Thus is fully established the fact, in Burns' own handwriting, that he has proven himself to stand as the worst type of private detectives which he so illuminatingly describes. In all modern history, there is no more glaring case of a deliberate, malicious purpose to convict a man by suborning witnesses, by false testimony and jury packing, than is made officially clear in this case. The President had no alternative. He unconditionally pardoned Mr. Jones, relieving him of payment of fines and of jail sentences. The President's statement accompanying the pardon, though not made public, is understood to be a scathing arraignment of Detective Burns and others implicated with him. Through the statute of limitations Burns will escape prosecution and punishment, yet he stands convicted, in the limelight which he sought and made.


After an educational campaign extending over half a century, it is no longer necessary to prove the industrial and social NEW EIGHT-HOUR LAW- benefits resulting from a shorter workday. On the shelves of every public library are scores of books and reports telling of communities made healthier, happier, and more enlightened by removing from the workers the burden of excessive toil. To grasp what shortening the workday means in human values one has only to read accounts of industrial conditions obtaining among the steel workers, where the twelve-hour day, seven days a week, shatters the nervous system and undermines the physique of strong men so that old age overwhelms them at forty.

With industrial advancement came complicated and highly specialized machinery, requiring greater tenseness and concentration of attention, by the sub-division of labor and the speeding up due to high pressure. Unmodified, these conditions would reduce intelligent workers to practically physical automatons. That deterioration of the American people has been averted is due to the organized workers who have persistently and insistently wielded their consolidated power and secured remedial concessions from employers, as well as through legislation.

The first eight-hour law, passed June, 1868, entitled "An Act constituting eight hours a day, for laborers, workmen, and mechanics employed by, or on behalf of the Government of the United States," was intended to be sweeping; but since no penalties for its violation had been specified, such open disregard of its letter and spirit prevailed, that President Grant issued two proclamations to infuse some vitality into the measure. The United States Government was further committed to the eight-hour day policy by the law of March 30, 1888, directing the Public Printer to enforce rigidly the eight-hour day in the department under his charge, and by the law of May 24, 1888, which established the eight-hour day for the letter carriers in the postal service. Then the Supreme Court rendered a decision that left the general law devoid of vital force. In the case of the United States vs. Martin (4 Otto, 400) that court held that the act of 1868 was in the nature of a direction by the Government to its agents; that it neither prevented the Government from making agreements with its employes by which their labor

might be more or less than eight hours a day, nor did it prescribe the amount of compensation for that or for any other number of hours. Under this decision, the laborer acquired no legal rights, and therefore no additional means, by reason of the law, for securing an eight-hour day or recovering for overtime.

The Committee on Labor of the Fifty-second Congress obtained power from the House to enter upon an investigation of the status of the eight-hour workday in Government employment. As a result of these hearings the committee reported a bill which became a law August 1, 1892. The terms. of the law provided: "That the service and employment of all laborers and mechanics who are now or may hereafter be employed by the Government of the United States, by the District of Columbia, or by any contractor or subcontractor upon any of the public works of the United States or the District of Columbia, is hereby limited and restricted to eight hours in any calendar day." But the advocates of the eight-hour policy had not yet gained their end. The phrase "on any of the public works of the United States," which they had interpreted in a general sense as including all work done for the Government, was officially interpreted by two attorneys-general in a narrow and technical sense. To correct this defect further legislation was sought at the hands of Congress.

Meanwhile, organized labor's activities have been directed in other and supplementary channels. It has secured in more than half of the States the passage of an eight-hour law applicable to labor on public works and for State employes. By organization and collective bargaining many trades have secured agreements providing for the eight-hour day. Strongly as the workers advocate the philosophy of the shorter workday, they have sought legislation affecting only work done by the government, for the government, by contractors and by sub-contractors.

Since 1892 organized labor has not ceased to press its demand upon the individual members of Congress. Its representatives have also constantly appeared before Congressional committees to substantiate their position and to refute the objections advanced by the representatives of big business. Nineteen years of persistent labor, nineteen years of relentless opposition, of exasperating, dilatory tactics, of uselessly prolonged hearings before committees, that the opponents of the legislation might thrash out over and over again their worn and lifeless objections, are now to be fittingly rewarded.

