———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
| Date | Bill | Summary | Page | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| November 15, 1937 | S. 2475 | Wage and Hour Legislation | 12 to 16 | (82 Cong. Rec. 12, 1937) |
| November 15, 1937 | S. 2475 and H. 7200 | Petitions, Etc. | 21 | (82 Cong. Rec. 21, 1937) |
| November 17, 1937 | S. 2475 | Wage and Hour Legislation | 99 | (82 Cong. Rec. 99, 1937) |
======================================================================
Page
12 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -
HOUSE November 15,
1937 (82 Cong. Rec. 12,
1937)
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
WAGE AND HOUR LEGISLATION
Mr. LAMNECK. Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying that this session of Congress is one of the most important we have ever attended.
Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a bill on hours and wages which I intend to offer as a substitute for Senate 2475 if it is urged for passage.
During the short vacation that has been granted to the legislative branch of Government I have been visiting with the people of my own district and confonrring with them concerning the various proposals for the remaking of America.
I find that in the Twelfth District of Ohio the laws of Nature have been neither amended nor repealed. [Applause.] The sun continues to rise in the east and set in the golden west.
In my endeavors to learn the truth I have not limited my sources of information to political couriers, chosen for their ability to bring in joyful news, but I have talked with the captains of hundreds and the captains of tens, with the privates in the ranks, with those honestly seeking the more abundant life. Yes; I have even talked with the forgotten man, and I find a plague of fear of what the day may bring forth. There is uncertainty, inquiry, and doubt as to the wisdom of the many things we have done and there is great apprehension of some of the things we are threatening to do.
On my return to Washington I know my people want me to oppose, with all the ability I can command, any scheme involving the attempted surrender of their inalienable rights or the transfer of legislative power or duties to boards or commissions who are controlled in most part by persons outside the legislative branch of government.
We have witnessed during the past 2 months one of the most drastic declines in the securities market of this country which has ever been known, at least within my experience. It reached its height with dramatic swiftness and it came apparently without any of the usual warning signals. There seems to be considerable difference in opinion of what really caused this terrific deflation, but I feel reasonably certain that I know personally at least one important factor which has contributed to the unfortunate result. That factor is the unreasonable and unnecessary meddling of the United States Government into the affairs of American industry. Here are some of the things which are hampering business: The
[PAGE 12
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
[PAGE 13]
restraints upon freedom of action; the regulations upon the daily conduct of ordinary business affairs; the constantly increasing burden imposed by complicated and unsound tax laws; the uncertainty of the point at which the next governmental interference may strike. As a result businessmen generally feel that the long recognized principles of sound business conduct can no longer be counted upon to produce the usual results. All of these elements have gradually combined to produce a state of mind on the part of everyone engaged in industry in this country which makes for fear, uncertainty, lack of confidence, and a reluctance to make plans or commitments for orderly progress in the future. These considerations are fundamental and until such time as they are recognized and taken full account of we cannot expect any continuity of progress or development in either our social or economic affairs.
It is my considered judgment that the things which I have just mentioned are the prime causes of the recent fall in the securities markets and whatever slump in business we may now face.
There seems to be a program outlined in this country that it is possible to improve the condition of the underprivileged by the process of regulating, restricting, chastising, and generally detracting from the other members of society.
I want, at this point, to stigmatize as un-American any process or any propaganda which deliberately encourages class hatred and class distinction. The fact of the matter is that the well-being of those who have not is interwoven with the well-being of those who have. Exactly to the extent that impositions are heaped upon those members of society who control the destinies of the industry of this country, to that same extent will the men and women who look to industry for their daily bread and butter suffer. This principle is a matter of ordinary common sense; it is based on historical experience.
It is true now and always will be true, unless we are prepared to go to the extent of actually and openly appropriating without compensation the property of those who have for the benefit of those who have not. Such a step, of course, is bolshevism, communism, and utter anarchy. I, for one, do not believe that the country is as yet prepared for any such form of government or lack of government. Short of this, I reiterate that to the extent to which you injure business, whether it be directly in dollars and cents or whether it be in depriving it of the desire, willingness, and incentive to go forward to that same extent, you injure the very people for whose supposed benefit the thing is being done. If you were to look for the best way possible to increase the relief rolls in this country, no better way could be found. Let no theorist tell you differently. This is the hard, cold truth, whether you are a reformer or a reactionary, whether you like it or whether you do not.
