Resolved, That we cannot support the candidates of the Republican party for President and Vice-President, because both of them are wanting in sympathy for the laboring classes. This was shown by General Harrison in the memorable strike of 1877, when he volunteered to command a company of soldiers to shoot laboring men down, after having refused to attempt a settlement by peaceable means. For four days' service as captain of said company, he received and receipted for twenty silver dollars, which was as much blood money as the "thirty pieces of silver" for which Judas Iscariot betrayed the Savior of mankind. It has been shown by Morton, in his career as a Wall-street money shark, and as & sharer in the unholy gains of many greedy corporations, that have cruelly oppressed their employes. In trying to get possession of the shingle on which was inscribed "Shoes made and repaired by Levi P. Morton," offering a large sum for it that he might destroy the evidence of his former humble occupation, Morton has shown himself ashamed of the condition to which he was born, thus sacrificing all claim to the respect and support of the honest laborers of the land who bave no blushes for their employment.

Resolved, That in voting on fourteen different occasions against measures that were proposed in the Senate of the United States for the restriction of Chinese cheap labor, and in his often-repeated private avowals of a willingness that the naturalization laws should be extended so as to give Chinamen the right to become citizens, Harrison has given the strongest possible proofs of his utter disregard of the interests and welfare of American workingmen.

Resolved, That for reasons here specified and for the further fact that these Republican candidates, in their habits, thoughts, sympathies and associations are of the class that would inaugurate an aristocracy on the ruins of free government.

Resolved, That organized labor in other States is cordially invited to co-operate with us in the enforcement of the sentiments and objects herein expressed.

DENOUNCING MR. HARRISON'S PET NEWSPAPER.

WHEREAS on the right of July 8, 1886, John C. New & Son, proprietors of the Indianapolis Journal, summarily, and without provocation, discharged the entire force of union printers in their employ who refused to obey their arrogant mandate in severing their connection with the Indianapolis Typographical Union No. 1, turned said employes upon the streets and imported from distant localities a large number of "rat" printers whom they have since kept at work in the Journal office.

WHEREAS said John C. New & Son, since the perpetration of this cowardly outrage and insult, have continued to conduct the said Journal in open hostility, not only to union printers, but to organized labor of all kinds by refusing to accede to any method of arbitration looking to an amicable settlement of differences; by maliciously misrepresenting the objects of organized labor; by wantonly distorting the honorable methods by which workingmen aim to attain a furtherance of their desires; by dishonestly obtaining and publishing the laws, secret work and private legislation of the Knights of Labor and other organizations, wherever opportunity enables them to do so; by attacking the private character and distorting the purpose of representative workingmen whose leadership is recognized, and whose character we reverence, and are pledged to protect; by maintaining in the reportorial, news and editorial columns of the "rat" Journal a position of unreasonable hostility to fair pay, shorter hours of labor, and improved economic condition of the laboring classes; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Indiana Federation of Trades and Labor Unions in convention assembled regard the conduct of John C. New & Son in their employing rat printers in the Indianapolis Journal office, and their persistent warfare upon organized labor, as both an injustice and an insult to the workingmen of Indiana.

Resolved, That we pledge the efforts of this organization and all whom it can control or influence, to antagonize, by every honorable means, the said John C. New & Son and the said Journal; and that we appeal to the patriotic workingmen of this State to aid us in this worthy effort so long as the said New & Son shall refuse to conduct a strictly union office, and shall persist in maintaining a position of hostility to organized labor.

Resolved, That to consummate this purpose a copy of these resolutions be placed before every organization subordinate to this federation, that the hostility of the said New & Son to organized labor may be fully known; and that to carry out this endeavor a sufficient number of copies of these resolutions be printed by this federation, to be properly distributed throughout the jurisdiction of this federation.

LABOR INTERESTS IN CONGRESS.

The labor committee of the House, composed in its democratic majority of well known friends of the interests of workingmen, has to be certain in promoting the demands made by intelligent organizations.

February 17, Mr. O'Neill, of Missouri, offered the following amendment to appropriation bill, adopted by vote 182; negative, 53, was concurred in by the Senate and is now a law:

"The Public Printer is hereby directed to rigidly enforce the provisions of the eight-hour law in the department under his charge."

Among the bills of this kind passed by the present Congress, which had their origin in the Democratic House, are the laws establishing a Department of Labor, introduced by Mr. O'Neill, of Missouri, Chairman of the Labor Committee; and the law to limit the hours that letter carriers in cities shall be employed per day, known as the letter carrier's eight hour law, introduced in the House by Mr. McAdoo, a Democratic representative from New Jersey.

are:

Among those passed by the Democratic House and now pending in the Senate,

The bill to prevent the production of convict labor from being furnished to or for the use of any Department of the Government, and to prevent the product of convict labor from being used upon public buildings or other public works; the bill to prevent the employment of alien labor upon public buildings or other public works and in the various Departments of the Government, and so forth; the bill to protect mechanics, laborers and servants in their wages; and the bill to create boards of arbitration or commission for settling controversies and differences between railroad corporations and other common carriers engaged in interstate and Territorial transportation of property or passengers and their employes; the bill to protect free labor and the industries in which it is employed from the injurious effects of convict labor by confining the sale of the goods, wares and merchandise manufactured by convict labor to the State in which they are produced.

