Mountain Home Republican. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1915-1946, 1916-10-28
now for a time upon a subject of more

recent legislation, and about whicl
, perhaps some of the people of Poca
: tello are as much interested as an,
other of the people whom / have tn
! honor in part to represent. | am goinj
to discuss with you what Is known a
the wage bill, or eight-hour law, which
was passed in the closing days of thi
session. AS you perhaps know, with
out my telling you, | voted against the
passage of that measure. | am no
here simply to Justify my vote, be-
cause L am not candidate before the
| people of the state. and do not know
that | will ever be, but l do want to
discuss with you the merits and de-
merits of that measure, and see, If pos
sible, what 1t Is advertised to be, and
what Its consequences may be, not
| only to the country, but ] want par
ticularly to discuss 1t as to its effect
upon the laboring men whom 1t is sup
posed to have served.
Now, my friends, in the first place,
II you will permit a personal reference,
had the honor to put through the
eight-hour bill for all public works
carried on or constructed by the United
States government. or for which the
United States government contracted.
When l went into the Senate, / had the
honor to be appointed chairman of the
committee on education and labor, and
urged the bill providing for an eight
hour daylight hours to constitute a
days work for all men employed upon
any work in which the United States
government was interested whether 1t
was public works, such as putting up
building, or whether it was contract
work wherein the government employ
ed the United States Steel Company,
we will say, or any other construction
company, to construct a certain piece
of machinery. Under that bill any one
working for the government under
contract could only employ their labor
for eight hours. That bill was pass
ed, as the working men of the country
know, and became a law.
Now l refer to 1t for this reason.
that bill provided a penalty or pun
ishment for the individual who en-
ployed men or permitted men to work
over eight hours. If men actually
worked more than eight hours, the
man who had the contract was penal
lied for permitting them to do so, and
that is an eight-hour law. In other
words, 1t limits the actual hours work
to the number of eight, and you can
not work beyond that.
And you know this bill does not linn
1t the hours of work, and a man may
work ten hours or may work longer.
1t is simply a basis of estimating the
wages.
1t may be, my friends, that these
men-and there Is no finer class of
men than those who handle our trains
were entitled to higher wages, but /
did not know so. There was not
scintilla of evidence before me, offered
taI 20 hot haf~ roc
were, what they were in comparison to
other wages, or what they were as
compared with other employees.
AS / say, investigation might have
established the fact that they were
entitled to that wage, and l want to
take this privilege of saying what l
said upon the floor of the Senate when
we were told that If we didn't pass
that law by Saturday night that the
men who run the trains of the country
would have stopped all transportation
and left the country at the peril of
starvation. took the liberty upon the
floor of the Senate in saying that in
my judgment 1t was absolutely untrue,
and said II the Congress of the Unit
ed States will today pass resolution
promising an investigation and full
consideration of this question, and a
hearing from all parties, and consider
alton of the facts, l will venture to say
that the men who run the trains will
run them until we shall have had an
opportunity to know what the facts
are. (Applause.)
You need not tell me, l don't care
what any representative of labor says,
you need not tell me that the men who
are entrusted with these trains and
millions of dollars of property, who
associate In their neighborhood and
community with the best people of the
country, would not have given Con-
gress an opportunity to know the act
ual facts. And, therefore, | said let
us investigate, and have full hearing,
and ascertain all the facts.
Now, my friends, If this was an
eight-hour day, 1t was question
of principle, wasn't 1t? Tell me
how you can apply question of
principle to twenty per cent of
the men working in an industry?
If II is an act embodying a prin-
ciple or act of humanity, II should
apply to the men in the machine
shop just the same as the men
who operate the trains. CAP
plause.)
And when you bring a bill into
L
honor to sit, and say to me that
this Is an act of humanity; that
the men should not be permitted
to work over eight hours, the
strain Is too great, then l will say
to you to include the other eighty
per cent of the men, because hu-
manity Is not limited to a few.
(Applause.)
Was 1t question of wage? II
It was question of wage, the
same rule applies How can l say
without a single fact before me
that these men in the machine
shop are given enough wages
while the men operating the trains
are not. They are in the same
industry, connected with the same
transportation system, and wheth-
er 1t was an act of humanity, or
an act of principle, or a question
of wage, take the position here
tonight before the working men
of this community as | took 1t in
the Senate, that every man en-
gagged in that industry was en-
titled to hearing as to whether
or not he was being Disseminated
against.
| was passing through the state of
plause.) I was passing through the
state of Maine a few weeks ago, and
upon the Kennebec River they throw
the train across the river with ferry.
| was walking on the deck when the
three gentlemen who were running the
ferry addressed me, l said to them:
N.lz a..