Arizona republican., 1916-09-26
EIGHT HOUR LAW
 |S ON[Y A WAGE
 FIXING MEASURE
lRepubllcan A. p. Leased WlreT


 DAYTON, O., Sept. 25.-Charles F. Hughes, addressing an audience in Memorial hall here tonight, replied to statements in President Wilson's speech of Saturday. in connection with passage of the Adamson law.
 MT. Hughes characterized as most regrettable" the reference made by President Wilson to the eighty cent gas case in New York as an instance where the courts had refused to de- clare rate fixing law in advance of determining how it would operate.
 Tt has been sought to draw an an alogy, Mr. Hughes said, between such a case and legislation in advance of in- quiry. The courts have nothing to do with the question of the wisdom or pol icy of legislation. Questions of consti- nationality come before the courts after the legislature has acted, presumably with knowledge of the facts and upon careful inquiry"
 President Wilson's declaration that he considered the eight-hour day as principle that was not arbitrable, was commented on as follows:
 Tt is said that the principle was not arbitrable. It is a very extraordinary statement for eighteen years ago, l be- lleVe, In the passage of the act to pro- mote conciliation and arbitration with respect to disputes between interstate commerce employees and carriers. there was provision made for arbitration with respect to hour of labor. condi- tions of employment, as well as of wages. And in a bill. which I believe was signed during this administration ln July, 1913, the same provision in, I believe, substantially the same lang uage. was re-enacted in the law pro- viding for arbitration with respect to wages, conditions of employment and hours of labor.
 of course, the question whether in a particular case that condition exists which should provide for a certain number of hours of labor is a question requiring the most earnest considera ton. But no one in this controversy to which l am now referring, had any idea of establishing an eight hour work day. The principle of the eight | hour work day is not in any way in- volved"
 | T protest against any endeavor tc I confuse the thought of America by talking about an eight-hour work day when nothing of the sort has been en. acted, nothing of the sort has been pro. posed, and the only thing that wa! | plOpOStu UT enacted was a change II the schedule of wages.
 If there is anything more remark able or regrettable than the effort [, have it appear that an eight hour worl day is involved, it is an attempt t, draw an analogy between the case 0 legislation of that description and tn acton of our courts in dealing witt rate cases.
 Tt has been stated, for example. tha when rate is fixed by law as a rail road rate, or as telephone rate. and Is attacked as unconstitutional an confiscatory, that the supreme cour has stated that it would not declare tn measure unconstitutional until the ef feet of the operation of the rate ha been disclosed.
 Tt has been sought to draw an anal ogy between such a certain legislatio
 in evidence of inquiry The court
 have nothing to do with the question p the wisdom or policy of legislation. , "Questions of constitutionality con
 before the courts after the legislatuI
 has acted, presumably with knowlede
 of the facts and upon careful inquir,
 The question that comes before tf
 court, is, whether after a legislatul
 has presumably done its full duty
 (Continued on Page Three)