Democratic Sentinel, Volume 22, Number 37, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 24 September 1898 — LABOR LEGISLATION [ARTICLE]

LABOR LEGISLATION

Record of the State>Democracy co Questions Effecting Workmen. 1 Law* Adopted by the Democrat* Prohibiting Contract Labor, Chlhd Labor, Requiring Workmen to Be Paid Once a- I Month, Prohibiting Bailroads From Bx— ■ acting Contribution* From For So-Called Insurance Societies, Abol—l ishing Pluck-Me Store* and Union Label*. The Democratic state platform for 1898 upon which the campaign is to be? < fought until election day in November, '] prudently gives prominence to the labor / Issue, because many thousands of our fellow citizens wear the badges of organized labor, and are profoundly interested in legislation which relates directly or remotely to their welfare. The term “labor” as used in this connection refers to wageworkers known as such in labor organizations, working men employed in shops and factories, in mines and on railroads, to the army of toilers, who build everything that is built and repair everything that is repaired and who keep the wheels of progress in motion and who, as the years have advanced, have taken an ever increasing interest in legislation and have demanded, as it was their {irerogative and duty to demand, legisation to emancipate them from embarrassment and thraldoms which aggregated wealth, in control of great industries, had imposed upon them.

In defense of the proposition, that the Democratic party from the first, had been the friend of wageworkers, there is abundant testimony, and if a reason for this condition is sought, it is readily found in the fact that Democratic ascendancy has always been promoted by a larger per centage of the votes of workingmen than any opposing party could secure. Men, working for a living, if they demanded legislation to protect their rights and interests, have looked to the Democratic party to respond to their requests, just as the rich, if they desired legislation to aid them in perfecting their schemes, have appealed to the Republican party for the required legislation and it is only necessary to appeal to the reoord to substantiate the affirmation. lu this connection, it is worthy of remark that the labor legislation, provided by Democratic legislatures from 1883 to 1893 inclusive, is something more and better than class legislation specifically beneficial to workingmen. True it is permeated with humanity and with justice; true it sought io emancipate workingmen from the autocratic domineering pf insolent and arrogant employers; true it sought to compel rapacious employers to cease trampling upon the rights of employees and to let go their grasp upon the throats of their victims, to cease their intimidations, coercions, blacklistings and other nefarious practices, all of which, while ostensibly and, in fact, in the interest of labor, have in the philosophy of government, a broader significance, because jt was of necessity and in an inestimable pleasure in the interest of society at large. It is vicious to the last degree to talk of a government of, by and for the people when any of the people are subjected to debasing conditions to gratify the cupidity and ostentation of the employers of labor, and hence Democratic legislation in the interest of toilers, bears the stamp of the best statesmanship of the times. Contract Labor. There existed in Indiana the pernicious practice of importing into the state aliens and foreigners under contract to perform various forms of labor. This practice aimed a deadly blow at the workingmen of the state by importing a vicious class of men who, caring nothing for the prerogatives of citizenship, were willing to accept meager wages and liye like swine in such huts as their wages enabled them to secure. But in 1885, the Democratic legislature, in the interest of social security and good government, put an end to the contract labor system in Indiana piaking the contract “utterly void and of no effect,” and imposing a heavy penalty for violating the law,

