TRADES-UNIONISM DEFENDED.

♦

-Labor is the Superior of Capital and Deserves much the Higher Consideration .—
Abraham Lincoln.

STATEMENT

Columbia Typographical Union

No. lOl,

CONCERNING THE ATTACK OX

LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

IN THE

UNITED STATES SENATE.

WASHINGTON. D. ( .

E. W. OYSTER. PRINTER.

No. 339 Penna. Avenue.

1888 .

33 1'.SI

REPORT

OF A

SPECIAL COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY COLUMBIA TYPOGRAPHICAL.
UNION TO OPPOSE ANY INTERFERENCE BY CONGRESS
WITH THE RIGHTS OF THE LABORING CLASSES TO
ORGANIZE FOR SELF-PROTECTION AGAINST
THE ENCROACHMENTS OF CAPITAL.

To the President and Members of Columbia Typographical Union,

JVo. i oi:

Gentlemen : Your committee respectfully submit their report, as
follows:

On February 24, 1883, there occurred in the Senate of the United
States, on an amendment to the legislative, executive, and judicial
appropriation bill, increasing the salary of the Public Printer, the fol¬
lowing debate:

Mr. Beck. I voted for this increase, and desire to ask the Senator from Rhode
Island a question in regard to this Printing Office. I understand that the Public Printer
has hardly any control over his printers; that they are run by some league or printers’
union or something else outside of the Government, so that he is absolutely at the
mercy of some outside association both as to the wages of his men and as to the men
he shall employ, and that he can not do anything unless he has the assent of some
outside organization. What is the truth about that ?

Mr. Anthony. There is too much truth in that. There is a typographical asso¬
ciation in this District composed of employes, who assume, without consulting the
employers, to fix the rate of compensation; and if any person not a member of that
association Ls employed in any establishment all those who belong to it leave. It is
a tyranny which the craft would not submit to if it was ordained by law, but which
they impose upon themselves for their own benefit.

Mr. Beck. If the Committee on Printing or any other body in this Government
has any power to emancipate the Government of the United States from the control
of an organization of that sort by placing power in the hands of the Public Printer
or anybody else, I am willing to vote him any amount of money, I do not care what
it is, so that this Government shall not be dictated to by any association.

Mr. Anthony. I am in full sympathy with the Senator from Kentucky on that
point. The Committee on Printing have once, and I think twice, reported a reso-

p 55 5

lution, which has been adopted by the Senate, instructing the Public Printer to
employ his men for the best interest of the Government according to the market-
price of wages; but it has not met the approbation of the other House of Congress;
and now there is a law of Congress which requires the Public Printer to pay to com¬
positors a larger sum than is paid by the private printers down street. This typo¬
graphical association fixes the price of composition, and then remits to the private
employers a portion of the rate.

Mr. Beck. I only desire to call attention to it because the attention of the Com¬
mittee on Appropriations was called to it sharply. While I know nothing about
this association and do not mean to reflect on it, I want to be entirely free from its
influence and power, and if the Committee on Printing can devise any way to do it,
it will get my vote..

Mr. Anthony. The Committee on Printing has devised a way and it has been
adopted by the Senate, but has not met the approbation of the other House of
Congress.

Mr. Rollins. I want to ask the Senator from Rhode Island, who understands
this matter fully, how much more the Government is required to pay for work in
the Government Printing Office by reason of this Union than is paid in the private
'establishments in the city of Washington ? That is a fair test.

Mr. Anthony. I suppose the difference is about 20 per cent., but the Public
Printer is compelled to pay it, not by that typographical organization but by a higher
power, by the power of Congress, which fixes the rate of compensation. The law
fixes the rate of compensation at a higher rate than is paid to other employes of
the same character.

Now, my sympathies are all with the interests of labor, and I desire that every
man who works with his hands shall receive the highest compensation that is con¬
sistent with the good of the business in which he is employed ; but I do not recog¬
nize the right of the employes of an establishment, without consulting the employer,
to fix the rate of labor, and to fix that for the Government higher than it is fixed
for private employes. A majority of this typographical association are employed in
the Government Printing Office, so that the employes of the Government Printing
Office fix the rate of wages, and then, after imposing it upon the Government, remit
a portion of it to private establishments.

Mr. Rollins. Is it not the fact that they practically dictate to the Public Printer
who shall be employed ?

Air. Anthony. They do so far as that he shall not employ any man who does not
belong to the Typographical Union.

Mr. Rollins. In other words, if he undertook to.employ to-day or to-morrow or
any other day a practical printer, if he did it even from charitable considerations, if
he found here in the city of Washington a poor printer starving for bread who did
not belong to this Union, could he do it under the present regulations?

Mr. Anthony. The members of the union would all leave the Government
Printing Office.

Mr. Rollins. That is what I wanted to get at.

Mr. Hale. Mr. President, these are most remarkable statements. It seems to
me that they must fall with startling effect upon Senatois’ ears, that a great govern-

mental establishment upon which’ we expend millions of dollars annually is hope¬
lessly and helplessly in the hands of a private, and for aught I know secret, associ¬
ation that dominates its whole management, that controls the choice of employes,
so that those who are not favored of the mechanics of the United States that belong
to vocations that are involved in this office can not have a competition there with
the men that do belong to this private association. Is it a fact that all the printers,
the type-setters, or the employes of any kind in the Government Printing Office
must be taken from one organization to the exclusion of the thousands in the United
States who do not belong to it ? Why, sir, if a tyranny of this kind exists to day
and pervades the Government Printing Office there ought not to be one dollar
more appropriated until we call a halt and this tyranny is removed and the Govern¬
ment Printing Office is put open to every person skillful enough to do the work done
there, whether he belongs to this association or not. I should be glad to know
whether the Public Printer is in sympathy with this performance and whether he
submits to it or whether he protests against it. I should be glad if the chairman
of the Committee on Printing, if he knows about that, would give some information
to the Senate.

Mr. Anthony. What is the use of his protesting when we have imposed upon him
by law rates which are even higher than those fixed by the Typographical Union ?

Mr. Hale. Do we impose on him the necessity of being controlled, dominated
by this union or association as to the men that he employs?

Mr. Anthony. We do not; but then if he does not obey the behests of that asso¬
ciation the Government Printing Office stops.

Mr. Hale. Then clearly the Government Printer at the close of the present ses¬
sion of Congress ought to begin deliberately and ruthlessly to weed out from that
office every man who belongs to this union, and summon from the great cities of
this country where they will be found other men who do not belong to it, so that in
an emergency when Congress is sitting and the work must be done we shall not be
at the mercy of this union.

Mr. Anthony. I quite agree with the Senator, and if Congress will give the
Public Printer power to do that I do not hesitate to say that he will exercise it.

Mr. Hale. What power would he need embodied in this bill to do that ?

Mr. Anthony. That he shall employ his labor at the market price of wages for
the best interest of the Government. I think that the printers in the Government
Printing Office are entitled to a little higher pay than those in private establish¬
ments, because their employment is somewhat uncertain. Sometimes there is a very
great press of work and a large number of men are employed ; then the work falls
off, and they are furloughed; but, expecting to be recalled again, they do not leave
the city and have to remain here unemployed. I think there ought to be some in¬
crease of compensation over that in private establishments where they have steady
work. But it is to be observed that the printers in the Government Printing Office
work only eight hours, and that they receive higher compensation than printers down
town who work ten hours.

Mr. Hale. I am not so much troubled about the rates that are paid, because I
am not intelligent upon that matter ; there may be reasons why it should be so, but
upon the other great Question that this office should not be controlled and tyrannized

over by this association I have no doubt. It ought to be open to the whole country
and not under this control.

I wish the Senator from Rhode Island, who has had this matter upon his mind,
would frame some clause that he can add, to which I do not believe a single Sena¬
tor will object, that shall give the superintendent of this great office the opportunity,
after this Congress shall have closed and ended its labors, to begin at once and weed
out the office so that we shall control it hereafter. When I say “ we ” I mean Con¬
gress and the people, and not this association.

Mr. Davis, of West Virginia. I think the suggestion coming from the Senator
from Maine a very good one, but this bill is not the place for it. The sundry civil
bill, as we all know, is pending in the other House, where it is probable that the
appropriation for public printing is made, and on that bill some regulation could
very properly be added.

