St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-02-16
SAINT PAUL.
THE EIGHT-HoUR SYSTEM.
Farmers Show the Lyceum How
IT CouId Work With Them.

farmers and business men filled the
Labor hall Yesterday afternoon to hear
the arguments, pro and con, upon the
eight-hour question. In view OF the
several bills upon this question now
Vending before the Legislature the meet
inc proved of considerable interest TO
the audience. which listened 10 the
varied views that were advanced upon
different phases of the short hour Gay
theory. II. Il. Martin read a paper ID
which he took a stand in favor OF legs
latiOn to reduce the working hours. lie
smoke as follows: The eight-hour day
is everywhere demanded by organlza-
tors of laboring men. Since laborerS
form the majority and pay the
most taxes it is but fair that
they should decide how many hours
the employees of the state and city snail
work. 1t is illogical for aldermen to
say that workingmen are opposed 10
the eight-hour day. because if such IN
cidcnts really occur it is only through
fear and intimidation that men Whl
oppose the reduction of hours. There
is no more need for making men work
zen or twelve hours day than there is
TO make women and children W0rk IN
factories aud mines. The great eco
monte problem of the times is not now 10
produce more wealth, but rather how to
distribute that which is already pro-
duced. The solution OF this question
can only come through the intelligence
of common people. There are vast
number of people who, in discussing the
eight-hour question, assume that tue
application of the eight-hour rule TO the
AGRICULTURAL industry is an utter lmpoS-
sibility. All opponents OF the move
ment are loud in giving voice 10 IhlS
assertion. and many people VINO profess
to favor this short hour cause are III the
habit of declaring that the eight-hour
dayi not intended to apply to the farm
ing districts. They say tits Impossible
10 carry on the business of farming on
the eight-hour plan. Now there is moth
inc in reason. logic or experience that
should lead us to doubt the justice or
expediency of applying the eight-hour
rule to The farming class. The man
who oyerWorks i'll the harvest field
endangers his intellectual, moral
and physical health, just as surely
as he vino oYerworks in the mine OF
shop. The bloom, beauty and bright
ness are crushed out OF the girls and
women who work long hours in the
farmers dairy and kitchen, Just as sure
~ as they are ground out of the lives OF
the women workers in stores and facto-
rieS. But, says some enc, the farmers
can't possibly get their crops soWn and
harvested in season by working Only
eight hours day. Let us look at this
statement and see how much truth there
is in ii. In the first place, may not the
farmer who works overtime for two or
three weeks each harvest or seed time
easily take an equal amount OF leisure
later on in the season? Again, what is
to prevent the farmer from increasing
his working force. Ii he finds that
eight men must work twelve or fourteen
hours, let him increase the force to
twelve or fourteen men and do the work
in eight hours. Some farmers claim
this will mean payment of more wages.
The farmer should not fight the labOrer
who wants fair wages for his Werk. The
farmer could afford to pay higher wages
if less of his produce went to the tariff
trusts. railroad monopOlieS, wheat rings
and land grabbers. Grant the lab0rer
eight hours a day and honest pay, then
Join hands with him against the mOnop-
OlieS, aud both will come sooner into the
Inheritance out of which they have been
SO long defrauded.
Erick Olsen started the discussion;
lie thought that the farmers were told
by the managers Of farmers institutes
and similar bodies that they should
work all the time and vary their prod
uctS. The farmers upon an average
work about eight hours a DAY. There
were other ills from which the farmers
Suffered. Mr.. MattsOn, who is bo-
nanZa farmer, said that short seasons
would stand in the way OF applying
the eight-hour day on the farms. The
ic q nd
be applied in mechanical occupations.
The farmers during recent years have
given aiithe surplus of their long hours
to railroads, business men and wage
workers. He also paid his compliments
to Loren Fletcher. who has recently eX-
pressed himself in very uncompli-
mentary way regarding the present in
dustrial agitation, and thought remedial
legislation has done much to relieve the
Qnfavorable condition from which the
farmers we're suffering.
A. O. Page said the natural order im-
piled an equal division of the day into
three parts. If all did their share, four
hours would be sufficient to perform all
manual labor. A combination of farm
erS and laborerS would bring about the
desired results. The existing system
will only be changed when determined
effort is made to secure the full results
of labor to those who toll.
Representative Sheets claimed to be
a practical farmer, and said the eight
hour system could be readily applied
under more favorable conditions. Agi-
tation would accomplish these results.
1t would be profitable, when discussing
short hours, to study the principles gov
erning the cost of labor and the law
which fixes wages.
W. l.. Robinson suggested that, in
view of the labor-saving machinery, a
reduction of hours is necessary.
f. Herman opposed the idea of COM
polling people to work less hours than
they desired. The present eight-hour
agitation was absolutely false in princi-
pie, and more effective means must be
adopted to obtain more favorable cOndi-
tiOnS.
These remarks brought out number
of trade unionistS, who quoted eminent
authorities to show that the eight-hour
movement is correct in theory and pos
Sible of practical application.
f. c. Ives objected TO other schools Of
thought belittling the eight-hour move
ment. While the wage worker of to-day
is receiving more wages in money than
formerly, still his prosperity has not
kept pace with that of other classes.
Representative p. Gildea did not OBJ
ject to the working people in cities
working eight hours, but long hours on
farms we're necessary at certain seasons.
Legislation in favor of short hours was
in keeping with the tendency of the
times, and ought to be encouraged.
T.. Kech claimed the socialists be-
lleyed the eight-hour day did not mean
TO the wage worker the securing of
property belonging to others, and ad-
Vised that steps be taken for education
of all classes on this question.
Frank Valesh quoted Mulhall, Giffen
and ThoroId Rodgers to prove that the
condition of society improved as the
hours of labor decreased. The short
hour theory is already established. the
only question being the details of prac-
teal operation; and showed that de-
creasing the hours of labor does not
necessarily increase the cost of produc-
ton.
On the whole there was less opposf-
ton to the eight-hour theory from the
farmers than might be pYDected While