Press enter after choosing selection

The Laboring Man's Enemy

The Laboring Man's Enemy image
Parent Issue
Public Domain
OCR Text

No law placed upou thestatute books of Michigan in a long time is so greatly opposed by the laboring man as the Baker cons liracv luw The Ann Arbor Courier is eognizant of tbis f act and were it not kuown that the Courier means to support Allen even by blackguarding his opponent, the leading editorial in last weeks Oourier would be regarded as a delibérate attempt tol aliénate f rom Mr. Alleu the vote of every laboring man in this district, ïhe Couriei's commeuts upon the bill are just. ïhe bill in the words of the Uourier is a stab at the rights oE tbe laboiing mau. Mr. Allen was a member of the legislature which iassed that bill. Mr. Allen voted for that bill. Mr. Allen spofce in favor of that bill, even before the amendment was made I whichè.did a little to mitígate the terms of the law. The Courier's articleis designed to praise Mr. Sawyer for uot supporting the bill. it was written with that mteution. Let it be remember that Capt. Allen was opposed to Mr. 8a wy er at nearly eveiy slatje of this bill aud it will be seen how deeply the Courier's strictuies cut. The Courier calis Air. Sawyer iu ita heacüng to iLe article, "Tüe .Laboring Mau's i'riend." Mr. Allen, then, must he the laboiiue: mau's enécny, because he was tryiug to to havealaw made, wbich was astab at their rights. Hut here is the Üouriei's article, word tor word, wiLhout the oinission of a single syllable. Iu 1S77 Mr. F. A. Uaker, a democratie memuer of tüe huuse of repieseniaiives, from Detroit iutroüuced into Lhe legislatuie a bilí whicli provided as lolluws: Sec. l.- Ü any person or persons shall wülfuüy and maliciously ey auy act or by meaus 01 ïutiiniuatiOu, ïinpede or obstruct, except Dy aueprouees ijtiaw, tüe recular operauou anü cuiiauct of tue ousiueos oi any raiuoact eouipany or othcruoiporaiion, tirni oríuui vidual, m iULa scaiu, oro.1 cue reuiar ol auy locumotive, entine, t'reihtor pasaeutförcriiu, 01 any tíucb oompany, or the lauor or uutinubö ol' iiuy suun coi-porai-ion, nrnior individual, hu or tuey stiull oncouvicuonthereot bu puinehod by ïujpribonüieut iu the couuty not more tliau turee nwnlüs, or in the state pnsou lor a penod uot ono year. Etu. Z. - ii two Or morepertioiis shall willl'uUy aud uialiciouyly comimieor cunspite togetücr to oüstruct or impedo by auy act, or by meaus 01 ïutimidation. tile regular operatiou and conduct oí tutí uusiness ot auy rauroad eouipuiiy, or any OLher Corporation, ñrm or ïudiviuuauu tuissuate, or to ïtnpedc, hinder oi obstruct, excepe oy due proeessot lkw. tue regular runningf ol any iocoinotive, engiue, t'reig:litor pastïenger traiu on any railroad, or the lauor aud uubi-iess 01 auy corpoiauou, ftrni or individual, such persons shail, on conviction thereoí, be punïshed by imprlsoament in the couuty jail íor a penod not more thau three months, or in the state pnson, tor a period not exceeding tw vears A. J. Sawyer was also a member of that same house of represeutatives, aud wiieu this bill was put on lts passage, Mr. Sawyer called the atteution of the house lo the tact, that ït persons in the einpioy ot the railroad compauy oi in the employ of any other peisou or coipoiaiion should simply quit sach einpioyinent it would le au act, and thai act might and naturally would impede the ruuuing of traius, aud, if so, the persons so quitting work would be liable to arrest aud imprisoument under the proposed law. He thought the laboriug man ought to have lef t him the poor reniedy tu strike for higher wages, or to strike to redress any other grevanee, eituer singly or by concert of actiou, if they saw tit without beiug hable to be sent to state prisou for it. Aud he therefore proposed the followiug amendment, viz: Sec. 3.- This act shall not bc construed tx apply to caeea oí persons voluntarily quitting tuo employinent of any railroaü coinpauy, or such other Corporation, flrm or individual, whether bv concert oL' action or otherwise. And upon motionof Mr. Sawyer, that amendmeut passed and became a part of the law. ïhis law is fonnd in the compiled lavvs sec. 7274, 7275 and 7276. Cannot the mterest of the taboring men be safely trusted in the hands of one who has thusshown himself mindful of their interests and vyatchful of their rights purely from principie, and before any poluical party had attempted to win the vote of the laboringman, bv declarations and platforms in his interest, and therefore before his action can be said to nave been influenced by any purpose of political preferment or party advautage. We say to the laboring men. it is safer to trust your interests to one who has shown himselt not only of snffliMfint iutftllisrenRn to detect the stab at your rights, but of sufficient ; ability to ward off , the blow, than to l submit them to the care of any untried man. Let the laboring men remember tbat Mr. Allen favored th:s bill from the i íirst, that he spoke iu its favor, svhen i the act of quitting tbe employment of a i railroad would constitute a punishable offeuce, that he voted for it on its final passage, wheu E. i. Norris and A. J. Sawyer the other members from this couuty voted again&t it. This tact is shown on page 232 of the House Journal of 1877. Any man can see the House Journal intheUniversitylibrary and learn the truth of this statement. Kemember these facts, and then as the Courier clearly implies don't vote for the enemy of the laboring man; dou't vote for one who has not either 'sufficieut intelligence to detect the stab at your rights," or "suflicient ability to ward off the blow." The Courier clearly implies that Mr. Allen was "unmindf ui of their (the laboring men's] interest" and not "watcnful of their rights parely from principie." Thi8 article in the Courier is oL recent date. It was published in che issue of Wednesday, OctoberS, 1888. It is a direct stab in the face at Allen. It is a blow which will lose him votes because it tel Is the truth. The truth may have slipped out through the columns of the Courier unaware, but an a3tute reader can see enough between the lines of the Courier article to warrant the assertion that enough is told to secure Allen's defe it. Laboring jnen of Ann Arbor and Ypsilauti! it was under this Baker conspiracy law that Torn Barry was sought t be impnsoned in the Saginaws, from which imprisonment he alone essaped by the shrewdness of lawyers employed forhim by Wellington 11. Buit and paid ior out of Burt's pocket. It was through this law that the railroads and otuer gigantic corpcrations were seekina; to coerce their employees. It was a blow at labor organization. lts repeal was earnestly sought by the labor organizations at the last legislature. You understand also that Allen voted for it. He made a speech on the floor of the house in its favor. Will you vote for Allen, now? Rather let him go into "innocuous desuetude." Rather let himstay at home and serd a man to Congress who is, in the words of the Courier "not only of sufflcient telligence to detect the stab at your rights, buc of suffieient ability to ward ofï tbe blow." A prominent republican leader of this city when spoken to by tbe Akgus, about the bad break of the Courier, said "Oh well! tbere are not enough laboring mea in this district to make very much difference with Allen anyway." Laboring men let Allen feel theweightof your ballots. See ïf it won't make some difference with him.


Ann Arbor Argus
Old News