Mr. Hale. That may be so, and that is a bill yet to be considered by the Com¬
mittee on Appropriations. It can clearly be done without trenching on the rule of
the Senate already adopted of not putting on legislation, because it can be put in the
form of a limitation on the expenditure of the money appropriated. I do not know
but that is the proper place; probably it is.

Mr. Plumb. I wish to say in regard to this matter that there is really nothing re¬
quired now. The Public Printer can do that now if he sees fit.

Mr. Davis. Perhaps he wants some encouragement from Congress.

Mr. Plumb. He may want the encouragement. He came there and found that
this printers’ union was absolutely running the establishment. They have a rule
which fixes the number of apprentices the Public Printer may employ—twenty, I
think it is—and no other person can be employed under their rule in the Government
Printing Office unless he belongs to the Columbia Typographical Union, an institu
tion of this city.

Mr. Hale. I am told by a Senator that an order has been really issued from the
bead of this establishment that no man shall be taken on to its rolls unless he belongs
to this association. Does the Senator know whether that be true ?

Mr. Plumb. I know that that is true, and I know, further than that-

Mr. Davis, of West Virginia. Allow me to ask the Senator a question. Do I
understand that the Superintendent of Public Printing himself has issued an order
to that effect ?

Mr. Plumb. No; but the Typographical Union, I understand.

Mr. Davis, of West Virginia. But I understood the Senator to say that from the
head of this printing bureau there was such an order issued; am I correct in that?

Mr. Plumb. I spoke of the association.

Mr. Hale. I was told that it was the superintendent of the establishment who
issued the order. That may not be so.

Mr. Anthony. Oh, no.

Mr. Plumb. All I know is this: the Public Printer has stated that he found the
Typographical Union in possession of the Government Printing Office when he
came in; that he did not believe the establishment could be run without the con
sent of the Typographical Union; that is, he did not believe printers of sufficient
skill could be had in the United States to meet the needs of that office, unless they

'Came from and at the dictation of the Typographical Union. I know that a person
was employed in that department as a proof-reader, and that immediately after his
employment an emissary of the Typographical Union, himself employed in the de¬
partment, came to him and asked him for his card or certificate of membership in
the Columbia Typographical Union, and I think, perhaps, also, that he added that
the body issues a special permit to a man to be employed in the Government Print¬
ing Office. At all events he was called on for his card of membership. He said
lie had none, upon which he was notified that he could not work in the Government
Printing Office, and he was discharged because he did not choose to pay #6 and
join the Columbia Typographical Union.

Mr. Hale. By whom was he told that he could not be employed if he did not
join ?

Mr. Plumb. An emissary of the Typographical Union, who was also an employe
■of the Government Printing Office, and still in the employment of that establish¬
ment.

Mr. Hale. I am told that the superintendent sympathizes with this feeling that
it ought to be broken up. I hope that is so.

Mr. Plumb. I can not say as to that, but still I have no doubt he would make
any correction he should be authorized by law to make. I believe he ought as a
matter of his own responsibility, of his own duty and obligation as an officer of the
Government, to establish his own rules and regulations for the employment of the
persons in that department, entirely independent of the rules and regulations of
any society or association whatever.

I was myself a printer at one time; I sympathize with that very meritorious class
of people; I certainly mean to sympathize, as I think I do, with every man who
wants to labor and with every man who wants the best possible price for his labor;
But I do not sympathize with any man whose desire to labor is so strong that it re¬
quires him to say, and to put extraordinary means into execution to say, that some
other man shall not labor or shall only labor on the terms that he himself imposes.
I believe that is a point we ought not to go to. I believe the Government itself
ought not to commit itself any more to such specifications of employment in the
Government Printing Office than it would similar ones in regard to employment in
the Treasury. If we are to be subjected to the domination in this important de¬
partment of the Government of an outside organization, which by co-operation at
the moment might choose to take away all the employes of the Government Print¬
ing Office, we had better meet that on the threshold before it grows stronger than
it now is and break it up.

As the Senator from Rhode Island says, perhaps these men ought to have more
wages than they have elsewhere. The matter of wages in this connection is a mat¬
ter of no possible consequence. I would rather pay twice the wages to a non-union
pi-inter, a man not only willing to labor himself, but willing that other men shall
labor with him for the support which they need as much as he, than to pay half the
wages and submit to the irresponsible control which now exists in that institution.

That is a question which we shall be required to meet at some time. I believe
the Public Printer, himself a practical man, who has had occasion to employ in the
private employment from which he came large numbers of printers, with a little en-

couragement to do this would faithfully carry out any hint or permission we give-
him in the law. I believe he ought to do it. I believe that every one who goes-
into that employ ought to go in free from any allegiance to outside associations-
which direct what the wages shall be, and the time employed.

We have raised a good deal of fuss about political assessments. They are no-
more unauthorized, no more pernicious than the assessments that are levied on the
employes of the Government Printing Office, who require everybody to observe
them. The hours of labor are not only established, but by insidious processes, which
they know best how to employ, particular persons become favored in the distribu¬
tion of the work of that office in such a way that some men make very considerable
wages, while other men, equally as needy and equally as deserving, make nothing.
The portion of the work that is called “ phat” goes to one man, and what is called
“ lean” goes to another; one man gets continuous employment, and another is el¬
bowed and shoved aside and is kept waiting and hungry. The work is carried on
in that way to minister to the power and to aid the purposes of this Typographical
Union, and the Government sits here and simply lets the functions of this important
department of the Government be entirely absorbed by this organization.

Mr. Voorhees. Mr. President-

Mr. Morgan. I should like to ask the Senator from Kansas if there would beany
difficulty in bringing printers of equal ability from the different States to do the
work of the Printing Office ?

Mr. Voorhees. Mr. President, I want to submit a few words on behalf of the
printers. There are two sides of a question. It seems that only one side of this-
question has been heard on this floor.

The Presiding Officer. The Senator from Indiana has the floor.

Mr. Morgan. I beg pardon. I merely wished to ask the question of the Sena¬
tor from Kansas before he took his seat.

Mr. Plumb. There would be no trouble in filling the Government Printing Ofifice-
from every State in the Union with printers who do not belong to the Typographi¬
cal Union. It is a thing of the past almost. The Senator from Connecticut [Mr.
Hawley] I have no doubt himself can bear witness to the fact that it has-
been largely broken up in the last few years, and that it does not exist at all in some
States.

Mr. Morgan. There were in 1880, according to the census returns, 72,726-
printers in the United States, and I suppose that ought to supply a sufficient num¬
ber for the Government Office.

Mr. Voorhees. I rose, Mr. President, for the purpose of saying a few words in.
behalf of the printers. It would seem from the debate the last half hour here as if
they were a very dangerous class of people. From the unbroken strain of amazed
and indignant talk on this subject it would seem that this Government had been
outraged and plundered by them. That is not my understanding. My understand¬
ing is that a more painstaking, conscientious, hard-working class of people does not
live than the printers who are now in question. If they have committed any abuse
on any public interest I should like to have it pointed out. I should like to know
what they have done. Have they received too much pay for their work ? I
should like to see a Senator who will rise here and say so.

Mr. Plumb. Will the Senator from Indiana permit me to direct his attention to*
one point ?

Mr. Voorhees. If you want to answer that point.

Mr. Plumb. I want simply to state the abuse I speak of. While they want to-
labor for themselves, and do good labor and valuable labor, they insist that nobody
else shall labor except at their beck.

Mr Voorhees. I will come to that directly. Let us take things as they are
presented; I want to settle some points as I go along. I do not understand that
anybody pretends that these men get too much pay for their work. I want to set¬
tle another point: I do not understand that anybody pretends that they do not do
their work well. So we have two great propositions in employment and labor;
one is that the work is done well, and the other is that they do not get too much
pay for it. Then I should like to know what the trouble is ? The Senator from
Kansas says the trouble is that they are associated together so that their wages shall
not be reduced by somebody coming in and working for less. That is about the
plain statement.

Mr. Plumb. No, I did not state it that way.

Mr. Voorhees. The Senator did not state it that way, but that is all that he
said.

Mr. Plumb. The Senator from Indiana is too fair to misstate me so grossly as-
that.