I now desire to speak briefly on Senate bill 2475, the so-called wage and hour bill, which is now held up in the Rules Committee. I have read this bill carefully and I hope the other Members of this House have done likewise. If they have not I earnestly urge them to do so. I a1so wish it were possible, although I know it is not, for all the men and women in this country who are engaged in industrial enterprise, especially the little fellow, to become familiar with the contents of this document. If this were possible, I make the direct prediction to you that the Members of this Congress would be so overwhelmed with almost universal indignant protests that this bill would receive no further serious consideration. I have suggested to you that the country is weary and sick of governmental interference, that business and the country is suffering as a result of it. I say to you now that if the administration's bill is passed, all of the interference which has heretofore taken place combined will seem mere child's play compared to the consequences of the enactment of S. 2475. There is set up under this bill a scheme so complex, so entirely impractical of administration, so fraught with certainty of dangerous—not to say irksome and expensive:—meddling on the part of a Government commission into the a1Iairs of business, both great and small, that the good Lord himself could not carry out the job satisfactorily if it were imposed upon Him.
The bill in its present form contains over 47 pages of printed matter. It is impossible for me within the limited time at my disposal to even scratch the surface of its numerous provisions. I will, however, select a few of them at random to give you a general idea of the extent to which it goes.
Under part IV, "General administrative provisions", section 9, entitled "A labor standard order", subsection (4), I quote:
Subject to the provisions of this act—
The Board—
may classify employers, employees, and employments within the occupation to which such order relates according to localities, the population of the communities in which such employment occurs, the number of employees employed, the nature and volume of the goods produced, and such other differentiating circumstances as the Board finds necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purposes of such order, and may make appropriate provision for different classes of employers, employees, or employment; but it shall be the policy of the Board to avoid the adoption of any classification which effects an unreasonable discrimination against any person or locality and to avoid unnecessary or excessive classifications and to exercise its powers of classification only to the extent necessary or appropriate to accomplish the essential purposes of the act.
How would any of you gentlemen like to undertake the job of classifying all of the employers, employees, and employments in this country in the manner indicated by this section?
Let me refer you to section 11 of the same part entitled "Advisory Committees on Fair Labor Standards with Respect to Wages and Hours":
SEC. 11. Before making an order under section 4 establlshlng a minimum wage or a maximum workweek, or both, for employees in any occupation, the Board shall appoint an advisory committee or committees to investigate and report upon the value of the services rendered by employees in such occupation or the number of hours of employment reasonably suitable to the nature of the work therein, or both, as the case may be. Each such advisory committee shall be composed of an equal number of persons representing the employers and the employees in such occupation, and of not more than three disinterested persons representing the publlc, one of whom shall be designated as chairman. Persons representing the employers and employees shall be selected so far as practicable from nominations submitted by employers and employees, or organizations thereof, in such occupation. Two-thirds of the members of such adVisory committee shall constitute a quorum and the recommendations or report of such committee shall require a vote of not less than a majority of all its members. Members of an advisory committee shall be entitled to reasonable compensation to be fixed by the Board for each day actually spent in the work of the advisory committee in addition to their reasonable and necessary traveling and other expenses and shall be supplied with adequate stenographic, clerical, and other assistance.
What do you think of this job and how much money do you think such a procedure will cost the taxpayers of this country? And who do you think would constitute the three "public" members of the Board? If you want to know, just look at the appointments to boards and other groups designed to deal with business that have been appointed so far. Are they composed of persons experienced in business? Is the membership drawn from the ranks of those who have met pay rolls and encountered other everyday business problems in the past? The type of citizen who approaches a businessman's problem with sympathy, understanding, and a spirit of helpfulness? No, indeed. These jobs have been filled since 1932 chiefly by college professors, fledgling lawyers, and half-baked theorists who are without practical business experience and with no intention of getting any, except at the expense of the Government and industry.
Section 12, under the same part entitled "Investigations; Testimony":
SEC. 12. (a) The Board, in its discretion, may investigate and gather data regarding the wages, hours, and other conditions and practices of employment in any occupation subject to this act
And so forth. Not only is the job here involved colossal but consider the possible hardship upon the business enterprises of this country inherent in this provision. Think of the time, trouble, and expense involved on the employer's part in preparing this data.
[PAGE 13
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
[PAGE 14]
Section 14 (a), under the same part entitled "Records; Labels," note the following language:
The presence of any employee at the place of employment at any other hours than those stated in the schedule applying to him shall be deemed prima facie evidence of violation of such order, unless such employee is receiving the overtime rate provided in section 6 (b).
