is essentially a cheap man. I want to say that it is inconsistent to impose duty on the products of Europe and then open our ports so that the men themselves from Europe can do the work here.Speech at Immigration Conference.

President Eliot. The word "protection" is a very much overworked one. Self-protection is a very good idea if it comes from the forces of nature. But the moment that you think it a sound motive in dealing with men who come to this country and are willing to work, you are treading on dangerous ground. This idea that we have to be protected from the people of other countries is not a noble talk and does not commend itself to the American people. We need the best blood and brains of the world. It is not a generous talk that American workmen want others kept out because their wages might be lowered. You may be sure that in the long run this ungenerous method will not prevail. — Speech at Immigration Conference.

Frank K. Foster. A head tax is grotesque, measured by any standard of a free country. Either people have a right to enter, or they have not. If not, the right should not be made purchas able in dollars. Nor is the educational test just. It is unfair to punish men because they lack oppor. tunity in their native land. None more ardently embrace public education than the children of parents who possessed no such advantages. It is a question of the assimilative power of the United States. But the standard of living of the wage. earner must not be permitted to be crushed down by men accustomed to a lower standard of life. I am yet to be convinced, however, that the time has come for us to act the part of dog in the manger toward the white people of the earth. With the Oriental races, however, quite another problem confronts us. The experience with the Chinese on the Pacific coast demonstrates this beyond the shadow of a doubt. The distinction is not one of degree, but of kind-physically, mentally, morally. I have no race prejudice, but each race is an unknown world to the other. The proposition to assimilate the Oriental race is, in my judgment, an economic mistake.

Boston.

- Speech at Meeting of Economic Club,

John Graham Brooks. We agree now that the terrors of 50 years ago about the results of immigration were a mistake. We are to-day assimilating the 1,000,000 immigrants quite as easily as the 30,000 were assimilated 50 years ago. - Speech at Meeting of Economic Club, Boston.

Ng Poon Chew. And you cry that your American manhood and womanhood are at the mercy of the Chinese. There is no sense in it. I am ashamed to answer these allegations. You say he will come here and live merely on rice. Yet rice is the most expensive of cereals. What about the Irishman with his potatoes, the German with his beer and limburger cheese, the Italian with his macaroni? Will they be satisfied with these? Give any nation the opportunity, and it wants the best it can afford to have. Why then keep out the Chinese and let the others in? . . . Brush aside the cobwebs of ignorance and selfishness from your sight and enter the perfect land of brotherhood, and you will see un. der the yellow skin the image of the common Father. -Speech at Meeting of Economic Club, Boston.

Frank K. Foster. - President Eliot should direct his criticism to the cultured representatives of Massachusetts in Congress, who stand sponsor for head taxes; to the senior Senator, who would apply educational tests; not to the labor movement, which,

in Boston at least, by a referendum vote, declined to go on record as in favor of any further restriction. Instead of being timid, unmanly, and mean as to immigration, the American wage-earner has only asked that the men of his own race should come here of their own volition, and he has welcomed them cheerfully and bade them lay hold of the opportunities which he himself has taken advantage of. Speech at Immigration Conference.

Ng Poon Chew. You say we won't assimilate, but you don't give us a chance to assimilate. You say we send our money home. Look at the millions sent to Europe every year, and you never say a word. You say we eat rice. Yes, rice costs six cents a pound, and flour costs two cents and potatoes a half-cent a pound. Rice is the most expensive food cereal there is grown. But the Chinaman, too, likes to eat meat and other things besides rice when he can afford it. You say the Chinaman works for fifteen cents a day. Yes, and the Italian works in his country for seven cents, and the Russian for three cents, and in parts of Germany the farm hands get $6 a month. The exclusion law, on the ground of sociology, is another fallacy. You say the Chinaman has bad habits. Now, give the devil his due. Has the white race all the virtues?- Speech at Meeting of Economic Club, Boston.

President Eliot. — - We're well content with our immigration during the last eight generations. It has been the source of all our civilization, of all our ideals. The only possible doubt of the present as compared with the past is whether the races that are coming now are as sound physically, morally, and mentally as the races from 1620 up to these recent years. There is a good deal of racial preju. dice. There is a good deal of religious prejudice. People ask, "Do you want hordes of Roman Catholics coming to this country?" I say we do if they are as good as the Roman Catholics we have had in the past. - Speech at Meeting of Economic Club, Boston.