Mr. Voorhees. I do not pretend that that was your statement, but that was the
point of it.

Mr. Plumb. You say that is what I said. I did not state it.

Mr. Voorhees. I will correct myself, then. Of course I meant that the Senator
said so simply in substance. I repeat it, the Senator from Kansas said that they
would not allow other people to work, in so many words. That is not true, and he
will have to correct his statement a little as well as I shall have to correct mine. The
Senator said they were associated so as not to allow men to come in and underwork
them and thus reduce their wages.

Mr. Plumb, No, that is not the statement I made.

Mr. Voorhees. I did not say it was the statement. I say that is what you meant..

Mr. Plumb. It is not what I meant.

Mr. Voorhees. Then what did you mean ?

Mr. Plumb. My meaning is that they will not let any person work unless he first
joins their association and subscribes to their rules.

Mr. Voorhees. And work at the same wages.

Mr. Plumb. But it is more than a question of wages. It is general direction and!
control in the relation of labor.

Mr. Voorhees. I do not remember how the Senator from Kansas voted on the
Chinese question, but I know that the idea of protecting American labor from the
competition of cheap Chinese labor swayed this entire Congress, both the Senate
and House. I believe in fact as I turn my eye to the Chair as it is now occupied
that about the only conspicuous and distinguished opponent of that idea is now in
the Chair. I do not remember the eloquence of the Senator from Kansas or any.
body else’s particularly except that of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar]

now in the Chair against the proposition which we were then putting in the form of
a law that labor in this country should not be brought in contact with cheap labor
from China.

I said I intended to say something for the printer. I want to talk on his side for
v a little while. The way he reasons is this: he lias as much right to protect him¬
self in the wages that will give him bread and shelter and clothing as other people
have to protect themselves. Is it wrong that they are associated together ? To hear
the Senator from Maine [Mr. Hale] and .other Senators it would seem as if there
was a sort of Cataline conspiracy. There is not an association in the world, either
of talent, or labor, or capital, that does not do exactly the same thing.

A medical association fixes the fees, and if one of their number comes and ad¬
ministers quinine for less than the agreed fees, he will be expelled from that associ-
tion. It is the same principle exactly with the Typographical Union. They say a
man must work at particular wages. The physicians of the country say the same
thing, and if one is employed at less than the agreed price, those who are already
•employed will walk away from the bedside of sickness and leave you to die. In
many places the bar have their associations and agreements also. Going still further,
take up the great industries of the country. Take the Wool Growers’ Association, the
Iron Mongers’ Association, the Steel Workers’ Association, the Spinners’ Association,
liquor Dealers’ Association, to say nothing of that master of all associated strength,
the National Banking Association. No words of reproach for them; no outcry; no
danger; but the Typographical Union, those men who work day and night at their
printers’ cases, seem to alarm Senators. They do not alarm me. I am much more
alarmed at the National Banking Association which meets every year at Saratoga
to have their annual congress, when the champagne corks pop and the terrapin is
good, and they lay down lines of financial policy agreed upon in luxury and splen¬
dor, and come down here and dictate to this Congress from end to end of this Cap¬
itol, and every Senator knows it.

These typos are not dictating here. The Senator from Kansas is alarmed ; other
Senators are alarmed, and they say this thing had better be met on the threshold.
Let us meet it upon the threshold, but let us not have a tempest in a teapot on the
threshold. Talk about Congress being dictated to ! It has been and will continue
to be till the end of time dictated to by associated capital, associated talent; but less
than on any other subject will it be dictated to by Government printers.

Sir, associated talent, associated wealth, associated labor have governed the world
in all times, and they will continue to do so. It is just as legitimate and just as inno¬
cent and harmless, and more so, for these people who toil with their hands and
make their associations to protect them in their rights as it is to those who are more
powerful.

I presented a paper here this morning from an association known as workers
in iron and steel in my State, and I want them to have their voice heard. It is
an association of men who delve in the earth and who work in the blast-furnaces
and all that. I believe they have as much right to be heard here as the national
association of banks. Yet how different would have been the reception of a me¬
morial of the annual National Banking Association held at Saratoga from that which
was given to those workers in iron and steel, and how differently we would speak

of something the National Banking Association was doing from that which we speak
of the poor Government printers down here with no voice on this floor !

Mr. President, I can generally be counted on on that side which is not here to
speak for itself. It seems to me that there are plenty to speak on the other side.
It seems to me there are plenty to get up here a sort of fictitious alarm about
the Government printers, who do work and get none too much pay, and who do not
want to be underworked by others. We have had the most eloquent appeals here
about the protection of American labor. That is just what this Typographical Union
are doing; they are protecting American labor in their own profession and calling.

Mr. Allison. As this matter is not involved in the pending item of appropriation,

I trust now we shall be able to go on with the bill, and when the appropriation
for the public printing comes up, of course any amendment Senators may desire to
suggest will be in order.

The Presiding Officer. The Chair had announced the adoption of the amend¬
ment before the debate began. The Chair will say to the Senator from Iowa that
he does not understand there is any objection to the amendment as to the compen¬
sation to the Public Printer.

Mr. Hawley. I want to say a few words just now, as a member of the Printing
Committee, so as to let all the remarks appear in one place in the Record.

The Presiding Officer. The Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. Hawley. All of these laborers and any other class of laborers have a perfect
right to form an association for their mutual benefit. I do not know that anybody
denies that it is not only natural 4 but even praiseworthy. The association has a right
to agree upon a price. Two men or 2,000 men have a right to agree upon the price
which they will ask for their labor. In the next place they have aright to say that
they will not work when they can not get their price. So far their rights are indisr
putable, but they have no right to say that another man not a member of the associ¬
ation shall not work in the place, or that he shall not work even for a lower price if
he chooses. The other man, not a member, who has not agreed to and does not
agree to their terms may come in and desire to work, and he may be willing to
work for a little less rate, and the employer should have a right to hire him and
the man should be absolutely protected in his labor. His right against the 2,000
is just as good as theirs against him. There is no sort of doubt about those princi¬
ples thus far.

It should be said, in order to state the case fairly, that the Government itself has '
more or less embarrassed some of these questions by establishing an eight-hour law,
and that brings it about that men in the employ of the Government get a little more
wages for the same quantity of work done. The Government has still further em¬
barrassed the question by establishing the rates to be paid those who do not work
by the day, the prices per thousand for composition, and the prices, I think, per
hour.

If we desire to open this question fully to the absolute control of the Public
Printer, so that he may stand precisely in the position of a private employer, we
should repeal those laws. No man outside of Government work in the country
is bound by any law 4 to call eight hours a day’s work, nor is he bound to give 60
cents a thousand for night work. If you wish to put your printer in a perfectly free

position, I say as free a position as the citizen is in, you should repeal those two-
statutes. I would then demand of the Public Printer, if that is to be your policy,
that he shall employ good men at good rates and defend them in the employment.

I do not object to giving the printers a little more there than they have in some
other places. Their claim for that, I say as a man who has had something to
do with the employment of printers, is not unreasonable, and for this reason: the
employment is uncertain, sometimes he requires more printers than at other times.
The inevitable result is—you may say it is their fault—that there will be a body of
printers about here sometimes who will have no work, and they feel under those
circumstances that when they are at woik they should be entitled to a little greater
rate of compensation. Those are general, equitable considerations.

The Public Printer should be in a condition to employ people for good wages (and
he is good pay and gives reasonable wages) upon just such terms as I in my private
business, or as the chairman of the committee, or anybody else.

While I sympathize with all the rights of association, to begin with, the natural
man rises up in opposition to dictation from anybody. I know something of a case
like that suggested by the Senator from Kansas. If a good and honorable and hon¬
est man is brought here and employed by the Public Printer, as it sometimes has
happened, without his knowing whether the man belonged to the association or
not, the members of the association ought to let him alone. I would have the Public
Printer compel the observance of that man’s rights as an American citizen.

The whole thing needs revision if Senators are going to do what they seem to
indicate and desire to do here.

We have now as good a Public Printer as in my opinion we have ever had, and
I am glad the committee has raised his wages a little, and I would add $1,500 more,
for it is a place that would kill Samson. It is the hardest-worked place in the Gov¬
ernment, and the largest printing establishment in the world, and I would be glad
to give him more wages still, that he might be able to insure his life against hard
work.

Mr. Conger. I do not understand from anything that has been said that this asso¬
ciation undertook to dictate at all to the Public Printer whom he should employ or
whom he should not employ otherwise than to say that they will not work there if
certain persons are employed.

Mr. Hawley. That they have a right to say. In my judgment they have a right
to say whether they will work in the Public Printing Office; but the man who
does not belong to the association has the right just as much as any other man to go
and ask for work there.

Mr. Conger. I have heard this question discussed at one time and another for
the last few years, and I never yet have heard that the printers’ association ever
undertook to control or dictate any terms to the Public Printer or the Government,
except so far as to say that they have for mutual benefit and mutual protection or¬
ganized all over the United States to protect themselves, as every other class of people
can and may and do do. They say if the Government will take one class of men.
if it is better for the Government to employ one set of men who do not feel an in¬
terest in joining together with them for mutual protection, they will go elsewhere.
"Who is to condemn them for that proposition ? Can the Government get along jus*.

as well without them? If it can, let them do so; that is all they say. They are
bound up in this association all over the United States, the printers for their mutual
protection, for their mutual improvement, to see to it that everybody who belongs
to the craft is educated in the craft, is capable of performing the duties of a printer,
as I believe for elevating the standard of skill and of labor and of education and sup¬
port, and for all the things that these •associations are formed for, for mutual benefit,
for supporting their sick, for burying their dead. They are scattered all over the
United States, in every town and village, a mutual benefit society. The object of
that is good, as I understand it; it is beneficial to the printer, and is good for the
art, and is good for the community, and is elevating.

All I have ever heard anybody assert that they say is that if those who do not
belong to this association, if those who are willing to cut under wages are employed
in the Government Printing Office, they do not desire to be employed; they will
leave. The Government can noi afford that. Sir, it would stop the action of both
Houses of Congress to-morrow, if that printing should stop one day, and we all
know it. It may be that some preliminary steps may be taken to organize printers
into a class of employes like those in other Departments, to give them appoint¬
ments and give them salaries. I know of no other way to meet this without doing
injustice to the printers belonging to this association, as I suppose probably four-
fifths and perhaps nine-tenths of all the printers in the United States do belong to
it. I do not know why Congress should commence with a threat against this class
of men. Unfortunately or fortunately, as it may be, Congress and the country
would suffer without their services to-day and every day. If the men belonging to
the association throughout the United States were to leave the different offices
where they are employed at any one day, the entire circulation of the newspapers,
the entire working of the presses, the entire business of the setting of type, would
stop as if an earthquake had stopped their business.

Those are facts that we must look at. It is the condition of the country, not only
in Washington, but in every city in the Union. I do not know that it is desirable
to threaten, as has been done here, that every member of a printers’ association, a
benevolent relief society, as it virtually is, should be threatened on the floor of the
.Senate with being turned out of position under the Government because he be¬
longed to such an association, which has nothing wrong in it, but everything that
tends to elevate that class of American citizens, any more than any other class you
have legislated against or condemned on this floor.

Mr. Hawley. The Public Printer would have no right to say, no citizen would
have a right to say, of any person seeking employment that he should not belong
to any voluntary association. I do not think he would have a right to do that. He
would have a perfect right to say, however, “ These are all the wages I have to
give, all I ought to give, and I will employ nobody except at these wages and on
these terms.” But the employer has a right to say what he will give, whether the
person belong to an association outside or any association in the trade, or anything
of that sort.

Mr. Conger. There is no denial of that by any member of the association. All
that they say to the Printer or all that they say to the Government or in the hearing
of the country is that if the Government or the Public Printer does not see fit to ac-

cede to those terms they will leave. They have a right to do that in my judgment.
The Government can supply their places by wandering printers who belong to no
association and will belong to no association, for I understand all may join this and
the fee is very small; the dues are small. All who desire to promote the order and
the efficiency of the printers of their class and the well-being of their families may
unite together in this; and the only penalty for appointing that class of men is that
the printers of these relief associations say that they will not work under certain
conditions, and will leave the Government free to get its men where it can.

Mr. Plumb. Mr. President, it is proper to have a fair statement of this matter, it
having been brought under discussion. I did not introduce it here, but I had oc¬
casion to say something about it, and I do not intend to be misrepresented by the
Senator from Indiana, or anybody else.

There is no question about the quality of the work, or the character of the men
who are performing it at the Government Printing Office. Both are good, the
work and the character of the men who are doing it. I believe in fixing the wages-
by law, just as we fix the wages by law in the various other departments of the Gov¬
ernment. There is no reason why that should not be so. I am entirely willing
that the wages shall Ire as they are now, if they are satisfactory, as I understand
they are. I am not only willing but believe in an organization of printers and other
people, professional and otherwise, for their own mutual protection. There can be
no question about that right; and, as the Senator from Indiana says, perhaps that
ought even to be encouraged.

But the action of the printers’ union does not end there at all. What they pro¬
pose to do is well stated by the Senator from Michigan, [Mr. Conger.] Pie says,
if they take a notion that they will not work for the Government the Government
must stop; Congress cannot carry on any business if they see fit to have it other¬
wise. That states the case as strong as I can state it. We are to-day at the mercy
of these men, and are bidden by their advocate on this floor to speak with bated
breath about them and about our relations with them for fear on the whole that we
may be obliged to adjourn nem. con. The trouble is not that they say they ought
to have certain wages and will not %vork for less; the Government fixes the wages
in this case; but they say in substance that no one shall work for those wages ex¬
cept he first joins their association and agrees that when they say he shall quit work,
quit he shall, and in every way submit himself to their dictation, which practically
amounts to their saying that no man but a member of their organization shall work
in the Government Printing Office.

In addition to that, what is further striking in the effort to maintain their monop¬
oly of employment, they prescribe the number of persons who alone shall serve as
apprentices in any printing office where they are employed. The very second para¬
graph of the article on that subject in the constitution of this local Columbia Typo¬
graphical Union says that the number of apprentices in the Government Printing
Office shall not exceed twenty, and that has the force of law. What is this country
if it is not to be a free country, for men to labor in, at least ? Where is the freedom-
in labor? Where is the natural aspiration of your boy, Mr. President, or my boy,
or the boys of any of us to learn the printers’ trade if that is to be canonized into
law and their disposition to learn the trade and pursue it as an honorable and profit-

able calling is thus ruthlessly cut oft ? The law substantially makes that thing per¬
manent and gives it effect. There is the trouble. No one complains about these
people having any organization. We are doing everything we can by law to give
free course to labor, to give good wages, to give encouragement to labor; but I tell
you, Mr. President, that an organization of this kind does not conduce to either of
those things. It conduces to the monopoly of those functions in the hands of a few.
It does not even conduce to the highest quality of labor.

The Senator from Michigan says the Government can not be run without print¬
ing. I admit that for thirty days it would have to stop, but I would undertake, and
no doubt many other men would undertake, and give large bonds, to put the Gov¬
ernment Printing Office in the possession of qualified men to run it in every depart¬
ment as well and fully as it is run now in thirty days without a single printer in it
belonging to any union in the United States. The statement is not correct that a
majority of the printers belong to it; but whether they do or not is entirely imma¬
terial. There are about 2,000 members of the local union here, perhaps not so
many, perhaps not more than a thousand, but the other 72,000 members of the print¬
ers’ craft in the United States are prevented from coming here and having employ¬
ment in the Government Printing Office unless when they come here they will join
the union in this place and submit themselves absolutely and unqualifiedly to its
direction.

Mr. Davis, of West Virginia. Mr. President, I shall prolong this discussion but a
very few moments. I hope that the Committee on Printing will have an amend¬
ment of some kind prepared to offer to the sundry civil bill which will meet the
case we have been discussing this morning.

