The Carbon advocate. [volume] (Lehighton, Pa.) 1872-1924, 1878-09-28

but all over the State, can see how he stood
up for their rights, while Bill was on its
final passage in relation to strikes, to tie up
their hands, so that they could not protect
themselves. The debate will explain itself.
See Legislative Record, page 1871, and read
the following MIR. RArsHER said
Mr.. SPEAKER-I hope the House will not
be in any undue haste in voting upon this
bill unless they intend 10 vote it down. If
the House intends tov0tc it down and was
satisfied Of that fact, would not detain the
House for moment. But you will find
that it Is strongly backed, and upon eXami-
nation that it is very peculiar in its pro-
visions. 1t has very peculiar purpose and
was drawn by peculiar hand. 1t has pecu
liar earmarks all through, and in illustration
Of that, | call your attention to the fourth
section. In the sixth line of the fourth
section the bill makes two or three crimes or
misdemeanors at one jump, and the last of
the lot is the worst. 1t makes it a criminal
offence if any one Shall by offer of recon-
"pense induce any employee ofany railroad
company within this State to leave the
service Of such company" Should that be
made penal otiense upon our statute books !?
| want to know, sir, if there is man upon
the floor of this House that iswilling to en-
dorse any such doctrine as that? think not,
if he Just thinks and reflects.
Mr.. .SCHNATTERLY.-The gentleman spoke
of the fourth section. will ask him a ques-
tion-will he endorse the doctrine that the
employee of any company has a right to
destroy the rolling stock of that company.
Mr.. RAPsHER.--No, sir.
Mr.. ScHNATTERLY.-This provides against
it.
Mr.. RAPsHER. i contend that it does not
provide any such thing. That is not the
purpose Of this act at all. The very title of
this act is delusUn and snare. This act
proposes nothing of the kind which the title
suggests, and if 1t had not been for the gem
tleman from Mercer, (MR. JACKsoN,) who
drew my attention to the act itself, pre-
sumo l should have voted aye through a
misapprehension. We are not here, even at
this late hour Of the session, TO put bills
through that we apparently know nothing
| about This is dangerous bill and is aim
ed at the rights Of the laboring man and its
| purpose is not as The title suggests,to provide
| for the protection of passengers upon rail
ways, and to insure the prompt transpoTta-
ton and delivery of freight. That is very
! fine-that title is-and almost any person
would vote for the bill upon merely seeing
the title. l agree with the gentleman from
| Fayette, (MR. SCHNATTEgLY,) J and the gentle.
man from Philadelphia, (MR. HALL,) that
no body of men engaged in q strike, have a
right to appropriate or destroy anybody's
property.
Mr.. LoNG..-Will the gentleman allow
himself to be interrogated
Mr.. RAPsHER.-I would rather not just
now. 1t will destroy my line of argument
to be Interrupted. think the property and
the rolling stock ofrailway companies should
be protected, but do notagree that it should
be done by taking away the laboring man:
rights. The object of this act is not to pro
tect the rolling stock of railroads, but it i:
virtually to prevent combination of the
engineers and employees to engage in 6
strike. | say that engineers upon railroads
and any kind or class of mechanics have 6
right to combine together in a lawful man
ner to protect their interests. 1t is one o
the great rights we claim in this country. /
is right which coal companies, railroac
companies and Banks and others engage in
and frequently they carry it with high anC
mighty hand. Now, | stand here at th
time to say that you shall not enact any
legislation here which has a tendency to in
teriere with the laboring man when he see
proper to combine for his welfare or protcc
tion. That is the point The object Of th
bill is to prevent men from striking at all
to make them powerless to do so. do no
imagine that this House will pass this bill
at any rate with that very Objectionable
clause in it.
We are pleased to state that Mr.. RArsHEl
carried the day, and the Objectionable an,
oppressive portion of the bill was defeated
and we are informed that, soon after, a com
mittee orrailroaders and workingmen calleC
upon him, at his room in the Hotel, anc
thanked him for his earnest efforts in thei
behalf.
We think we have fully proven all W
claimed in our last weeks issue when w
: said Mr.. RAPsHER favored the laboring man
We would say to the voterso of Carbon county
do not let his enemies deceive you by slan
dering him, and we predict that when tn
votes are counted, after the election is over
the result will show that you did not forge
him at the polls.