Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

[Quincy Business Mens' Association.]

QUINCY, ILL., February 22, 1908. DEAR SIR: We, the undersigned manufacturers and business men of this city, hereby enter our protest against the passage of the Gardner eight-hour bill, the title of which is H. R. 15651. This bill has been referred to the House Labor Committee and ordered printed.

As business men, citizens, and taxpayers of this great Commonwealth we ask that you use your influence in defeating this and all similar bills.

We believe this to be class legislation, that it would be destructive rather than constructive, that it would work against the best interests of the great majority of the American people, and that it would be legislation in favor of classes against the masses. Respectfully submitted for your consideration.

Joseph Knittel Show Case Co., by J. Knittel, treasurer; Ebert & Shanahan; Monroe Drug. Co; Gem City Transfer Co., C. W. Breitwieser, manager; W. T. Henning; Cadogan Hatcher Mfg. Co.; James M. Irwin; J. L. Niswander; Miller Bros. Transfer Line; Weems Laundry Co., F. H. Weems, treasurer; Berghofer Mitchell Co.; Pure Ice Company, Wm. H. Woodruff, secretary; E. M. Miller & Co., B.; Collins Plow Company, per J. W. Brown, secretary; McMein Printing Co., W. H. McMein: Quincy Show Case Works; Central Iron Works, H. Lechtenberg, secretary-treasurer; Roeder & Greemann; C. H. Wurst Co., C. H. Wurst; The Henry Knapheide Wagon Co., per H. E. Knapheide, treasurer; Geo. Von de Haar; A. Roehl; Kochler & Koch; Excelsior Stove & Mfg. Co., John J. Fisher, president; Fick Coal Company, W. C. Fick, manager; W. D. Meyer; Enterprise Pub. Co., H. H. Rickmyer; Buerkin & Kaempen; Quincy Pattern Co., per E. W. C. Kaempen, treasurer; C. H. Peacock; Michelmann Steel Construction Co., W. F. Gerdes, superintendent; George Rupp & Bros. Company, per Geo. Rupp, secretary and treasurer; H. M. Sheer Co., by H. M. Sheer; Stationers' Manufacturing Co., by H. F. Dayton, treasurer; Reliable Incubator & Brooder Co., J. W. Myers, president; The Mulliner Box & Planing Co., per E. S. Mulliner secretary; W. T. Sprague; W. H. Konantz; Chas. H. Cottrell; Tenk Hardware Company, Rudolph Tenk, secretary & treasurer; The E. Best Plumbing & Steam Heating Co., per E. Best, president.

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,

[Quaker City Rubber Company.]

PHILADELPHIA, PA., February 18, 1908.

Chairman House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: I respectfully protest against the eight-hour bill, H. R. 15651, which you have recently introduced, as being unfair and class legislation, one which I think will injure the business interests of the country and in all probability will be the forerunner of broader and more general eight-hour-day legislation, which would invade our very homes.

I sincerely hope that the subcommittee of the House Committee on Labor will not report this bill favorably. We are having enough business troubles, and they are likely to continue now for the balance of this year; and class legislation of this objectionable kind will certainly not tend to help put business conditions in better shape. Yours, very truly,

C. A. DANIEL.

[Quintard Iron Works Company.]

NEW YORK, February 19, 1908.

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,
Chairman House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C.

SIR: We desire to register our opposition to the passage of the proposed eight-hour bill which we understand is before your committee.

Like other people in a similar line of business in this vicinity, we are now running our works nine hours a day with an eight-hour Saturday, and our experience shows that this, at the present time, is about all the reduction in hours that this business will stand.

We are practically prevented from bidding on certain work which demands an eighthour day and on account of the disorganization which will inevitably follow by endeavoring to carry on the two systems at one time.

The fact that certain work is offered with a limit of an eight-hour basis and the proposed eight-hour bill now before you offer a serious handicap to the manufacturing business which is now suffering a serious falling off. Our business at the present time is carrying all the burdens that it can stand.

Respectfully,

Hon. JOHN G. GARDNER,

QUINTARD IRON WORKS COMPANY,

GEORGE Q. PALMER, Treasurer and General Manager.

[Roane Iron Company.]

CHATTANOOGA, TENN., March 2, 1908.

Chairman House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: I desire, not only on my own account but in the interest of our people engaged in manufacturing and mining in this section, to protest most earnestly against the passage of the eight-hour bill, H. R. 15651.

I think this is very vicious legislation and not really to the interest of either manufacturers, miners, or laboring men. It seems to me that we are all suffering from too much legislation, and if matters could be allowed to go along quietly the country would recover and everybody would be better off.

Do not let this bill become a law.

Yours, very truly,

H. S. CHAMBERLAIN,

President.

[Reed Manufacturing Company, steam fitters' tools.]

Hon. ARTHUR L. BATES,

Washington, D. C.