On the evening of the 27th of February, at a special meeting of the
Union, we were appointed, with instructions to memorialize the Senate
to take no such action as this debate indicated. The committee pro¬
ceeded that night to prepare a memorial, and on the following morning
it was printed and taken to the Capitol. Upon arriving there it was
found that an amendment had already been reported from the Senate
Committee on Printing and referred to the Appropriations Committee
of that body. It was then determined to include in our memorial the
objections to this amendment, which was done. The memorial was
then laid on Senators’ desks, and the committee bent their energies to
defeating the objectionable amendment. Before proceeding to give
. our experiences in this regard we present here the amendment re¬
ferred to and our memorial:

Amendment intended to be proposed by Mr. Anthony, from the Committee on
Printing, to the bill (Ii. R. 7595) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses
of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1884, and for other pur¬
poses, viz.: Insert the following :

And the Public Printer is directed, in the expenditure of the money herein ap¬
propriated, to employ the highest character of skilled workmen, at the fair market

price of labor, having reference to the prices paid in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and
Richmond, and also to the uncertain tenure of employment in the Government
Printing Office / and in case that he can not obtain a sufficient supply on these terms,
he is authorized to expend such portion of the appropriation as shall be necessary
for the temporary execution of such work outside of the Government Office.

Memorial of Columbia Typographical Union, No. ioi, Protesting Against
Legislation Hostile to the Interests of Labor.

To the Honorable Senate of the United States :

We, the undersigned, a committee appointed by Columbia Typographical Union,
No. ioi, respectfully represent to your honorable body the following facts„our de¬
sign being to correct many misstatements made in the United States'Senate on Sat¬
urday last, during the debate on the amendment to the legislative, executive, and
judicial appropriation bill increasing the salary of the Public Printer:

The statement that the Public Printer has hardly any control over his printers,
and that he is at the mercy of the Printers’ Union, is untrue. The Public Printer
has absolute control over his printers. It is true that the Printers’ Union has cer¬
tain rules and regulations, but these rules and regulations are in strict conformity
with the following law, passed by Congress July 31, 1876 :

* * * “ It shall be the duty of the Public Printer to employ no workmen not

thoroughly skilled in their respective branches of industry, as shown by a trial of
their skill under his direction.”

The union admits to membership any man or woman who has learned the print¬
ing business, and it has among its members men and women from all parts of the
United States; in fact, from all parts of the world. Of course, it will not admit a
person who has no knowledge of the printing business, any more than a law associ¬
ation would admit a doctor or a shoemaker. This union is one link of a chain of
typographical unions which extends all over the United States and Canada, and
printers from any city in the United States and Canada are eligible to membership.
A member of one of these unions is eligible to membership in any other union by
presenting his certificate of membership in his own union. In short, certificates
of membership are interchangeable. This chain of typographical unions is under
the direction of a supreme body—the International Typographical Union—whose
policy has always been to accomplish by arbitration what many persons, and especi¬
ally some honorable Senators, suppose we accomplish by dictation and force. This
has always been the policy of Columbia Typographical Union, No. 101, especially
when treating with the Government.

As an example of the “tyranny” and “dictation” which our Union is guilty
of toward the Public Printer, an honorable Senator refers to a person who was
appointed a proof-reader, but was forbidden by our union to work, and was discharged
“ because he did not choose to pay $6 and join the union.” A simple statement
of the facts will show where the “ dictation ” came from. The person referred to
as a proof-reader was appointed to that position upon the urgent recommendation
of a Senator. Although not a printer, the Senator was very urgent that he should
be appointed chief proof-reader, but finally compromised on the former position.

He was offered a clerkship by the Public Printer but declined it, for reasons which,
perhaps, the Senator best knows. As, not being a printer, he could not be admitted
to our Union, and finding that it was the evident intention to force upon us an issue'
which would bring us in collision with the Government, the Union formally with¬
drew all opposition to his employment, and he, with an assistant, as “copy-holder,”
was retained on the pay-rolls for three months, at an expense of nearly $600, a sum
for which absolutely no equivalent was returned by this proof-reader, for every line
.of his work had to be done over again during that entire three months ! Finally
he resigned, utterly unmolested or disturbed by us, confessing to the foreman that
he was not competent to do the work! The law was violated and the Treasury was
robbed, and neither the Public Printer nor the Typographical Union felt strong
•enough to prevent it. That there was “ dictation” here is plain, but it is equally
plain that the Union was not the dictator.

Again, it is charged that the union fixes the “rates of wages and the time em¬
ployed.” All that it is necessary to say in reply is that both wages and time arefixed
by law; that Congress four years since reduced our wages twenty per cent., unjustly
;as we believe, and they still remain at that figure. Again, the charge is made
that the Union provides and enforces a rule that no more than twenty apprentices
shall be employed in the Government Printing Office. This charge also falls to
the ground. Such a provision does exist in our by-laws, but it is, and has been
■for years, a dead letter, the proof of which is found in the fact that over fifty ap¬
prentices are now employed, exclusive of the press-room and bindery.

In conclusion, we wish to say that Senators who believe that typographical
unions are “ a thing of the past,” are mistaken indeed. Our fellow-craftsmen now
number many thousands, and its membership is rapidly increasing. Standing be¬
hind us, fully sympathizing with us, quivering when we are struck, are the members
-of our fellow unions, who are numbered by the hundreds of thousands, and their
numbers are hourly and rapidly increasing: The Senate, the House, the Executive,
may be able to strike a destructive blow at our local organization which will shatter
and destroy; they may ruthlessly “ weed us out,” but that very consummation will
give us a hundred ora thousand adherents abroad where one is lost here. In con¬
clusion, before inaugurating a policy of extermination against us as trade-unionists,
we ask Senators to read this testimony to the benefits of trade-unionism from Ex.
Doc. No. 21, 44th Congress, 1st session, House of Representatives, 1876, entitled
“ Labor in Europe and America,” by Edward Young, Ph. D., Chief of the Bureau
•of Statistics; it is an extract from a chapter on Trades-Unions by Mr. Stanley Jones :

“ Trades-unionism in England is an established fact, and a power which, although
many politicians try to shirk or avoid it, it is best to openly admit. The unpreju¬
diced observer must allow that, in England, trades-unions have raised workingmen
morally and intellectually, and have taught them a higher sense of their respon¬
sibilities. They have increased the prices and shortened the hours of labor ; have
educated workingmen to a knowledge of their common interest and common
duty, and in every sense have raised the character of English workmen.”

Another eminent English authority quoted on the same page (222), the British
Quarterly Review , says :

“ It appears pretty clear that unionism by its influence has, by slow degrees, al¬
tered for the better the circumstances of the British workmen.”

We, too, by long years of experience, know that it has conferred upon us innumer¬
able pi-ivileges and blessings, and to our vision it is the harbinger of faith and
hope for the future for millions of us and ours. It does no injustice to any worker,,
but is always a shield against injustice and oppression for the whole.

Therefore, it is that, as representatives of the most numerous, and at the same
time most helpless, of their constituents, the wage class of the nation, we entreat
Senators, intrusted with the gravest functions of this great Republic, to pause and
consider well ere they enter upon a policy of “ weeding out ” and “ extermination,”
for such we regard it, the consequences of which no man can foresee.

Your memorialists wish to protest against the passage of the following amendment
to the sundry civil appropriation bill:

“ And the Public Printer is directed, in the expenditure of the money herein ap¬
propriated, to employ the highest character of skilled workmen, at the fair market
price of labor, having reference to the prices paid in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and
Richmond, and also to the uncertain tenure of employment in the Government
Printing Office ; and in case that he can not obtain a sufficient supply on these terms,
he is authorized to expend such portion of the appropriation as shall be necessary
for the temporary execution of such work outside of the Government Office .”

This amendment is a blow at trades-unions, but put in a shape that is calcu¬
lated to deceive the friends of labor organizations.

In the first place, the Public Printer has the power now to employ skilled work¬
men, and he can and does “ weed out ” incompetent men at his discretion.

Second. It is admitted by the majority of Senators and Representatives that the
“ market price ” of labor in the Government Office is not too high; and, further¬
more, they have fixed the rates by law, so that reference to prices in other cities
is really not to be considered here.

Third. The most objectionable feature in the amendment is the last clause. We
consider it, in plain words, an attempt to make the Government a party to the
breaking up of trade-unions, by using its money to offer a premium for non-union
labor. The Public Printer is authorized to use the appropriations, if necessary, to
employ non-union men at higher terms, to work in the places of union men. This
construction of the clause we are convinced will be indorsed as the only plain one
by every unbiased person. This clause also aims at giving the Public Printer power,
in case of trouble with the union men, to give the work out by contract. This,
would only be done in the event of trouble with the Union, which course would
throw three-fourths of the union men in this city out of employment, so that, take
it in any shape, it is a direct thrust at organized labor.

