The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1885-02-14

Hawley thought the bill was in con-
travention of natural rights.
Mcpherson thought it would prevent
people from coming here, even as col
onistS.
Blair said the wages of the working
classes should be protected from the eff
fects of imported gangs of labor. In
the course of his remarks, Blair alluded
to the recent disturbances in Hooking
Valley, which were attributed to the
class of people this bill would exclude.
Those disturbances had already re-
suited in loss of 100000.
ingalls, said he sympathized with
Hawley in his regard for natural rights,
but we were confronted with a por-
tentous exigency. We should soon
be called on to decide whether every
man, woman and child on the face of
the earth, no matter in what condition
of physical or intellectual development
or moral standing, has the natural
right to come to the United States and
do and act as he pleased, to the detri-
ment of those already here. There were
at this present moment, ingalls, said,
100000 wage workers in this county
who were idle, but were willing to
labor for their dependent women and
children; that would make 5000, 900
people who, amid the extraordinary
rigors of an unusually inclement winter.
are suffering form the necessaries OF
life. They needed shelter, they needed
clothing that might be manufactured
from the surplus productions of our
| factories now stored in warehouses
awaiting purchasers. They were in need
OF corn, that was to-day being used for
fuel on the plains of Nebraska, and
wheat that was being fed TO hogs
in the valleys of Kansas. The
question was, had we the right 10
protect our own citizens against danger
Gus and determined competition, where
forced on US by the ambition of those
| desiring to improve their condition, OF
by the cupidity of those great employ.
ers who were Indifferent as to the
means they employed to swell their al
ready egregio is gains. The nations Of
this earth, under this doctrine o.
natural rights" had been dumpins
their pauperS and criminals and dan
gerous and uneasy classes upon US un
til, in ingalls, opinion, in view of recen
events in New York Cincinnati and Chi
cago, the time had come to consider
whether we might not be called on Il
modify, in some degree, our views as t.
the significance of the Declaration Q
American Independence and universe
rights of man.
Bayard did not see the present direc
application of ingalls, remarks. Thos
remarks were directed against the com
munistic forces which proposed an al
ray of numbers against property. /
was not, however. by bills of this char
acter that such forces were to be met
but by measures amending our crimina
! law, so as to punish unrelentingly tn
foes to human society, whose doing
and threatenings had been adyerted t
iby ingalls,. That was the obvious RICH
: land the obvious duty of every State, a
la means of self-preservation. But thi
bill was not levelled at the difficultie
involved in dynamite. Bayard then re
viewed the bill to show its provision
were impracticable.
Sherman defended the bill. 1t wa
directed not against freemen, but me
who were not their own masters, VIII
did not come as free individuals, bu
were imported in a body, at pre-al
=, ranged price, to compete with ire
and intelligent American workingmer
1t was not race discrimination. She
} man had voted against the Chinese bi
r and would have opposed this bill if
were a discrimination on account {
race.
y After further debate. the Senat,
e without action, adjourned.