Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 27, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 August 1884 — The Conductors’ and Drivers’ Bill. [ARTICLE]

The Conductors’ and Drivers’ Bill.

Much has been said antagonistic to Governor Grover Cleveland because he refused to sign the following bill, which was presented in the last Legislature of the State of New York by Mr. Earl: An Act to regulate the hours of labor of conductors and drivers of cars drawn by horses in cities. Section 1. —On and after the passage of this act it shall be unlawful for any officer or agent of any railroad corporation in any of the cities of this State whose cars are drawn by horses, to exact from conductors and drivers employed by them more than twelve hours’ labor for a day’s work, and such corporations shall out of said twelve hours’ labor allow conductors and drivers a reasonable time to obtain meals. Sec. 2.—Any officer or agent! of such corporation who shall openly violate or otherwise evade the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not to exceed six months, or both fine and imprisonment for such offense. On this subject the Brooklyn Union, Republican, remarks: “The history of the passage of the bill through both branches of the Legislature is both peculiar and ridiculous. When it was introduced, it was referred to the Committee on the Affairs of Cities, when it ought to have gone to the Committee on Judiciary. When it was discussed in the Cities Committee, two-thirds of its members laughed at it, and said that if it were enacted it would he‘a dead law.’ All the members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee laughed at the bill when they saw it on the printed files of the Assembly. They said that the Legislature could not interfere with private contracts. In this they were sustained by a recent decision of the Court ot Appeals declaring the act prohibiting the making of cigars in tenement houses unconstitutional, on the ground that the Legislature could not pass a law to prevent individuals from contracting to labor where they pleased, and to labor as long as they pleased, if that labor was not detrimental to public health. As a piece of buncombe, however, the Conductors’ and Drivers’ Twelve-Hours hill was passed in the Assembly with a laugh. When it reached the Senate it was reierred to the Senate Committee on Cities, where it was allowed to sleep until near the close of the session. A majority of the members of that committee were opposed to it at first on the ground that it was not worth the paper it was printed on. Assemblyman Earl went to Senator Daggett, who was a member of the Senate Cities Committee, and asked him to prevail upon the committee to report the bill favorably. Mr. Daggett replied: ‘I cannot see how I can ask the committee to report favorably a bill so clearly unconstitutional. If it is enacted, it will do the conductors and drivers no good—it will not have the effect of shortening the hours of their daily labor.’ When the session was nearing its close, Governor Cleveland’s name was more prominently and more generally named for the Democratic nomination for President than at any previous time, and it struck Senator Daggett and Senator Gibbs, chairmen of the Cities Committees, that it would be a good Republican party move to report the bill favorably, procure its passage, and subject the Governor, who would be compelled to veto it, to ignorant popular clamor. At an informal talk between leading Republican Assemblymen and Senators at the Kenmore Hotel, Albany, during the latter part of April or beginning of May, it was conceded: First —That the bill was a humbug, but ought to be pushed to passage. Second —That as a claptrap measure it would take well with the people. Third —That the Governor would he compelled to veto it because it interfered with the rights of both employers and employes, or in other words, because it was a humbug. Fourth—That if he did veto it, the laboring men would stigmatize him as a creature of corporations, and a good handle could be made of it in opposing his election as President if he was nominated by the Democrats. So the bill was passed by Republican Senators, they knowing that there was not a provision in it which was constitutional, and that if the Governor performed his duty he would veto it, and he did on the following grounds: “‘I fail to see any good purpose to be gained by this bill. It is distinctly and palpably class legislation, in that it only applies to conductors and drivers on horse railroads. It does not prohibit the making of a contract for any number of hours’ work, and if it does it is an interference with the employer’s as well as employe’s rights. If the ear drivers and conductors work fewer hours they must receive less pay; and this bill does not prevent that. I cannot think this bill is in the interest of tlie workingman.’ ’’ And in October, 1882, Governor Grover Cleveland said: “The laboring classes constitute the main part of our population. They should be protected in their efforts peaceably to assert their rights when endangered by aggregated capital, and all statutes on this subject should recognize the care of the State for liouest toil and he framed with a view of improving the condition of the workingman.” Governor Cleveland is the laborer’s best and truest friend, and all liis public acts show it.