CHAPTER XVIII.

LABOR AND THE LEGISLATURE. 258

So-called Labor Measures Were Given Consideration Which Under Machine Rule Had Been Dodged or Denied.

The report of the California State Federation of Labor 259 on the measures opposed and supported by La

258 In addition to the labor measures considered in this and the five following chapters, the following measures which had the support of the Labor representatives at Sacramento became laws.

A. B. 388 (McDonald) for the better protection of the Union Label.

A. B. 547 (Ryan) empowering the Labor Commissioner to enforce the Upholsterers' Shoddy law.

A. B. 240 (Griffin) providing that all children within certain age limits must attend school.

A. B. 1305 (Young) defining duties of probation officers.

S. B. 31 (Welch) providing for local inspection of weights and measures. State inspection is provided in Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 2, which was submitted to the people for ratification.

A. B. 278 (Kehoe) changing the policy of the old law so that contractors and material men are given a direct lien upon the property.

A. B. 836 (Coghlan) compelling contractors and builders to provide for temporary floors in buildings more than two stories high, in course of construction.

A. B. 1328 (Clark) providing that physicians treating patients suffering from occupational diseases shall notify the State Board of Health.

A. B. 821 (Bliss) appropriating $5000 to be used by the State Board of Health in investigating the prevalence of tuberculosis. S. B. 1221 (Burnett) providing improved conditions in tenement houses.

The votes by which the principal measures considered in this chapter were passed or defeated will be found in the appendix, in the table on Labor votes.

259 The report is signed by D. D. Sullivan, president, and Paul Scharrenberg, secretary-treasurer, California State Federation of Labor; L. B. Leavitt, Theo. Johnson, legislative agents,

bor representatives at the 1911 California Legislature, shows that of forty-nine bills advocated by Labor, thirtynine were passed. Among the measures which had the support of Labor were the amendments to the 1909 Direct

California State Federation of Labor; Eugene A. Clancy, legislative agent, State Building Trades Council of California.

The Coast Seamen's Journal, one of the ablest Union Labor journals published, in commenting on this report in its issue of April 19, 1911, says: "The legislative report of the California State Federation of Labor, published in this issue, is the most remarkable, and at the same time most gratifying, not to say astonishing, document of the kind ever issued by a labor organization. Thirty-nine bills passed out of a possible forty-nine bills! "Mark the contrast with the usual report on labor legislation. Usually the labor movement considers itself fortunate when it can record an even break as between the number of bills passed and defeated. Quite frequently the labor movement is compelled to make the best of a mere scrap of legislation-to magnify the importance of one or two bills passed out of pity or for mere decency's sake. Not infrequently we are forced to acknowledge utter and absolute failure.

"Such has been the experience of California in the past, and such is the experience of many other States up to the present time. The record of the recent Legislature of California is epochal, even revolutionary. That record will long stand as an example to other legislative bodies and an inspiration to the labor movement of the whole country.

"The conditions making for the present success are easily seen and understood. California throughout her history has been ruled and ridden by a gigantic and greedy corporation, the Southern Pacific Railroad. The State Legislature, even the smallest town council, has been but the mouthpiece of the 'S. P.,' registering the will of that corporation. In a word, the State was but a plantation, the people were so many 'hands,' and the bosses and officials so many overseers.

"This situation reached its logical climax in the concentration of public opinion upon a platform which, as interpreted by the leader of the anti-Railroad forces, meant simply 'kick the Southern Pacific out of politics.' This accomplished, everything else would be easy of achievement. Anything less than this would result merely in Dead Sea fruit-in utter failure.

"Hiram W. Johnson was elected Governor and with him was elected a Legislature pledged to the policy he so clearly enunciated. The Southern Pacific Railroad was 'kicked out of politics.' The Railroad lobby was no longer a dominant force at Sacramento. The members of the Legislature were free to keep their pledges to the people, to vote as their consciences dictated. If they needed advice they knew where to look for it. Governor Johnson was not only against the Railroad; he was for the people; he was against the Railroad because he was for the people. The Railroad was out and the people were in. The success of labor in the recent Legislature of California lies in the success of the people of the State in ridding themselves of the domination of their chief and only enemy-a great public-service corporation. We congratulate the people!"

Primary law, which give The People of California a practical State-wide vote for United States Senator; the Initiative and Referendum amendment, and the Boynton bill, which restored the Australian ballot to its original simplicity and effectiveness, and took the Judiciary out of politics.260 In according support to such fundamental reforms, the Labor representatives at Sacramento demonstrated that intelligent Labor leaders are alive to the fact

260 It is interesting to note that with possibly one exception these reforms would have been realized in 1909, had it not been for the adverse votes of Senators and Assemblymen who had been elected with the endorsement of the so-called Union Labor Party.

Thus the plan for a "state-wide vote" for United States Senator, as contained in the original 1909 Direct Primary bill, which, while not so good as the Oregon plan, would at least have given The People a voice in the selection of Federal Senators, was defeated in the Assembly by one vote, while a single vote would have carried it in the Senate. In the Senate, six members who had Union Labor endorsements-Finn, Hare, Hartman, Reilly, Welch and Wolfe-voted against the State-wide plan. In the Assembly, twelve members who had been nominated by the Union Labor Party, voted against the State-wide plan. They were Beatty, Behan, Black, Coghlan, Cullen, Feeley, Johnston of Contra Costa, Macauley, Nelson, O'Neil, Perine and Pugh. Had only one of these Assemblymen voted for the State-wide plan, the so-called machine amendments to the Direct Primary bill would have been defeated, and The People of California given a State-wide vote for United States Senator.

