National Republican., 1888-03-22

was u virtual acknowledgment on the part
OF It's Trainers that there was no existing
law, equity, or good conscience upon which
these claims could be based.
Mr.. Lane, of Illinois, maintained that the
bill was wrong In principle and form and
was utterly vicious.
Mr.. Lodge, of Massachusetts,, said that he
had had the audacity to introduce bill sim
liar to the pending measure. The matter
had been brought to his attention by work
inemen in his district No claim agent had
come to him. lie believed that their claims
were Just ones, and II seemed to him that It
was only Just and reasonable that the men
their claims
Mr.. Compton, of Maryland, favored the
bill because he believed the claims were ius',
and believing that he would vote to do tbs
claimants justice, be the consequences what
they might. This great government ought
TO be ashamed to refuse to do Justice to its
worklngmen, no matter how many they
might be or how much It might cost.
Mr.. Dingley, of Maine, advocated the
measure on the ground that the govern
ment was bound to deal In good faith with
its employees. In dealing with the govern
ment bondholders the government acted up
to the spirit and the letter OF the contract.
The same principle should actuate II in deal
ing with It's mechanics and laborers.
Mr. Cummings, Of New York, said that
he was not one OF those who throttled labor
with his left hand, while he waved the flag
OF labor in his right. He cared not how
much money this bill might take from the
treasury. That was not the question. The
question was to whom did the money be-
long-to the workingmen or the govern
ment. That was the question the court Of
o1atN NNsna a.. A..
history Of the eight-hour legislation he de-
clared that the bill provided that the will of
Congress should not be thwarted by gov
eminent officials.
The workmen had been robbed by the
government officials. Let those who
thought that the amount involved justified
the robbery vote against the bill. There
was no other argument TO justify such a
vote. Great corporations had been pro-
tectsd in rohberies to the extent Of hun,
dreds of millions Of dollars. Empires had
been thrown to them and government Sc
eurity without stint and yet members
higglcd about this proposed act to do JUS
tice to the laborer
Mr.. Boothman, of Ohio, said that fail
ure to pass the bill would be to say TO the
workingmen: ave took your labor, we
stole your money, and because We are able
to do II we ARE going to keep it,
Mr.. Buchanan, of New Jersey, quoted from
the eight-hour law and President Grants
proclamation In regard thereto to support
his argument that the claims under consider
alton had strong legal basis. The bill was
class legislation. Other classes had had
their legislation in the past, and II was time
that the workingmen had their legislation.
This legislation was for class of deserving,
needy workmen, not for monopolics, and 1t
would not involve an expenditure Of more
than S6,000000.
Mr.. Tarsney, of Michigan, earnestly sup
ported the bill, and declared that to him it
was revolving proposition that men sent
here to make laws should themselves publish
to the country that they as representatives
violated the very laws they told their con-
stitueDts to obey.
Mr.. Tarsney then moved that the commit
tee rise, stating that his intention was to let
the bill go over until April IL, in order that
the gentlemen who were shooting at II bird
that they didn't see and that was not there
might have an opportunity to examine the
record and become better Informed as to the
merits of the case than their speeches to-day
indicated them to be.
The committee then rose and the bill went
over.
Bills were passed to prevent the product
of convict labor from being furnished to or
for the use of any department of the gov
eminent, and from being used IN public
buildings or other public works, and to pre-
vent the employment of alien labor on pub
lie buildings and other public works and In
the various departments of the government.
The House then went into committee Of
the whole (Mr. Hatch, of NO., In the chair
on the bill to establish department of
labor.
Mr. Buchanan, of New Jersey, moved TO
strike out the clause charging the commits
sioner to ascertain, whenever industrial
changes shall make 1t essential, the cost of
producing articles at the time dutiable in
the United States, In leading countries where
such articles are produced, by fully specified
units of production, and under classlfica-
tiOn showing the different clements of cost
or approximate cost of such articles of pro-
duction.
Mr.. Buchanan said that the commissioner
would be unable to to gather the informa
ton with the force at his disposal, and that
If the force were increased sufficiently to
to enable him to do so, the expense of the
department would become so great that he
feared Congress would refuse to appropriate
the money.
Mr. Mills, of Texas, regarded the clause
which 1t was proposed to strike out as the
most important feature of the bill. He
wished the commissioner to get the needed
information from men thoroughly equipped
for the work. Then when Congress came
to legislate upon the tariff question gentle
men would not be able to deceive the peo-
pie, who would be able to see for themselves
what was the labor cost of production in
European counties. Let gentlemen come
up to the Scratch and have this matter in
vestigated Gentlemen should not tell the
people that the tariff was intended for their
benefit. Every line Of it was intended for
the benefit Of the trusts.
Mr. Reed, of Maine, expressed wonder
whether the chairman of the committee on
ways and means If he got the information
would allow II to be read to the committee.
Mr. Buchanan said that he had no idea
that his motion would give rise to so much
excitement. He had no idea that it would
bring to the front, clad In all the panoply of
war, the leader of the House. He hoped
that the gentleman would get the informa-
tion he wanted but he hoped he would get
II in n legitimate way. The very excitement
his motion had produced furnished but
another reason why the clause should not be
retained in the bill. If the very mention of
the matter gave rise to political discussion
the fact that the clause was kept in the bill
the department Of labor would become
political football kicked this way and that
by political parties.
Mr.. Randall, of Pennsylvania, offered an
amendment to extend the inquiry to the