ERIE, PA., February 20, 1908.

DEAR SIR: I wired you this morning as follows, and wish to confirm same:

[ocr errors]

Please use every effort and influence against the Gardner eight-hour bill."

In explanation will say that we would consider the passage of the Gardner eighthour bill as a serious menace to every manufacturer.

It seems to be of narrower application than any previous propositions, but its passage would be sure to be the opening wedge to a general eight-hour day in private employ

ment.

We trust that every possible influence will be used by you against it and urge such effort.

Very truly, yours.

REED MANUFACTURING COMPANY,
P. D. WRIGHT, President.

[Racine Boat Manufacturing Company.]

MUSKEGON, MICH., February 19, 1908.

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,

Chairman House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We understand that you are about to introduce an eight-hour bill, H. R. 15651. This bill in our opinion will impose a hardship upon manufacturers in general, and we wish to enter our protest against same and trust that you will give both sides of this question your careful and impartial thought.

Yours, truly,

RACINE BOAT MFG, CO., Per W. J. REYNOLDS, President.

[Russel Wheel and Foundry Company.]

DETROIT, MICH., February 18, 1908.

Mr. JOHN J. GARDNER,

Chairman House Committee on Labor, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: I have in my hands the printed copy of H. R. 15651. I can not too strenuously deprecate the passing of such a measure that would embarrass hundreds

and thousands of industrial plants in this country and even destroy many of them. We have distributed many thousands of dollars to workmen in payment for labor upon Government work and hope we will not be prevented from figuring in the future. The passing of this bill would absolutely do this, and God pity our land if the Government should start factories in addition to the burden of so many municipally owned and controlled utilities of our country.

I am, yours, very truly,

[The Roberts Brass Manufacturing Company.]

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,

WALTER S. RUSSEL.

DETROIT, MICH., February 20, 1908.

Chairman House Committee on Labor, Washington, D. C.

HONORABLE SIR: We notice with very much regret that there is to be an effort put forth to enact the bill H. R. 15651. The same would be very detrimental to our business. We frequently bid for and do manufacture a considerable quantity of brass goods for Government use, and if this bill becomes a law we would be compelled to refuse to make any further bids for such work, and we respectfully enter our most emphatic protest against the passage of such bill.

Thanking you in advance for giving the above your favorable consideration, we remain,

Very respectfully, yours,

THE ROBERTS BRASS MFG. CO.,
D. H. ROBERTS, President and General Manager.

[J. Regester's Sons Company, brass work.]

BALTIMORE, February 22, 1908.

Mr. JOHN J. GARDNER,

Chairman Subcommittee on Labor, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: As you are considering the eight-hour labor bill, we as manufacturers and employers of about 200 hands want to set before you the fact that it will be a great hardship to us and everybody in our line of business if this bill is reported favorably by you and it becomes a law.

We think it applies socialism by force and will surely be a great detriment to numbers of large manufacturers in the United States, and in our humble opinion it will not help the laborer at all, but will rather have a tendency to destroy what little ambition he has.

This is a very serious matter when looked at by a manufacturer, and we only wish that we were able to eloquently describe our opposition to the passage of this bill. Hoping that you will give our weak attempt your serious consideration, we remain, Yours, respectfully,

J. REGESTER'S SONS COMPANY.
S. W. REGESTER, Manager.

[Ravenna Lamp Factory.]

RAVENNA, OHIO, February 3, 1908.

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We wish to go on record in reference to Gardner bill, which is known as H. R. 15651, as being unfair and would work a great hardship on manufacturers throughout the country.

Yours, very truly,

RAVENNA LAMP WORKS.
W. H. STILES.

[Remington Machine Company, brass founders.]

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER,

WILMINGTON, DEL., February 27, 1908.

Committee on Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of a copy of the eight-hour labor bill, known as the "Gardner bill," No. 15651, and looking over the same and comparing it with the pres

ent eight-hour law, it occurs to us that if this bill is passed it is of such a nature that it will compel manufacturing concerns like ourselves, who do quite a little work for the various departments of the Government in addition to our regular and special lines, to either decline any future Government business or to place our entire shop on the eight-hour basis, which would so interfere with our line as manufacturers regularly and for the trade, increasing the cost of the same to such an extent that it would not be possible for us to enter into competition with those manufacturing concerns who do no Government business.

We have been and are doing quite a volume of business in a small way for various departments of the Government, but as we read this bill, if it should become a law it would then become necessary for us to absulutely decline to figure on any further Government work or even to furnish them with repairs and parts of machinery, which we have already installed for them in various parts of the world.

We trust therefore that instead of using your efforts to encourage the passage of this bill, that you will do the best you can to have it held up in committee and not even presented to the House for a vote.

Yours, very truly.

REMINGTON MACHINE CO.,
J. J. SATTERTHWAIT, President.

[Reeves Engine and Machine Company.]

