THE FIRST $1,000,000 109 
large contingent of laborers in Newark, as elsewhere, out of 
employment.’ The Presidential election was pending, and 
the great struggle between the McKinley and Hobart sound 
money forces and the persistent advocates of a silver cur- 
rency, under the leadership of W. J. Bryan, was going on 
and had already resulted in an extended business depres- 
sion. The labor situation was still farther depressed by the 
continuous arrival of hordes of emigrants, especially Ital- 
jians, many of whom found their way immediately to Essex 
County. The commissioners understood that this class of 
labor was then being employed by contractors on railroads 
and other large works at prices as low as ninety cents to $1 
per day. They wished to have the work done as cheaply 
as it could be done, and done well, and at the same time to 
insure the laborers receiving whatever rate was paid. This 
would prevent the large margin, which, without some such 
restriction, might be exacted; as in cases then occurring 
where the contractor would be paid the contract price (of 
perhaps $1.25 per day), but actually pay the laborer much 
less. 
In establishing the prices noted, the commission intended 
that they should be the fair current rates for the service 
named. This view was not shared by some of the other 
public boards, and the action was severely criticized by some 
of the labor representatives. 
The Board of Freeholders at the meeting June 11, 1896, 
voted down a drastic resolution offered by one of the mem- 
bers protesting in vigorous language against such a restric- 
tion “in fixing the pay of the laborers on county park work 
at $1.25 per day, as we do not believe good men should be 
compelled to work for so small a compensation.” There 
was a lively discussion over the resolution. Freeholder 
Medcraft denied that he had offered the resolution “for elec- 
tion purposes” on his own behalf. Mr. Condit suggested 
that “if the Park Commission should pay any more than 
the market prices for labor, they would be doing wrong, and 
taking money wrongfully out of the pockets of the taxpay- 
ers; and the rate per diem of wages was evidently the mar- 