CHAPTER XXX.

CLEVELAND AND CORPORATIONS.

INSISTING UPON FAIR TREATMENT FOR BUSINESS CORPORATIONS

YET HOLDING THEM TO A STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY.

The public duties and rights of private corporations were the subject of repeated consideration by Mr. Cleveland when Governor of New York, and his views were stated in terms so explicit and just as to merit and receive the approval of fair. minded men who informed themselves as to the particular grounds of his

action.

In accepting the nomination for Governor, in October, 1882, he thus defined his position, from which he has never wavered:

"Corporations are created by the law for certain defined purposes, and are restricted in their operations by specific limitations. Acting within their legitimate sphere they should be protected; but when by combination or by the exercise of unwarranted power they oppress the people, the same authority which created should restrain them and protect the rights of the citizen. The law lately passed for the purpose of adjusting the relations between the people and corporations, should be executed in good faith, with an honest design to effectuate its objects and with a due regard for the interests involved."

Almost the first act performed by him as Governor was in fulfillment of the law here referred to, the Railroad Commission Act, which authorized the appointment of three Railroad Commissioners, one from each of the two great political parties, and one upon the nomination of the Anti-Monopoly bodies. Despite great pressure to the contrary, and without waiting for a proposed amendment of the law, the Governor promptly nominated three commissioners, in literal compliance with the old law, accepting without hesitation the Anti-Monopoly candidate, Mr. O'Donnell. The fact that the work of the Railroad Commission has been so well done as not only to justify its creation to those even who were originally doubtful of its value, but also to be satisfactory to the Anti Monopoly sentiment which led to its formation, is due to the conscientious care with which Governor Cleveland, ignoring every consideration but the purpose of the law, selected the members who were to serve upon it.

CHECKING THE AGGRESSIONS OF CORPORATIONS.

Upon April 2, 1883, the Governor, jealously regarding the interests of the public, as opposed to those of corporations, vetoed a bill tending to increase the power of telegraph companies to use the public streets, from which message the following extracts are made:

"A fatal objection to this bill is found in the provision allowing the corporations therein named to enter upon private property, and erect and maintain their structures thereon without the consent of the owner. It seems to me that this is taking private property, or an easement therein, with very little pretext that it is for a public use.

"If a private corporation can, under authority of law, construct its appliances and structures upon the lands of the citizen without his consent, not only for the purpose of furnishing light, but in an experimental attempt to transmit heat and power, the rights of the people may well be regarded as in danger from an undue license to corporate aggrandizement.'

Upon June 14, 1884, despite great opposition from the parties interested, he signed a bill requiring such companies to put their lines under ground on or before November 1, 1885. So, upon May 29, 1883, he vetoed a general street railroad bill, upon the ground that its design was "more to further private and corporate schemes than to furnish the citizens of the State street railroad facilities, under the spirit and letter of the Constitution, and within the limits therein fixed for the benefit of the people."

Upon April 6, 1883, in further exhibition of his disposition to keep corporations within the limit of the laws creating them, he vetoed a bill to extend the time for the payment of the capital stock of a corporation, saying:

"Our laws in relation to the formation of corporations are extremely liberal, and those who avail themselves of their provisions should be held to a strict compliance with their requirements. This company and its stockholders have assumed for their own benefit certain relations to the State, to the public and to their creditors, and these relations should not be disturbed. If corporations are to be relieved from their defaults for the asking, their liability to the people with whom they deal will soon become dangerously uncertain and indefinite."

PUBLICITY OF CORPORATION OPERATIONS REQUIRED.

In his message to the Legislature at the beginning of his second year, the Governor, in vigorous language, called attention to the duty of railroad corporations, and of all others as well, to truly inform the public as to their operations. In the present season of distrust and distress, conséquent upon a supposed failure to discharge this duty, these words of the Governor are appropriate. After commending the requirement by the Railroad Commissioners of quarterly reports from the railroad companies, he says:

"It would, in my opinion, be a most valuable protection to the people if other large corporations were obliged to report to some department their transactions and financial condition.

"The State creates these corporations upon the theory that some proper thing of benefit can be better done by them than by private enterprise, and that the aggregation of the funds of many individuals may be thus profitably employed. They are launched upon the public with the seal of the State, in some sense, upon them. They are permitted to represent the advantages they possess and the wealth sure to follow from admission to membership. In one hand is held a charter from the State, and in the other is proffered their stock.

"It is a fact, singular though well established, that people will pay their money for stock in a corporation engaged in enterprises in which they would refuse to invest if in private hands.

"It is a grave question whether the formation of these artificial bodies ought not to be checked or better regulated and in some way supervised.

