MP ■ I.-. «1? IMS A3 l„»„lw«iioo of latKK i,o»j«>««. '" M...O THE LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002217101 49th Oongeess, » HOUSE OF EEPKESENTATIVES. f EEPOEf M Session. J ) No. 4174. INVESTIGATION LABOE TEOUBLES MISSOURI, ARKANSAS, KANSAS, TEXAS, AND ILLINOIS. IN TWO PARTS PART 1. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT FEINTING OFFICE, 1887. PROPERTY OF LIBRARY NEW YORK ?■-" tit INDUSTRIAL AK: ■ ^^UllONS CORNELL UNtVtKSITY 49th Congress, ) HOUSE OF EEPEBSENTATIVES. ( Eepoet 2d Session. j | ^q 4]^74_ INVESTIGATION OF LABOR TROUBLES IN MISSOURL ARKANSAS, KANSAS, TEXAS, AND ILLINOIS. ^-i P March 3, 1887.— Ordered to be printed. ij . 5 I i S i" A 3 Mr. CuETiN, from the Select Committee on Existing Labor Troubles, submitted the following / EEPOUT: The resolution of the House of April 12, 1886, authorizing the ap- pointment of the committee, is as follows : Besolved, That a select committee, to consist of seven members, be appointed by the Speaker to investigate the cause and extent of the disturbed condition now existing between the railway corporations engaged in carrying on interstate commerce ana their employes in the States of Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, and Texas. Said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, examine witnesses under •ath, sit during the sessions of the House, and may visit or send a subcommittee to such places in such States as may be necessary in order to facilitate such investiga- tion. It shall report to the House during the present session, with such recommenda- tions as it may deem proper to make; and the expense incurred, not to exceed the sum of $3,000, shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the ^ouse upon vouchers certified by the chairman and one member of the committee. On April 15, 1886, the Speaker announced the following-named mem- bers as the select committee authorized by the resolution adopted Anril 12,1886: i' 1 A. G. OUETIN, of Pennsylvania; J. N. Buenes, of Missouri; W. H. Ceain, of Texas; J. H. Ottthwaite, of Ohio; J. W. Stewaet, of Vermont; A. X. Paekee, of New York ; and James Buchanan, of New Jersey. And by resolution of the House, August 5, 1886, the powers of the committee were enlarged with permission to sit during the recess, and time extended to report at this session. HISTOET OP the STETKB. To comprehend clearly the great railroad strike of 1886 on the Mis- souri Pacific Railway, including its leased and operated lines, known as the Southwest, or Gould, System, it is necessary to refer briefly to the strike on the same system the year previous. The strike was inaugurated March 9, 1885, by the shopmen of the Missouri Pacific Railway, in Missouri, Kansas, ahd Texas, and it was in its last stages participated in by a limited number of trackmen. One cause of the strike, as alleged by the employes, and not specially denied by the railway officials, was the repeated reduction of the wages of the former, bringing the earnings of the men below those received for similar work on other lines in the States above named. In justifica- tion of their resistance to these reductions the employes cited, amongst other grievances, the recently published annual financial statement of II LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the receipts and expenditures of the system, showing greatly increased earnings over previous years. \ The first order reducing wages was posted in the shops about the 1st day of September, 1884, and was followed by similar notices in October, 1884, and February, 1885. The reduction of October was 10 per cent., and that of February was 5 per cent. No labor union organized the strike, but on Saturday, March 7, 1885, at 3.20 p. m., at Sedalia, Mo., at a given signal, the shopmen laid down their tools and walked out of the shops in a body and proceeded to ^ Smith's Hall and organized a secret meeting. That the strike was prearranged seems probable, for about the same hour the shopmen went out at Atchison, Parsons, Kans.; Palestine, Denison, Fort Worth, and Dallas, Tex. ; and on March 9 at Kansas City and Saint Louis, Mo., though at the two latter places work in the shops was at no time entirely suspended. Maj. O. Kotchtitzky, commissioner of the bureau of labor statistics and inspector of Missoliri, who had been sent by Governor Marmaduke to Sedalia, in his special report, of March 19, 1885, to the governor, de- scribes the strike in the following language : The strike of the shopmen in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway sys- tem in Missonri, Kansas, and Texas, commencing oa Monday, March 9, 1885, was not an impulsive outburst of dissatisfied employes, but it was an action -decided upon after full deliberation and consideration of every point. The grievances of the em- ployes were based upon repeated reduction of wages and shortening of time in the shops of said Missouri Pacific Railroad and leased lines qperated by it, bringing the wages of the employes below the wages by other lines in this State and in Kansas and , Texas. The feeling of dissatisfaction was intensified by the puhlication of the financial statement of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company at the last annual meeting of its ' directory, showing a large earning for the road, but neglecting to show the deficiency in the earnings of its leased and other|line8 operated bylt ; and when, on February 9, a notice was posted in th« shops that another reduction would take place, dating from March 1, the employ(S8 determined to quit. This has been, so far as is known, the first strike that has everheen made where the strikers were thoroughly and systematically organized, and the control and manage- ment of it remained in the hands of the organization. Every movement was directed by the /executive eompiittee, and a perfect police system maintained, under which the property of the railroad company and private individuals was fully protected. After going out the employ^ strikers formed a permanent organiza- tion and prepared a statement of grievances, which they forwarded to Mr. H. M. Hoxie, at that time third vice-president of the Missouri Pa- cific Eailway Company, having his ofQce at Saint Louis. Their demand was for the restoration of the previous fall's wages, when the best me- chanics received $2.75 and the next best $2.50 per diem. It was fur- ther claimed that "in the reductions since then the men have suffered both as to cuts in time and amount of wages, aggregating in all froip 10 to 15 per cent. Part of the time they were allowed to work only five days in a week at nine hours a day. At other times they were cut so that they could not work more than three or four days. To this demand no response was given. The strike became general on Monday, March 9, at all points through- out the Southwestern system, and in many places the men had the active sympathy of the citizens. All freight traffic was immediately suspended, and only passenger trains permitted to move. No specific acts of violence were resorted ^to, and there was no particular destruction of the property, the strikers having appointed a special police force from their own men to prevent it. oil the same day the mayor of Sedalia, at the request of Division Superintendent Hagan, had sworn in 50 or 60 railroad employes as po- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Ill licemen for the protection of the companies' property, and to assist in