Home: The Annexation Of Hawaii: A Collection Of Document
Hawaii Organic Act: Congressional debates on Hawaii Organic Act
[ Previous Page ] -- [ View PDF ] -- [ View in MS Word ] -- [ Next Page ]
1980
contracts for labor. The situation is and has been peculiar in Hawaii and in
marked contrast to our conditions here. I have not been able to find-because
I have not examined the volumes of the statutes referred to-just what is the
theory of the commit-tee with reference to this subject, and what the bill
contains and carries.
Mr. CULLOM. Mr. President, to begin with, as I stated yesterday, there are
about 40,000 laborers in those islands, about half of whom are supposed to be under
contract, and who were brought there under contract.
Mr. HALE. Under existing contracts?
Mr. CULLOM. Under contracts how existing in the republic, so called. This
bill goes upon the theory that when the labor laws of the United States are
extended over these islands by the passage of this bill nothing more can occur
in the way of the importation of contract labor. Then, in addition to that, we go
for-ward and repeal all the penal laws which justify the punishment in any way
of a violation of labor contracts. So that, as the committee think, and as I think,
the whole question is put beyond the control of the islands in undertaking to
make any further labor contracts.
Mr. HALE. If the Senator will allow me, what troubled me was the repeal
of all legislation which punishes the violation of the labor-contract provisions.
As I understand the Senator, the bill proceeds upon this proposition, that there
shall be no future contracts for the importation of foreign labor.
Mr. CULLOM. There can not be after our laws are extended over the
islands.
Mr. HALE. The operation of this bill is to extend our laws, which provide,
just as they do for Illinois or for Maine, that there shall be no importation of
foreign labor by contract.
Mr. CULLOM. Yes.
Mr. HALE. And those laws which make that provision also provide
punishments for their violation. The Senator does not mean that there is
anything in this bill which prevents the operation of the penal force of our laws
or permits any violation of the labor-contract laws that we have.
Mr. CULLOM. Certainly not. We have just adopted a pro-vision which I
offered here-as I stated yesterday, and I desired to do so specifically-requiring
by this bill that all prosecutions for violation of labor contracts should be
prohibited. In addition to that, we repeal all the local laws which in any way
authorize such things.
Mr. HALE. All prosecutions not for the violation of labor laws, but labor
contracts, so that they can not be enforced.
Mr. CULLOM. They can not be enforced.
Mr. HALE. Now, what does the Senator believe is the condition of the
contracts which are now subsisting?
Mr. CULLOM. That raises a constitutional question, I might say, as to
whether Congress or any other body can legislate right-fully, thereby invalidating
a civil contract.
Mr. PL ATT of Connecticut. No doubt they can.
Mr. HALE. I think they can; but does this bill attempt to do that?
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. No, it does not.
Mr. HALE. Then this bill excludes that in so many words.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. I so understand. This bill in terms permits
those contracts to exist and to run until they expire. Now, from the Senator's
examination, what does he think is the actual operation of existing contracts for
labor upon persons who have been brought in under those contracts, as to what
numbers and what time, and how long they will continue? I do not know
anything about that myself.
Mr. CULLOM. Those contracts run usually, I think, three years. That is
my impression; but after the passage of this bill, the repeal of the laws
authorizing labor contracts to be made, and the prohibition of an attempt to
punish anyone for violating such contracts, what the result will be I do not
know; but my judgment is it will result in the entire abolition of the contract
system there.
Mr. HALE. The Senator believes that. Then, certainly in not more than three
years it will all pass away.
Mr. CULLOM. My judgment is that it will pass away in less than one year,
because they can not enforce such contracts by punishment as they have been
doing heretofore. So I think in a very short time the result will be that the
contract laborers in those islands will be a thing of the past.
Mr. HALE. The Senator thinks that it is practically abolished by this bill?
Mr. CULLOM. Yes.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. Will the Senator read the laws which are
repealed?
Mr. CULLOM. If I should read all the laws which are re-pealed by this bill,
I would be reading nearly all day.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. I mean the penal laws with regard to the
punishment of contract labor.
Mr. CULLOM. I have the chapter here before me. Here is the chapter with
the title "Masters and servants." I shall not undertake to read all of that.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. That is repealed.