--

Oscar C. Straus. — Is it not remarkable that of the three gentlemen, including my humble self, who have addressed the meeting, respectively the presi dent, the first vice president, and I, two were them. selves immigrants [Gompers and Straus] and the third [Belmont] is the son of an immigrant father? It has been said, "In this country we are all immigrants; simply a question of a few years between us." I think there is no difference between us on the question that this country is not to be used as a prison house of the nations of the world. We all agree that there should be some restrictions upon undesirable immigrants. Speech at Immigration Conference.

Frank P. Sargent. - The Commissioner General of Immigration said: “I believe if the government would present to the aliens some information of the resources and advantages of the far West and the South, give them something whereby they might know there were places to work outside the big cities, a large proportion of them would go to the regions where they are needed. I think the time has come when this government should posi tively assert that no convict, no man of immoral character, no man who is escaping punishment that he rightfully deserves, no pauper, no person afflicted with a contagious disease, should be permitted to obtain transportation to America. I further recommend that instead of the great bulk of immigrants coming to New York, efforts should be made to have them enter other ports."- Speech at Immigration Conference.

Broughton Brandenburg. — Says this eminent gentleman (President Eliot): "The contract labor law is not, has not, and never should be enforced," which means, without even drawing a long inference, that he is willing when the coal miners strike this spring, for the bettering of their conditions, that the coal operators shall import from the 25 cent-per-day labor markets of southern Italy, Hungary, and Croatia ship-loads of men to take the places of the men who only want a chance to live decently as every American should. And further he asks: "What race have we digested with greater difficulty than the Irish?" If this profound student of political economy finds that we have had great difficulty in digesting the hard-working, quickwitted, country-loving Irish, who had the advantage of understanding our tongue and of having our sympathy in their troubles, what a national dyspepsia awaits us when the great conglomerate mass of unfortunates, with their hundred tongues and habits of life, from the heart of Europe have been finally gulped down. - Speech at Meeting of Economic Club, Boston.

Seth Low. I remember saying not so many months ago that New York would perish in its own fat if it did not have problems, and this problem of immigration is only one of many that come to our city, that come to urge us on to nobler and better opportunity. . . . Now, another thought that occurs to me is this: What is it that we can offer to these people that they so much need? Is it not the oppor. tunity that will lead to their prosperity? That is almost the only reason why we ought to let these people come if they want to. We can give them, what is far better, an opportunity to make out of themselves all that they are capable of being. What America did for you, and has done for many others in the line of public life, it is doing all the time in every other field of action; it is giving to the writer the best chance to write and be known; it is giving to 'the merchant the best chance to prosper; it is giving to every man the opportunity to freely develop, to develop without the least unnecessary obstruction. That is a great thing to offer to any man - the ability to come and live in a free atmosphere, where conditions help him instead of hinder him that is a privilege and a blessing. That is what America can do for the immigrant. - Speech at Meeting of New York Section, Council of Jewish Women.

Cardinal Gibbons.-There is no doubt that European immigration, when judiciously regu lated, is productive of untold material benefit to the nation. This is evident from the enormous increase of wealth in the United States during the past fifty years, due to the development of our resources and to which the sturdy immigrant has already contributed. From past experience we have happily learned that the immigrant of to-day

becomes in a few years assimilated with the body politic and cherishes as much love and devotion for the land of his adoption as his fellow citizens who are to the manner born.- Letter read at Immigra tion Conference.