the resumption of the traffic of the road. Adjutant-General Jamison was or- d no authority to enter into any contract other than that directed by the court. The first intimation of trouble on the Texas Pacific, a part of the sys- tem, was a telegram dated February 24 from a member of the executive board of the Knights of Labor at Marshall to the general agent of the receivers requesting him to go to Marshall immediately to settle troubles in the shops. The agent responded that he had heard of no trouble in the shops and was too busy to go. Under date of February 28 Col. ■George Foble, the general agent of the receivers, received the following message from Martin Irons : Governor Sheldon referred me to Dallas. Cannot control matters here long. If not settled by 2 o'clock March 1, 1886, must call out Texas and Pacific employ^. Answer immediately what action you will take. . This telegram was signed by Martin Irons as chairman of execuutive board, Knights of Labor. No response was made to this telegram. , The receiver giving it as his reasons that he knew of no trouble in the shops, and knew of no au- thority Martin Irons had to represent the employes. Without any further warning, on Monday, March 1, 1886, at 3 o'clock, the whistles at Marshall and Big Spring Creek sounded, and the em- ployes in and surrounding the shops at those points walked out to a man, and the greatest railroad strike in the history of the United States was inaugurated. At that hour, at a preconsidered signal, the shop- men at Fort Worth and Dallas laid down their tools and went out in a body. At Fort Worth no grievance was named, the only grievance as- signed was that an order had been received from the Knights of Labor at Marshall to stop work at Marshall ; the grievance given to the pub- lic was the discharge of G. A. Hall. On March 2 an order was issued by the receiver notifying all the em- ployes that those who had failed to return to work by March 4 by 10', o'clock a. m. would be considered dismissed from the service of the road, and would be paid in full on application to the paymaster. On the same day the coal heavers quit work at all points on the Eio Grand and East- ern Division. The first attempt to interfere with trains was made on the night of this date. As train 315 was ready to leave Big Springs a body of twenty-five masked men took possession of the engine, broke head and cab lights, took the fireman from the engine by force, and un- coupled the engine from train and pulled coupling-pins from the train/ cutting it in several pieces, and throwing the pins away, forcing the dis- continuance of freight trains. On the 3d of March several bridge gangs and all roundhouse men at Long View Junction struck. On the 4:th of March six engines were disabled in Big Springs roundhouse by a mob of fifty masked men, forcibly entering the roundhouse and removing parts of them all. Trains were discontinued this date west of Colorado. The miners em- ployed at Gordon mines, which belonged to the Texas and Pacific Eail- way, pulled the coupling-pins and notified the trainmen not to come there again until the strike was over. The telegraph operators em- ployed by this company at Fort Worth, with the exception of one man, walked out, and great difl&culty was experienced by reason thereof. Messages were delayed in some cases from twenty-four to thirty-six hours, and in others destroyed altogether. On March 5 everything was at a standstill at Big Springs, so far as the movement of freight trains was concerned. This was the condition LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XIII of the affairs on the line of the Texas and Pacific up to the 6th of March, when the strike on the Missouri Pacific took place. At 10 o'clock on the morning of that day, at a preconcerted signal given by steam whis- tle or otherwise, at points along the line, the trackmen, yardmen, and the men in the shops and freight-houses of the entire system quit work. They not only simultaneously ceased to work, but also seized the c6m- panys' shops, engine-houses, freight depots, and yards, and interfered with the movement of freight until terms should be made with them. They enforced this position by removing from great numbers of engines , indispensable pieces connected with each cylinder, " killing the engine," as they term it, and by threats and violence intimidating those em- ployes who were disposed to assist in moving freight. The movement of passengers and mails was not interfered with by the strikers to such an extent as to cause any serious delay or great inconvenience. The men who did this were a very small partof the total number of employes of all classes at that time in the company's service. The employes known as engineers, firemen, conductors, and trainmen, generally took no part in the movement. They rendered such service, as under the circumstances they could, to assist the company in the transmission of its trafBc. TJp to March 6 there had been no violent demonstrations except on the line of the Texas Pacific. In its earliest stages the strike was char- acterized by little violence, the only injury done was the killing of freight engines, which consisted in drawing the fires and emptying the engines of water. A strike of such magnitude necessarily affected the commercial interests of the entire country and especially of those States and Territories west of the Mississippi Eiver, and therefore speedily became a matter of nation&l concern. It was asserted by the Knights of Labor that the cause of one brother was the cause of all. On the part of the business public, who were to suffer most, it was urged that nothing should be used to prostrate business and injure the innocent. As soon as the strike had been inaugurated on the Missouri Pacific Eailway, leased and operated lines, correspondence was commenced be- tween the officials of the Southwestern railway system and the head of the executive committee of the Knights of Labor, with the view of set- tling the difiaculties existing between the railroads of the Southwestern system and their employes. The committee has obtained copies of this correspondence and received it as evidence on the part of the railroad companies and striking employes. Various claims were made as to the cause of the strike. Some claimed that the strike was for an advance of wages for unskilled labor to $1.50 a day. Others claimed that it was for a reduction of hours. At a meeting between the dele^tion of citizens and the executive committee at Marshall, to hear the gmvance of the employes against the railroad company, Martin Irons, chairman of the committee, stated in substance : That the strike waa not in the interest of one man, but for a principle involved f that the contract between the employes and the railroad, made through the mediation of the governors of Missouri and Kansas one year ago, had been violated. 