The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-04-15
MEMPHIS DAILY APPEAI---THURsDAY, APRIL IT, 1886

~, APRIL Ii, 1886
shown and he controverted the cor.
rectness of the law as laid down by
the majority, that as it had not been
proved that the intimidation had had
its effect no notice should be taken OF
it. There was something revolving to
him in the intimidation Of employees
by their employers. Shame on the
cause which would perpetrate such a
crime against labor in its own interest
shame on the patty that would DELHI
erstely engage in the work of uDman.
ming men. Applause Kelley had
ated that he was protecting his bust
ness. He Mr.. Hurd) did not know
of any business which required a vic.
lation of law in its interest. Enter
prlses might loom into seeming pros
! perity, lines OF trade might be cast in
every direction, wealth might be
gathered from all nations, but il the
business must succeed through crime
and violation Of law the day would
come when the enterprise would fall,
the tade would be lost and the
wealth would not remain. He wanted
Kelley and every other employee to
understand that they might own their
acres, their plant, their machinery,
but they did not own their men. APP
plause. There was a line beyond
which they should not 90. They
might persuade, they might argue,
they might convince, but they must
not threaten they must not coerce,
they must not compel. That was the
lesson which the law taught. That
was the lesson he would have the
House teach to-day. Let it teach every
employer in America that II he intimi-
dated any man in his employ he did
at his risk, for every such vote he at
tempted to influence would be lost,
unless it was afiirmatively shown that
the influence did no. effect its pur-
pose. Let it teach employers to re-
spect the dignity Of labor and the
dignity of manhood. Let it teach
them that no wealth, however great,
can rob the humbest citizen of the
right OF suffrage, and no manufactur.
ing interest, however potential, shall
be permitted to interfere with the
freedom of elections. In conclusion
he said: / do not deem it proper TO
call attention to the election
at which l was defeated. 1t
was the October election in Ohio in
1884. The Democratic party in that
State was engaged in the first great
battle of that canvass. All the forces
we're concentrated on it's soil. The
fate Of the Republican party was held
in its hand. If Ohio went against the
Republican State ticket Ohio was lost
to the Republican candidate for Presi-
dent. 1t is matter OF public noto-
riety that whatever wealth, or power
or organization could do was done.
Members of the different departments
at Washington were in Ohio. The
campaign was managed under the eye
OF the great leader OF the Republican
party, and the Republican candidate
for President was in Ohio, in my dis
trict, in my city, on the night before
the election. The eyes of the whole
nation we're turned to II. The battle
everywhere else was suspended, but II
went on in Ohio, And how it went
on with such effort against such feay.
full odds, with such pains, strength anC
vitality none can know except the gal.
liant Democrats OF Ohio who were en-
gagged in the controversy. 1t was in this
battle in the very forefront of it.
in which l was stricken down. II |
had been fairly stricken down |
should have waited for the tender
hand of kindlier day to lift me up.
But having been un 'airly stricken
down, as honestly believe, | could
do no less than to come to this House
and ask it, in IFS impartial Judgment,
to give me the seat to which am en-
titled--not through Sympathy, not
through craftsmanship, God forbid, but
in punishment Of wrong and in vindi-
cation of right.
As Mr.. Hurd ended his speech he
was greeted with loud aid long.con-
timed applause on the floor and in
the galleries.
The vote was first takn on the reso'
lv;ion of the minority, which declares
that Jacob Romeis is not en- tiled to
the ssat. This was defeated-yeas,
1916; nays, 1856. The following Demo
Gratis voted with the Republicans in
the negative: Mess1s. Beach, Blount,
Blanchard, Boyle, Gambler, Clutch
ings, Dorgan, Dockery, Dunn, Findlay,
Ford, Gay, Gibson [ Md. ], Hale, Ham
mond, Harris, Heard, Hemphill, Hem
ley, Hewitt, Holman, Lanham, Lawler,
Lore, Lowering, Lowry, Morgan, Neal,
Niece, 0'Ferrsll, Perry, Randall,
Rogers, Seymour, Shaw, sowde,
Spriggs, Stewart Tex st. Martin,
Swope, Tillman, Turner, Ward III. ].
Warner [O.l, Wilson, Wise, Wolford
and Worthington
The majority resolutions confirming
Mr.. Romeis's right to his seat were
agreed to without division.
The agricultural appropriation bill
was then taken up and passed; the
river and harbor bill made the I'M
finished business, aud the House adj
journed.