Simon Wolf. I have no apologies to offer, no excuses to make for having been born on the banks of the Rhine, reared as a Jew in faith, and thoroughly imbued with the lofty ideals and manly patriotism of the American citizen. . . . No one is in favor of the admission of the cripple, the imbecile, the idiotic, those who have contagious disease, criminals, or anarchists. Those must be excluded, of course, but, on the other hand, those men, women, and children who, although they may come to our shores anæmic, superinduced by persecution and want, or those who come without a large amount of money those certainly should not be excluded for those reasons only. The gentleman who has spoken and who is a member of Congress advocates a head tax of $40. Can there be anything more cruel or criminal? . . . And yet this action is to be taken against people whose co-religionists have contributed their brawn and brain to the prosperity of the United States. For it was a Polish Jew, Haym Solomon, who, in the darkest days of the Revolution, when the soldiers of Washington were starving at Valley Forge, advanced to Robert Morris, the Secretary of the Treasury, $300,000, and which has never been repaid, to aid in securing the liberties we all enjoy... Naturalization has been made too cheap and easy. No State Court should be allowed to issue naturalization papers; the Federal Courts only should be permitted to do this sacred and important function. . . . No one is more alive to the necessity of regulating the immigration question and bringing to this country first-class immigrants than those who have been immigrants themselves. . . . You can trust the immigration population of our country. You can be assured that the children who go to our schools and universities are proving, and will continue to prove, to be of the best mental, moral, and physical stock. The leading newspapers of our country have been complimenting especially the Jewish children for the admirable progress they are mak ing along the lines of intelligence and educational ability. Do not make the hardships of the deserving immigrant more intolerable. Let well enough alone. This country has mainly been made what it is by the immigrant, and will continue to be the home of the oppressed and the asylum of the persecuted, and while all of us must naturally think of those that are with us to see to their elevation and their happiness, there is no reason to be restric tive or in fear of the immigrant for what he has done in the past and which he will continue to do in the future. Speech at Immigration Confer

ence.

Witnesses - Trade Unions. In the recent case of People v. Cowan, 82 Pac. 339, the Court of Appeal, Second District, California, held that the membership of a witness in the same labor union as the party for whom he is testifying may be shown to affect his credibility.

Employers' Liability - Defective Appliances. In the recent case of Feeney v. York Mfg. Co., 75 N. E. 733, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that an employer is liable for injuries to an employee caused by a defect in a temporary as well as a permanent appliance. It appeared in the case

that a temporary staging collapsed because con structed of insuflicient materials, though under Revised Laws, c. 106, § 71, it formed no part of the permanent

ways, works, and machinery of the defendant. The Court held that an employee is protected where an unsafe appliance is used, even though it be only of a temporary character.

Child Labor - Employer's Liability. The Supreme Court of New York held in the recent case of Lee v. Sterling Silk Mfg. Co., 47 Misc. 182, that the violation of the statute (Labor Law, § 70), which provides that a child under 14 years of age shall not be employed in any factory, makes the employer liable, as matter of law, for injuries to a child under 14, so employed, by machinery in the factory of em ployer, and the questions of the child's contributory negligence or assumption of risk of the employment cannot enter into the case.

Wages of Laborer Constitutional Law. The Supreme Court of Alabama held in the case of Richardson v. Kaufman, 39 Sou. 368, that, under Code 1896, § 2038, as amended by Acts 1898-99, p. 37, declaring that wages of resident laborers for personal services to the amount of $25 a month shall be exempt from garnishment for the collection of debts, laborers' wages to the amount specified are exempt from garnishment, notwithstanding a waiver by the debtor of his exemptions; that such section was not unconstitutional by reason of the fact that the Constitution allows a debtor to waive his exemptions; that such section is not invalid as impairing the obligations of contracts made after its enactment.

Eight-hour Law- Constitutionality. In the recent case of ex parte Kair, 82 Pac. 453, the Supreme Court of Nevada held that, on an attack on the constitutionality of Act Feb. 23, 1903 (St. 1903, p. 33, c. 10), imposing a penalty on any one working more than eight hours a day in any mine, smelter, or mill for the reduction of ores, on the ground that such labor was not dangerous to health, evidence that particular reduction works and mills, including the one in which petitioner worked, were healthful, as distinguished from the healthfulness of mills in general throughout the country, was inadmissible, and that this Act, regulating the hours of labor in mines and ore mills, etc., is not unconstitutional as depriving the miner of liberty and property without due process of law.

