It seems to me that one great leveling law limiting the production of the ambitious, healthy, and energetic citizen to that of the lazy or sickly citizen must in the long run be hurtful to the community. If you will look over the "field" I think you will find that the men who are in the front rank and on the upper steps of the ladder to-day are the men who worked overtime. With excuses for trespassing on your time, I am, JOHN D. DALZELL. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, GRAND RAPIDS, MICH., May 18, 1906. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We notice that the labor unions are trying to revive that old eighthour bill for all articles sold to the Government. Does this mean that we could not sell any of our refrigerators to the Government if our factory runs more than eight hours per day? If it does, we wish to say that you will be doing the manufacturers of this country a great injustice if you recommend any such bill. You have as much right to tell us when to go to bed as to say how long we shall work. At some seasons we can not work at all, there being no demand for our goods. At others, we have to work overtime to supply the demand. We think that upon due reflection it must be evident to you that Government can not regulate a matter of this kind. We therefore most earnestly pray that you will kill this bill in the committee. Hoping to hear from you on the subject, we remain, most respectfully, THE GRAND RAPIDS REFRIGERATOR CO. By C. H. LEONARD, President. DETROIT, MICH., May 18, 1906. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Noting that you are a member of the House Labor Committee, we desire to enter our protest against the passage of an eight-hour law, as we feel that under the present conditions of radical agitation and unrest it would work serious loss and inconvenience to the large and small manufacturers of the country and would soon place the manufacturers of this glorious country on the same plane of servitude as are the manufacturers of the Australasian States, whose parliaments are controlled by the labor element. We are in no way antagonized to labor, organized or unorganized, but the strikes, lawlessness, intimidations, and boycotts indulged in by labor unions as such lead us to fear for the future of the business and manufacturing interests of the country should this pernicious eight-hour law be even favorably reported. We feel that the honorable gentlemen having this bill in hand are working not only for the best interests of their immediate constituents, but for the people of the country at large, and that they fully appreciate the magnitude of the manufacturing interests of our beloved land and have no intention to pass any such legislation. We also believe that these same honorable gentlemen are at all times pleased to hear from the interests to be affected, and on this supposition we have taken the liberty to address you on the subject. Trusting and believing that the large interests involved will be fully protected in so far as in your power lies, we remain, Yours, respectfully, Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. ATLANTA, GA., May 19, 1906. DEAR SIR: We hope we are not too late to add a word against the eight-hour bill before Congress and to emphasize the statement that, in our opinion, any such legislation would prove a serious mistake for all classes. Yours, truly, DELOACH MILL M'F'g Co., Per A. A. DELOACH, President. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. SAGINAW, MICH., May 19, 1906. DEAR SIR: It has been brought to the writer's attention, through the National Association of Manufacturers, of which association this company is a member, that there is an eight-hour bill being urged for passage at the present time, and we understand that such a bill as this would be referred to your committee. It hardly seems necessary for the writer to say anything as to the nature of legislation of this kind. The continued increase in the cost of living is largely brought about by the spirit abroad in the land to work as little as possible, and to actually look to the Government or to the community at large for supper. In the case of our own manufacturing plant, at the present time it is almost impossible to get young men from the age of 15 to 21 to work at all. They prefer to hang around water tanks and crossings of the railroads, stealing rides from place to place and following the attractive vocation of tramping. Then there is a tendency to flock to cities where the same class frequent pool rooms, cheap amusement places, and acquire expensive habits and ultimately degenerate into embezzlers, robbers, etc. Witness the car barn robbery in Chicago. So at the present time there is certainly no demand for an eight-hour day which, of course, applying still more to the city than to the country, would tend to bring in a still greater influx from the country, and tend to make conditions even worse than at present. And, moreover, the expense of all of this kind of legislation is borne by the small taxpayer, and the industrious citizen of small means who, at the present, has all he can do to make both ends meet. In place of limiting a man's opportunities for labor, he should be encouraged to labor and of course enjoy the fruits of his labor. At the present time, in place of enacting socialistic laws, enact laws to secure to the public the natural resources of the country; discontinue granting special privileges to any class; study