Waterbury evening Democrat., 1888-02-20
THE KNIGHTS KICK.
They Protest Against the Settlement of
 the Northheld Case.

They Protest Against the Settlement of
 the Northfeld Case.
 HARTFORD, Feb 20.-At the annual meet ing of District Assembly, No 95, Knights of Labor, last month & committee was ap- pointed to prepare and publish a protest against the action of the government in compromising the case of the United States against the Northfield Knife com pany of Litchfield, for violation of the law prohibiting the importation of labor under contract. The protest has just been made public, the committee signing it being Thomas H. Kehoe of New Britain, Paul G. A. Schultz of Middletown, and George w. Hewitt of Hartford. It appears that the case was settled, by instructions from the solicitor of the treasury, on recommends ton of United States Attorney Stanton, the defendants paying one hundred dol lars and costs.
 The protest takes exception to the inter pretation of the statute that the importa- ton of 15 contract laborers constitutes only one violation of the law, holding that each and every person imported in violation of the law constitutes separate and dis tince offense, and separate penalty attaches to each such offense. In defense of this position an ingenious argument is made.
 To the plea but forward by the defense, and commented on favorably by the gov ernment attorneys, that the defendants were ignorant of the law and did not vio- late it Intentionally, the committee replies, CD That the law had been in existence for 16 months and had been universally com mented upon by the press of the country; t2) that the Knights of Labor have evidence to indicate that the defendants were ac- quainted with the law, and secured their foreign laborers by incorrect representa- tions, and (3 that in any event ignorance of the law is no excuse for its violation. But, as the solicitor for the treasury has said that the matter was not compromised on the ground that the defendants were ignor- ant of the law, the committee would like to know what the ground of settlement was
 To another statement of the government attorneys that it would seriously embarass the company to pay the fine, the commit tee replies: "When was the rule estab- lished that offenders against the law should not pay the penalty annexed to the offence because it might embarass them to raise the moneyp
 In conclusion the committee represents | that the law in question was intended for the protection of American laborers against | the importation of cheaper labor from abroad, and as an offset to the protection given to the manufacturers by the tariff on foreign products. And they point out that if the action of the department in this case is to establish a precedent, the law will be of no value, for any large corpors- tion could import thousands of laborers al one time, and it would only make single violation of the law for which a fine of Sl 900 is all that could be imposed. The committee has no expectation that this particular case can be re-opeued, but they respectfully ask the President to ex- anime into the facts, and if he finds that the public officers who have been instru- mental in the compromise and settlement of this case have exceeded their powers and have done great wrong to the great mass of the people, that he remove them from I office, or at least administer such repri. mand as his judgment of the exigenoies of the case may demand. But if hs finds that the law admit. of the consSyuc4Son given it by such sble lswyrxs ss United States Attorney Stanton and Acting Soli- citor Reeves, that he 'sreoommend conCress to alter or recommend the act 60 ss to re- lisve it of all ambiguity and leave 1t sub ject to only one interpretation, to wit: That every alien imported constitutes n diskinct ofense for which tsepsmay muIt tbe e1cbsd.s