Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "undefined".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    A BILL TO PREVENT PERSONS FROM BEING FORCED TO LABOR ON SUNDAY

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it shall be unlawful for any person or corporation, or employe of any person or corporation in the District of Columbia, to perform any secular labor or business, or to cause the same to be performed by any person in their employment on Sunday, except works of necessity or mercy; nor shall it be lawful for any person or corporation to receive pay for labor or services performed or rendered in violation of this act.ABSB 3.2

    Any person or corporation, or employe of any person or corporation in the District of Columbia, who shall violate the provisions of this act, shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars for very such offense: Provided, however, That the provisions of this act shall not be construed to apply to any person or persons who conscientiously believe in and observe any other day of the week than Sunday as a day of rest.ABSB 3.3

    The bill was referred to the Committee on District of Columbia. That committee is composed of the following-named gentlemen: Mr. Grout, Vermont, chairman; Mr. Atkinson, Pennsylvania; Mr. Post, Illinois; Mr. De Lano, New York; Mr. Snider, Minnesota; Mr. Burton, Ohio; Mr. Moore, New Hampshire; Mr. Hemphill, South Carolina; Mr. Heard, Missouri; Mr. Lee, Virginia; Mr. Compton, Maryland; Mr. Campbell, New York; and Mr. Ellis, Kentucky.ABSB 4.1

    The chairman of the committee referred the bill to the sub-committee on Education, Labor, and Charitable Institutions, which is composed of the following-named gentlemen: Mr. De Lano, chairman; Mr. Moore, Mr. Lee, and Mr. Ellis.ABSB 4.2

    Tuesday, February 18, 1890, the sub committee gave a hearing on the bill. Of the sub-committee there were present, Mr. De Lano, in the cha r, Mr. Moore, and Mr. Ellis.ABSB 4.3

    Besides these there were present of the whole committee, Mr. Grout, Mr. Heard, and Mr. Campbell, making six, in all, of the whole committee present.ABSB 4.4

    In favor of the bill the following persons spoke: Rev. George Elliott, Rev. J. H. Elliott. Mr. H. J. Schulteis—Knight of Labor—and Rev. W. F. Crafts.ABSB 4.5

    In opposition to the bill the following persons spoke: Elder J. O. Corliss, Mr. Millard F. Hobbs, District Master Workman of District Assembly 66, Knights of Labor, and Alonzo T. Jones, editor of the AMERICAN SENTINEL. In addition to this, Prof. W. H. McKee, secretary of the National Religious Liberty Association, submitted a brief.ABSB 4.6

    The arguments in opposition to the bill are here printed in the order in which they were delivered. The points made by those who spoke in favor of the bill are answered in the arguments here given.ABSB 5.1

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents