Birmingham state herald. (Birmingham, Ala.) 1895-1897, 1897-02-11
A CARD.
To the State Herald.

To the State Herald
Permit me to trespass on your valuable
space in answer to an article or inter-
view which appeared in the Daily Ledger
of the 5th instant, in which VIM. STAN
ley harshly criticizes my action in regard
to the monthly pay bill which was de-
feated in the senate few days ago, and
for which he gave me the undeserved
compliment of being the medium of de-
feating in the senate.
I desire to say that the article as it
appeared in the Ledger is untrue. In the
first place, he makes mistake when he
refers to the bill as a two-weeks pay bill,
knowing that the bill calls for regular
specified day in each month on which the
operators must pay their employees the
amounts due them in cash.
have made no secret of my opposition
to the measure presented to the senate.
1 informed the author of the bill time and
again that the remedy desired was not
comprehended by his proposed bill, and
would not suit the wishes of the miners.
In my judgment, it would benefit only a
few money lenders and sharks who would
stand ready to discount the certificates
which it was proposed should be issued at
the specified times mentioned, and could
not benefit the miners, who wanted two
weeks pay bill pure and simple.
l had a petition signed by 300 miners
and was in receipt of numerous letters
from friends asking me not to support the
measure, and no petition or communica-
ton came to me from any friend of the
bill.
If Mr.. Stanley had attended to the busi-
ness which he claims he was sent to
Montgomery to look after instead of try
ing to further his own personal political
ambition, he could readily have found out
my position on the proposed measure.
60 Nv &c ott 10
the fact that he opposed similar meas
ure before the recess. A bill of the same
nature was drafted at the commencement
of the session by Mr. Iipscomb, of Jeffer-
son. The bill was shown to the miners
committee, Mr.. Stanley and myself, and
we all expressed disapproval of the meas
ure as proposed, for the reason that it
could not change the present method in
vogue in the mining district of the state
We informed Mr.. Lipscomb we wanted d.
bill which would require our employers to
pay us in legal currency of the United
States every two weeks, and at our solic-
itation he drafted bill in keeping with
our ideas, which was defeated in the sem
ate about ten days ago.
He charges me with being in company
with the representatives of the corpor-
atoms to the exclusion of every one else
which is absolutely untrue. have tried
to treat the representatives of those cor
poratfons courteously, as l have tried to
do with every one else I have come in
contact with while in Montgomery, and
let me say right here, am under no OBJ
legations to the corporations. They owe
me nothing neither am I indebted to
them for anything more than the respect
due one honest man from another.
He refers TO conversation he had
with Gen. Rucker in the Exchange hotel
lobby when came up; If he had reversed
his statement he would have been truth
full. When Gen. Rucker came up Stanley
and myself were in conversation. asked
him the question as he states 1t, and
considered 1t pertinent at the time.
suppose Mr.. Stanley felt that report of
his labors at Montgomery to the victims
he had duped had to make an excuse for
the failure of the measure he claims he
was in Montgomery advocating.
AS the Daily Ledger has printed the
interview with Mr.. Stanley rejecting On
me it would be but fair and just that it
print my reply.
Thanking you for your kind considera-
ton, am yours respectfully,
JOHN HARKINS.