1 hat the contract was that no njan should be discharged without due notice and investiga- tion. This they charged had been violated in the case of Hall. It was further charged that Hall had been discharged because he had attended a meeting of the district assembly of the Knights of Labor the pre- vious week, although it was claimed he had been granted leave to do so by his superior, Mr. Crosby. Ex-Gov. John O. Brown, receiver of ■ the Texas and Pacific, denied any responsibility of that road for any XIV . LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. vioiation of the agreement of March 15, 1885, with the Missouri Pacific and its employes. In the mean time active prepaiations were being made at all points by both interests for the threatened struggle. Or- ders were given by the Texas and Pacific company to receive no live stock or perishable freight for points on or reached by the Missouri Pacific and Texas and Pacific Eailroads and the lines operated by the Missouri Pacific Railway. It was charged by the Knights of Labor in a circular that the Mis- «ouri Pacific leased and operated lines and Texas and Pacific Railways were employing convict and Chinese labor to the detriment of honest and citizen labor, in addition to the violation of the contract of March 15, 1885, and alleged further they never complied with its provisions. They declared they would make common cause with their down-trodden brothers, known as unskilled laborers ; that they would call upon all laborers, such as trackmen, engine-wipers, coach-cleaners, baggage and freight hands, &c., to help them in driving convict and Chinese labor from the different roads, and that all labor should receive just and fair remuneration. The testimony taken (which is necessarily made part of this report, in order to a full comprehension and understanding of the labors of the committee) fails to show the employment of any convict labor by these corporations, and a very limited number Of Chinamen was employed at a remote point, where it was impossible to procure other labor. A large amount of correspondence was had and committees appointed by the citizens and strikers to confer with the receivers of the road. After repeated conferences all efforts to secure a settlement of the dififlculty were fruitless and the condition was growing worse. On the 8th of March the strike became general throughout the entire system, and in many places included not only the shopmen but track- men, switchmen, wipers, and other employes, and all freight traffic on the system came to an» absolute standstill. It is estimated that nine thousand men had quit work, exclusive of those who were laid off in consequence of there being no work for them to do. The strikers having been discharged from the Missouri Pacific Railroad shops by the order of Mr. Kerrigan, general superintendent, and the guard of Knights of Labor removed, the shops were placed in charge of a force of detect- ives, under Thomas Furlong, and a notice issued from William Kerri- gan, general superintendent, and posted at Saint Louis and mailed to all points on the system, to the effect that the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Company was prepared to furnish employment to a number of ma- chinists, carpenters, car-cleaners, engine wipers, yardmen, switchmen, trackmen, and laborers, in its shops and yards at Saint Louis, Mo., and 6ther stations on its lines ; such men will be employed without ref- erence to their past relations to this company^r their connection with any society or organization, open, secret, secular, or otherwise, at the same rates of wages which such labor had been paid for since the agree- ment with the governors of the States of Missouri and Kansas. On the 10th of March, Martin Irons, chairman of the executive board of District Assemby 101, a dangerous if not pernicious man (but for whom it is the opinion of your committee the strike would have been declared off at the request of Mr. Powderly, Grand Master Workman, Knights of Labor), who was the leading spirit of the strike returned to Sedalia and added to the number of grievances. In Older that the public may understand why the present strike is in existence on the Gould Southwest system, and in order to show to the puhjic the falsity of the cir- cular issued from the executive department of the Missouri Pacific Eailwav, addressed. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XV o tbe employes of said road, but in reality intended for the public for the purpose of eliciting public sympathy. We consider the circular too insignificant to reply to in de- tail. It is indeed surprising that railroad magnates -who have so long insulted the people -with the epithet " be damned," will come down on iheir knees and cater to them for sympathy. The settlement of the strike of March, 1885, in which ^e had no voice, but which we accepted in good faith, and which has been kept inviolate by us, has been repeat- edly violated by the company, viz, by not restoring to all the employes the wages paid prior to September, 1884, in several places on the Texas and Pacific Railroad, as well as on the Missouri Pacific road and its branches, and by the discharging of employes contrary to the spirit and intent of the settlement. Now, it is the belief of every Knight of Labor on the system that the companies therein mentioned have inaugurated a systematic method for the purpose of breaking up the organization of the Knights of Labor on the system, and that the placing of the Texas and Pacific in the hands of a receiver and under the jurisdiction of the United States court is the main feature of their scheme, and in order to meet and de- feat these contemptible and blood-sucking corporations and their governmental allies, and in order to secure redress for the foregoing grievances and the following demands, we have inaugurated this strike. In order to bring about a speedy adjustment of the difficulty now existing between the management of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, and the Texas Pacific Railway Company, and all its branches and their employes, the district executive board of District Assembly No. 101, of the Knights of Labor of America, submits the following basis of settlement to the aforepaid roads: First. A conference to be arranged with the management of the aforesaid Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, and the Texas and Pacific Rail- road, and all its branches, as party of the first part, and the district executive board of District Assembly No. 101, as party of the second part, for the purpose of settling the following grievances by arbitration : First. That all unskilled labor employed by the roads previously mentioned now receiving less than $1.50 per day be paid at the rate of |1.50 per day, the above to in- clude all section laborers, traclkmen, and crossing-watchmen. Second. The abolishment of convict labor on the above-named roads, and that con- victs now employed in the Missouri Pacific leased and operated lines and Texas Pacific Railway and all its branches be immediately discharged. Third. That the rate of pay of all bridgemen be restored to the rates of September, 1884, viz, in a gang of ten men, two at |3.75, four men at $2.50, two men at $2.25, and two men at $2. Fourth. That all house-repair gangs be rated as bridgemen. Fifth. That all boarding-bosses for bridge gangs shall be entitled to half-rates of freight on all supplies for use of bridge outfits. Sixth. That when outfit cars are moved at night or on Sunday, bridgemen shall be allowed one and one-half time while being so moved. Seventh. That while bridgemen are compelled to work in water at washouts, &c., they shall be allowed double time while so engaged. Eighth. That when bridgemen are detached from their gangs on special service they shall be allowed time and half time while traveling at night, and straight time for all other time until they return to their respective gangs. Ninth. That bridgemen having families shall be permitted to travel on their