Think over the implications of this and the questions arising from its attempted enforcement.
Consider subdivision (c) of the same section:
No person other than the producer shall be prosecuted for the transportation, shipment, delivery, or sale of unfair goods who has secured a representation in writing from the person by whom the goods transported, shipped, or delivered were produced, resident in the United States, to the effect that such goods were not produced in violation of any provision of this act.
I am not sure that I understand this correctly, but as I do understand it I should like those of you who have had any practical business experience to put yourselves in the place of the person or corporation transporting, shipping, or selling goods who in order to secure immunity from prosecution must secure a statement of the character indicated from the person who produced the goods. Also put yourself in the place of the producer of the goods who is requested to make the statements. In either capacity, how do you think the efficiency of your operation would be affected by the requirements of this section?.
Consider section 18 (a) of the same part entitled "Reparation; Release of Goods":
SEC. 18. (a} If any employee is paid by his employer a wage lower than the applicable minimum wage required to be paid by any provision of this act or of a labor standard order, or required to be paid to make it lawful under this act for goods in the production of which such employee was employed to be shipped in interstate commerce or to compete with goods shipped in interstate commerce, such employee shall be entitled to receive as reparation from his employer the full amount of such minimum wage, the amount actually paid to him by the employer.
What do you think of the potentialities of this for stirring up strife between employer and employees? What a ripe field of investigation for the shyster lawyer! Cannot you imagine how the tired businessman will be helped in the day-to-day conduct of his business and business conditions in the country improved?
Consider subsection (c) of section 8, part III, which section is entitled "Protection of Interstate Commerce from Effect of Substandard Labor Conditions." The significance of this subsection may be overlooked if the details of this bill are given only such consideration as the powers back of it are pleased to allow. It seems to be clearly foreseen that the operation of this particular legislation may result in an increase of the cost of necessities to the consumer to a point where foreign manufacturers may find it profitable to attempt to seize the American market, and, in order to forestall or prevent any such calamity, the bill provides that the protective-tariff principle may be invoked.
Shades of William McKinley and the "horse and buggy" days! We are asked to enact legislation which its proponents suspect will increase the cost of living, will imperil the home market, and then, in order to save us from our own folly, we are asked to borrow from our traditional political adversaries their panacea for ills of our own creation. It may be suspected that the all-wise are planning; by this maneuver, to enlist the support of the old-time, stand-pat Republican Members of Congress for the support of this measure, and are laying the groundwork to put upon their shoulders the blame for the inevitable failure of this noble experiment.
I could go on almost indefinitely along this line, but I think I have given you enough examples, taken absolutely at random, to make the point which I have in mind. It has been alleged that this bill is the proud handiwork of Messrs. Corcoran and Cohen. Whether it be or not, I am personally not particularly concerned. However, I will say this about its authorship: The bill itself proclaims to the high heavens the work of men who have had no practical experience whatever in the administration of a going business, whose ideas, how ever carefully elaborated they may be, are entirely theoretical and utterly impractical. Their handiwork, if enacted into law, would create a chaos in business never yet known to us, not even in the N. R. A. days. It sets an all-time high in crackpot legislation, which, in the light of certain measures passed during the last 5 years, is going some.
Now, what do I propose to do about all of this? Well, I hope to suggest a simple, workable substitute for his hodgepodge bill of doubtful, or at least unidentified parentage, which has been dropped into the hopper.
Let me make it very clear that I am not opposed to the social theory which condemns unduly low wages and unduly long hours. No decent American citizen can take exception to this attitude. What I do take exception to is any approach to a solution of this problem which is utterly impractical, which in its operation would be much more destructive than constructive to the very purposes which it is designed to serve, and which is intrinsically subversive of the fundamental principles of American democracy. The difficulty is that fear of criticism has caused many Members of Congress who understand the fallacy of this type of legislation to fail to voice their opposition. When one has the temerity to oppose such half-baked, impractical, and unworkable legislation as Senate bill 2475, he is immediately labeled as a heartless foe of the worker, bent on depriving him of the actual necessities of life. It is lack of courage to face such a false charge and stand up for common-sense legislation that causes all too many Members of both Houses to enact into law legislation of the ridiculous character of this wage and hour bill.
I now submit my answer in a form which I believe will accomplish the desired purpose to the extent that it is sound, helpful, and constructive, without at the same time giving industry another jolt from which to recover.
