National Republican., 1878-05-22

wealth Of the country in order to give relief to
the laboring classes. Congress could make an
appropriation to send an exhibit of our manu-.
factures to tho Paris Exposition, but II found
constitutional scruples when II was proposed
to relieve our own poor. Some legis-
lators always found constitutional scruples and
objections to the appropriation Of public money
unless II was for some purpose In their own
section, and whore they have the will they
lind the way 10 appropriate the money. Tho
evils affecting the laboripg classes resulted
from two primo causes: First, because Of In.
sufficient employment for labor; and second,
because Of insufficient compensation, which
prevented the poor from getting the ordinary
comforts Of life. He who labors and produces
should DO adequately paid, so that he may en-
JOY the fruits Of his labor. II was grievous
wrong that there should be lack of employ
ment. and that, too, at unfair wages. What
aro the causes of this wrong2 That
could not always be ascertained; but he
would mention what he thought TO be
few Of them First, one cause was tho damage
done to the country by reason Of the great loss
OF lifo and property growing out Of the late
rebellion second, the stoppage Of tho develop
ment Of the country as q consequence Of the
late rebellion; third, the crowding Of labor to
the large cities and the large manufacturing
districts by reason Of the initiation Of wages I;
| fourth, the reflex of the tide Of prosperity
which began in 1873, and which created
financial and economical panic; fifth, the de-
crease In tho value of all property, which
| made Investments unsafe; sixth, tho en-
forced under-consumption while there was
over-production. Men may bo starving
in the midst of plenty, and the result Is bread
| riots. The great trouble after all was, how
| ever, that there had never been proper legisla-
tion In behalf of tho industrial classes. lie
had no sympathy with idlers or criminals, but
his heart went out to the honest laborer or
mechanic who wanted work but could not get
1t, or could not get adequate wages. The only
legislation for tho poor was the homestead acts,
but they were not remedial, for the lands
were so far of that the laborer could not avail
himself OF the advantages Of the acts.
MIR. BUTLER then quoted long list of acts
Of Congress which made appropriations Of
public money for public works Of improve
ment, as for rivers and harbors, and also the
acts to pay claims, and said gentlemen found
no constitutional scruples In making these ap-
preparations. There was no scruple even In
establishing Southern claims commission,
which had discovered enough loyal men in the
South to have crushed the rebellion If they
had been in the South and had sat down on it.
Laughter.
1t had coststhis Government for all It's ex-
penses for the last five years 600, and
yet there had been no legislation or appropria-
tion for the industrial classes. He then
proceeded to argue as to the duty of tho Gov
ernment to set works in operation, and to set
machinery In motion, and by liberal appropri.
alton to set the people at work, and argued
that that should be done.
Before Mr.. BUTLER had concluded his hour
expired, and consent was asked that he should
be permitted to continue.
MIR. WRIGHT. Oh, yes; let him go on.
There are two demagogues here now, and you
can't get too much of this. Laughter.l
| cat1 Il. L.
demagoguo he was glad to bo Joined with the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
objection was made to Mr.. BUTLER proceed
ing by several gentlemen on account of the
number who wanted to speak, while others
were anxious to have him proceed.
| Mr.. BRAGG insisted upon objecting.
MIR. WRIGHT said the objection camo too
late, but Mr.. BRAGG insisted.
Mr.. GARFIELD spoke upon tho pending
bill, arguing that the skeleton form of the
army should be kept up, in order that 1t might
be expanded by enlistment,,if tho expansion
was ever required. He believed that We
needed an army Of $4,000 men in order to
properly guard and protect our widely -ex-
tended frontier, not only along our Northern
border, but along the Mexican frontier.
Referring to the speech made by Mr.. HEw-
TIT, OF New York. ON the bill, ho took issue
with him in his view of the labor question,
and said that no one in this country had ever
denied the right of laborer to refuse to work.
lie could do as he pleased about working him
self, but when he says to another that he shall
not work, except under certain circumstances
or Tor certain wages, ho then invades the right
Of the other. He denied the right of any man
or Dody TO coerce, menace, or drive others from
work. When they did that they became vio-
lators of the law
Mr.. GARFIELD then referred to the labor
lotsi OF last summer, and in this connection
quoted the letter written by Macaulay, the
historian to the biographer of Jefferson, in
mhieh nc gave us his reason for not admiring
the character of Jefferson because ho,could
not agree with his theories of government, and
IN Which ne predicted that when the United
states became more populous the lower classes
would rise against the higher classes, and that
vandalism would ensue.
Every american who had ever read that let
yer must nave had 1t recalled by the scenes OF
st'st n summer, when belt of States running
from ocean TO ocean was appealing for the pro-
lection OF the Government, He did not agree
with that doctrine of Macaulay. Macaulay
mad never considered the moral force of uni
'ersai education III this country, nor had he
considered the fact that we had no classes in
TINS country as they had in England.
ln this country all might rise. But he as
serted boldly y that In the conflict of society,
such as we had in this country last summer,
when States are pOwerless to protect them
selves, the strong arm of the General Govern
mont must DO invoked. While he would pro-
tect all the rights of labor, he was for the
reign Of law, and he wanted an army large
enough to make the peace of the state secure.
lie therefore hoped 1t would be kept at 25,-
900 men.
Mr. BRAGG advocated the bill In speech
Of an hour or more, in which he denounced
the theory that standing army was neces-
sary in this country. He regarded Mr. GAR
FIELDS speech as an argument that the people
of this country were not capable of self-gov-
srnment, and Mr.. BRAGG believed that the
country demanded army reorganization.
Mr. HARRISON advocated the bill.
Mr.. SCHLEICHER said his district was
largely interested in the bill and he had had
no opportunity to be heard. He asked to be
permitted to be heard tomorrow.
The committee then rose and motion to
| reconsider tho vote closing debate WAS nninrel