gang- passes to and from their homes for the purpose of visiting at least twice per month. Tenth. That a system be established for the government to the employ and wages of apprentices on the Gould Southwest system of railroads, as follows : That four years constitute an apprenticeship, and that the scale of wages be fixed as follows : For the first year, |1 per day; for the second year, $1.25 per day ; for the third year, $1.75 per day ; and for the fourth and last year, $2.25 per day ; and at the expiration of their term of apprenticeship they are to receive the average journeyman's wages of the department to which they belong ; and that no boys under the age of seventeen years be admitted as apprentices in any department on the above-mentioned roads; and that In each case articles of agreement shall be sigced by the representative of the railway company of the first part and the legal representative of the applicant for the apprenticeship of the second part ; so that in no case shall the ratio of appren- tices be more than one to every eight mechanics, and that no more apprentices be em- ployed until the number is reduced to the above-mentioned ratio. Eleventh. In view of the fact that considerable i dissatisfaction and trouble have arisen op account of the discharge of employes without cause being first made known, therefore we demand that when any employ^ who are Knights of Labor do not give satisfaction in the capacity In which they are engaged, it shall be made known to them in writing, that tiiey may defend themselves in the following manner : The ac- cused party to select two persons to assist in conducting the defense and the officer of the company in immediate charge of the department in which the accused Is em- XVI LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ployed be allo-wecl to select two persons to assist in conducting the prosecution, anci that the accused be tried before Ithree disinterested parties, to be selected in the fol- lowing manner : The parties assisting in the defense to select one and the parties as- sisting in the prosecution one, and the two thus selected choose the third. The ac- cused mnst be allowed to remain at work until the charges are disproved or substan- itiated. / Twelfth. "We demand that all men be paid the same wages for the same work ; in other words, that when a man quits or is taken off a job that pays a certain pricey that, his successor receives the same rate of pay. Thirteenths We further demand that all men who have been unjustly discharged from any of the aforesaid roads be immediately reinstated in their respective positions at the conclusion of the existing difficulties. Respectfully submitted. PH. MARTIN IRONS, Chairman Sxecutive Board, District Assembly 101, Knights of Labor. It will be observed from an examination of these grievances and de- mands that they largely exceed the former ones. Efforts were being made to induce conductors, engineers, and firemen to join the strike, but there is no instance given in the testimony where any firemen, engineer, or conductor voluntarily abandoned his post. They succeeded, however, in persuading, by threats and otherwise, en- gineers and firemen to quit their engines in some instances. In the mean time engines were being killed as they arrived or attempt- ed to depart at all prominent stations. No acts of personal violence were resorted to except at Fort Worth, Tex., on thelQth, where one man who belonged to a force of men Imported to take the places abandoned by the strikers was assaulted and badly beaten by the latter. Matters were now growing from bad to worse. While the leaders, in a majority of the cases, of the Knights of Labor deprecated violence and lawlessness, it nevertheless began to manifest itself. ISTot only were engines boarded and killed, but at De Soto, Mo., on the Iron Mountain road, the strikers marched to the roundhouse some 200 strong, forded it open, and drew the water from all the boilers. At all the principal points along the line of the Missouri Pacific a similar condition of affairs existed. At some points, notably at Pacific, and De Soto, Mo., where some of the civil authorities were members of the Knights of Labor they either could not or would not enforce the law against unlawful assemblages and' riotous conduct. At Little Eock, Ark., a party of strikers detached an engine from a passenger train and rapidly followed a freight train, which had suc- cessfully run the blockade, overtook, and killed it. They were in turn followed by another engine, loaded with United States deputy mar- shals, who overhauled the strikers, and returned to Little Eock with both engines, where the strikers attempted to escape by making a break for the woods. They were fired upon a number of times, and one of the strikers was shot in the thigh. Notwithstanding the deputy marshals, policemen, detectives, sheriffs, and constables, the strikers succeeded in killing engines, side-tracking trains, uncoupling cars, and warning engineers and firemen. One day was but a repetition of the events of another, except violehce and law- lessness were increasing. In Bast Saint Louis chaos reigned. The police force of the city, reinforced by scores of detectives clothed with th§ power of police ofacei's, were without avail. Vice-President Hoxie asked the intervention of the court, and the following proceedings were had in the circuit court of Saint Louis on the 13th, and an injunction was servetj upon four hundred and seventy prominent striking employes for the record proceedings of Which we would refer you to Exhibit e' page 607 of the testimony. * LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XVII At Pacific, ou the 13tb, a passenger train was detained by a force of one hundred bridgemen under a contractor. Up to this time no pas- senger trains had been interfered with. On the same day violent dem- onstrations occurred where the men, in defiance of the police force with noise and menaces, drove firemen and engineers from their posts' Similar acts of violence and intimidation occurred at Kansas City, At- chison, Parsons, and at the principals points in Texas. But along the line of the Texas and Pacific the influence of the United States deputy marshals was being felt, and many arrests were made for contempt of court. Some few freight trains at principal points were allowed to arrive and depart. Acts of violence were common and a number of arrests were made. On the night of the 16th an attempt was made to wreck a passenger train near Marshall by the removal of spikes from the rails On March 18, Mr. T. V. Powderly, General Master Workman of the Knights of Labor of the United States after consultation with the local officials of the order, telegraphed Mr. Hoxie to meet with a committee, and himself to arrange settlement of pending difficulties. Mr. Hoxie declined to meet Mr. Powderly, fcr reasons which his sub- sequent death without examination are not given further than as set forth in the following telegram : The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Executive Department, „ Saint Louis, March 19, 1886. T. V. Powderly, ' Kansas City, Mo. . I have just received your telegram of the 18th instant, asking if I will meet your- self and committee to arrange settlement of the pending difficulties. As tiis company now has contracts and agreements with various labor unions and organizations, and is not unwilling to continue.to make such agreements as