At the 1909 session, the Initiative amendment was defeated in the Senate. Senator Wolfe led the fight against it. He and Senator Hartman voted against it. Senator Finn was not pres

ent to vote.

The 1909 measure to remove the Party Circle from the election ballot passed the Senate but was defeated in the Assembly, that body by a vote of 35 to 36 denying the measure second reading. The change of one negative vote would have sent the measure to its final passage. Five Union Labor members-Behan, Cullen, Feeley, Macauley, Perine and Silver-voted against the measure; Johnston and Pugh did not vote.

The 1909 Judicial Column bill, to take the Judiciary out of politics, passed the Senate, but was defeated in the Assembly, 35 members voting for it and 29 against, 41 votes being necessary for its passage. Six more affirmative votes would have passed it. Seven Union Labor members-Beban, Black, Coghlan, Cullen, Feeley, Macauley and Silver-voted against this bill. Four Union Labor members-Johnston, O'Neil, Perine and Pugh-did not vote upon it.

that industrial reforms worth while depend upon political reforms.

Governor Johnson dealt with the so-called labor measures in the same broad spirit that governed his course in the whole field of legislation. He vetoed certain labor measures which had the insistent support of the Labor organizations, because he held them to be unnecessary or bad,261 while, because he deemed them just and nec

261 The so-called Bake Shop bill (S. B. 673), for example, and the Blacklisting bill (A. B. 604). In his message vetoing this last-named measure, Governor Johnson said:

"To the Assembly of the State of California:

"I return herewith to you, without my approval, Assembly Bill 604, entitled: 'An Act to amend the Penal Code of the State of California by adding a new section thereto to be numbered 653e, relating to blacklisting.'

"My reasons for vetoing this bill are that its provisions are vague, uncertain and indefinite, and that while prohibiting some things that we might desire to prohibit, it prohibits others we do not wish to prohibit.

"Reading the Act, omitting superfluous words, the first inhibition contained in it is, that no company shall blacklist or require a letter of relinquishment. I inquired of the author of the bill what a letter of relinquishment' was, and he was unable to tell me. I have sought the same information from various sources, and but one gentleman has been able to define this term and he was quite uncertain of his definition. If 'letter of relinquishment' has some specific and definite meaning, it has not as yet required a legal signification, and should be described in some fashion so that the phrase may be easily understood. The next inhibition in the section is contained in the words, that no company, etc., shall publish any employee. The most astute attorneys will be somewhat at a loss accurately to determine what constitutes publication of one individual by another. is possible we may accept the legal definition of 'publish' as applied to libel, and it might be held that when a person, firm or corporation is prohibited from publishing an employee, the meaning intended is that nothing shall be uttered or circulated concerning that employee. At any rate, the vagueness of the expression renders it so uncertain as to be of doubtful validity.

It

"Again, the Act makes it an offense for any person (if 'publish' be construed in accordance with its legal significance) to impart to another truthful information concerning a discharged employee with intent to prevent that employee from securing similar employment. I doubt very much if it was the intention of the Legislature to make it a crime for 'A' who had discharged for theft, or incompetency, or other righteous cause, his employee, to say to 'B,' if 'B' were about to engage that employee, that the employee was dishonest or incompetent. There are in the United States many statutes designed to reach blacklisting. In most of those statutes there is a saving clause pro

essary, he signed labor bills which had the opposition of some of his most effective supporters.

Measures, recognized to be just, the enactment of which at previous sessions had been prevented, generally by trickery and indirection, passed both houses and were approved by the Governor,262

law.

Notable among these was the so-called "Full Crew"

This measure provides that railroad trains must be properly manned, that is to say, each train must carry a

viding for a truthful declaration respecting a discharged employee, and in any statute our Legislature might enact, I think such a proviso should be contained. I may add that this particular law is copied from the Oklahoma statute, but I have been unable to find any construction of that statute, and though it has the sanction of Oklahoma, I yet believe it open to the objections I have presented. I have no objection to prohibiting blacklisting; but if it is to be done, I wish it accomplished by an Act direct, certain and plain in its terms which cannot be defeated by judicial construction, and which would preserve as well the right to make a truthful disclosure of the reasons for the discharge of a dishonest or incompetent employee.

"For the reasons I have stated, I have vetoed the bill."

262 Governor Johnson's attitude was generally appreciated. The Building Trades Council of Santa Clara County, for example, in March, adopted, and forwarded the following resolutions to Sacramento:

"To the Senate of the State of California:

"Whereas, The thirty-ninth session of the California Legislature, the most remarkable in the history of this State, from the standpoint of the laboring people, is now drawing to a close, and "Whereas, This administration has demonstrated by the laws that they have enacted that they are true representatives of the people and have devoted their entire time to the interests and welfare of humanity, while previous administrations, in their efforts to do the bidding of corporations, have forgotten their pledges to the people, therefore, be it

"Resolved, By the Building Trades Council of Santa Clara County, representing its twenty-eight affiliated unions, in regular session assembled, this 23rd day of March, 1911, that we commend Governor Hiram Johnson, the Senate and Assembly for their great achievements, and congratulate the people of the State for electing representatives who have fulfilled their promise and have shown the world that California is no longer corporationridden; be it further

"Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be given to the press and a copy forwarded to Governor Johnson, the California Senate and Assembly."