Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-07-11
SIXTEEN HOURS A DAY.
Bill to Regulate Hours of Railroad
 Employes Was Not. Passed.

Washington, D. C., July 11.-A vigorous effort was made during the recent session of congress to secure the enactment of the bill to promote the safety of employees and travellers on railroads by limiting the service of railroad men. The measure had the backing of the labor organizations and of all the men whom those or ganizations could influence.
 The principal proposition of the bill that railroad employees be limited to sixteen hours of labor in each day of twenty-four hours encountered a serious snag in the senate, not be- cause senators believed men ought to work longer than sixteen hours or even so long as that, but for various other reasons that were advanced. The measure was regarded as too drastic in it's present form, and the opinion was expressed that it was proposed at a time too late in the session to admit of proper considerd- tion and amendment before adjourn ment. It, therefore, went over until the short session next December.
 The chances are that some meas ure, approximating in its provisions that which now is pending, will be enacted at the next session. but it is certain to meet with pretty serious opposition. Cautiously enough, the op- position is not to come entirely from members of congress. but from many of the railroad employees themselves. and It will be based upon entirely natural reasons. It frequently hap pens that railroad employes-conduc- ! tors, brakemen, engineers and fire men, especially-find it really dtsir- able, for personal reasons. tc work sixteen or more hours consecutively: and it could be shown that it would l be a hardship on them to compel them by law to cease their labors af- ter having been on duty sixteen hours. ,.
 I This position is stated strongly by ] Senator Carter, of Montana. who was one of the senators who opposed the ! enactment of the measure in the closing hours of congress.
 II Throughout the great West" said he, ''it happens that the railway em- ployes desiring to have their families located at points where the children | can go to school. extend divisions from centers of population to points in the timber or on the prairie cut along the line of the railroad. II is not natural that the railroad em- ploye-engineer. conductor or brake man-should desire to make his stop at the end of his division in the timber or on the prairie as short as possible. to the end that he nigh; have more time with his family at the place where he resides? The pending bill simply would require the employe to divide his spare time between his family and the tall grass at the terminus of his division.
 "Of course. no member of congres: would support a bill which required railroad employees or employees in any other capacity 10 work for six. teen consecutive hours. or fourteen hours. or twelve hours. or any other specified number of hours. beyond the legal limit of eight hours. The rail. road corporations themselves do mol make this requirement. The man i' brutal and unjust who will require sixteen hours of continuous service al a post of peril from any man. II would enable the railroads to demand sixteen hours of continuous service from their employees. If they desired to make the demand. Tn it's present shape. therefore. I do not think il ought to he enacted.
 'I am for the man who desires tr lspend time with his family. If by making a run say of twelve hou-s and then with a rest of four or five hours he c7n get back to his family and rest there fortwenty-four hours II am in favor of enabling him to Sc that. That is what we do in ths west
 Other members of congress. manv iof them men vko have vorEed twelve and sixteen hou-s a dsv for vears. also tskn the n~Sitio1 tfat nT rusn ought to have the hours cf his labor urresscnstIv currzilsd- It is likely. therefore. that the provisions of the proposed sezisIztion vili be modified materially before the meas .-- ar-rr- sr ~~-r<nrrfxaI frfo raW