Contempt Strike — Injunction - Unlawful Persuasion. In the recent case of The I. & E. Greenwald Co. v. Iron Molders Union et al., it appeared that defendants violated the Superior Court of Cincinnati, O., injunction, by inducing employees of the plaintiff company to break their contract with plaintiff and leave their employ, by pay. ing said employees a sum of money and giving them railway tickets for themselves and wives to another city. The Court held that to seduce plaintiff's employees for the purpose of aiding the strike was directly to hinder and obstruct and unlawfully to meddle with plaintiff's business; that so called "persuasion" with this object in view is clearly unlawful persuasion, and that it is a farce to characterize as " persuasion" the act of enticing men away under such circumstances by the pay

ment of money with the threat of the union in the background.

Injunction Trade Unions. The Supreme Court of Mississippi held, in the recent case of Curphey & Mundy et al. v. Terrell et al., 39 Sou. 477, an appeal from the Chancery Court of Warren County, where plaintiffs brought suit against defendants for an injunction restraining them from interfering with the labor and business of firm, and the Court dissolved the injunction as to some of the defendants, that where certain labor unions ordered a strike against complainants, and they sued for an injunction preventing interference with their business, but the suit was instituted against defendants as individuals, and all the members of the unions were not joined, and it was not alleged that defendants jointly conspired or combined to commit the trespasses and injuries complained of, it was proper for the chancellor to deal with each defendant as an individual and decide on the testimony relating directly to him.

Master and Servant― Non-compliance with Fac tory Law Assumption of Risk. In the recent case of Hall v. West & Slade Mill Co., 81 Pac. 915, it appeared that plaintiff employed in the lumber mill of defendant was required to work between two parallel sets of rollers, one of which, composed of what is known as "live rollers," was kept in motion by the motive power of the mill, by means of a steel shaft on the side next to where plaintiff worked. The shaft was uncovered and unprotected in violation of a statute requiring operators of mills to place safeguards over shaftings and other dangerous devices. While performing his regular duties, plaintiff's clothing caught on the shaft, drawing him down upon it and permanently injuring him. The Supreme Court of Washington held that defendant was liable, not having complied with the statutory requirements, and could not avail itself of the doctrine of assumed risk.

Illegality of Closed Shop - Collective Bargaining - Agreements. In the recent case of Jacobs v. Cohen, 183 N. Y. 207, the Court of Appeals of New York reversed the judgment of the Appellate Di vision of the Supreme Court (Jacobs v. Cohen, 99 App. Div. 481).* In the case before the Court it appeared that a contract was entered into between the Protective Coat Tailors and Pressers Union, Local 55, of the United Garment Workers of America (Meny Jacobs, President) and Morris and Louis Cohen of the firm of M. Cohen & Son whereby the firm was prohibited from employing labor not belonging to the union, also, from employing members of the union not in good stand. ing. A promissory note was given by the employers as collateral security, to be applied as liquidated damages for the violation of such contract. The Court held (by vote of four to two) that the contract was legal and not violative of public policy, and that the promissory note was a valid and enforceable instrument.

Strike- - Contempt — Conspiracy. In the recent case of Franklin Union No. 4 v. People, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, held that irregu larities and errors in proceedings antecedent to contempt proceedings are not available as a defense

to the contempt proceedings, where the court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject-matter; that while a corporation can not be attached or imprisoned it may nevertheless be guilty of a contempt in disobeying or violating an order or decree of court, as it might be guilty of a tort or crime, and it may be fined therefor and its property sequestered; that under the evidence in this case there is no room for reasonable doubt that the union was a party to the conspiracy charged in the bill, and that the picketing was established and continued under the direction of plaintiff in error through the officers and strike committees, and that it must, therefore, be held responsible for the illegal acts in violation of the injunction disclosed by the evidence.

Injunctions - Boycotts. In the recent case of Jensen v. Cooks and Waiters Union of Seattle et al., 81 Pac. 1069, it appeared that Jensen, who conducted a café in Seattle, refused to discharge an employee, upon demand of Cooks and Walters Union, who was not a member of the union and who refused to join, whereupon the union ordered a strike. Pickets were maintained in and about the entrance of café and interfered with its patrons. The Supreme Court of Washington held that while one person, or many persons jointly, may, if they are not under contract obligations to the contrary, quit the service of another at any time, and may lawfully state, either publicly or privately, the grievances felt by him or them giving rise to their conduct, yet such person or persons having no legitimate interests to protect may not ruin the business of another by maliciously inducing his patrons and other persons not to deal with him, and by congregating about the entrance of his place of business, and there, either by per suasion or force, preventing his patrons and the public at large from entering his place of business or dealing with him; and their acts in so doing may be prevented by injunction.