Senate bill 2475 propsses to set up a new commission for the purpose of making effective and administering the wages and hours proposal. It takes forty-odd pages of printed matter to describe the purposes and duties of this new body, with all its attachments, commissions, committees, attorneys, clerks, expenses, and appurtenances. All this, mark you, is to be paid for by the taxpayer in addition to all the other going governmental bodies at a time when we are supposed to be retrenching. I had thought that we already had enough commissions to run several governments. I had also understood that we were being asked under other pending administration legislation to empower the President to take drastic steps to reorganize the Federal Government departments and bureaus in the interest of speed, efficiency, and curtailment of expenses. It appears now, however, that we must have still another commission immediately. This present special session of Congress has been deemed necessary for the purpose of creating this commission, among other things.
I stand here to tell you gentlemen that if this new commission ever comes into existence and tackles the job imposed upon it by the forty-odd pages of printing it will put to shame in size, complexity, and cost of upkeep all of the other commissions together which we have been asked to create and have created during the last several sessions of Congress.
Considering these facts, I ask myself, What is the real nature of the objective we are being required to seek, and will it not somehow fit into the scheme of existing Government things? If I can find the answer to this, I will be really cooperating with the President in his broad, declared objectives. The plain answer, it seems to me, is this: On analysis, the basis upon which we can object to and get at the payment of oppressive wages, the maintenance of excessive hours of work, and improper child labor is that these practices, insofar as they affect interstate commerce, put a burden upon such commerce by creating competitive conditions which are unfair to other business paying a decent wage, working decent hours, and not employing child labor. In other words, what these "oppressors" are doing amounts to an unfair trade practice, an unfair method of competition in commerce. Then it immediately becomes apparent that we already have a commission well qualified, well equipped and seasoned,
[PAGE 14
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
[PAGE 15]
one whose very function it is, by the law of its creation, to put a stop to unfair methods of competition in commercethe Federal Trade Commission. The machinery is set up, the trained personnel is there, and the Commission itself by its statesmanlike conduct of its business over a period of years has inspired general confidence in its administration of restrictive legislation. In passing I cannot forbear to say that in this respect the impression which it has created throughout the country is in marked contrast to the feelings which have been experienced and expressed about one of our more recent creations, the National Labor Relations Board. So, gentlemen, I have prepared and introduced a very simple bill covering about three pages of printing. This bill defines what is meant by oppressive wages, oppressive hours of work, and oppressive child labor. It denominates these practices as unfair methods of competition in commerce and expressly states that in so doing it is simply giving name to some of the practices referred to by section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which states:
SEC. 5. That unfair methods of competition in commerce are hereby declared unlawful.
Having thus placed the subject matter of the bill directly within the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission, most of the further details of administration are automatically taken care of by the existing provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The limited respects in which these provisions need supplement for present purposes I have undertaken to cover by special provision. For instance, the determination of what will constitute oppressive wages or oppressive work hours or oppressive child labor is for the Commission to make in each case, just as it is presently deciding every day whether other trade practices are unfair or constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce. But in view of the far-reaching effect and the novel · character of the determination here involved, it bas seemed to me wise to afford the Commission some lead from which to work. Consequently there have been specified a number of simple, well-understood considerations which shall be definitely taken under advisement in reaching determinations as to the oppressive nature of labor conditions.
In my opinion, the ultimate solution of the problem with which we are dealing is for each State to legislate in respect of labor conditions for its own industries of which it bas firsthand intimate knowledge. One of the purposes of my bill is to encourage by its terms or implications this decentralizing process. In this regard it is in exact opposition to the principles of the administration's bill which will serve to increase the existing centralization of authority in the Federal Government even beyond its present peak.
Outside of a few simple enforcement provisions, I have now given you the gist of my proposal I have no particular pride of authorship, but I do sincerely believe that if we are to have legislation on this much-mooted question it offers a workable basis of operation, which I cannot say for the administration's bill now pending. One more contrast. My bill will operate on the same basis as does the present Federal Trade Commission Act, that is against individual offenders unless there are groups in collusion. Under the administration bill there is to be a blanket application to "occupations," which is given a broad interpretation, of standards of minimum wages and maximum hours. It apparently is not designed to take any cognizance of units in an industry or of geographical divisions. Thus, those differentials which have developed in this country and in the various industries over a period of years not by arbitrary action but through the operation of natural economic laws, are to be utterly ignored and all units in an industry and all sections of the country are to be pressed together in the same strait jacket. On this subject, I have reason to think that my colleagues in this Chamber from south of the Mason and Dixon's line entertain rather strong ideas.
