The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-10-17

co-partnership or corporation. The leg
~islative assembly shall provide by law
for the working of convicts for the bone
fit of the state but in such manner that
the labor Of such convicts shall not come
into competition with free labor"
Now, then, Lieut.. Gov. Richards made
an extended speech on this resolution
and this is what he said in conclusion:
~ favor leaving this entire matter to the
legislature. 1t does not seem to me that it
is our province to attempt to leglslate on
this question. 1t Is safer and better and
wiser to leave this entire matter In the
hands of the legislature. Two years ago L
had the honor to be a member of the terri
torial legislature and we wrestlcd with
this question and L suppose further legis-
intures will wrestie with 1t. 1 believe ii
we attempt to adopt either the original
section or any amendment we will act un-
wisely, and therefore 1 shall vote, and I
hop 1 am understood, againstthe adoption
of the original or any substitute that may
be adopted in lieu thereof"
The following day Mr.. Richards again
spoke on the subject, saying that as it was
evident that the convention proposed to
adopt a clause relating to the subject he
had a resolution to offer. He therefore
suggested as a substitute that the labor
of convicts shall not be let out but that
the state shall provide for the working
of convicts and any profits accruing to
the state shall go to the state. This
would mean that convicts could be en-
ployed in the construction of state
buildings, a work that belongs to work
ingmen, and that profits ordinarily 60
ing to contractors would be given to the
state.
But mark not only this mans opposi.
ton to a measure in which the labor inter
ests we're so vitality concerned, but glance
again at his W words and study the
insincerity so plainly revealed. He says
that the matter should be left for legis-
lative consideration, then he adds that
the legislature of which he was a mem
Der wrestled with it and that other
! legislatures will wrestle with it. Gould
better evidence be offered Of k~navery
and duplicity in dealing with this sub
ject?
The other clause in the constitution,
tho adoption Of which caused great sat
isfaction to the labor organizations reads
as follows, Section 81, Article MILL:
No armed person or persons or body of
men shall be brought into this state for the
preservation Of the peace or the suppress
sion of domestic violence. except Upon the
application of the legislative assembly or
of the governor when the legislative assem-
bly, cannot be convened.
Richards opposed this.
He opposed it in a speech in which he
reiter aztec the argu ment that it was not
a proper subject for the constitutional
convention to consider out should be
left to the consideration of the next
legislature, which he doubtless expected
would ''wrestle" with it as with the
other.
1t was an occasion of great moment,
for here was a gathering Of men to for
mulate the fundamental principles
under which a new state would enter
the union. Every proposal was to be
weighed with great care and every mem
Der of that memorable body was to be
held responsible for his part. The labor
interests of the state, strongly repre-
sented, made certain requests of the
convention. They asked hat the above
instrument, that is hat they should be
placed beyond the passage or repeal of
successive legislatures and only to be
changed or removed by the will of the
people expressed at the polls.
lGlChdIiS Wdb C~oubpiCuOuS ny MS OppOSl-
tion to both measures, which were made
part Of the constitution. Hon. Il. +.
Collins, the democratic candidate, sup
ported both.
What then shall be said Of this re-
publican candidate who is posing in diff
ferent sections Of the state as the friend
of the workingman, whose love for the
rights Of organized labor is heralded by
the morning republican paper as some
thing almost immaculate?
Did he not publicly oppose the two
measures for which labor commended SO
strongly?
Did he not favor leaving these subjects
to legislatures and then predict they
would be only "wrestled" with by future
legislative bodies?
If you don't believe it look at the
records but don't forget to vote against
the author of such double dealing