lishment, such female employes to be permitted to use the seats" when not engaged in the active duties for which they are employed."

The Constitution makes it mandatory on the Legislature to provide an efficient system of free public schools for all children between five and eighteen years of age. This duty has not been neglected, and has been further supplemented by the compulsory education law of April 20th, 1885, which requires those who have control and charge of any children between seven and twelve years, to send them to school for a period of at least twenty weeks in each year, "to be instructed in spelling, reading, writing, English grammar, geography and arithmetic." The first steps for providing for a system of industrial education have been taken by the enactment of a series of acts which authorize aid from the State treasury to local schools partly or wholly of this character.

The "amicable adjustment of grievances and disputes between employers and employes" may be voluntarily submitted to a board of five arbitrators selected by the parties interested, under the act of April 23d, 1886. This gives the board power to examine witnesses under oath, compel their attendance, evidence and production of books and accounts. None of the members is to receive any compensation for services rendered, except "by voluntary subscriptions." There is no compulsory arbitration whatever provided for, nor any power of enforcing the judgment of the board. It depends entirely upon the parties themselves whether, in the words of the act, the "decision shall be a final settlement of the matters referred to said arbitrators, and shall be binding and conclusive between the parties." The voluntary character of these proceedings, of course, militates against the efficacy of this sort of legislation; but, except, possibly, so far as corporations are concerned, no effective plan of compulsory arbitration has yet been suggested.

Legislation to protect the wages of laborers and mechanics forms. an important part of the statute law of every State in the Union. In New Jersey, it began with the mechanics' lien acts, intended to secure mechanics and others payment in preference to other creditors, for labor and material furnished for the erection of buildings. The early measures of this nature were special and local in application, the first general law covering the State being enacted in 1851. Prior to the amendment of 1890 (Chap. 292), the owner of a building, by

complying with certain formalities in filing his contract in the county clerk's office, protected his building from the claims of all interested in its erection, except the contractor, who alone could place a lien thereon; and was not liable to the others who furnished labor and material-mechanics and materialmen, practically unknown to the owner-unless they gave due notice to him of the amount of money due to them, and then only to the extent of the unpaid balance of the contract price. The law, as it now stands, virtually puts all the risk of discovery of creditors of the contractor upon the owner, on whose property those not releasing their claims have a right to place a lien within one year from the time of the accruing thereof.

In the general manufacturing act of 1849, provision was made for priority of payment of wages of employes due from insolvent corporations. This claim is recognized and extended by later and similar enactments, and holds good, to a limited extent, against all employers against whom any execution, judgment or other process has been issued. In the case of gaslight companies, organized under the general act, the stockholders are jointly and severally liable to laborers, servants and apprentices for debts due by the companies, at any time. There also has been a series of acts, since 1864, aimed at the odious truck system, or the custom, very general in the State a few years ago, of forcing employes to take store-orders instead of cash in payment of wages. This practice, except in a few localities, has been practically discontinued, but it is problematical whether the result is due to legislative action. In the way of a supplement to one of these acts "for the better securing of wages to workmen and laborers " (March 9th, 1877), the Legislature, in 1891 (Chap. 43, April 14th), prohibited the holding back of wages by corporations for the purpose of recruiting relief funds for the benefit of employes, without the consent of the latter. This is particularly directed against the socalled "railroad relief (or insurance) associations," fully described in a previous report of this Bureau.*

Under the act of March 27th, 1874, the earnings of a married woman are her sole and separate property, which are not liable for her husband's debts. And in Howell v. McDowell, 18 Vroom 359, Chief Justice Beasley observed, that it was not the legislative intention in the "act respecting executions" to compel the application of wages to the satisfaction of judgments; while the supplement of February

* 1888.

26th, 1886, to the "act respecting executions," exempts the wages of a non-resident employe from attachment by a non-resident creditor.

*

It is unnecessary here to refer in detail to the miscellaneous legislation enacted in the interest of the wage-earner, such as the statute authorizing the formation of associations for the purpose of carrying on industrial co-operation, or that which encourages the establishment of building and loan enterprises, or that under which the organization of this Bureau was effected in 1878, or that which permits the incorporation of trades-unions, of April 16th, 1886, under the "benevolent and charitable associations" act of April 9th, 1875 (Revision). The latter legislative sanction of labor organizations, though effective only so far as to permit them to be incorporated for the purposes of extending relief to members "incapable of attending to their usual occupations," or of providing funeral and death benefits, is noticeable, because even at this late day no inconsiderable part of the public press looks with suspicion at trades-unionism; and it is not long since that the courts in this country, as well as in England, appeared inclined to discourage all combinations of workmen.

