OF THE EXCHANG AUG 1 1044 Serial Pen HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Copy EBRUARY 4, 11, 18, 25, MARCH 3 AND 4, 1904. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1904. HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR OF THE HOUSE Copy of bill under consideration, H. R. 4064, Fifty-eighth Congress, first session. A BILL 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, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That every contract hereafter made to which the United States, any Territory, or the District of Columbia is a party, and every such contract made for or on behalf of the United States, or any Territory, or said District, which may require or involve the employment of laborers or mechanics shall contain a provision that no laborer or mechanic doing any part of the work contemplated by the contract in the employ of the contractor or any subcontractor contracting for any part of said work contemplated shall be required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any one calendar day upon such work; and every such contract shall stipulate a penalty for each violation of such provision in such contract of five dollars for each laborer or mechanic for every calendar day in which he shall be required or permitted to labor more than eight hours upon such work; and any officer or person designated as inspector of the work to be performed under any such contract, or to aid in enforcing the fulfillment thereof, shall, upon observation or investigation, forthwith report to the proper officer of the United States, or of any Territory, or of the District of Columbia all violations of the provisions in this Act directed to be made in every such contract, together with the names of each laborer or mechanic violating such stipulation and the day of such violation; and the amount of the penalties imposed according to the stipulation in any such contract shall be directed to be withheld by the officer or person whose duty it shall be to approve the payment of the moneys due under such contract, whether the violation of the provisions of such contract is by the contractor or any subcontractor. Any contractor or subcontractor aggrieved by the withholding of any penalty as hereinbefore provided shall have the right to appeal to the head of the Department making the contract, or in the case of a contract made by the District of Columbia to the Commissioners thereof, who shall have power to review the action imposing the penalty; and from such final order whereby a contractor or subcontractor may be aggrieved by the imposition of the penalty herein before provided such contractor or subcontractor may appeal to the Court of Claims, which shall have jurisdiction to hear and decide the matter in like manner as in other cases before said court. Nothing in this Act shall apply to contracts for transportation by land or water, or for the transmission of intelligence, or for such materials or articles as may usually be bought in open market, whether made to conform to particular specifications or not, or for the purchase of supplies by the Government, whether manufactured to conform to particular specifications or not. The proper officer on behalf of the United States, any Territory, or the District of Columbia may waive the provisions 3 and stipulations in this Act during time of war or a time when war is imminent, or in any other case when in the opinion of the inspector or other officer in charge any great emergency exists. No penalties shall be imposed for any violation of such provision in such contract due to any emergency caused by fire, famine, or flood, by danger to life or to property, or by other extraordinary event or condition. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to repeal or modify chapter three hundred and fifty-two of the laws of the Fifty-second Congress, approved August first, eighteen hundred and ninety-two. WASHINGTON, D. C., February 4, 1904. The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. John J. Gardner in the chair. The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, this is the day set for the beginning of the hearings on this eight-hour bill. No applications for hearings have been made except by those in opposition to the bill, and it was in deference to the applications for hearings in opposition that a time was set for the committee to take up the bill. Mr. Clerk, is there any application on file by anybody to be heard in advocacy of the bill? The CLERK. No, sir. Mr. GOMPERS. If I may ask your attention for a moment, I desire to say that this bill, or substantially this bill, has been before the last three Congresses and reported favorably by the Committee on Labor of these Congresses, and passed by the House of Representatives by a practically unanimous vote. We who advocate the passage of this bill believe that because of these facts, because notwithstanding the large array of local talent which has been retained and has appeared in behalf of the opponents of the bill in former Congresses, and before this committee, and in view of the fact that a large amount of time was taken up by the opponents of the bill in presenting evidence, and the opponents being unable to persuade any prolonged hearings, these hearings being very largely printed, the evidence being printed, we do not believe that it is necessary for us to present testimony in favor of this bill. Our arguments are in print and are easily accessible to the members of this committee and to the members of Congress. If the opponents were to adduce any particular new feature we would then feel warranted in asking the indulgence of the committee to give us an opportunity to submit evidence, or arguments, to disprove the contention of the opposition. And, further, in view of the fact that the Committee on Labor is very largely made up of the same members that constituted the committee last Congress and in previous Congresses all these things taken together-it seems to us unnecessary to submit any proof or any evidence as to the advisability or necessity or wisdom of the passage of this bill. Mr. MCCAMMON. Permit to say that the gentleman who has addressed the committee was not-unconsciously, perhaps very complimentary to this committee. This is the committee of the Fifty-eighth Congress, the Committee on Labor of the House of Representatives, composed largely of new members of Congress, new members of the committee, and it is not the same committee, not nearly the same committee, that considered this matter in the last Congress, and I take it for granted that the members of this committee desire all that is necessary and important for them to hear with regard to this bill. Another thing; this is not the same bill that was before the former committee, and in some respects it is not substantially the same bill as was presented for the consideration of this committee at the last Congress. It is true the central idea is the same- that is, to compel directly Government contractors to adopt a fast eight-hour system, and indirectly to compel large manufacturing interests of the country to follow suit. That is the object of the bill. On the first division, as to Government contractors, with the permission of the chairman and the committee, I would say-I do not wish to extend my remarks at this time, but it seems opportune to say this much that this present bill avowedly is for the purpose of compelling the shipbuilding interests and those manufacturers who supply materials for ships to adopt the eight-hour system. In other words, in this country of ours of equal rights-we believe in equal rights, all of us believe that without regard to party, and whether we have them or not is another question-it is proposed by this bill to sustain a principle which is obnoxious to every theory upon which our country has grown. If the committee will carefully read the bill it will be noticed that nearly everything is excluded, and if you go further and inquire as to the meaning of this particular bill, please read the record of the proceedings before the Senate Committee on Education and Labor of the last Congress. I say "avowedly," because time and again the chairman of the committee very plainly indicated, in fact several times he plainly said, that everybody was excluded except the constructors of ships and the makers of steel which went into the construction of ships. For that reason I think it is important, first, that the committee should understand the full scope of this bill. Therefore it should have hearings for that purpose, and I, of course, go beyond that; I feel that it is the duty of those who favor the bill to explain why such an un-American measure should be forced through this committee. On that, before sitting down, I would like to call attention to a paragraph from the argument that I had the honor of making before the committee, or its predecessor, on March 18, 1902, and I hope I will not be tempted to make any further remarks at this session. The paragraph to which I wish to call attention is as follows: Mr. McCAMMON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, in presenting the final argument on behalf of certain companies and individuals who have heretofore contracted with the Government, it seems incumbent on me to disclaim any opposition either to the theory of those who advocate an eight-hour system or to the practical application of an eight-hour system where the consent of the various trades and manufacturers which produce the same or nearly similar articles as are contracted for from time to time by the Government is unanimous. This consent must necessarily be practically unanimous or universal, else the advantage must be with the establishment which employs men to work ten or twelve hours in producing substantially the same product as those working shorter hours. Our opposition is to no theory, to no principle, but is directed to the vicious attempt to compel a Government contractor to be placed at a disadvantage in connection with producers in the same line of business if the bill under discussion should become a law. The meaning of that last paragraph is, and it must be evident to every member of the committee, that it will be impossible for a shipbuilder to construct Government ships under an eight-hour system and ships for commercial use under the ten-hour system. Mr. GOMPERS. Mr. Chairman, I take it that the gentlemen of the committee will appreciate the fact that Judge McCammon is the sponsor for the intelligence and the safety of the committee, particularly as directed by the insinuations coming from myself. As far as I am |