"At any rate they should always be kept well in hand, and the funds of its citizens should be protected by the State which has invited their investment. While the stockholders are the owners of the corporate property, notoriously they are oftentimes completely in the power of the directors and managers, who acquire a majority of the stock and by this means perpetuate their control, using the corporate property and franchises for their benefit and profit,regardless of the interests and rights of the minority of stockholders. Immense salaries are paid to officers; transactions are consummated by which the directors make money, while the rank and file among the stockholders lose it; the honest investor waits for dividends and the directors grow rich. It is suspected, too, that large sums are spent under various disguises in efforts to influence legislation.

"It is not consistent to claim that the citizen must protect himself, by refusing to purchase stock. The law constantly recognizes the fact that people should be defended from false representations and from their own folly and cupidity. It punishes obtaining goods by false pretenses, gambling and lotteries.

"It is a hollow mockery to direct the owner of a small amount of stock in one of these institutions to the cour 8. Under existing statutes, the law's delay, perplexity and uncertainty leads but to despair.

"The State should either refuse to allow these corporations to exist under its authority and patronage, or acknowledging their paternity and its responsibility, should provide a simple, easy way for its people, whose money is invested, and the public generally, to discover how the funds of these institutions are spent, and how their affairs are conducted. It should at the same time provide a way by which the squandering or misuse of corporate funds would be made good to the parties injured thereby.

"This might well be accomplished by requiring corporations to frequently file reports made out with the utmost detail, and which would not allow lobby expenses to be hidden under the pretext of legal services and counsel fees, accompanied by vouchers and sworn to by the officers making them, showing particularly the debts, liabilities. expenditures and property of the corporation. Let this report be delivered to some appropriate department or officer, who shall audit and examine the same; provide that a false oath to such account shall be perjury, and make the directors liable to refund to the injured stockholders any expenditure which shall be determined improper by the auditing authority.

380

"Such requirements might not be favorable to stock speculation, but they would protect the innocent investors; they might make the management of corporations more troublesome, but this ought not to be considered when the protection of the people is the matter in hand. It would prevent corporate efforts to influence legislation; the honestly conducted and strong corporations would have nothing to fear; the badly managed and weak ought to be exposed."

Thus, it will appear from the Governor's own words, with which his actions have been in full accord, that he has insisted that corporations shall observe the limitations of the laws creating them; that their privileges shall be exercised in subordination to the rights of the public; that their affairs shall be open to public scrutiny; and that to their members and the public alike they shall be honest end fair.

MAINTAINING THE PUBLIC FAITH.

In this same spirit of exact and equal justice, which has demanded of corporations compliance with the provisions of law binding upon them, the Governor has observed the express rights given to them by law. His principle has been "The public faith must be scrupulously kept." Upon this principle he undertook to__act in the matter of the veto of what has come to be known as the "Five Cent Fare Bill."

The elevated Railroads of New York city, under their charters, charged an uniform rate of fare of five cents during certain of the morning and evening hours in which the great body of workingmen went to and from their homes, and ten cents for the rest of the day. In 1853 the Legislature passed a bill to make the rate of fare five cents throughout the day This bill the Governor vetoed, upon the ground that it involved a breach of faith on the part of the State. The general railroad law, passed in 1850, and for nearly a quarter of a century declaring the policy of the State, had promised that the Legislature would not reduce the rates of any railroad until its reduced rates should produce a profit of ten per centum on the capital actually expended. The Governor declared that until the profits of these roads should have been ascertained to exceed this limit, the policy of the State forbade their reduction. A subsequent examination by the Railroad Commission, consisting of one Democrat, one Republican and one Anti-Monopolist, showed that the earnings of the roads were not such as to justify the proposed reduction of fare, thus justifying the action of the Governor.

Another reason for his veto was found in the express provisions of special acts applicable to these roads. It was therein provided that the company should under bonds pledge itself to pay a certain percentage into the city treasury which should "constitute an agreement in the nature of a contract between the city and constructing company, entitling the company to the legalized rates of fare, which shall not be changed without the mutual consent of the parties."

The railroad company having made these payments to the city, the Governor considered that under those terms of this act there had been constituted "an agreement in the nature of a contract" between the city and the company, which the State could not in good faith abrogate.

It also appeared that still another contract in writing, to the same effect, had been made between the rapid transit commissioners and the railroad companies, before the roads were built and to induce their construction, thus constituting a third promise on the part of the public which this bill proposed to break. The Governor did not believe that the people of New York nor its Legislature, when brought to a knowledge of these facts, would desire this great State to be even suspected of trifling with its obligations, and so in a message so explicit as to necessarily reach great length, he transmitted to the Assembly the reasons why he was unable to approve the bill. The effect justified his estimate of the honor of the State and of its legislators. (A majority voted to sustain his veto, while two thirds would have been necessary to overrule it.) From every side came expressions of commendation for the scrupulous attention that had been given to the maintenance of the public faith.

Among many expressions in opposition to the bill was a most emphatic communication from the Mayor of the city of New York, earnestly asking for the veto of the bill, concerning which, as a measure particularly relating to the City of New York, the Mayor of that city seemed to be particularly qualified to speak.