Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1891-02-27

nay osAsf W1Sosne snop. II va proposed
to make the Limitation 10 bat myself vol
unseersd 10 make il IS that il might no
+. include the email roads which have feu
men way mp in the woods where they can
; not reach them. The roads in Massachu
setts do pay once week. / don't know
whether il il to their advantage
! TO do % or not The testimony be
fore the committee vas that il vas
Perhaps there sle few men Who are reek
less and in the habit of drinking when they
get their psy. Once in . while you fad
men in any employ ment Who spend theil
money ofterer Of they have it - times Z
! year than il they had ii but l2 dmes Z
year. But are you going to keep back the
pay Of 24S men Who are - worthy citixeni
- We have at WAterville, good mechanics
because OF one or tvo men who are no
ihrifrys These men have petitioned 10 the
Legislature for this bill and see no reason
why they should not have il. The bill il
not offered in any spirit Of hostility, but in
the spirit Of what is just and fair to these mer
In Waterville Who are personally interest.
ed. hope the matter will be &doEt ted, not q
any reflection upon the committee, - con-
slider it simply . reasonable proposition tc
pay these men once . fortnight, and IL the
minority report il adopted instead of the
ms ority, DO not see any trouble in havip 4
the amendment, which know 10 agreed to
BY great many, if not all the railroad men
do not see any objection to placing the
matter before this body.
Mr.. StewArt-The Senator from Ken.
nebec, to my mind has advanced the
strongest argument against the passage OF
this bill. He declares it to be an original
proposition to single oat class Of men, to
take out few of the mea employed in the
Maine Central Railroad aud
legislate for them and for them only.
l submit, Mr.. President, whether il
is the business OF this legislature to
iegislste for any class OF men as against q
much larger maj ority, ~ he himself hss
stated are employed 10 the eame or similar
business. This may be q manufacturing
business but it is a railroad corporation. II
it is good for $50 men employed in one
branch Of railrosding. it il good for 1000
men employed by the same corporation ia
other capacities. If it is, as he has stated
an original proposition, covering something
| which he has some private or personal in
terest, or in which few Of his constitu-
ents or my constituents have a personal OF
private interest in. then l submit we are
not here to legislste upon that proposition.
II this matter is for class Of men %
againet much larger class Of their fellow
workers employed by the same corporation,
in the same business, then l submit
| to the good sense Of the Senate that it ought
not to pass. If it 10 good for these men it
| is good for men all over the State. II it Is
| good for corporations employing 2400 or
mi nd $rR thav mi. Al
1t is good for corporations employing ten.
II this is = manufacturing business wholly,
why isn't it covered by the statutes regu-
lsting manufacturers. Simply because it
is railroad company that does the manu-
featuring; and there cannot be any reason
adduced here for singing out these men
and calling them manufacturers. They are
rAilrosd men, employed all along the line
of the railroad, they may be called out Of
the shop any day to 20 to Portland or to
do some other business. II 10 class
legislation when you pass an act compelling
this company to pay $50 Of its employees.
You simply open the door for the other
$3.50 to come in here and demand the same
thing. They come here and make this de-
mand without asking or suggesting to the
company that they would like their pay
fortnightly. There is nothing that ap-
pesred before the committee or that has
| appeared in the argument of the senator
from Kennebec that shows they even desire
their payment oftener than they get it.
claim it is not the province Of the Legisla-
ture or a committee Of the Legislature to
pass this act when the employees Of the cor
poration have never asked the managers Of
corporation to remedy wha. they
think to be existing evils. Does All evil
exist in the shops at Waterville? !?
Are these employees oppressed? Why have
they not appealed to the managers Of this
coiporation2 If the corporation failed to
meet its employees when asked to pay to its
employees, then submit. is time for them
to come here and ask for legislation. l
place the opposition to the adoption of this
minority report upon the broad ground
stated by the Senator from Kennebec. taat
it is class legislation, that it is an original
idea. The times do not demand 1t. The
people of the State of Maine do not demand
it. The employees Of the Maine Central
Railroad do not demand it. and until they
ask for it, submit, it is not proper for
US to legislAte upon it.
Mr.. Hsines-Who asks for this? Who
is it wants this legislation? What is the
legislation proposed2 We sit here six
seven or eight weeks. and three. f0u,ths.
I've eigh,hs, six-eighths, seven.eighths of
the legislation here passed are private bills
and private acts for the benefit Of private
persons or corporations. Talk about class
legislation. What kind Of legislation was
it when the Legislature in 1887 said that
the lsboring men of this State, where there
were ten in number. should have their pay
once fortnight. Was that class legisla-
tion? Why is it, my friends, running mills
and foundfies have to pay their men once
fortnight. Is the Maine Central railroad
grown 50 great in this State that the rights
of $50 men in the Legislature is not to be
heard. Is it grown so great they
have got to 70 down on their knees
and crawl for everything they want.
Is the right of petition to be taken
away from the 250 men at Waterville !?
The proposition has been made here that
they could get their pay when they ssked
for it. heard the testimony before the
committee and 1t was that they had prac-
tice there that any man who wanted to take
bill Of bis time. practical discharge and
be hired over again could 60 and get his
pay. Two instances were given where
men had done that and one never came
back; he stated he bad to get bis pay to bury
his wife. 1t was before the committee.
/ say there never has been any practical
recognition Of paving man once fort
night when he wantsdit. They say when
a good reason is given, but who is to de-
eide as to the validity Of the reason? Some
clerk sitting behind asbarbed wire fence has
| to adjudicaie whether ii is proper for a
man to have hi, pay once a fortnight
| who knows when ne wants his pay better
| than the man who earns it2 They are dif-
ferently situated from the line and train
men. They travel about from place to
place over the State and have opportunity
| for buying country produce. These man
ufacsurers, whether they 60 to Portland or
Lewiston, return to the shop every day OF
| in tso days, with their tools. That is theil
headquarters, where their time is made up
and where they ge their pay. say thai
the committee was right in reporting ,hs;
the bill! ought not to pass in its original
draft, but it would not be right to refuse
70 pass Phil 10 pay $50 men employed in
! Wstervi!le or any other men aggregauug 2
over 25 under the same circumstances and
conditions.
| Who DO you want to protecthere? Do you
want to protect the employer or the EN-.
ployel What was the Law Of 1887 for bui
for the employees? 1. wss fought mosl
strenuously. The employees wanted the
law ard the Legislature gave it TO them. II
is admitted by common consent to be q
good law, and one which has worked fol
the good OF every body; and there is nc
reason why it will not work for the benef
| of these men, and can see no reason Nhy
it should not be adopted.