The

Minor Employee- Dangerous Machinery. Supreme Court of Indiana held, in the case of Laporte Carriage Company v. Sullender, 75 N. E. 277, that the mere allegation that the plaintiff was under 16 years of age and that the defendant made no inquiry as to his age, his knowledge of the work, nor his physical ability, and was not informed concerning the same, did not charge such a violation of Burns Ann. St. 1901, § 7087 Cb., as to make the employer liable on that account for injuries suffered by the boy in getting hurt by the machinery; that a breach by the boy's employer of his legal duty to instruct him concerning the dangers of the machinery was not charged by merely averring his age and that he was not instructed, without alleging that he was ignorant or inexperienced in regard thereto; and that the mere allegation that an emery belt in the defendant's factory was used in polishing metal and that particles of the metal flew into the plaintiff's eye when he was working near it did not charge that the belt was such dangerous machinery and so capable of being operated with guards upon it as to impose on the employer the duty of guarding it under said § 7087 Cb.

Trade Unions— Strike- Conspiracy — Picketing. The Supreme Court of Indiana held, in the case of Karges Furniture Company v. Amalgamated Wood Workers' Local Union No. 131 et al., 75 N. E. 877, that a trade union, consisting of an unincorporated association of artisans, cannot be sued in its com

pany name, in the absence of statute authorizing it, but must be sued in the name of all the individual members thereof; that where a labor union, consisting of 600 members, by majority vote inaugurated a strike and agreed by peaceable means to induce employees in such factories, not members of the union, to become such and strike, in order to assist the strikers, but it was expressly voted that under no circumstances should any striker endeavor, by any violence or intimidation, to influence the acts of any employee for complainant or others, the combination of such employees to strike did not constitute a conspiracy; that the fact that certain individuals, part of whom were members of the union, used violence and abuse to induce non-union men to stop working for the plaintiff, and were discountenanced in so doing by the union as a body, did not entitle complainants to an injunction against the union; that members of a trade union, consisting of employees under no contractual restraint may lawfully combine and by prearrangement quit their employment in a body, to secure from their employers an advance in wages, shorter hours, or any other legitimate benefit, though they know at the time that such action will be attended with injury to their employers' business, provided the strike is carried on in a lawful manner, and free from force, intimidation, and false representation; and that a trade union during a strike may appoint pickets or a committee to visit the vicinity of the factories to take note of the persons employed, and secure by lawful means their names and places of residence, for the purpose of peaceful visitation and solicitation by means other than threats, intimi dation, etc.

Injunction-Picketing. The United States Cir. cuit Court, Southern District, Iowa, E. D., held in the recent case of Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fé Railway Co. v. Gee et al., 139 Fed. 582, that the maintenance of a system of picketing by men out of employment by reason either of a strike or lockout, the purpose and effect of which is to annoy and intimidate men working for their former employers by keeping a picket line of men around or at the approaches to the places where such work. men are employed, who obstruct the approaches, and use threatening or profane and vulgar language toward the workmen, is unlawful, and in violation of the rights of the workmen and their employers, and of an injunction against acts of intimidation toward such workmen, although no actual violence is used. Such picketing, when maintained for a year, cannot be justified on the ground that its purpose is to persuade the workmen to quit their employment or to ascertain who such workmen are.

Judge McPherson in rendering his opinion said in part: "The rights of both the company and employees as to severing relations were and are reciprocal. The company can discharge employees at will and employees can quit the company at will" (in lieu of any contractual restraint). "The company has precisely the same right to employ non-union men or union men and the absolute legal and moral right to have its rights and prop. erty and its employees protected when it does elect for any reason to employ non-union men; and when such rights are violated the company has the right to seek and obtain an injunction against the repetition of such violations. All the courts, Eng. lish and American, Federal and State, so hold. These questions are not debatable. . . . There is and can be no such thing as peaceful picketing, any

...

more than there can be chaste vulgarity, or peaceful mobbing, or lawful lynching. When men want to converse and persuade, they do not organize a picket line. When they only want to see who are at work, they go and see, and then leave, and disturb no one physically or mentally. But such picketing as is displayed in the case at bar by the evidence does, and is intended to, annoy and intimidate. The argument seems to be that anything short of physical violence is lawful. One man can be intimidated only when knocked down. But the peaceful, law-abiding man can be and is intimidated by gesticulations, by menaces, by being called harsh names, and by being followed or compelled to pass by men known to be unfriendly."