And, as in duty bound, your memorialists will ever pray.

Your committee saw a number of Senators, and found that some
one had been lobbying very thoroughly against us. As indicated in
the debate by Mr. Plumb, our constitution and by-laws were quoted
from, and almost every Senator approached asked us whether we
would refuse to work with men who would not become members of
our Union, or whether we were not attempting to dictate as to the

management of the Government Printing Office. A friendly Sena¬
tor advised us by all means to see the Committee on Appropriations,
where the objectionable amendment was pending. This we did, and
on that committee we found the following-named Senators :

William B. Allison, of Iowa;

John A. Logan, of Illinois;

Henry L. Dawes, of Massachusetts ;

Preston B. Plumb, of Kansas;

Eugene Hale, of Maine ;

Henry G. Davis, of West Virginia;

James B. Beck, of Kentucky;

Matt. W. Ransom, of North Carolina;

Francis W. Cockrell, of Missouri.

We were in the committee room but a few moments when we
found ourselves in the midst of our enemies—surrounded, as it were.
We were questioned and cross-questioned, very much as in a criminal
prosecution, and the Union was characterized as a secret league, an
oath-bound organization, dictating terms to the Public Printer, and
proscribing from work ‘‘honest” men who would not join it. Fear¬
ing that nothing could be accomplished favorable to our cause, we left
the room, very much discouraged. This interview with the Appro¬
priations Committee developed the fact that the fight was against the
Union, and not so much against the rate of wages paid by the Gov¬
ernment.

When the amendment was reported back to the Senate in the sun¬
dry civil appropriation bill we found that the provision for scaling
the rates with those in Philadelphia, Baltimore and Richmond, had,
much to our surprise, been stricken out, which was a point gained for
us. But the objectionable contract feature remained. This was struck
out in open Senate, on a point of order by Mr. Voorhees, which
elicited the following debate :

The amended amendment is as follows:

“ And the Public Printer is directed, in the expenditure of the money herein ap¬
propriated, to employ the highest character of skilled workmen, at the prices now
fixed by law, and in case that he cannot obtain a sufficient supply on these terms,
he is authorized to expend such portion of the appropriation as shall be necessary
for the temporary execution of such work outside of the Government Office.”

Mr. Voorhees. I raise the point of order on the amendment from the
word “ law,” in line 2245, t° th e word “office,” in line 2248. The point of order

is that that changes an existing law and is general legislation. The present law, as
contained in section 3786 of the Revised Statutes, provides as follows :

^Sec. 3786. All printing, binding, and blank-books for the Senate or House of
Representatives and the Executive and Judicial Departments shall be done at the
Government Printing Office, except in cases otherwise provided by law.”

The law I have read provides that all Government printing shall be done at the
Government Printing Office. It also provides that it may be otherwise provided for by
law. That would require new legislation, and that is what this proposes. I call
the attention of the Chair again to the phraseology of this provision :

“ And the Public Printer is directed, in the expenditure of the money herein ap¬
propriated, to employ the highest character of skilled workmen at the prices now
iixed by law—”

That is correct, and that is in accordance with the section of Revised Statutes
which I have just cited. Then follows this provision:

and in case that he can not obtain a sufficient supply on these terms, he is authorized-
to expend such portion of the appropriation as shall be necessary for the 'temporary
■execution of such work outside of the Government Office.”

That is to say, he is authorized by the proposed law to let the work out at con¬
tract.

The President pro tempore. Does it change the present law ?

Mr. Voorhees. Undoubtedly it does.

Mr. Edmunds. Let us see about that.

Mr. Voorhees. Pardon me a moment. The present law is that all Govern¬
ment printing shall be done at the Government Printing Office:

“ All printing, binding, and blank-books for the Senate or House of Representa¬
tives and the Executive and Judicial Departments shall be done at the Government
Printing Office—”

Suppose it stopped there; but it does not; it goes on—

“except in cases otherwise provided by law.”

That is what it is now proposed to do—otherwise provide by law.

Mr. Allison. This is a mere direction as to the appropriation in this bill.
That is all there is about it.

Mr. Voorhees. On the contrary, it confers a power on the Public Printer,
which he does not possess at this time, to let this work out at contract outside of the
Government Office, directly in the teeth of the language of the statute.

Mr. Edmunds. I should like to say a word about this point of order. I en¬
tirely agree that there should be no legislation on an appropriation bill of any kind ;
but I have never carried that idea so far as to hold that Congress in an appropria¬
tion bill could not direct how the money that it appropriated should be expended
either without law before or against any law before. If it merely confines the
direction to the expenditure of the money that it appropriates, it has a right to do it
consistently with our rules, because you can not have an appropriation bill without
appropriating money, and you can not have an appropriation bill appropriating
money without stating the objects for which the money shall be expended.

Therefore it has always seemed clear to me, and that has been the decision of the
Senate for many years before when we have had these questions stoutly contested,
that where the direction (which is legislation, of course, just as the appropriation is)
is confined to the appropriation, to the expenditure of the money appropriated,
which can not be paid out of the Treasury without the consent of Congress, Con¬
gress may say that it shall be paid for moonbeams, if it pleases, although the Con¬
stitution of the United States itself might say that no money should be paid for buy¬
ing moonbeams. Congress by an appropriation may say that no part of this money
shall be paid beyond the extent of $5,000 for the salary of the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court of the United States. That would be a violation of existing law,
but it is the condition upon which the appropriation goes, and therefore it merely
regulates the expenditure of the money. That has always been the rule; and this
appears to do that thing. Run through this bill and all the others we have had,
and in a thousand instances where money is appropriated there is a specific direc¬
tion as to how it shall be expended. That is what this attempts to do. Whether
it is right or wrong in itself on its merits is another question.

Mr. Anthony. The rule forbids general legislation upon appropriation bills ; but
this is not general legislation; it is legislation that is confined to the expenditure of
the money herein appropriated. It does not affect any other appropriation; it does
not repeal any general law. After the money herein appropriated has been ex¬
pended, then the old law remains in force; it is not repealed.

Mr. Garland. I refer to this now more for the purpose of another point that is
coming up after a while in this bill than for this particular point. The question of
order raised by the Senator from Indiana, it seems to me, is sustained by the letter
of the rule in the book and by various rulings of the present incumbent of the chjfir.
The best way to test this is in this way: Suppose now this provision does not exist,
suppose this provision is out, what is the law ? The law is in section 3786, read by
the Senator from Indiana. That is a general law. Does the Chair now compre¬
hend the proposition I am stating ? Have I stated it sufficiently plain ?

The President pro te?npore. Yes, sir.

Mr. Garland. Here is the general law that the work shall be done in the Gov
eminent Printing Office. That is the general law affecting the printing done for all
}he Departments of this Government. That is displaced, then, by these lines that
the Senator from Indiana objects to.

The President pro tempore. The Chair understands the Senator. In the opin¬
ion of the Chair the point is well taken that the Senate can not change the law in
an appropriation of money.

Mr. Allison. The Chair then rules that we can appropriate money, but can not
direct how it shall be spent.

The President/^ tempore. You can not direct that it shali be spent contrary
to the law of the land, which is in this case that the work must be done in the
Government Printing Office. The question is on that part of the amendment not
stricken out by the ruling.

Mr. ALLISON. What words does the Chair strike out, may I ask?

The President pro tempore. They will be read.

The Acting Secretary. In line 2245, after the word “ law,” down to and includ¬
ing the word “ office,” in lirfe 2248, as follows :

“ And in case that he can not obtain a sufficient supply on these terms, he is au¬
thorized to expend such portion of the appropriation as shall be necessary for the
temporary execution of such work outside of the Government Office.”

The President pro teinpore. The question is on the adoption of the residue of
the amendment.

Mr. Allison. Then I move to strike out the remainder of that amendment down
to line 2245, down to the part the Chair has struck out, as follows:

“ And the Public Printer is directed, in the expenditure of the money herein ap¬
propriated, to employ the highest character of skilled workmen, at the prices now
fixed by law.”