circum- stances may require with such unions and organizations of its employes as have shown a disposition to carry out, in good faith, their undertakings ; and as it has had in the past contracts with your organization, and its representatives have heretof ire had conferences with yourself and other members of your executive committee, it is but just and courteous that I should give you the reasons ibr this company now de- clining to meet yourself and your executive committee, which it would have done before this strike was inaugurated. The usual object of such meetings between railway companies, through their repre- sentatives, and committees of their employes, is either to discuss such differences as may have arisen, in order that an understanding may be reached of the rights and relations existing between them, and such mutual concessions made as will avoid strikes and the losses resulting therefrom, or, on the other hand, to settle and com- promise such differences between the parties, after the grievances of the employes have been presented and redress refused, and after resort has actually been had to the strike as the only remedy. In the present case neither of the above reasons for a conference exists, but the anomaly is presented of a strike which is without a redressible grievance, which was entered upon without notice to the company, and which had resulted in the wanton and malicious destruction of this company's property by violence and incendiarism, and in the almost total stoppage of its business by threats, intimidation, and force. A review of the history of the past year is essential to a full understanding of the present conditions. , The differences between this company and its employes, resulting in the strike of March, 1885, were settled by the voluntary intercession of the executives and officers of the States of Kansas and Missouri, and not with your organization. The agree- ments subsequently entered into with the committees of your organization have been faithfully carried out by this company. Minor grievances under these agreements have from time to time been presented, considered by the management, and adjusted in a manner apparently satisfactory to the petitioners, and for the sake of peace and harmony this company has repeatedly, on the demands of your organization, made changes in its staff by the removal of officials entirely satisfactory to the company, but objectionable to some of your members. In our meeting with you of last August in New York, your committees then stated that no grievances or complaints existed against the Missouri Pacific Railway on the ' H. Eep. 4174 ii XVIII liABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. part of your organization through non-compliance -with the contracts then existing, but that it was necessary to utilize your organization upon the Missouri Pacific road to force an adjustment of, the diflSculties then pending with another corporation. Similar action has been taken by your organization in three instances within the last eight months. (1) In threatening that the members of your organization upon theMissouri Pacific Railway would strike if it continued to exchange business with the Wabash road. (2) When^he members of your organization compelled a strike of a portion of the employes of this company in carrying out your boycott against the Mallory line, at Galveston, Tex. (3) In the present instance, when the existing strike was forced upon this company by the discharge of one C. A. Hall by the receivers of the Texas and Pacific Kail way, a'road in the hands of the United States conrt, and in the management of which this company has no voice or control, a fact which your organization fully recognized when your committee made application to the receivers of that road for reinstatement of said employ^. Instances might be cited where endeavors have been made to use this company for the purpose of boycotting individuals who had incurred the displeasure of your or- ganization. An especially aggravated case of the failure of your organization to carry out its agreements was that of the workmen at the Palestine shops, who, in the last days of February, stopped work on account. of an alleged grievance, which was thereupon adjusted in a manner to their entire satisfaction, so that they resumed work with an agreement to continue under the concessions made by the company ; but within ten days thereafter again left their work on demand of your organization in ordering the present strike, and without any grievance whatever against this company. These continued stoppages of the work of this company without cause have become so frequent that, believing the future will be as unsettled as the past, it cannot con- sent to renew the agreement voluntarily and arbitrarily abrogated by your organiza- tion, and longer submit to it the management o:^our business. This company, through its representatives, is, and always has been, willing to meet the public through committees or individuals on matter of public concern, and if yourself orother intelligent citizens can suggest practical methods whereby thp pres- ent situation can be changed and traffic permanently resumed, this company will be pleased to meet yourself or them as citizens, but not as representatives of your or- ganization, to discuss the pending difficulties or any other matters of public interest. lu conclusion, I desire emphatically to state that the responsibilitj for the future continuance of the recent unjustifiable strike will not rest with the management of this company ; but inasmuch as your organization has committed the error of strik- ing first, and endeavoring to negotiate afterwards, it has the power to and should cud the present troubles by permitting such of our employes and others as desire to work to do so without fear of threats and intimidation, leaving this company free to re- sume its operations, and adjust with its employes, as it is at all times ready and will- ing to do, any grievances that they may have. H. M. HOXIE, •First Vice-President the Missovri Pacific Bailway Company. Mr. Powderly replied in the following telegram to Mr. Hoxie: Kansas City, Mo., March 20, 1886. H. M. Hoxie, First Vice-President Missowri Pacific Jtailway, St. Louis, Mo. ; Since you will not meet with me as General Master Workman of the Enights of Labor, I must decline to meet you in any other capacity, and the responsibility for - the future continuance of the strike must not be charged to the Enights of Labor, since the executive officers of that order will not be permitted to meet and co-opernte with you in settling the strike. It was my intention, had you consented to meet with me, to effect such settlement as would prevent impositions being practiced upon tl^e employes of your company by subordinate officials and put an end to strikes ou your lines for the future, T V. POWDERLY. This was followed by correspondence between the governors ol Jlis- sonri and Kansas and the first vicejjresident of the Missouri Ivailroad Company, but without effecting a settlement of the diflSeulties. About this time a joint meeting of the board of the directors of tbe Meicliauts Exchange and the Merchants' Transportation Committee of Saint Louis was held, and a mass meeting of merchants and manufacturers was LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XIX held at the Mercantile Club iu which resolutions were ])a8sed, express- ing their views that in the