Child Labor. The Democratic legislature of 1888, In response to the demands of humanity and the future well being of society, a subject which broadens by contemplation, enacted a law relating to the employment of child labor. In Indiana it became notorious that children of tender years were being employed in various Industries, udder the influence of which mind and body were subjected to the tortues of work, which forced upon them infirmities frem whleh there was no escape in after life. To mitigate the evils of such employment, the Democratic law of 1885 was enactod, providing that in certain employ, ments children under 12 years of age should not be employed, and In cases of pertain manufacturing enterprises where the employment of children was permitted it was made unlawful to permit a child under 12 years of age to work more than eight hours per day. This law was preeminently wise and was universally approved by all thoughtful citizens, because In gome measure it emancipated children from tasks they were physically unable to perforin, thereby Increasing the number of infirm adults in after years. In 1893 the Democratic legislature amended the law, making 14 years instead of 12 the limit of age. Faying Workingmen Every Month. A shameful practice existed in Indiana prior to 1885 on the part of employers, of paying employes when it was convenient for them to do so; the inconvenience tq employes having little or no might in the transaction. This practice bore heavily upon the great body of workingmen and imperatively demanded remedial leglslation. and this was supplied by the Democratic legislature of 1885, the law in the dase providing: That every company, corporation or association now existing or hereafter organized and doing business in this state, shall, in the absence of written contract, to the contrary, be required to make full settlement with and full payment in money to its emgloyes, engaged in manual or meehanloal labor, for such work and labor done or performed by said employes for such company, corporation or association, at least once in every calendar month of the year. The violation of this section of the law entailed a penalty upon the employer of 81 a day for each day the wages wUre withheld. Besides the law provides that the debt shall be a preferred claim, the wages duo the employe to be first paid in full when the property of an employer has gone into tne hands of a receiver. This law, though it required but a few words, solved a most important labor problem, enabling employes to know When .they would be paid for their services, A certainty that gave them credit and enabled them to provide for current wants. And in the same line still another law was enacted by thejOomodPatio legislature of 1885 to pro tipi tge workingmen, In where the property of aft employer is

stdzed upomby any process of oowrt the witges oq employes to the amount of in each case is made a preferred claim, tot to be paid in full if assets are suffioieiit. or pro rata if there is a In t pc foregoing it is seen tha t the Democratic legislature of 1885 was on the alert to thi dw around workingmen every possible pre Section that 1 egislation could afford. \ Exacting Contributions. Railr. lad corporations, under covey of duplicit les as shameless as ever provoked indignation, concocted a scheme for robI bing their employes with a double purpose iu view, it was a combination of and paternalism, designed 1 T>rimarily i to destroy organisations of railroad mep, by notifying them that the corporation had established for them a system of insurance and hospital protection to which they were expected to contribute, and their hired henchmen always j| Intimating that their “job” might depend I upon their willingness to be robbed, and ■ growing bifid as they gathered in their ■'.victims they proceeded to conficate a cerain amount of the wages of their emp loyes to carry forward their scheme. I Th’s was a species of piracy which m roused widespread indignation in the ra 1 nks of railroad eniployes, who appealed t® i a Democratic legislature of Indiana to ew I '.ancipate them from such slavish environments. and the Democratic legislate ire of 1885 responded to the request of raiil road employes by enacting: ■shall be unlawful for any railroad con* ! >aaiy-or corporation operating railroads in Ind h ma to exact from its employes, without obtai 1 ning'written consent thereio in each aud everv • instance, any portion of their wages for the i* aintenanee or any hospital, reading room, librai y, gymnasium or restaurant.” Ab d the law imposed a penalty from |IOO lto Jsoo fcr its violation. This law had dthe desired effect in arresting the rapas Ity of railroad corporations to some exteu i, but it could not keep railroad corporate ons from subjecting such of their emplo; ves us resisted their machinations from the penalty of discharge from employment, but it did have the effect olf making the corporations a little more cabutious in practicing their intimidations.' Lien*.