The President pro tempore. Is there objection to doing that ? The Chair hears
none ; and that part is stricken out.

Mr. Anthony. Is anything left of the amendment ?

The President pro tempore. The amendment stands beginning with the word
« provided,” in line 2249.

Mr. Anthony. All before that is left out ?

The President pro tempore. Yes, sir.

Mr. Anthony. It might as well be; it was emasculated by the Committee on
Appropriations.

From the first attack upon our Union in the Senate it is plain to us
that it was an attempted war upon labor organizations generally, and
the attempt was made to have the Congress of the United States ini¬
tiate it and back it up with enactments and money.

The amendment was drawn to deceive, a s was shown by the fact
that Senators friendly to us did not see the effect of it until pointed
out by our memorial and personal interviews. The evident idea was
to make it, on its face, appear harmless, and have it run through on
an appropriation bill without its being noticed.

Our explanation of it is this : The lowering of rates to those pre¬
vailing in the other cities named was to cause a strike in the Govern¬
ment Office, and if non-union men enough could not be obtained im¬
mediately to get out the work, then the Public Printer was to give it
out to any one at rates lower than those paid in any union office in
this city. We deem this a fair view of the effect of the amendment.

It seems to us an outrage that we, as one of a chain of labor or¬
ganizations of the country, should be called upon to defend ourselves
against the attacks of Senators of the United States, when the lobbies
of the Capitol of the nation are filled with schemers for big jobs with
money in them, that these same “indignant” Senators not only

•do not protest against, but assist in engineering through. Our or¬
ganization, as we told these Senators, is for mutual protection, eleva¬
tion, and benefit. We violate no law. We have done the work of
the Government for more than half a century, and have never had,
nor do we wish to have, any trouble. We want nothing but what is
just, but we do want to be let alone in the management of, and the
making of rules for, the better regulation of our trade affairs.

If men who are carried into the Senate under the wings of great
corporations insist on “ weeding out” union wage-workers, your com¬
mittee would respectfully recommend that you and all unions, of
whatever branch of industry, should meet them without flinching.

When these Senators found poring in upon them telegrams from
their constituents instructing them not to interfere with the union
printers in the Government Office, they were quick to deny that such
was the intention, as the following debate will show, in which Mr.
Anthony plays the role of trickster in a style both “childlike and
bland

Mr. Miller, of New York. I present a memorial in the form of a telegram, pro¬
testing against the passage of an act to prevent the employment of members of the
Typographical Union at the Government Printing Office, signed by Samuel Gom-
pers, chairman legislative committee of Organized Trade and Labor Unions of the
United States; one signed by Richard Lyon, president of the Buffalo Type Union,
and several others, all of the same nature and all of which are requested to be en¬
tered as memorials. I send them to the Secretary’s desk, and ask their reference
to the appropriate committee.

The President pro tempore. The telegrams will lie on the table for the present.

Mr. Voorhees. I have a telegram in the nature of a petition, which I present.
At a meeting of the Trades and Labor Assembly of Indianapolis, representing the
organized labor of that city and vicinity, they passed a resolution and forwarded it
to me to be presented to the Senate, which I do. I ask that it may be read.

The President pro tempore. It will be read, if there be no objection.

The Acting Secretary read as follows :

Resolved, That the Trades and Labor Assembly of Indianapolis, representing the
organized labor of this city and vicinity, earnestly protest through Senators against
any action forbidding employment of members of Typographical Union in Govern¬
ment Printing Office.

Steve. A. Bedel,
President Trades Assembly.

Mr. Voorhees. I move that it lie on the table.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. Sherman. I have a paper signed by Mr. A. W. Thompson, president of the
Typographical Union of Cleveland, and a similar one from Cincinnati, stating that

a bill is pending here disqualifying union printers from holding situations in the-
Government Printing Office. I am not aware of any such bill or proposition being:
made here.

Mr. Anthony. There is no such bill and no such proposition, and no such in¬
timation has been made in the Senate, or, to my knowledge, in the other branch of
Congress.

Mr. Sherman. Still I present the memorial. The persons who send these dis¬
patches must be under a misapprehension, for I do not know of any such proposition,
as they describe as having been made here.

Mr. Anthony. Nobody proposes to proscribe the members of the Typographical.
Union.

Mr. Voorhees. I am very glad to have the assurance of the Senator from Rhode
Island. I did not know that he intended to make such a statement, and it was not
with the view of an intention of that kind on his part that I presented the resolu¬
tions. It is possible, however, that the trades union at Indianapolis have got such-
an impression at that distance.

Mr. Anthony. The impression is wholly unfounded from anything that I know
of. All that has been proposed is that the Government Printer may be allowed to-
employ non-union compositors as well as union compositors.

Mr. Lapham. I desire to state that I received several telegrams yesterday to the
same import, and I answered the parties that there were no such propositions
pending.

Mr. Hawley. Perhaps as others are doing so I ought to acknowledge the re¬
ceipt of two or three dispatches, but I tpok them as being directed to myself per¬
sonally rather than to be intended for presentation to the Senate.

Mr. Dawes. I am in receipt of a telegram addressed to my colleague and my¬
self from the printers’ union to the same purport; and I hope the statement of the
Senator from Rhode Island will be the answer which ought to be made to that
telegram and will be noticed by the senders.

Mr. Pendleton. I have a similar dispatch from the Typographical Union of Cin¬
cinnati pertaining to the same subject, and I ask that it lie on the table.

The President pro tempore. It will lie on the table.

Mr. Jackson. I have a resolution from the Typographical Union of Memphis,,
Tennessee, addressed to myself and colleague, on the subject just referred to about
the Printing Office. I move that it lie on the table.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. Blair. I have received a telegram from the Philadelphia Typographical.
Union, in which they protest against action of which they are apprehensive.

Mr. Anthony. What is the action ?

Mr. Blair. Action hostile to the Typographical Union. I do not propose to lay
the telegram upon the table. I merely call attention to the fact that I have re¬
ceived the telegram. I do not think it is in a form which makes it proper to be¬
laid on the table of the Senate.

Was there ever bolder effrontery? Look at it! The amendment
offered by this very Senator [Anthony] proposes to introduce non-

union men into the office, and goes farther, as it plainly says that the
rates shall be scaled by those in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Rich¬
mond. In either of those cities the rates are 20 per cent, lower than
in Washington, and in one at least—Richmond—30 per cent, lower
and yet this Senator has the audacity to say that no interference is in¬
tended with union men.

But all this seems to be a lesson for workingmen, and that lesson is
to unite all tradesmen in the United States into leagues or assemblies
for their protection against capitalists, who now dictate legislation
against our interests in the halls of Congress.

This is not a Government printers’ fight; it is more grave than
that; it is capital against labor in these United States, and the sooner
our /ellow-workmen throughout the country realize the fact the bet¬
ter for all of us. It should be carried to the polls in the various States,
and none but workingmen put on guard. This is the only way it
can be met. This outbreak upon us on the floor of the Senate has
already had its effect, in the knowledge of your committee, of making
workingmen forswear allegiance to party, and if this case is properly
published to all labor organizations throughout the country, as it
should be, there can be no doubt of its effect.

It is with a deep sense of gratitude that we should acknowledge and
be thankful for the'unsolicited impromptu remarks in our behalf by
the able Senators, Messrs. Daniel W. Voorhees, of Indiana, and Omar
D. Conger, of Michigan. The attack upon us was made without warn¬
ing, and the remarks of these honorable Senators were made without
time for preparation; so that coming, as they did, on the impulse of
the moment, we see they were the utterances of men who are true
and consistent advocates of the rights of the wage-workers of this
country. We owe them a debt which something more potent than
words may yet, in the hands of the toiling masses, repay. Occasion
makes the man, and in this case our bitter foes in the Senate brought
forward champions of our cause, unsolicited, who “bested” them at
every thrust.

The prompt action of sister unions, in sending telegrams and peti¬
tions, had great weight in preventing hostile legislation. The receipt
of them in the Senate caused a flutter, and coming, as they did, from
constituents, the legislators looked about them to see what the matter
was. We owe our success, in great part, to this assistance, and your
committee take this opportunity to make grateful acknowledgments.