In New Jersey, before the "act relative to persons combining and encouraging other persons to combine," of February 14th, 1883, a union of workmen to strike was unlawful. It was held by the Supreme Court in 1867, in State v. Donaldson and others,† that it was an indictable conspiracy for several employes to combine and notify their employer that, unless he discharged certain fellow-workmen, they would quit his business in a body. The Chief Justice held, that this threat to disarrange his business was an unwarrantable and unlawful interference with their employer's affairs. This was, however, an indictable offense under the common law in force in this State, and not under Section 191 of the "act for the punishment of crimes," which makes it a conspiracy for "two or more persons to combine * * * to commit an act * * * injurious to trade

or commerce." "To fall within the latter provision, the act must be one," observed Chief Justice Beasley, "which, with directness, inflicts an injury to trade, as, for example, a combination to depress any branch of trade by false rumors. It is true that, at a far remove, an injury to an individual manufacturer may affect trade injuriously;

*See reports of 1889 and 1890 for these acts.

+3 Vroom 151. See below.

↑ Revision, p. 261.

but in the same sense, so it is true, will an injury inflicted on a consumer of manufactured articles. But it is not this undesigned and incidental damage which is embraced within the statutory denunciation."

It is a query, however, whether, even since the statute of 1883, referred to above, the "boycott" would not be considered "a conspiracy in restraint of trade," under the common law, even if not under the Revised Statutes. It has been so held in New York and some other States;* but the opinion of Vice Chancellor Green, in Mayer v. Journeyman Stonecutters,† seems to imply the contrary : "The restraining power of the court is invoked to enjoin the association, the officers and members from denouncing two of the complainants, journeymen stonecutters, by the use of an offensive appellation, from persecuting or preventing them from getting work, and from coercing or intimidating the other complainants, master stonecutters, by the use of strikes, boycotts or other methods of violence, from employing them. The legislation of 1883 has greatly changed the law which declared combinations to effect such purposes unlawful. In fact, the policy of the law with reference to such combinations was revolutionized, and what before that time would have been held to be an unlawful combination and conspiracy, became, in this State, a lawful association, and acts which had been the subject of indictment became inoffensive to any provision of the law."

*

It is also a question how far the act of 1883, sanctioning peaceable combinations to strike, modifies previous criminal legislation especially applicable to railroad employes, making it a misdemeanor for them to disobey "any rules, regulations or published order" of a railroad company, or to strike or induce others to strike "while in transit." The latter inhibition is the substance of the "act to provide for the better protection of passengers upon railroads and to insure the prompt transportation and delivery of freight," and was the legislative result of the great railroad strike of 1877.

The only other labor legislation which specially deserves mention, outside of the detailed compilation following, is the "supplement to 'an act for the punishment of crimes""-the "anti-Pinkerton act" of 1890-which makes it a misdemeanor to employ any but dulyappointed citizens "to preserve the public peace and quell public disturb

* People v. Wilzig, 4 N. Y. Crim. R. 403; Casey v. Cincinnati Typo. Union, 45 Fed. Rep. 143. †2 Dick. Ch. 519. See below.

99 66

ance; 'provided, this act shall not apply in times of riot or unusual disturbance." While this enactment is the result of considerable agitation, and is considered of great moment by workingmen, it is claimed that the latter proviso destroys largely its efficacy.

Below are reproduced in full all the acts now in force relating to the employment of labor in New Jersey, supplemented by decisions of our courts affecting the interests of wage-earners. The first complete compilation of State labor legislation was made in the Bureau report for 1885. The demand for these reports and the more recent acts has induced the present revision. For convenience of reference an index of these statutes and decisions is here annexed. The acts regulating the formation of co-operative societies of workmen, and of building and loan associations, in this State, were republished in the Bureau reports for 1889 and 1890, respectively, and it is deemed unnecessary again to repeat them in this chapter. For the "exemption" and "apprenticeship" laws, see the Bureau report for 1885, in which, and the following reports, are also contained the various acts respecting free public libraries and parks.

In the Bureau report of 1889 were published the general factory and workshop acts of 1878 and 1883, England. As the act of 1891 makes important amendments thereto, that is also reproduced in Appendix 3.

INDEX TO LABOR LAWS.

FACTORY ACTS.

To regulate elections (1876).

To limit the hours of labor and prevent the employment of children, in factories, under ten years of age (1851).

In relation to days of recreation and holidays (1891).

To regulate the hours of labor of employes of surface and elevated railroad companies (1887).

To provide for the better protection of the drivers of horse-cars on street passenger railroads in the cities and towns of this State (1882).