The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1903-05-09
THE EIGHT HOUR DAY.

The court of appeals of the state of
New York has recently decided that
the labor law of that state which pro-
hibits public contractors from work.
ing their men more than eight hours a
day is unconstitutional. This decision
is one of vast Importance to labor.
The Federation of Labor has been
conducting a campaign all over the
country in favor Of an "eight-hour'
day. In the last congress bill was
introduced in the house and passed by
that body and favorably reported by a
senate committee, which prohibited the
use, by the government Of the United
States, and all contractors employed
by the government, Of any materials
OF merchandise CT supplies of any KIND,
for the army OF the navy or the In
dams, OF in any other branch of the
public service, made or produced by
more than eight hours work per day.
This bill was not passed by the senate
before it was reached. 1t was sup
ported by the leaders of both political
parties. In view of the decision of the
New York court it is probable that
such law as congress proposed would
be unconstitutional. The court held
that it was not a proper exercise Of
the police power Of the state to limit
the length Of days labor on public
works. 1t says that, Sin the interest Of
public health, Of public morals, and Of
public order a state may restrain and
forbid what would otherwise be the
right Of private citizen. 1t may
enact laws to regulate the extent of the
labor which women and children or
persons of immature years shall be al
lowed to perform, and prohibit alto
gether their employment in dangerous
occupations. 1t may limit the hours
of employment of adults in unhealthy
work, and it may be that it could pro-
hibit the performance of excessive
physical labor in all calings The
statute now before us does not deal
with the character of the work, the
age, sex or condition Of the employees,
but applies only to the case of a con-
tract with the state or municipality.
What possible bearing OH the health or
security of the employees or on public
health has the fact that the employer
is executing a contract for the con-
struction or performance of state or
municipal work? The defendant might
he constructing in the next town
road for a turnpike company or for
its own use. In this work it could
require labor for as many hours day
as it saw fit and could find workmen to
perform. Yet the same action, involv-
ing exactly the same character of
work, when done in performance of
contract with the public is by this
state made criminal
There is practically nothing left to
the labor law which the labor unions
forced through the legislature Of New
York in 1898. The same court has al
ready held unconstitutional the pro-
vision that all building material for
public works must be produced in the
state. Also the provision prohibiting
the competition Of prison made goods
with other goods and has refused to
sustain the provision in reference to
union labels. 1t is interesting to note
in this connection that Chief Justice
Parker, who has been spoken Of as
candidate for the presidency, assented
to this opinion, although he has al
ways been regarded as staunch
friend Of labor. His opinions have
always been favorable to labor. He
has sustained the right Of boycotting,
the right of union men to prevent nom
union men from working under GER
tain circumstances, and dissemted from
the opinion of the court in the deci-
siOns against the union label and
against the prohibition of the sale of
prison made goods. The court intimates
that Il law which prohibits i'm all cases
the performance of physical labor for
more than eight hours out of the
twcnty-fOur would be constitutional.