It has been loudly proclaimed, and will be again, that 40 cents an hour and a 40-hour workweek are levels of decency which no fair employer can object to and which should not be contravened regardless of objection. For my part, I would have the levels determined in the case of each employer by a fair-minded tribunal upon the basis of actual facts presented in the particular case than to have them jammed down the throats of entire industries at the behest of a group of law writers who are distinguished most of all by their well-known lack of training in every aspect of business but its theory.
I believe I have given sufficient reasons to convince most anyone that Senate bill 2475 should never be passed. I will say further, on my own responsibility, that if it is passed and becomes the law of the land, America will cease to be a free country the day the law goes into effect.
I have many other reasons for being opposed to the bill. First, I believe it is unconstitutional. On more than one occasion the Supreme Court bas already held that the Federal Government has no power to control wages and hours of labor of employees—that these things, so far as control is at all possible, are within the police power of the various States and that Federal control can be brought about only by the usurpation of power. In this connection I would like to call your attention to part m, section 8 (a) of the bill, which I quote, as follows:
SEC. 8. (a) Whenever the Board shall determine that any substandard labor condition exists in the production of goods in one State and that such goods compete to a substantial extent in that State with other goods produced in another State and sold or transported in interstate commerce, in the production of which such substandard labor condition does not exist, the Board shall make an order requtrlng the elimination of such substandard labor condition and the maintenance of the appropriate fair labor standard in the production of goods which so compete.
Here you will observe a direct attempt to imoose standards dictated by the new commission on purely intrastate operations merely because they compete with interstate operations. Are we to infer from this that the doctrine of State's rights has now been completely and openly relegated to the "horse and buggy" days?
It is true that outside of the example just given the bill attempts, as far as I can ascertain, to provide for the fixing of minimum wages and maximum hours only in occupations which may be declared to be associated with interstate commerce. It does not pretend, except as I have stated, to benefit the millions engaged in occupations not related to or connected with interstate commerce except by indirection—this despite the reckless disregard for States' rights otherwise evinced. The theory behind this unusual restraint seems to be that the fixing of wages and hours in some occupations will create so much trouble and discontent in others that the States will be obliged to take action to meet a new and unnatural situation. In other words, in this respect this bill is designed to accomplish by subterfuge what the Federal Government has no power to impose upon the business and labor of our country by straightforward honesty.
Thus it is implied that the human commission created to function under this bill will be able to simplify the enormous ramifications of modem business to such an extent that it can control that portion of a single industry engaged in manufacturing a part of its product for interstate commerce and leave another, perhaps a much greater, part of the same industry to the ministrations of Providence or the fortuitous conduct of the individual States.
In connection with the position already taken by the SUpreme Court restricting the power of the Federal Government in fixing wages and hours of labor, it will be urged in all probability that the Supreme Court has set a precedent of reversing itself, that its decisions in the future are not to be based on the simple language of the Constitution itself, but must be from day to day in harmony with the ever-changing current of certain opinions.
It may be urged that the Constitution itself no longer forms the basis on which we are to build our future, but that, without a change in language, there shall be a change of interpretation of language from time to time to meet changes in conditions and to meet the fancies of those who wish to mold our destinies untrammeled by the dead band of the past.
[PAGE 15
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
[PAGE 16]
I shall not stop now to combat this line of thought, however fantastic it may appear in the light of mere human reason; but I do wish to warn you that if this condition has come upon us to stay, a tremendous responsibility has been. added to the duties of the legislative branch of government—a responsibility of eternal vigilance lest the acts of Congress, ill-considered and ill-advised, shall transgress the basic laws of nature and the accepted rules of common sense. If our acts are not to be subject to review, if this is the court of last resort, then our errors are likely to be fatal and our acts must be guarded as we would guard our honor and our homes.
One of the arguments used by the proponents of the administration bill is that this is going to be a great benefit to labor. I deny this contention absolutely and predict that if the bill is passed American labor will lose most, if not all, of the great benefits they have gained by the fact they have been free men and have secured by their own efforts concessions which have improved their conditions financially and physically. American workingmen have been organized for a good many years and they have been doing quite well for themselves.