TRENTON, N. J., March 11, 1908.

Mr. JOHN J. GARDNER,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We understand that you as chairman of the committee in charge of the eight-hour bill will have the same up for consideration and report. We desire to protest against this measure, as we believe it unjust and against the commercial interests of our country.

Respectfully, yours,

REEVES ENGINE AND MACHINE Co.,
CLIFTON REEVES.

[W. C. Ritchie & Co., paper boxes.]

CHICAGO, March 16, 1908.

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: We wish to enter our protest against H. R. 15651, which is revolutionary and paternalistic in its tendencies and if it becomes a law would keep the business world in an indefinite foment.

At the present time what this country needs most is a chance to recuperate and regain some of the ground lost since last autumn. Even with favorable legislation the restoration of business to a volume large enough to reasonably furnish employment for the mass of unemployed will be slow. We believe all energies should be bent in this direction and that this would be the grandest thing that could at present be done for our workingmen, even though possibly such action would not be picturesque. Trusting that you will put forth your best efforts to defeat this bill, we remain, Yours, truly,

W. C. RITCHIE & COMPANY,
R. H. RITCHIE.

[F. J. Römer Sons (Incorporated), contractors.]

Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C.

ST. PAUL, MINN., March 12, 1908.

DEAR SIR: Being among the contracting firms competing on Government work, we protest against favorable action being taken upon House bill 15651, and we urge your honorable committee not to take favorable action upon this bill.

Objections are many, some as follows:

It would irretrievably embarrass, industrially and financially, hundreds if not thousands of plants whose product is intended wholly or part for the Government.

It would drive hundreds of concerns out of the field of Government bidding; it' might result in the establishment of Government factories.

It would be irresistible entering wedge of new labor legislation, for the labor lobby would not stop there.

The enactment of this class of legislation would be an injustice to the employers and practically 90 per cent of the workingmen of the country and is not in keeping with the principles of this Government, giving to every man a right to work. In the name of employing interests of Minnesota, we urge your influence to defeat this bill.

Very sincerely,

F. J. RÖMER SONS,
Per F. H. ROMER, President.

Hon. C. R. DAVIS,

[Jacob Ries Bottling Works (Incorporated).]

SHAKOPEE, MINN., March 10, 1908.

Representative Third District of Minnesota, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: The active work of interests seeking the enactment of national laws detrimental to those who are employers of labor and who have money invested in manufacturing and other enterprises calls upon us the work of aiding in caring for legislation in Congress. Powerful lobbies of labor agitators, representing the American Federation of Labor, are at work in the city of Washington seeking the passage of this class of legislation; they are endeavoring to bring strong influences to bear on Congressmen from every section of the country to intimidate into voting for this class of legislation.

House bill 15651, limiting the hours of daily service of laborers and mechanics employed upon work done for the United States or for any Territory or for the District of Columbia, or for other purposes, was introduced on behalf of the labor interests on January 29, 1908, and hearings are now being had before the Labor Committee of the House. Unusual pressure is being brought to bear on the members of this committee to report the bill favorably. The labor interests feel that with a favorable report the bill will pass the House.

We kindly ask you to see members of the Labor Committee and protest against favorable action taken upon the bill.

It would irretrievably embarrass, industrially and financially, hundreds, if not thousands, of plants whose product is intended wholly or in part for the Government. It would drive hundreds of concerns out of the field of Government bidding. It might result in establishment of Government factories. It would be the irresistible entering wedge of new labor legislation, for the labor lobby would not stop there. It is a proposition, by indirection and in time, to legislate the hours of labor into the private enterprises, factories, bill, workshops of the whole country by act of Congress.

The enactment of this class of legislation is sought only by an organization which, allowing all its claims, represents but one-tenth of the wage-earners of the United States. It is not desired by employers nor by that vast army of workingmen who are not subject to the orders of the organization referred to, and until such time as it is desired by at least a majority of those who would be affected we believe that it would be unfair to favorably consider this enactment.

The theory of regulating the hours of labor by law is wrong and inimical to the best interests of the people of this country, be they either employers or employees. Practically all of the factories (thousands in number) competing for Government work now operate their plants on a nine or ten hour basis, and should the bill in question become a law it would compel them to run two shifts of men and operate two separate plants, one eight-hour and the other nine or ten hour basis. It is needless to say that system like this would be impracticable. The only alternative left, therefore, would be for them to retire from the Government market altogether, for while the Government may be the largest customer they have, nevertheless the percentage of goods bought compared to the purchases of other customers is but a small percentage of the whole.

Looking at this matter from the standpoint of the wage-earners, the greater portion of the goods purchased by the Government are made by men to whom wages are paid based upon the work done either by the hour or by the piece. By limiting the time these men are employed each day their wage-earning power is thus curtailed, and we believe that if their wishes were consulted that

« AnteriorContinuar »