Mr. CULLOM. A part of that is repealed, I see. Here is one of the provisions:
TO REGULATE CONTRACTS BETWEEN MASTERS AND SERVANTS.
SEC. 1368. All contracts for service between masters and servants, where only one
of the parties is a native Hawaiian, shall be written or printed in both the Hawaiian
and English languages. No such contracts shall have any affect in law when
executed in one language only: Provided, That nothing Herein contained shall be
held or construed to prevent any such contracts being written or printed in the
Hawaiian language only where both parties thereto are native Hawaiians.
SEC. 1360. The minister of the interior is hereby authorized to prepare. In both
languages, printed forms of contract, as provided for in the foregoing section, in
blank as to place, time, and service, wages, name, place where engaged, and place of
residence.
SEC. 1370. Every contract for service authorized by section 1382 shall, in order to
its validity, be acknowledged by the master or his duly empowered agent, and the
servant before the agent to take acknowledgments of con-tracts, as hereinafter
provided, and the certificate of acknowledgment shall be substantially as follows:
And so it goes on here for pages.
By this proposed law we will wipe that entirely out, so that there will be no
statute in the Territory of Hawaii that pertains to the importation of labor or labor
contracts such as we under-stand to be now in existence.
Mr. TILLMAN. But if the Senator will permit me, do not the penalties attaching to
the breaking of a labor contract still obtain? Are they not left?
Mr. SPOONER. They are eliminated by the amendment offered by the Senator from
Illinois.
Mr. TILLMAN. If you will read it, you will see that they are not eliminated.
Mr. CULLOM. I did not hear it read distinctly.
Mr. TILLMAN. They apply to contracts made since the islands have been in our
possession, and not all the time.
Mr. NELSON. If the Senator from Illinois [Mr. CULLOM] will allow me a moment, I
want to say to him that the amendment I offered can do no harm. It covers the
exact case which he in-tends to reach. Here is the phraseology of the bill,
commencing in line 5, on page 8:
All offenses which by statute then in force-That
means in August, 1898-
were punishable as offenses against the republic of Hawaii shall be punishable as
offenses against the government of the Territory of Hawaii, unless such statute is
inconsistent with this act or shall be repealed or changed by law.
It may be that your repeal covers the case; but should there be any question about
it, it will do no harm to insert this clause, as I suggested, after the word " offenses," in
line 5; so that it will read:
All offenses except for the violation of labor contracts.
There can be no harm in that, and it "makes assurance double sure " on this point.
Mr. MONEY. Will the Senator from Illinois allow me to say a word to the Senator
from Minnesota?
Mr. CULLOM. Certainly.
Mr. MONEY. If the statute which defines the crime and pro-vides the penalty is
repealed, then how can it be in force?
Mr. NELSON. That may be true, technically.
Mr. MONEY. It is absolutely so.
Mr. NELSON. I have not had time to examine it.
Mr. MONEY. All of. those statutes are repealed by this bill. If P. part of a statute
falls, everything else goes with it.
Mr. NELSON. Is the Senator sure that the repeal will affect all of those laws?
Mr. MONEY. They are named by sections in the bill itself; and if the Senator
will compare that-I suppose he has the penal statutes of Hawaii before him, has he
not?
Mr. NELSON. No; I have not.
Mr. MONEY. I thought perhaps the Senator had a copy of the penal statutes. He
will find that those statutes are repealed by this bill.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. I think they are.
Mr. MONEY. If they are repealed, there can be no offense and no punishment; and
therefore the amendment would be entirely unnecessary.
Mr. CULLOM. The committee thought and believed that the bill had been so
framed that it would get rid entirely of the con-tract-labor system which has prevailed
in Hawaii.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. Chapter 78, if the Senator will permit me, which
relates to masters and servants, reads:
If any person lawfully bound to service shall willfully absent himself from such
service, without the leave of his master, any district magistrate of the republic,
upon complaint made, under oath by the master or by anyone on his behalf, may
issue a warrant to apprehend such person and bring him before the said
magistrate; and if the complaint shall be maintained, the magistrate shall order
such offender to be restored to his master, and he shall be compelled to serve the
remainder of the time for which he originally contracted.
That has all been repealed, and those were the objectionable features, as I
understand.
Mr. CULLOM. On page 6 of the bill the Senator will find that