Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1890-02-24


afford them opportunity to thwart the
councils progressive spirit.
Aid. Hampton said that on the re-
monstrances which had greeted the coun-
Gil at its previous meeting were found
the names of many of a certain
class of property holders who are not SO
anxious to kill the eight hour law OIL
find fault with it, as to oppose city i'm
provements on general principles. VIVA,
he wanted was to see the city put itself
in a position where it can go right
ahead and triumph over all technicalities
and overdrawn excuses. He wanted the
city to put itself in a position where il
can push its improvements without in
reference from those whose only aim is
to check the march of progress. He did
not want any loop holes left which OBJ
| structionists could crawl into and make
trouble. Besides the city attorney had
come before the council with the law. II
the council was misguided by his opin-
ion. he must alone stand the RESPONSE
bility. He. therefore. favored the re-
peal of the ordinance.
Aid. Knox voted against the ordi-
nance, he said, when it first came up,
because the city attorney had advised the
council that it was illegal. He was not
| opposed to the eight hour law or to eight
hour men, but he believed the eight hour
ordinance was not only illegal but that it
would drive men away from the city if
the understanding that they we're to have
only eight hours pay was strictly adhered
to. He believed the eight hour contract
ordinance hardship to the laboring
classes instead of benefit.
Aid Evans stated that he was an eight
hour man; he had voted for the ordi.
nance andswould vote to maintain it
He differed with the city attorneys 10.
depreciation of the law. He thought
too that Aid. Knox's statement that the
| eight-hour law would drive labor from
the city was entirely wrong He could
not see either, on what ground prop
erty holders had to object to eight hours
as days work. 1t was immaterial to
them whether the men worked ten hours,
as long as the men received pay only for
what they did. He was. in favor of
shortening the hours of the laboring men
as far as pos sible, and he took occasion
here to accuse Aid. Schnell of over.
working and underpaying his men as a
contractor. and he said further that Aid.
Schnell would work his men by the elec-
trio light if he could do so unrestrained.
Aid. Schnell replied to the attack by
saying that it was wholly unfounded.
That he paid his men good wages, at least
more than living expenses. which was
more. he said, than the alderman from the
Fifth could say.
Aid. Evans modified his accusation
With reference to Mr. Schnell somewha,
and the wordy war cea' ed, Mr.. Evans
holding. however. that Mr.. Schnell was
not friend to labor.
| Aid. Larkin said he could not see how
the cost would be more whether the men
worked eight or ten hours There was nc
use of anticipating trouble. He had no,
met laboriDg man yet but WHIST was
willing to work and take his pay accord,
ing to the time he put in. There had been
an under current to kill the eight hour law
for several days and now it was coming
to the surface. He did not believe the
ordinance as it stood was illegal
Aid. Negus held that the property
holders we're many of them of the opin-
ion that the eight hour day ordinance
would entail additional expense 10 them
in paving work and were therefore op-
posed to the ordinance as a stipulation OF
contract work.
Aid. Howard did not believe the ordi
nance was unconstitutional, and he could
see no reason for resembling it. He
thought the council should stand firmly
and solidly by it, and insist that the hours
of labor be established as eight hours.
| Aid. Corken had always been an eigh,
man, and he proposed to stand by every
law that looked to the establishment OF
an eight hour law. He could not see
how ii was unconstitutional or in con-
fiict with the laws of the state. He
thought the law should be maintained
and continued on the ordinance books OF
the city. With all due respect to the
city attorney, whom he regarded as one
of the best the city had ever had. he
could not see any reason to change hi!
mind.
Mr.. Haas stated that he stood befor,
the council purely on legal basis. Fl,
was not opposed to the eight hour law
but it is in this instance against publ,
policy. against the law of contracts. Tn,
city had no right to interfere betwee,
the employer and the employed, or t
impose a condition of this kind. Tn
city had no right to override the law o
the state.
Aid. Edwards and Schroeder bot
spoke further in favor of the repealinl
ordinance.
! Aid. Buncher said he wss in favor o
/ the eight hour law. but the city of Roc
, Island could not exercise any power no
dedicated 20 it by the Legislature Of tn
state and he thought the city should stan
by its city attorney, whose advice Of
! points of law should be accepted. Tn