Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-10-17
CONVICTED AND FINED
PENN BRIDGE CoMPANY'S Al
LEGGED VIOLATION OF LAW.
Caused Employees to Labor in Excess
of Eight Hours-Charles McCaul
Company Also.

The Penn Bridge Company, represented
oy John Meigs. the superintendent In
charge, and the Charles McCaul COMPANY
represented by Henry +. Woodland, their
attorney, were defendants in the Police
Court this afternoon, on charges of hav-
ing violated the eight-hour law in the con-
struction work for the government. In
the case of the McCaul company a plea of
guilty was entered and al the recommended
ton of District Attorney Baker fine OF
$50 was imposed and paid. Three charges
were against the Penn Bridge Company
and trial was before the jury. The case
went to the twelve men late in the after
noon. and the verdict was guilty. The
court imposed fine of $500 in each of three
cases. and counsel for the defense gave
notice of an appeal to the District Court OF
Appeals.
The Charles McCaul Company. the in
formation states. is building a part of the
new marine barracks for the government
under a contract, and 1t was alleged that
September - the company caused William
Spencer, a pasterer. to labor longer than
eight hours in a single day. District At
torney Baker stated In recommending the
fine of $50. that he had held a conference
with the officials of the company. and they
now understand the provisions OF the law
and Will carry out its provisions in the
future.
That the District government Itself. by
its requirements in the construction OF
the Piney Branch bridge by the Penn
Bridge Company. compelled the contra ctors
to work their men more than eight hours
a day the claim of the defense in the
charges against the Penn Bridge Company.
The District Commissioners and not the
Penn Bridge Company, ought to be prose-
cuted here for compelling these men to
W. han atohf a
Attorney Colbert.
I'VE will indct or prosecute any one who
is violating this law, was the reply OF
District Attorney Baker.
John l.. Meigs. who represented the COM
pany as defendant. was one of the chief
government witnesses. He produced the
time book OF the company, and his testi-
mony showed that the carpenters were
worked for about ten hours per day on the
Piney Branch bridge.
1t was contended. however. that the emer-
gencies of the case made il necessary. 1t
was stated that through the advice of En-
gineer Commissioner Biddle the Commits
sioners of the District required the COM
pany to complete a pillar of the bridge, nifty
feet high. without ceasing work after the
construction was started. This was neces
sary, because. after the cement was hard
ened, as II would do in case the work was
left over night, another layer could not he
put on and make the bridge safe. 70 COM
plete pillar thus required 10y the
Commissioners, it was stated, required from
twelve to fourteen hours. and the cement
men and the carpenters We're compelled TO
be on duty all those hours. That was the
emergency claimed by the defense to justify
fthe men continuing work more than eight
hours.
"Why didn't you work two shifts OF
men, asked the District attorney.
Because after one shift had worked eight
hours there was only two to four more
hours of work to be done, and we could not
get the men to work for that short time,
regularly was the reply.