The JDeittiocratic legislature of 1883 gave mechanic:! find all persons performing labor for erecting, altering, repairing or removing buildings, bridges, etc., a lien on such building for the payment of wages due them, and in 1885 the Democratic legislature amended the law of 1883 so as to inolade workingmen who had performed laibor in the construction of railroads wilßin the state. The law was demanded tto protect workingmen who in various ways were being defrauded by means which the ordinary process failed to remedy, but the lien laws enacted by Democratic legislatures in 1883, ’BS and ’B7 afforded ample and certain protection, as in all such labor laws the supreme purpose was to exempt workingmen from the numerous schemes of designing employers to cheat thorn out of their hard earned dollars, and the influence of the law has been wholesome and has met requirements. Payment of Wagon and Pluck-Me Store. Indiana had a number of citizens controling large industries and employing a large number of mon who paid wages in checks payable in goods at the stores owned and operated by the corporation, firm or individual carrying on rhe industry. As a result the employe, having nothing but his wages to feed and clothe his family, was compelled to deal at the “pluqk-mq” sfote, where any price for goods was charged that tb6 rapacity of the employer demanded, and there was absolutely no escape for the victims of this mercenary plundering, which had proceeded for years unmolested and had enriched the employer and reduced work: ingmen to extreme depths of poverty and want.

The Democratic legislature of 1887 designed to put a stop to this piratical practice by enacting that employes should be paid at least once a manth In the “lawful money of the United States.” This law was hailed with general acclamations of approval. But "to still further protect workingmen, the law prohibited greedy employers, who run the “pluck-me stores” from Charging their employes more for “merchandise or supplies” than such goods were sold to others for cash, and this law with the severe penalty imposed for Its violation, has proved effective and workingmen have been permitted to receive cash for their labor Instead of “pluck-me-store” checks. Nor was this all the Democratic legiature accomplished for workingmen for the purpose of relieving them from the schemes of employers, concocted to filch a large per cent of their wages. Prohibited from paying them In “pluck-me store” checks, they resorted to various coersive tricks, by which they sought to compel their employes to buy goods at their stores. This scheme was strictly in keeping with the “pluck-me store” infamy, but the Democratic legislature of 1889 enacted a law which grasped the outrage and' squelched It by enacting that It shall be unlawful for any owner, manager, superintendent, operator, bank boss, agent, or employer, employed in any of the occupations described ih Section 1 of this biU to hold out any tokens or inducements, or make any threats or promises of reward, or in any other way, by words or acts, to coerce any of their employees to buy any article of merchandise, food, groceries or supplies of any particular person, corporation, association, firm or company, or at any particular place; shop or store In this state. It is seen at once that the provisions of this law, with the anfci-pluck-zne store law, emancipated workingmen from the degrading and piratical domination of rapacious employers, and the penalty imposed b£ the law gave assurance of liberty of action on the part of employes that previously had been denied them. The Union Label. Organized labor, in recent years, became impressed that goods manufactured by union workingmen should be known by a label, wrapper, mark, name, brand, stamp or device of some kind which should be used for their protection, and this label or other device should be legalized by statute. It requires little effort to comprehend the great advantages such a label or other device would secure to organized labor since a moment’s reflection brings Intf. view a vast army of consumers wearing the badge of union labor, who, when it is practicable, purchases such goods only as bears the union label or other device, a fact well calculated to attract the attention of manufacturers, because of the larger sale of their wares. But the label or other device to have the desired effect required legislation, and this protection was given to union workingman and women by the Demoora'tio legislature of Indiana of 1898, the law providing! That the label, wrapper, mark, name, brand,. stamp or device used or intended tp be used by any union or association of workingmen or women, or of both, may be registered and receive protection. And the law further provides! "Every unlawful use” of the label or other deviced name, ‘‘waioh Is substantially tM same as one so registered or so nearly resembling the same as may bo oaiealated to deceive, may be enjoined in any court of competent jurisdiction and damages recovered therefor.” And the law provides severe penalties for violating any of Its provisions, such as counterfeiting the label or other device that has been registered, or by placing such forged label or other device upon goods and offering the same for sale This law passed In 1893, by a Democratic legislature, was in response to the earnest request of union workingmen who were earnestly seeking to promote the general welfare of labor in the state. Whatever else may be said of the Democratic party, the fact stands forth in the boldest relief that at all times and on all occasions, it has been the earnest and unfaltering friend of the wageworkers of Indiana and has responded with alacrity to promote fcheh welfare by prudent and just legislation,