Employers' Association - Contracts. In the recent case of City Trust, Safe Deposit & Surety Co., of Philadelphia, v. Waldhauer, 95 N. Y. Supp. 222, before the Supreme Court, Trial Term, New York County, it appeared that employers of labor in the building trades formed an organization to secure stability in conditions and certainty with respect to the performance of contracts by obtaining an agreement with their employees for arbitration instead of sympathetic strikes. Defendant, an em ployer, joined the Building Trades Employers' Association and gave a surety company a bond in favor of the association to obey its regulations and orders. The association, endeavoring to provide against strikes, arranged with the men entering their employment to sign an agreement to arbitrate their differences, and sent to each member a resolution that no members should employ workmen who had not signed. Defendant laid off his men for three weeks, when he took them back without consent of the association, and without asking them whether they had signed the arbitration agreement, and the association demanded payment of the surety on his bond because thereof. The Court

held that employers have a right to organize and refuse employment for the purpose of accomplishing any lawful object; that the order requiring defendant to abstain from employing workmen who had not signed the arbitration agreement was lawful and within the fair import of the constitu tion of the association, so that he was liable to the surety company, because of its payment of the penalty accruing from the breach of the bond. The Green Bag, Boston, January, 1906, comments upon the case as follows: In Curran v. Galen, 152 N. Y. 33, it was held that an agreement between a labor union and an employers' union that the latter should employ only union men is illegal. The pres ent case holds that an agreement between members of an employers' association to employ only work. men who sign an arbitration agreement is legal.

Employers' Association- · Conspiracy — Injunc. tion. In the recent case of Employing Printers Club et al. v. Doctor Blosser Co., 50 S. E. 353, the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the judgment of the lower Court for the Doctor Blosser Co. It appeared that the Club formed a combination among the employing printers to control and fix the price of printing done in the city of Atlanta, and because the Company refused to affiliate with the Club they called out Company's employees, which rendered it impossible for the Company to conduct its business. Some of the employees re. turned to work and then unions refused to call a strike in company's shop, whereupon the members of the Club declared "open shop." At this juncture of affairs Company petitioned for an injunction and brought action for damages. The Court held that a combination of two or more persons to injure one in his trade by inducing his employees to break their contract with him, or to decline to longer continue in his employment, is, if it results in damage, actionable.

Labor Digest from the President's

Message.

Child Labor.

I renew the recommendation I made in my last annual message for an investigation by the Depart. ment of Commerce and Labor of general labor conditions, especial attention to be paid to the conditions of child labor and child labor legislation in the several States. Such an investigation should take into account the various problems with which the question of child labor is connected. It is true that these problems can be actually met in most cases only by the States themselves, but it would be well for the nation to endeavor to secure and pub. lish comprehensive information as to the conditions of the labor of children in the different States, so as to spur up those that are behindhand, and to secure approximately uniform legislation of a high character among the several States. In such a Republic as ours, the one thing that we cannot afford to neg.

lect is the problem of turning out decent citizens. The future of the nation depends upon the citizenship of the generations to come; the children of to-day are those who to-morrow will shape the des tiny of our land, and we cannot afford to neglect them. The Legislature of Colorado has recommended that the national government provide some general measure for the protection from abuse of children and dumb animals throughout the United States. I lay the matter before you for what I trust will be your favorable consideration.

Hours of Labor of Railroad Employees. The excessive hours of labor to which railroad employees in train service are in many cases subjected is also a matter which may well engage the serious attention of the Congress. The strain, both mental and physical, upon those who are engaged in the movement and operation of railroad trains under modern conditions is perhaps greater than that which exists in any other industry, and if there