means of preserving the forests and mineral lands, and not let them come into the hands of a few who will hold possession of them, the same as so many dogs in the manger, to the expense of coming generations. Apologizing for this long letter, which is written from a sense of duty as an American citizen, and calling upon you to use your efforts to enact statesmanlike laws, broad and just in their nature, I remain. Very truly, yours, Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. WM. B. MERSHON & Co. ELMIRA, N. Y., May 21, 1906. DEAR SIR: Any eight-hour bill would prove disastrous to all manufacturing interests and labor also, if they could but see it. We urge you to use your strongest influence against it, and oblige, Yours, very truly, ELMIRA KNITTING MILLS and Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, BUFFALO, N. Y., May 21, 1906. House Labor Committee, Washington. D. C. DEAR SIR: I understand that the McComas eight-hour bill is now before the House Labor Committee. My own convictions are so strong that I can not help thinking that everyone, both employer and employee, should be opposed to this bill. It seems to me that this movement is a positive injury to all. First. It is revolutionary; if enforced it will disrupt present business methods. Second. It is made in the supposed interest of Government employees, and is therefore special class legislation. Third. If the bill is passed making an eight-hour day it will be compulsory upon Government work and not compulsory on other work, and it will make it Impossible for any manufacturer who runs his plant more than eight hours per day to bid upon Government work, as he could not run part of his plant eight hours and the balance longer. There are many other reasons which might be mentioned, but the above will be ample to show you that the passing of an eight-hour law would be extremely embarrassing to employers of labor. The employers of labor now have as heavy a load as they can very well bear in their endeavor to continue to do business and meet the demands that labor is constantly making upon them. It would be unwise and unjust for our legislators to do anything at this time to increase the load they are now carrying. I sincerely hope that you and the other members of your committee will vote unanimously against the eight-hour legislation that may be presented to you at this time. Sincerely, yours, Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. H. G. TROUT. NEW YORK, May 22, 1906. DEAR SIR: In reference to the McComas eight-hour bill now before the committee for consideration, I wish to state in behalf of our concern, as well as the trade with which we are connected, that a national law limiting the hours of work is entirely uncalled for. We feel sure that the majority of the citizens of the United States do not desire any such a bill to pass, and that it is a pernicious measure, fostered and indorsed solely by labor unions and their agitators. Will you, as our New Jersey Representative on this committee, endeavor to bring about an adverse report on the McComas bill? Yours, very respectfully, ALLING & Co., MATTHIAS STRATTON, President. THE WILLIAM CRAMP & SONS SHIP AND ENGINE BUILDING Co., Hon. J. J. GARDNER, Very truly, yours, HENRY S. GROVE, President. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, GREENFIELD, OHIO, May 22, 1906. Member House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I am the owner of nearly all of the $1,250,000 capital stock of the American Pad and Textile Company, of this place, manufacturers of all kinds of pads for horses, principally collar pads. Said company produces fully 80 per cent of the kind of pads stated that are used in the United States, Canada, and a few foreign countries-the bulk of the goods, perhaps 70 per cent of said 80 per cent, being used right here in the States. I am sole owner of American Textile Company, a cotton mill located right close to Cartersville, Ga., said business having an investment of a little over $1,000,000. I am the principal owner of Crescent Manufacturing Company, Louisville, Ky., $100,000 invested, a business devoted to the manufacture of lines in woods and metals. It would work great hardships on all of said businesses if an eight-hour bill were passed, therefore I write this as a protest. It seems to me that it would be a very unwise move on the part of the Congress to pass such a law at this particular time. It would undoubtedly result in largely paralyzing the manutacturing industries of the United States, and it would work hardships of a serious nature. In this day of keen competition between the United States and certain foreign countries it would seem little short of a deliberate play into the hands of foreign manufacturers if the Congress were to enact said law. It would be revolutionary, dangerous, and disastrous in the extreme, and I don't believe, outside of a comparatively few labor leaders who are unwisely misleading their followers, that the workingmen of the United States want any such law enacted, and it is reasonably sure that the business interests are an unalterable unit against it. Yours, truly, E. L. MCCLAIN. SAN ANTONIO, TEX., May 23, 1906. