The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1899-06-02
nothing which was done in New York

nothing which was done in New York
or Chicago.
Trustee Tebbets wanted to find
whether Mr.. Hatfield's statement. that
the Trustees, in case of difficulty, would
be liable on their bonds, had foundation
IN fact
Trustee Devine said that the trades
ul.lcns were formed merely 10 protect
labor. Capital he held, protected itself,
arc he thought labor ought to have the
same privilege. With regard to the rail-
road, he contended that it was labor
that built it and he said he had figures
To show that with the assistance re-
celved from the Government by the
promoters Of the road, he Oevin-l could
nave built a road clear across The con-
tinent, and would have had enough left
tc turn over several millions of acres
OF land of which the people had been
disiaheriteo. He favored adopting the
resolution with the cause inserted. and
sa4u that he believed with great writer
mat by and by, if the present condition
OF affairs continue the middle man as
wen as the laborer will be wiped o.
the face Of the earth.
trustee Dolan wanted an opinion
1rom Corporation Counsel Devine as TO
Wnether or not it would BE- Illegal TO
enter INTO contract with such a pro-
vision embodied in it. Mr.. Hatfield. he
SAD, ndd intimated that the Trustees
would DC liable if things vert wrong.
and he did not want to '.go broke
Corporation Counsel Devine said he
was entirely impartial in the matter,
SO Tar as giving an opinion was con-
csrned. IT he had sympath' IS they
leaned toward the union men. but as
counselor to the board his duty was
PLAIN He had carefully examined into
the matter and had concluded that the
PROVISIONS OF such a clause as that pro-
posed, could not, if inserted, be en-
forced.
Corporet ton Counsel Devine said lie
ma talked with a number CT the most
prominent attorneys in the city On the
question, and that all of them had
agreed with him. He said that if his
aoVics was ignored the result, would
probably be that the attorney of the
Electric company would advise his
clients TIC disregard the clause mas
hucn as, under the Constitution it
could not be enforced. If the company
Should follow the advice of the attorney.
ne explained, and employ non-unio1
men, the union men would probably
lodge a complaint with the Board of
trustees, and demand that the latter
withhold the money due the company
until the terms of the contract should
nave been complied with If the Trus-
Ices complied with the demand and
Withheld money due, the company
would, he said, probably bring suit
against the city; costly litigation would
follow and costs would pile up, and in
view OF the fact that the board had
acted contrary to the advice of its legal
adviser, the members would proba bly,
BE held responsible and their bondsmen
be forced to pay.
In conclusion Corporation Counsel
Devine said that the grievance, if there
was one, should be adjusted between The
union and the company, and that the
Board of Trustees should not be
dragged into the muddle
Trustee Brown wanted to know
whether it was not intended to make
a test case out Of the matter, seeing
that it had never been settled in this
State
Mr.. Hatfield replied that the question
had been decided fifty times in other
States.
Secretary Smith of the Fedora ted
Trades Union inquired whether the city
would not have right to require pro
fessional nurses to be placed in its
hospitals
Attorneys Hatfield and Devine replied
that it would have no right to employ
nurses of some particular union, but
that 1t~would have a perfect and I'M
doubted right to employ skilled nurses,
and no other kind
Secretary Smith said he understood
that the seven or eight men who COM
posed the Electrical Workers Union
had been given notice to quit.
Mr.. Hatfield said that that statement
like others made by Smith, was not
true. The latter, he said, had stated
that the work done by the employees
OF the Sacramento Electric. Gas and
Railway Company was shabby. while
as matter of fact no complaints had
ever been lodged with the Board of
Trustees to that effect. He contended
that If such state of affairs actually
did exist the members of the union
would lose no time in laying in a COM
plant. Mr.. Munsey, he said, at last
Mondays meeting, had informed the
board that he had received a shock,
but If he had it was because he did
not know what he was doing, or because
he was intoxicated. He said such
statements were untrue, and that
unions, when they do that which they
good.
the audience.
Anybody can see it, continued
Mr.. Hatfield. 1T was proven in this
city in 1884,
Trustee Tebbets said he hoped there
would be no trouble.
Trustee Paine suggested that the
whole matter go over until next Mon
day.
Then Mr.. Munsey, the lineman who
said at Mondays meeting that he had
received a shock, and whose statement
Attorney Hatfield criticised, was rec
ognized.
i want to know" he said, '.how Mr..
Hatfield got his information that l was
either careless or drunk. He had no
right to say such a thing
1 said that you did not know what
you We're doing, or that you were in
toxicated," retorted Mr. Hatfield, land
l say it again.
"On what authority" inquired Mr..
Munsey.
say it, and I am authority