In the special session of the present Congress, Representative Hughes of New Jersey introduced H. R. 9061, and Senator Borah, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, introduced S. 2791.

These bills, identical in character, were in line with Labor's demands and were introduced to extend further the operations of the eight-hour law. The House Committee on Labor, through its Chairman, Hon. William B. Wilson, on August 21, favorably reported H. R. 9061 to the House, with amendments which further strengthened the bill. The bill was passed by the House December 14, 1911, but was held up for some months in the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, by the timeconsuming tactics of the representatives of the "interests." On April 11,

as directed by the committee without a dissenting vote, Senator Borah reported the bill, unamended. May 31, by a vote of forty-nine to eleven, the Senate passed the bill. An amendment adopted by the Senate was that agreed to by the Executive Council of the American Federation of Labor, exempting the small balance of the work on the Panama Canal from the provisions of the bill until the first construction is completed. After that, that is, after January 1, 1915, the eight-hour law will apply to the entire Panama Canal Zone. Even at present in that territory it applies to the American workmen only.

The enactment of the eight-hour law shows the remarkable change that has come over the sentiment of Congress, due to the American Federation of Labor campaign begun some years ago, not only to make demands but to back them at the polls, and due also, in a great measure, to the fact that organized labor has been electing trade unionists to represent it in Congress and to serve on the committees deciding the fate of bills introduced. We expect much from the new law, since any extension by Congress of the policy of the shorter workday will not only give additional prestige to the movement but will widen the field thus opened to the beneficent influence which will be exerted by compelling companies, desiring to secure Government contracts, to comply with the eight-hour stipulation. It will also have a great influence in the general establishment of the eight-hour workday in all employment.

Nowhere has an eight-hour day resulted in decreasing production. The fewer working hours have been offset by increased physical and mental vigor and by more effective use of labor power on the part of the workers; by the invention and use of improved machinery and more effective methods of production.

The eight-hour workday carries with it a great human as well as social and industrial advantage. It conserves the vital forces as well as the productive energy of the workingmen, thereby lengthening the period of their lives and their productive value. Industrial statistics prove that the lives of workers have been prolonged many years by reason of the reduction of hours of labor. Men who are living longer than their predecessors at the same calling, are obviously living better in all that the word implies.

Decreasing the hours of work, the establishment of a normal workday, has been attended by increase in wages. The underpaid industries are those in which long hours prevail. Thus, the workers not only gain. leisure, which means time for self-improvement, cultivation of higher tastes, desires, and aspirations, the opportunity to be something more than mere work animals, but they also gain the means for gratifying these desires and wants. Just a little more money means a little better home, a little better clothing, more comforts in the home, a book, perhaps some of the beautiful things in the world. A little more time from the workday means more sleep and rest for tired brains and muscles, that the workers may have keener minds and a chance to possess their own souls, to know something of human friendship and intercourse. So closely are the commonplace things of life interwoven with the infinite and ultimate that the shorter workday results in a better citizenship and manhood, a brighter womanhood, and a happier childhood.


The pages of history reciting the events of the opening scenes of the twentieth century will ever present a sombre hue in the recounting of the details of that direful tragedy of the sea, and depicting the scenes of heroism and anguish RECURRENCE. attendant upon the sinking of the Titanic. The peoples of the entire universe, awed by the magnitude of the catastrophe, awaited in expectancy each fresh incident as it unfolded, that full comprehension might take the place of conjecture. Heralded the world over that the Titanic, in size, safety, and comfort, was the very acme of supremacy in the shipbuilders' art, the initial voyage of this ocean monster attracted a large passenger list, ranging in personnel from the lowly steerage passengers, seeking industrial betterment, to the distinguished and wealthy, endeavoring to indulge themselves in some new and novel sensation of luxury.