Possibly they have not yet gained their goal. Possibly they have not yet procured for themselves a just and adequate share of the fruits of their endeavors; but they have made substantial progress in their own behalf, in their own way, and they have kept their independence and their self-respect. There is before us no proof that labor is ready and willing to surrender its ideals to government, to trust its program to theorists, to return to the cradle and assume the role of a coddled infant. There is not sufficient certainly that the new untrained nurse may not fail to furnish the bottle regularly or might not neglect her ministrations entirely while daydreaming on the velvety violet beds of Utopia.
I doubt if American labor is being fooled at all. l may be permitted to doubt the value to labor of' any 'scheme to lessen the responsibility and necessity of organization. That is exactly . what this administration.pill is designed. to accomplish; and, if enacted and accepted as sound public policy, it will be but the entering wedge to unlimited encroachments · upon the private rights .of millions-the worker Will becoi:ne a ward of Government; the millenium of the fairy,..minded will be with us.
We are supposed to believe that a human commission, appointed and annointed by a human executive, will be able to perform miracles. It is inferred that this commission will have conferred upon it the ability to establish wages and hours suited to all the conditions in Georgia and in Massachusetts at one and the same time. The whole theory of the minimum wage is questionable. If this measure accomplished its purpose of disrupting labor organizations and taking over their mission, then the minimum will ever tend to become the maximum and those now earning satisfactory incomes will be reduced to even lower levels. The result will be a leveling down for the many and only imaginary benefit for the few.
I object to the proposed legislation because it will tend to set a dangerous precedent, dangerous to American liberty. Some day we may have a Chief Executive who will pride himself on not being a "man of sorrow and acquainted with grief," someone who will be greedy for power and ambitious for the members of his own family. Such an Executive may use this, or similar legislation, as a system of rewards for political loyalty and punishment for failure to pay tribute of whatever sort. When a set of economic royalists neglect to make satisfactory contributions to the party war chest, they may have their minimum wage scale increased and when one section of labor fails to deliver at the polls, it may be made to suffer a drastic reduction in hourly pay. Thus "control" may pass entirely out of the hands of those who pay and those who earn wages and receive salaries into the hands of one of the class who "toil not, neither do they spin."
We, of this House, have been permitted to view—yes; to participate in—the creation of enormous national debts for the payment of which the next generation must assume an unwilling obligation. All this may have been necessary. But it is not necessary for us to enact legislation well designed to add chains to the burdens of this slavery.
We are told that the object sought to be attained by the fixing of maximum hours of work is to make necessary the employment of more men to produce the same volume of goods and thus reduce the ranks of the idle. This might work out to some extent if there were any assurance or any provision tending toward the probability that the level of production coUld be maintained. This leads very naturally to an inqUiry as to why no legislative effort has been made looking toward the stimulation of production and the consequent employment of additional labor. There has never been before us during all of the depression one single suggestion designed to make it safe for those who have saved to invest their earnings in any American business enterprise. Nothing has been proposed that would tend to encourage men of genius and organizations of new businesses or the extension of industries already existing. We have entirely neglected the obvious, time tried, and tested methods of curing the evils of unemployment and have wandered from the beaten paths following a political will-o'-the-wisp.
No doubt there is a time to make experiments, there is a place for theory, there are reasons for studying all new and strange suggestions, but in times of peril it is foolish, beyond the power of words to describe, to neglect a certainty in order to pursue a fantasy.
[PAGE 16
======================================================================
======================================================================
Page
21 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -
HOUSE November 15,
1937 (82 Cong. Rec. 21,
1937)
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
PETITIONS, ETC.
3327. Also, petition of the Prominent Specialty Co., New York City, concerning the Black-Cannery bill CS. 2475 and H. R. 7200); to the Committee on Labor.
[PAGE 21]
======================================================================
======================================================================
Page
99 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -
HOUSE November 17,
1937 (81 Cong. Rec. 99,
1937)
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
WAGE AND HOUR LEGISLATION
Mrs. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to call attention to a petition on the Speaker's desk to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration of the bill S. 2475, the so-called wage and hour bill, and ask all Members interested in this legislation to sign this petition as quickly as possible, so that we may be able to get the bill before the House by December 13, which would be the first date possible to bring it up under the operation of the discharge rule.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. NORTON. I yield.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Is it not a fact that the Committee on Labor, of which the distinguished gentlewoman is chairman, by an almost unanimous vote decided on that procedure?
Mrs. NORTON. Yes; that is true.
[Here the gavel fell.]
[PAGE 99]
======================================================================
======================================================================