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, M. C., Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We desire to protest in the strongest manner against the eighthour bill which is now before your committee. We will not go into any long argument on this matter, but desire simply to say that, in our opinion, no manufacturing industry can be successfully operated running only eight hours per day, and no man who works only eight hours per day ever made a success of his work. Trusting that the bill will not be reported, we are, Very truly, yours, SAN ANTONIO PRINTING Co. By L. B. CLEGG. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. NEW YORK, May 24, 1906. DEAR SIR: We, as manufacturing jewelers of Newark, N. J., will respectfully ask you, as one of the House Labor Committee, to vote against any legislation in regard to the proposed eight-hour bill. Such a law would be a serious matter in our business, and we would urge you to use what influence you can against reporting favorably on such a bill. Kindly give this your careful attention. Very respectfully, KENT & WOODLAND. CAMDEN, N. J., May 24, 1906. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, 66 House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. ESTEEMED FRIEND: We trespass on your valuable time in reference to the bill introduced by you limiting the hours of daily service of laborers and mechanics employed upon work done for the United States or any Territory or District of Columbia, therefore securing better products, and for other purposes." Without going into detail as to the many objections of this bill, we wish to express our earnest protest against it being reported favorably to the House. We think the whole influence would be detrimental to the best interests of the country and would work much hardships to many manufacturers as well as to the laborers themselves. Therefore, without dwelling further upon the matter, we earnestly wish to reiterate our protest against any such bill being enacted into a law. We are aware you have given much time to this, but, with due deference to your opinion, we think you are in error in your views upon the subject. Very respectfully, THE ESTERBROOK STEEL PEN MFG. CO. Hon. JOHN, J. GARDNER, EAST NEWARK, N. J., May 25, 1906. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: It is the hope and prayer of the writer that no compulsory eighthour bill will be reported. It would work vast injury to our industries and prove disadvantageous to the workmen. The latter to a large extent are not favorable to the bill. A few leaders are trying to fight the bill through your committee. They write to the subordinate unions to indorse the bill, but it is well known to those posted that only a small proportion of the members attend and generally least capable workmen run the unions. They indorse everything the leaders dictate. Seven-tenths at least of the men belonging to the unions are members under more or less compulsion. Should an un-American law be enacted at the demand of a few agitators, when it is well known that such a law would prove of incalculable injury to the business and labor interests of the country? It is reasonably to be believed that our Representatives, especially those on your honorable committee, will not wish to encumber our statute books with such an unrighteous law. Respectfully, yours, STEWART HARTSHORN Co., E. F. HARTSHORN, Vice-President. CARTERSVILLE, GA., May 25, 1906. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER. Member House Labor Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We are operating the American Textile Company, a cotton mill located right near Cartersville, Ga., said business having an investment of a little over $1,000,000. It would work great hardships on this business if an eight-hour bill were passed. Therefore we write this as a protest. It seems to us that it would be a very unwise move on the part of the Congress to pass such a law at this particular time. It would undoubtedly result in largely paralyzing the manufacturing industries of the United States, and it would work serious hardships. In this day of keen competition between the United States and certain foreign countries it would seem little short of a deliberate play into the hands of foreign manufacturers if the Congress were to enact said law. It would be revolutionary, dangerous, and disastrous in the extreme, and we don't believe, outside of a comparatively few labor leaders who are unwisely misleading their followers, that the workingmen of the United States want any such law enacted, and it is reasonably sure that the business interests are an unalterable unit against it. Yours, truly, AMERICAN TEXTILE CO., PEORIA, ILL., May 25, 1906. Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We take this opportunity of expressing ourselves in no uncertain terms against the present eight-hour bill which is pending before your committee. We most earnestly request that you do not press to a favorable report or permit to be reported any eight-hour bill whatever. We believe that this is only a wedge used by the union labor leaders to eventually force all employers of labor to work their men only eight hours a day. If the Government establishes that rule by law, they will then use this as an argument to make all other employers to use the same rule. Such a law destroys the freedom of a laborer to sell his labor on such terms as he sees fit and prevents the employer from employing to the best advantagea blow at the freedom of trade. It is our desire that you use every reasonable and just means to defeat a favorable report of this eight-hour bill, and we believe that this is the sentiment of all the employers in this city of 80,000. Yours, respectfully, PEORIA PACKING CO., |