Your committee also think proper to testify to proffers of assistance

by numerous Senators and Members of Congress, and various courte¬
sies extended, too numerous, in fact, to specify.

The assistance of members of other local organizations, and also
members of our own Union, is also gratefully acknowledged.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

A. D. Brock,

Geo. M. Depue,

A. P. Marston,

Geo. J. Webb,

J. P. Hamilton,

W. W. Maloney,
Samuel Haldeman,
Committee.

ADDRESS

BY A JOINT COMMITTEE OP THE PRINTERS 1 AND BOOKBINDERS 1 UNIONS OF
THE CITY OF WASHINGTON,

CCOMPANYING THE

Presentation

of JDanes

RESPECTIVELY TO SENATORS D. W. VOORHEES AND OMAR D.
CONGER, IN APPRECIATION OF THEIR ELOQUENT DE¬
FENSE OF THE RIGHTS OF LABOR UNIONS
IN DEBATE UPON THE FLOOR OF
THE U. S. SENATE.

Senator : We have been commissioned by Columbia Typographical Union, and
by the Bookbinders 1 Union, embracing, with insignificant exceptions, every mem¬
ber of their respective crafts in this District, to formally express to you their deep
and grateful sense of the obligation conferred upon them, and upon workingmen
every where, by your unexpected and unsolicited defense upon the floor of the Senate
of the rights, privileges, and objects of our trades-unions. Made, as it was, upon the
spur of the moment, in the face of an almost universal chorus of misrepresentations,
misstatements, and denunciations, your eloquent arguments and your clear statements
of our purposes and objects prove to us that you have deeply studied questions which
we believe to be of vital moment to the interests of all workingmen, and that you
fully comprehend the fact that the great majority of legislators on the floors of Con¬
gress are either actively hostile or wholly indifferent to the interests of the millions
of their constituents, whose sole capital and only means of livelihood is in the labor
of their hands. You cannot have failed to note the fact that every form of associated
capital—powerful trades-unions, in fact—employing in the aggregate many hundreds
if not thousands of millions of dollars, is, and always has been, efficiently represented
in both branches of the national legislature ; that the statute-books of the nation are
mainly compilations and aggregations of acts intended to protect and encourage the
interests of property and of capital in all their numerous ramifications, while meas¬
ures conceived and contrived in their exclusive interests have at this very session
crowded out all chances of legislation upon subjects of the most important and vital
character, affecting the lives and welfare of the working people of every condition
and degree; and more, sir, when malicious and cruel aspersions, wholly unprovoked
by us, were uttered in the United States Senate upon the actions and motives of the
Printers’ Union—which is but one of hundreds of associated unions of a single national

industry, interlocking with and representing more than a million of skilled workmen
in all the other branches of industry—out of seventy-eight Senators, with a solitaiy
exception, yours was the only voice raised in defense of those whose misfortune it
is that their labor is the only capital not “ protected ” in any schedule of the tariff bill.

Senator, it is difficult for us to find words strong enough to fitly express our sense
of the obligation you have imposed upon us by the brave and manly stand you have
taken in our behalf, and for the watchfulness and skill you have shown in defeating
the cunningly-contrived amendment to the sundry civil bill, engrafted upon it in the
final hours of the session, in palpable violation of an express rule of the Senate, and
which was deliberately concocted, as we are now convinced, to inaugurate an issue
with our union which should result in compliance with the threat of an honorable
Senator, “ in deliberately and ruthlessly weeding out of the Government Printing
Office every member of that union /”

We have therefore been instructed by our respective unions to present you with
this cane, suitably inscribed, as a slight additional but wholly inadequate testimonial
of our appreciation of the services you have rendered us.

One more word, Senator, and we have done. Like all other non-political bodies,,
we number among our members men of both political parties, but upon all questions
affecting our interests as trades-unionists and as workingmen our allegiance far trans¬
cends that to party. On such questions we know no party, but act together as a
unit for our mutual protection and defense. We shall therefore take due measures
to provide that every labor organization in your State and in all the States shall be
fully advised of the action you have taken in our and their behalf; and we further
assure you, Senator, that we shall henceforth watch your career as a public man
with the deepest interest, and that if, in the vicissitudes of party politics, we may be
able to discern a time or place when or where the labors, voices, or votes of work¬
ingmen can be of service to you, we shall not wait to be invited to do our utmost in
your behalf. '

H. S. Linker, President ,
A. Thomas,

H. C. Espey,

E. C. Grumley, President ,
A. D. Brock,

Geo. M. Depue,

A. P. Marston,

Com. of Bookbinders'' Union .

Geo. J. Webb,

J. P. Hamilton,

W. W. Maloney,

Samuel Haldeman,

Com. of Printers ' 1 Union.

Washington, D. C., March 6, 1883.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

Washington, D. C.,

March 7, 1883.

Gentlemen : Your communication of yesterday and the beautiful token of your
regard which accompanied it have been received. This generous action on the part
■of the unions which you represent is so wholly unexpected and unlooked for on my
part that it is difficult in fitting words to make my proper acknowledgments.

The few words which I said in the Senate in behalf of the Printers’ and Book¬
binders’ Unions of Washington were not prompted by a word of solicitation from any
■one. They were simply the long cherished convictions of my mind, and would
have been spoken for any other of the many labor organizations of the country whose
rights were called in question.

The sole capital of the workingmen and women of the United States, and of the
world, is the labor of their hands, guided by their acquired skill, and I maintain that
they have the same right to combine, organize, co-operate, and unite for their pro¬
tection, profit, and advancement which the corporations of millionaires have to exist.
Indeed, their right is not only the same, but their duty to do so is a far higher one.
Disunited, the daily laborers of the world are at the mercy of those powerful com¬
binations of capital which traffic in cheap wages. On the other hand, there is
strength in union. Your unions are founded upon principles of justice, benevolence,
and industry. They have done the printing and binding of this Government for the
last fifty years, and their record of skill and fidelity will last forever. I do not be¬
lieve their enemies will ever prevail against them. I am glad if I have contributed
to their discomfiture.

While I do not feel that my conduct in the Senate called for any recognition at
your hands, yet you have my grateful thanks for your kind words and the handsome
present. 1 shall keep and cherish the cane as a lasting evidence of my good fortune
in securing the favor of the Printers’ and Bookbinders’ Unions of Washington, while
simply discharging a plain duty not only to them but to all laboring people.

I have the honor to be, with the highest respect,

Your friend and obedient servant,

D. W. VOORHEES.

E. C. Grumley, H. S. Linker, and others.

Senate Chamber,
Washington, D. C., March 26, 1883.

Dear Sirs: I have received your very flattering address, accompanied by the
beautiful cane, which you presented to me in behalf of the Columbia Typographical
Union and by the Bookbinders’ Union of the District of Columbia.

Permit me to express through you to the societies you represent my grateful ac¬
knowledgments for this token of their approval, and to yourselves, personally, my
sincere thanks for the kind and graceful manner in which you have conveyed to me
their message.

I had learned beforehand that your unions had been formed for mutual benefit,,
assistance, encouragement, education in your craft, protection to your labor, your
skill, your compensations, and your general well being; that temperance, morality,,
charity, relief of the sick, destitute, and bereaved among the members of your unions
and of their families were prominent and essential elements of your organizations \
that through their influences the burdens of labor would be lightened, the irksome¬
ness of toil be alleviated, the domestic virtues be cultivated, higher degrees of skill
be attained, and the general welfare of your ancient and noble craft be promoted—
purposes and objects that should bring honor, not detraction, applause, not perse¬
cution.

I could sympathize in your praiseworthy purposes and I could share your pride
and pleasure in the gradual accomplishment of your original designs.

The first words that occurred to me to say when I believed you were misunder¬
stood and misrepresented sprang from such views of your organization and its be¬
neficent purposes, and I trust you will believe that my sympathies were with you
because my lot in life was cast among the sons and daughters of toil, amid the de¬
privations of frontier life, amid incessant efforts to improve both mental and physical
conditions, and that I am proud of the advancement and attainments of our people
in all the departments of industry and skill.

Accept, gentlemen, for yourselves and those you represent, my thanks for your
kindness, and believe me,

Most truly yours,

O. D. CONGER.

E. C. Grumley, H. S. Linker, and gentlemen of the committees.