Human ingenuity of the highest order had been called into requisition; money had been spent with lavish hand to pander to the aesthetic tastes of titled and untitled ocean travelers, until the interior of the vessel rivaled the historical palaces of foreign monarchs. In the impassioned desire of the great over-sea transportation companies to attract business, with the sole end in view of reaping a heavy reward on the investment, everything had been done to gain popularity and patronage, save one. That exception was the reprehensible disregard to provide adequate life-saving apparatus and seamen in case of accident. While it may be said that custom had sanctioned, without protest from the traveling public or society as a whole, the great trans-Atlantic liners in not providing sufficient life-saving boats to accommodate all passengers and crew, yet the transportation companies must be held responsible for any lack of facilities with which to protect the lives of their passengers and crew. Modern business methods, however, are not primarily concerned with the safety of the public; the all-absorbing question is the profit to be derived from any enterprise, conducted at a minimum cost, without regard to any consideration of the public, unless forced to do so by an enlightened popular sentiment, or by law.

When the magnitude of the Titanic catastrophe was fully realized by the people on this side of the Atlantic, Senator Smith, of Michigan, introduced a resolution in the Senate providing for an investigation of the causes of the disaster, so far as could be determined, before any of the officials of the White Star Line, or any of the officers or crew of the ill-fated Titanic rescued by the Carpathia, should have had an opportunity to leave the country. The Senate acted favorably on the resolution, and Senator Smith was appointed chairman of the committee authorized to conduct the inquiry. It is not a matter of common knowledge, yet it is known to those who follow the trend of current events, that during investigations of such a character which suggest flagrant disregard of humanitarian safeguards to protect life, and where immense property interests are at stake, influences are immediately directed towards the citadel of governmental power that responsibility for a great disaster may be difficult of ascertainment. This was

apparent in the investigation of the Titanic calamity. On pages 367 and 368 of the hearings before the sub-committee of the Committee on Commerce of the United States Senate is to be found the following:

"Senator Smith: . . . I desire to make an announcement. First, I want to meet the inquiry, so often heard, as to our purpose in this inquiry, and I want to say that it is to get all of the facts bearing upon this unfortunate catastrophe that we are able to obtain. It is, of course, very apparent that the surviving officers of the Titanic are not shipbuilders having had to do with the construction of that vessel, and the committee · have assumed that if these witnesses should tell what they themselves know of the circumstances surrounding the ship up to the time of the collision, and what transpired thereafter, this information would be about all that we could obtain from these witnesses.

"One word as to the plan. It has been our plan from the beginning to first obtain the testimony of citizens or subjects of Great Britain who are temporarily in this country, and this course will be pursued until the committee conclude that they have obtained all information accessible and useful to a proper understanding of this disaster.

"Now, one word about the difficulties. To the credit of most of the officers and crew we have experienced no very troublesome difficulty in securing such witnesses as we felt were necessary. But from the beginning until now there has been a voluntary, gratuitous, meddlesome attempt upon the part of certain persons to influence the course of the committee and to shape its procedure.

"Misrepresentations have been made, I have heard. Personally, I have not seen a single newspaper since I was appointed chairman of this committee, because I did not wish to be influenced by those papers or unduly encouraged. Neither did I wish to take on any partisan bias or prejudice whatsoever.

"The representatives of the press have all co-operated in every way possible to lighten the burdens of the committee and to assist in obtaining the results we seek.

"The committee will not tolerate any further attempt on the part of any one to shape its course. We shall proceed in our own way, completing the official record, and the judgment of our efforts may very appropriately be withheld until those who are disposed to question its wisdom have the actual official reports."

A careful perusal of the statement of Senator Smith reveals beyond the peradventure of a doubt that sinister influences were being exercised, to the end that the purpose of the investigation should come to naught. Modern business, however, in its feverish anxiety to secure revenue and profit, has eradicated humanitarian policies as a primal feature and only slackens its pace when, as the result of its methods, some great public calamity occurs.

As chairman of the investigating committee Senator Smith received but scant encouragement. Only incidentally did the Senator receive the commendation to which he was entitled. The press was concerned with the sensational features of the testimony adduced, but the so-called power of the news-gathering agencies was not exercised to any great degree in demanding that full responsibility be placed and protective measures enacted to preclude the occurrence of a similar disaster in the future.

But the investigation was continued, and the splendid courage of Senator Smith became apparent when he warned the "influences'' that were at work that they would not be tolerated in any further attempt to shape the course of the committee. The inquiry brought to light many facts that will be of service in shaping future legislation. Already an

« ForrigeFortsett »