Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-10-27
WILSON WAS AGAINST
S-HOUR DAY AS EARLY
AS 1909, LETTER SAYS
Communications That Passed
Between a Labor Editor and
President of Princeton
Barred by Republicans
LIMITED DAY ATTACKED

Ii hu III In n n " n ~ ~
Letters In which woodrow wilson as
early as 1909. before he was candidate
for President OF the United States, pro-
claimed himself the foe OF the eIghtJnour
day. or, in fact. any limitation upon 4
length Of the working day. were made
public today for the hrst time by the Re
publican state committee.
Copies OF the two letters which have
been quoted In part by Republican orators
since the passage OF the so-called "eight-
hour" law, issued by the State commit
tee are facsimiles OF the original communi-
cations that passed between Edgar X Lave
erty. labor editor on the New York Evening
Telegram, and Wilson, who at that time
was president of Princeton University,
Laverty. in his letter 20 Mr.. Wilson,
quotes the present Democratic candidate as
bitterly attacking the idea OF n limited
working day for members of trades unions.
The speech Of Mr.. Wilson's TO which he
referred was delivered at Princeton June
1s, 1909.
Mr. Wilson. in his answer TO Laverty,
verifles the statements attributed to him,
cites two or three minor instances and con-
cludes by saying that he is convinced Of
the general truth Of his statements
FIRST OF THE LETTERS
Both letters bear facsimiles Of the sigma
turos OF the writer's. The first of the two
letters was sent by Mr.. Laverty 20 Mr.. Will
son under date OF New York, June l6, 1909.
II follows:
Hon. Woodrow Wilson,
President Princeton University,
Princeton, N. J.
Dear sir-In the New York Times of
June II, which purports to give ex-
tracts Of your baccalaureate address to
the students OF Princeton University,
you are quoted as follows:
You know what the usual standard
OF the emplove is In our day II is to
give as little as he may for his wages
Labor is standardized by the trade
unions, and this is the standard to
which II is made to conform. No one
Is suffered TO do more than the average
workman can do. In some trades and
handcrafts no one is suffered to do
more than the least skilful of his fell
lows can do within the hours allotted
to days labor. and no one may work
out OF hours at all or volunteer any
thing beyond the minimum"
Now, your reported remarks strike
me as being so extraordinary-so diff
ferent from what I. as n member OF
organized labor, have found to be the
facts--that I feel impelled TO ask you
II. the foregoing paragraph is correct
report OF what you said
If you are correctly quoted | should
like to have you give me your author
ity for your statement that In labor
unions mo one is suffered to do more
than the average workman can do
Also give me the names of a few trades
or handicrafts where mo one is sur
forced to do more than the least sNllfup
OF his fellows can do within the hours
allotted to n days labor, and no one
may work out of hours at all or volun-
teer anything beyond the minimum"
| As n matter of course. n president
OF n university of the reputed stand
ing of Princeton would not make state
ments in hts baccalaureate address un-
| loss he knows. or at least fully believes,
| that his statements are true. There
| fore, II ought not be difficult matter
for you to oblige me with the names
of those labor unions whose laws, or
even policies, bring about the results
you specify.
Awaiting your reply with lively in
| terest, l am, yours very truly,
| EDGAR r. ,LAVERTY.
WILSON'S REPLY
Mr.. Wilson's reply was written from
| Princeton University under date Of June
IS, 1909. II follows:
NY dear sir-Your letter of June 16
contains very proper challenge,
quite agree that I ought not to make
| the statements ! did make about the
trades unions, unless / were able to
cite cases in verificaton Of my state
| ments
|, of course. had no individual trades
unions in mind which l can name by
number. but l had in mind several
cases of buildings In New York city,
for example, the bricklayers working
| on which spent about one-third OF the
working day sitting around, smoking
their pipes and chatting. because they
had laid the number Of bricks to which
they were limited for the day by the
union TO which they belonged. had In
mind numerous experiences OF my own
| in dealing with working men In Prince
| ton, where i once found II impossible,
| for example, on very cold evening TO
get "A broken window pane mended at
the house OF an invalid friend, because
tho prescribed labor hours of the day
were over and the glazier could not
venture, without rislking strike, to do
the work himself and could not order
any of his workmen TO do II. had In
| mind scores OF Instances, In short lying
within my own experience and resting
upon the testimony of friends in whose
veracity 1 have every reason to have
the greatest confidence.
l. OF course. could not, in the case OF
more than one two of these in
stances. give legal proof OF my asser-
tons, but the evidences have are en-
tlrely sufficient TO convince me OF the
general truth OF the statement made.
Very truly yours,
WnnnRONU WIZ SON