Norwich bulletin., 1912-11-04

an explanation, but he declined to do so. have always been a union man, and l now hold a bosses card issued by the Bricklayers and Plasterers' un ion of Norwich. I was the first build CT to reduce the number of hours of la Dor for the masons and helpers from ten hours to nine hours per day, and at the same time I increased their wages 25 cents per day. I also re- duced the number of working hours for city employees to eight hours per day, while acting as street commits sioner of Norwich, and while am now employed by the state I am employing men all over this county, and these men are working eight hours per day. Now 1 would like to ask any member of any local union what union is MT. Craney connected with, or ever was connected with, that union men should be expected to support him for repre- sentative, or why that great effort was made to pack the democratic caucus and nominate him for this office? The plea was made that he was all right on all labor matters that came up in the last legislature. Well. that is all right to say, but let us take up his record. l have in my possession the journal of the house of representa- 2 LlNGSJ MtlAGil W HI Dc Slstu lD SIION any one who may have any doubts as to the truth of the following state ments:
 On page 2111 the record shows he voted to sustain the governors veto of the bread bill. thns defeating the Dill. On page 1911 employment of labor | more than six days per week bill, ad- l versly reported by labor committee; 1 no objections from any one ill the | house. Bill rejected
 On page 1340, bill to guarantee labor i bills from contractors or others, ad- versely reported by the committee; no objections from any one in the house. 1 Bill rejected.
 | On page 1913, bill in regard to prison | labor, adversely reported; substitute ! bill submitted debated in the house ! Bill deferred to next legislature or motion of MT Me'6ser of Bridgeport a democrat
 ! On page 1858. bill making eight hours : labor one days work iD state iuStitu- ! tons. Bill adversely reported by the i committee: no objections Bill reject l ed. This hill was of some importance i to Norwich. l have been very credibiy informed that the interest lin tho l passage of this bill was of much i'm l portance to the employees of the Nor ! wich hospital for the insane; so much i so that a committee of five was ap- ! pointed to wait upon Mir. Craney anC
 urge him to appear with this commit
 tee before the committee on humane institutions and urge the passage ot l the bill. I have been informed thdt 1 when he was waited on by one whC was interested and was apprised of tht
 wishes of the committee. the meetins was in the Del-Hoff hotel the persor
 was brushed aside with this remark Leave it to me. I will get that bil
 through, You fellows would no
 amount to anything. Quiet work i
 what is needed. I will get that bill
 through, all right" The committee
 went to Hartford and appeared befor
 the committee. When the committe
 saw Craney and asked him to 20 wit
 them before the committee, he toll
 them he would have nothing 10 d
 with the matter, stating that he woul
 like to sec them get the bill through
 they were So smart. The pill did no
 go through. ] wonder If there Was an
 quiet work done to block the Dill. ]
 this bill had passed 1t would have de
 creased the number of hours from i
 and A hours per day for the nurse and attendants and increase the annu
 al payroll upwards of thirty thousan
 dollars. I think have shown yo pretty clearly how Mfr. Craney stoo } on the labor question. His voice wa never heard on the floor of the hous during all the time he was there. nc ? even in explanation or defense of bill