The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-10-09
COLONEL GRAY's BOOMERANG.

One of the most unfortunate remarks made
by Would-be Governor Gray in his joint de-
bate with Major CallSins. at Fort Wayne, was
his allusion to a speech made by Mr.. Calkins
in Congress Colonel Gray tried to pervert it
into an attack on workingmen. We ask all
the workingmen in Indiana to read what Mr..
Calkins did say, and then answer if it is not
one of the most noble and fitting speeches
ever made in their behalf. Colonel Gray will
not probably refer to it again. We quote
from the Congressional Record of May 81,
1878, page 3642:
'Mr Calkns: Mr.. Chairman, at the spe-
cial session of this Congress- and on the 9th
day of November last, while in five minutes
debate upon the army appropriation bill,
submitted to the House certain remarks, OF
which the following is a brief extract:
1 say to the gentlemen upon the other side that
during the riots it conclusively shown by
gentlemen who hold opinions differing from those held
this side of the House that they believed that the
only security had at that time in the army,
was shown by the calls for assistance made by the
Governors of the States upon the President OF the
United States.
Mr.. Luttrell-Does my friend propose to main
tain standing army for the purpose OF suppressing
the rights of aboring men2
Mr. Calkins-Not at all.
Mr. Luttrell-It looks very much that way.
Mr. Calkins-By means. nope my friend from
California (r Luttrel does not claim that the riots
and destruction of property which took place in the
cities of the North were by the workingmen. hope
he does not in any way pass such libel upon them.
Mr.. Iuttreil~fhen thew must have been Republican
politicians because it took place in Republican States
Mr.. Calkins-I say that those who destroyed prop
erty not laborng in the true meaning OF the
Mr.. Luttrell-Do you to say that the 80, 900
or 1000 men engaged in those riots were not labor
ing menl
Mr.. Calkins-I do not know whether they are Re
publicans not. But this do know-that the exec
utive officers of States that Democratic called as
Justify for the strong of the government as does
the gentleman from California to suppress the heath
Chinee"
Mr.. Luttrell-Do understand the gentleman to say
that he believes the maintaining of standing army is
necessary for the purpose of putting down these men
monopoliesl
Mr.. Cakins-I say to the gentleman from California
that every man has the right to cease work when ne
chooses but he has no right forciby to compel all
other man to cease work who may wish to.
'My surprise may well be imagined when
saw these remarks not quoted literally as they
occurred, but the deductions of certain news
papers, drawn therefrom to suit their own
purposes, published throughout the United
States, in which publications it was claimed
that had taken ground for q standing army
for the purpose Of suppressing workIngmen
associations formed by the laboring men of
the country. Nothing was further from my
mind at the time, and it is surprising to me
that any papers have drawn any such deduc-
tons from the remarks made on that occasion.
l am not one of those who regard labor as SER
vile, but | believe it to be enrolling. 1t is
the workingmen of this country on whom we
must depend in any and all emergencies, and
there is no one whose sympathies go out to
fhaYr or how limo md | lu ma a
these remarks now in justice to myself be-
cause of the adverse criticisms made by GER
tain newspapers throughout the country. Ny
idea then was, and is now, that we ought to
have a standing army to suppress instructions
of all kinds where they threaten the public
peace. But in no way do believe that an
army should be kept as menace to prevent
that which is lawful. 1 said then, and say
now that it is right for all workingmen to
enter into what is known as strikes, and to
make them successful wheneve>. it can be
done by peaceable and lawful yns. l not
only believe it to be their right, but when
they are oppressed by corporations, or in any
other way, it becomes their bounden duty to
see to it that their rights are protected by all
lawful means, and no one will stand by them
to the last sooner than L.
''Now, l deny that it was the laboring men
who did the burning and the riOting in the
memorable riots of last summer [l877]. |
hold that it was class who never dignifed
labor, or who never hardened their hands
with honest toll. This class which infests
the lower places of cities seeks occasions of
public commotion to burn and destroy and
pilfer, and in many instances-nay, nearly
all, during those troublous times-the labor
ing men who were engaged in lawful strikes
protected the property both of citizens and of
railroads against the marauders and criminals.
zone instance of the protection which they
afforded to property occurred in my own State,
at the city of Fort Wayne, and am credibly
informed that they volunteered and did pro
tect the property of the citizens and of the
railroad companies by standing between that
and an unlawful combination Of tramps who
had assembled for no good purpose. And l
here and now repela and hurl back the insinua-
ton that made an attack upon the working
men of this country by advocating larger
standing army than we now have, to suppress
them as unworthy of the source from whence
it came. This much have said in justice to
myself.