bill, was then section 299 and
failing in that, | made further attempt
to amend by striking cut the words
coal bank, mine, shalt manufactory, or
place where workmen are employed" and
by inserting IN lieu thereof the word
premises, so as to make the principle Of
general application, and by that means
avoid even the semblance Of special, or
class legislation. But 1 was defeated in
that also. This will not deter me, howev-
er, from making another attempt to have
eliminated from the bill this unnecessary
section.
well know the difficulties Of revision
work like this undertaken, and, in the
nam, 50 well performed by the distin-
gulshed gentlemen who reported this bill,
and while there is much in this work,
taken as a whole, that | admire and in
dorse, yet the revisers will permit me to
say that there is also much in it that | can
not indorse, and will give my reasons
therefor. But first to the section in ques-
tion. No one will question the right OF |
any person To forbid another to come upon |
his premises without the enactment Of this |
section. Nor will any one doubt that il
is III the power of the owners and mana
gers OF premises like those described, to |
prevent, YUhOut fur5her enactment, any |
person or persons from coming upon such |
premises. Then why elevate what at best |
could only be regarded as a merely tectni
cal trespass, to all the dignity Of N !
nlsdeneanor, by the imposition of sDh
unhtsrd OF penalties and punshments
But this section Is clearly wrong, i'll that |
1t Is limited In its operation and applica-
uon TO miners and worklngmen 1t Is OBJ |
nOxIous to the constitutional objection |
that 1t Is class legislation, and is III dero-
CATION OF the simplest principles of hber
~. 1t makes that a crime which no civil |
ized country IN the world regards as such. |
and Is OF piece with latter day so-called |
'paternal legislation" which would not /
only prescribe what we shall eat and what |
We shall drink, but would also make our |
free school system compulsory, with view
ot moldIng the minds Of the rising genera
zion after some government model, which /
might OF might not be as changeable as |
the ever varying fortunes and vielssitudes |
OF the conflicting political parties Of the |
day. l need not say here, that l am op
posed to all sunIptuary laws, holding them,
as do, III common with such measures as
this now under discussion, AS being unne-
cessarlly restrictive Of human liberty, con-
fessedly obnoxious, and entirely indefen-
slDle. Such measures strike Extensively at /
the very root of both individual sove-
rel9nIy and individual responsibility, and
they are unworthy Uf the prugrt ssive spirit |
IT western people, and Of the present
aye. Under control of the spirit which
dictates the enactment Of such provisions,
We may yet live TO see the time when the
curtew bell shall again toll the hour for
extlnRuIshIng the lights and retiring; and,
II We look not well to the signs of the
times, ami take warning thereby, the light
of intelligence may also be- put out in like
mIShner.
But, to return. Ii q merely naked
technical trespass Is to be punished i'll 81
unusual = manner, as by tine Of tve
hundred dollars, or imprisonment in the
county iau for SIX months, although no
damage be done to either person OF prop
hryt ho r,,l., Is
Application as to persons, places and cir
culnstances Why single out "places
where workmen are employed" for the
application Of this new rule, the counter
part Of which can no where else be found,
as believe, On the statute books OF any |
other State In the UnIonl Is not this |
class legislation : 50 regard it.
On another and former occasion, l was
delighted to hear the Senator from Coles,
when speaking of another measure say |
" do Lot believe in making laws to strike |
one class of citizens and exempt another,
or all other classes. 1 believe in making |
laws that apply to all citizens alike"
That was bravely and eloquently SAID,
and | now invoke the and of the gentleman |
In the attempt | am about to make to have |
this bill recommitted, for the purpose of
having this unnecessary section stricken |
out 1t is pan. Of law that was passed |
in 1858, which has been known ever since,
as the odious LaSalle Black Law" and |
which has long since outlived its time. But |
IT there ever was any necessity for lts ex-
lstence-which l deny-the committee on
revision, not content to let 1t remain as 1t
was, have extended and intensified its op-
Grafton and sc Jpe so as to make il include |
all manner of workmen.
Mr.. HInchclitfe here read sections 158,
15y and l6O, which he insisted were broad
enough aud severe enough, in all con-
science, to meet every reasonable require
ment. He was, as he had ever been, in
favor Of the largest measure Of personal
liberty, compatible with public good, and
believing that the section in question was