opinion of the merchants and manufacturers of Saint Louis, the strike on the Missouri Pacific system has ceased to be merely a question between employers and employed and has become a matter of national importance, involving great questions of right and wrong, in the settlement of which four States are vitally interested and on the rightful solution of which may depend the very integrity of the Eepublic, and certainly the maintenance of the principle of freedom and the rights of persons and property on which our Government is founded. And if this state of alfairscontinued, it would work the ruin of the commercial, industrial, and laboring interests of Saint Louis and of the Southwest. And they further resolved that while tliey recognized to the fullest extent the right of all men to organize for mutual protection and all legitimate and lawful purposes, and to unitedly abandon employment when they see fit, they denounced as tyrannical, unjust, and illegal to interfere with the rights of others for siich employment, or to prevent by violence or secret or open intimidations the exercise of their rights, and denounced also any and all interference with the rights of jiroperty, and any unlawful dictations from any source as to the unrestricted use of the railways of the companies,' or as to how the business of citizens or corporations shall be conducted ; and all similar efforts to destroy freedom of action or to control the property of othejs, believing them to be subversive of every principle upon which free government and free institutions are founded, and to be equally destructive of the rights of rich and poor, employers and employed, and to threaten the very foundation of society. And they further demanded of th^ Missouri Pacific Railway system that freight traffic be resumed at once, and demanded also of the muni- cipal and State authorities that protection to the full extent of the power of the city and the State be afforded in such resumption. This was fol- lowed by proclamations by the governors of Missouri, Kansas, and Texas, demanding of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company to resume traffic of all kind in the usual way on all railroad lines operated by said company in the States of Missouri, Kansas, and Texas. To add to the complications already existing, the switchmen of the Chicago and Alton ; Eock Island, Wabash ; Missouri Pacific ; Hannibal and Saint Joseph ; Kansas City, Saint Joseph and Council Bluflfs ; the Burlington and Missouri River; Atchison, Topeka and Santa F6; Union Pacific and Kansas City ; Fort Scott and Gulf Railroads, numbering two hundred and thirty persons, struck at Kansas City, and the strike enforced idleness on a large number of engineers and firemen. No trains were allowed to depart, and all traffic came to a standstill. While these events were transpiring on the west side of the river, troubles of even a more serious nature were being enacted on the east side at East Saint Louis. Acts of violence were frequent, and all trains were impeded in their movements. A gradual and partial resumption of railroad traffic was manifest in Missouri, Kansas, and Texas, which portended the end of the great strike. Mr. Powderly again became prominent in his efforts to assist in the settlement of the difficulties. And through a continued correspondence abd repeated interviews, Mr. Powderly telegraphed to Martin Irons, from New York City, under date of March 28, 1886, the following telegram : President J. Gould has consented to our proposition for arbitration, and so tele- graphed Vice-President Hoxie. Order men to resume -work at once. By order of the executive board. „ , , „ T. V. POWDERLY. XX LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AJ?D WEST. And he also sent a telegram of the same import to the Knights of Labor, then on strike in the Southwest. Mr. Powderly was influenced to this course by the letter of Mr. Gonld to him of the same date : New York, March 28, 1886. T. V. Powderly, Esq., G. M. W. : Dear Sir : EeplyiDgto your letter of the 27th instant, I write to say that I will to-morrow morning send the following telegraphic instrnotions : " H. M. HoxiE, " General Manager, Saint Louis : " In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ment of labor in the several departments of this company, you will give preference td our late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during the said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the em- ployes and the company, past or future." Hopine the above will be satisfactory, I remain yours, very truly, ^ ^ JAY GOULD, President. Why the instructions of that letter were not concurred in by Mr. Hoxie he has never explained. On pages 40 to 66 inclusive will be found tes- timony relating to that subject. jSTotwithstaudiifg trafQc was being gradually resumed at the princi- pal points on the Soiathwestern system, and, as is contended in the testi- mony of the officials of the Missouri Pacific Railway or Southwestern system, that the strike was practically over on the 31st of March, yet the testimony shows that the end was not yet. Violence of a more or less serious character was frequ&t. This was notable at De Soto, Mo., the location of the most extensive shops on the Iron Mountain Eailway. There a passing freight train in charge of Conductor Nelson was delayed, Kelson was assaulted, and Yard-master Todd, who at- tempted to interfere on behalf of the conductor, was also assaulted and driven to his boarding-house by an angry mob, and his life probably only saved by the heroic conduct of a Mrs. Duffy, the wife of an engi- neer, who, with pistol in hand, stood in front of her door, braved the mob, and prevented their entrance to the apartments of the fleeing yard- master. On March 30 a conference was held between the general executive board of the Knights of Labor and the officials of the Missouri Pacific Eailway Company in New York, which resulted in the following dis- patch to the striking Knights of Labor in the Southwest: Have your executive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from the employes of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie to adjust any difference. It is true that, when Mr. Powderly's telegrams came announcing his disagreement with Mr. Jay Gould, the frenzy that follows disappoint- ment was let loose. At Texarkana, Atchison, Sedalia, Palestine, and Parsons and East Saint Louis there were riotous proceedings, and in some instances trains were stopped and men were assaulted, but still no delay came from a lack of working force, but simply from disorgan- ized violence. On the 30th of March, by order of the governor of Illinois, Adjutant- General Vance visited East Saiint Louis, for the purpose of making a personal investigation and reporting as to the necessity of military in- tervention. Orders had already been issued for the national guard to hold itself in readiness for immediate duty. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XXI Exciting scenes on this last day of March and the following days of April were being enacted at Fort Worth. At 1.30 p. m. an engine, car- rying a posse of oflicers, intended to guard a train into Alvarado, Tex., was suddenly approached by six men and the engine killed. Later in the day a train of thirty cars was assailed by a mob, " who," to use the language of a witness, " climbed up the sides of the cars like ants." The ofQcers in heavy force did all that men could do to restrain the mob except actually killing, but the brakes were set, pins removed, and when t*he engine departed it bore only six of the thirty cars with which it en- tered the yards. One striker was knocked down by a revolver in the hands of a United States deputy marshal and several arrests were made. At 10 o'clock the next day another effort was made by the ofQcers to move a train, some 2,000 or 3,000 men attacking it and succeeding in palling all thecoux)ling-pins. At Parsons, Kans., matters had been grow- ing from bad to worse, and Governor Martin, upon the recommendation of his adjutant-general, ordered a force of militia to that city. The First Eegiment of the Kansas National Guards, eight companies, numbering 400 men, arrived at Parsons on the evening of April 2. The presence of the militia at Parsons had the desired effect, and compara- tive peace was restored, and on the 3d five freight trains were sent out without molestation. But at Fort Worth, Tex., the affair culminated in a tragedy. It will be observed that in addition to the striking railroad men a large and irresponsible mob had collected and were the most active'in incit- ing violence. Some of these men had never been railroad employes ; others, it is alleged, had long been black-listed by the railroads. The sheriff* and his deputies having determined to take out a freight train at 10 o'clock a. m., an engine loaded with armed officers pulled out and proceeded to the Missouri Pacific yards. After attaching a caboose it proceeded to Hodges Station, from where it was to pull a freight train into the city. The train proceeded slowly to the crossing of the Fort Worth and New Orleans Eailroad, where it stopped, as is customary before crossing. The switch was found open, and as the officers ap- proached the switch, they discovered five men with Winchester rifles, partly concealed in the weeds a few yards distant. The chief of the posse and deputies called out for the men to throw up their hands. Immediately firing began on both sides, and resulted in three police- men being shot and one striker. The prompt response at this time of Governor Ireland, of Texas, to • a call for military aid gave some assurance of the restoration of order. His militia was rapidly ordered to Forth Worth. In themean time negotiations were still pending between the heads of the Knights of Labor and the railroad ofiicials to settle the difficulties. And in pursuance of such efforts the Hoxie Turner interview was had in Saint Louis on the 3d of April. The strike continued through the month of April without incident of any graver character than the occa- sional killing of an engine, derailment of a train, the moving of troops, and the continued issuance of orders and the passage of resolutions and correspondence of all kinds. The quantity of this peculiar mass of matter would fill a volume. Only that part of this correspondence nec- essary to a historical sequence to the narrative is here given. In East Saint Louis, on the 7th of April, large bodies of rioters, to the number of some 300 persons, formed in procession, and marched to the various yards and freight-houses, demanded that the laborers cease their work, and attempted to take forcible possession, but were resisted by the force of deputy sheriffs armed with Winchester rifles. The XXII LABOR TROUBLES IN THE- SOUTH A\D WEST. sheriff increased his force of deputies the next day by addina: over one hundred more to it. These men and bthers had volunteered, and many of them in response to a notice that good men were wanted to act as deputy sheriffs, the compensation being $5 a day and board furnished. We now approach the terrible tragedy of April 9, at East Saint Louis, the bloody end of the riots and strikes of 1886. ■ A brief history of what occurred on that day, and as nearly correct as it can be gleaned from the testimony, is about as follows : The Louisville and Nashville roads had determined to run Its trains in at all hazards, and for that purpose had at its service guards of a considerable force, consisting of deputy sheriffs and marshals. At 10 o'clock a. m. of that day the first effort was made to move a coal train. When the train reached the crossing where the strikers and sightseers had congregated, the engineer and fireman were stoned, and the train \ stopped and forced back to its starting point. A second effort was made, but with no better success. In the afternoon the company resolved to send a posse of deputies to clear the crossing. For this purpose nine men, armed with Winchester rifles and revolvers, were selected. When the posse approached the trestle it was greeted by jeers, , yells, hooting, and profane epithets. The chief of the posse commanded the mob to disperse, and attempted to arrest a man who was in the act of throwing a stone. The squad of deputies were then furiously assailed with stones, as is alleged by the deputies, several of them being struck. One of the deputies raised his rifle, fired, and a man was seen to fall. Thenshowers of stones and pistol-shots from all directions began to rain upon the officers, who returned the fire with their guns and pistols, with deadly effect, intb the crowd. The firing was kept up until the crossing was clear, the people fleeing panic-stricken and rushing into houses in every direction for protection and safety. ^ The deputies, after a brief parley, started for Saint Louis by way ot the bridge over the Mississippi, and in the^ approach of the bridge halted to await developments. They were here overtaken by the mayor of East Saint Louis, the city clerk, and two policemen, who attempted to place them under arrest. They protested, and continued their retreat over the bridge, being followed by the officers and a constantly increas- ing crowd of excited men. The mayor and other parties seized several of the deputies and attempted to drag them back by force, and then the firing began and one man in the ranks of the pursuing party fell. This checked the crowd and the deputies were enabled to go to Saint Louis, where they surrendered themselves and were locked up. The scene at Bast Saint Louis after the fight was distressing. Six men and one woman were killed, and one seriously wounded ; but the end had not come yet. Bloodshed was succeeded by incendiarism. At an early hour in the night of this memorable day, a car loaded with baled hay on the Louisville and Nashville road was discovered to be on fire. This fire had hardly been under control before another fire was discovered on the Cairo Short Line— a caboose and three empty box cars. The third Are was ont he rib track of the Cairo Short Line, and included one passenger car and five box cars and a shanty used as an oil and machine house. Two loaded cars and one empty were burned on the Pittsburgh track of the Cairo Short Line, which was followed soon afterward by two more, and a sixth fire occurred along a string of box cars on one of the sidings of the main track of the Cairo Short Line, and fifteen or sixteen cars were destroyed. These six fires resulted in a loss of over forty cars, a large lot of valuable hard- wood lumber used in building passenger coaches and other property of the Cairo Short Line Company; amounting, in all, to about $75,000. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XXHI Upon the request of Sherifi' Eobiequet and other officials, Governor Oglesby, of Illinois, immediately ordered the National Guards of that State to the scene of trouble at East Saint Louis. They began arriv- ing on the night of the 9th, and relieving many of the deputies as- sumed control of affairs, and an armed trnce was the consequence. At first eight companies rendezvoused at East Saint Louis, and finally several more companies, including a battery with a Gatling gun, were upon the field, and order was restored. On the 12th of April this committee was appointed to investigate the cause and extent of the disturbed condition then in existence on the southwestern system of railroads. On the 20th of April the committee began the examination of witnesses. After examining a number of wit- nesses in Washington, it proceeded to Saint Louis on the 28th< arriving there on the 30th, and at once began its duties at that point. After exam- ining a nui5>,ber of prominent business men as to the effect of the strike in Saint Louis, the committee divided itself into subcommittees, one to pro- ceed to the West, composed of the chairman, Messrs. Burnes and Stewart, and the other to the Southwest, of which Mr. Grain was chairman, Messrs. Outhwaite, Buchanan, and Parker, members, for the purpose of facili- tating the taking of testimony. On the evening of the 1st of May a correspondence was begun between the executive board of the Knights of Labor, which was at that time in Saint Louis, and members of the committee, which resulted in declaring off' the strike, to take effect on Mays. The subcommittee in the Southwest was absent ten days, and in that time traveled 2,000 miles and examined 328 witnesses. The subcom- mittee which went to Atchison, Kansas City, and Sedalia, traveled over 700 miles and examined 250 witnesses, making a total of miles traveled from Washington and return of 4,880 miles, and an examination of 578 witnesses. The effect of the strike was and is a serious loss to the business in- terests of that section of thecountry ; the public generally, the producing classes, the mercantile population, and everybody was caused to suffer even more than the strikers or the railroads, for their losses were beyond computation. The loss to the strikers alone, 9,000 of them, for 50 days, at $2 a day, would amount to the enormous sum of $900,000. The loss of the non-striking employes, necessarily deprived of employ- ment pending the strike, is roughly estimated at $500,000. The loss of property, destruction of engines, ears, bridges, machinery, of the company and the loss of revenue to this company, taking the earnings of 1885 as a comparison, was about $2,800,000. The loss to the general public certainly amounts to millions of dollars. Your committee having thus given as far as practicable a history of the strike on this Southwestern system of railroads known as the Wa- bash system, Missouri Pacific Eailway and Texas and Pacific Eailroad, the people of the United States may have an understanding of what occurred and form their conclusions as to the result and the remedies. With regard to the general question of the right of workmen to com- bine together for determining with their employers the terms on which only they will consent to work for them, provided the combination be per- fectly voluntary and full liberty be left to all other workmen to under- take the work which the parties combining shall refuse, and no obstruc- tions be placed in the way of the employer resorting elsewhere in this country in search of a supply of labor, we think there is no ground in justice or sound policy in withholding such a right from the workmen. It cannot be doubted that a demand, backed by the resolution of a large XXIV LABOE TEOUBLES IN -THE SOUTH AND WEST. body of workraeu, to decline work, if the demaud be not acceded to, comes with more force than that of an isolated workman. The work- men may reasonably claim to be allowed any advantage which they can derive from such concerted action in bargaining with their employer from time to time as to the terms on which they will dispose of their labor. The holding out of any single workman, out of a large number, may advance his cause but little, and does not much affect the employer. The works of the latter go on, though perhaps not in complete efflciency until a further supply of labor is obtained ; but the workman is gener- ally in such a position that he must suffer unless he either accepts tiie terms offered or is able speedily to find work elsewhere. He, in general, cannot wait. It is to redress this inequality that the power of combin- ing is justified by the promoters of trade unions. But, upon the, same principle, and for a precisely similar i;eason, whilst conceding to such workmen as desire to exercise it an extended right to combine against their employers, especial care should be taken that an equal right be secured to those workmen who desire to keep aloof from the combination and dispose of their labor with perfect individual freedom. The workmen who think It for their advantage to combine together in the disposal of their labor are no more justified in constrain- ing any other workman, who does not desire to enter such combination and bring his labor into common stock with theirs, than an association of capitalists are in combining to advance prices or rates of transportation to be paid by the general public. Your committee have aimed in this investigation to represent the 60,000,000 people of the United States, who have the right to the en- joyment of transit over the highways of the Kepublic, but without in. justice to the railway companies or their employes. There can be no doubt that the concentration of wealth and power,' and the oppressions which have occurred, as shown in the evidence taken, may have promoted the unrest of labor, as is painfully apparent Whatever remedy will give the proper protection to the capitiil in- vested in the railroads of the country and at the same time protect their employes from injustice and oppression, your committee propose that they shall together, as a single instrument of our interstate com- merce, be looked upon as the servants of the people of the United States, and as such be regulated and protected by law. The Congress of the United States having recently passed an act, now a law, to regulate interstate commerce, your committee are of the opin- ion that, whatever may be the defects in that law, if any, an enlight- ened commission, soon to be appointed, will recommend prompt legisla- tion to give the protection which is needed to those who are interested only in the regular and proper operation and management of the rail- roads of the country. In view of all the facts, it might have been better to have raised a commission with general powers; and, after a full examination of all ex- isting difficulties, to recommend appropriate legislation to carrv out the purposes which are proposed in the act of Congress. A majority of your committee cannot believe that arbitration can be effective for the reason that there must be two parties to the arbitra- tion, and either may decline. And said majority further believe that when disturbances occur it would not be efffective in immediately re- dressing wrongs or restore the means of transit of person and property to the people of the country. i i- j liABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOTTTH AND WEST. XXV It will be found in the evidence tliai there were grievances of which the laborers and workingineu of the roads had just reason to complain, and these may have extended or enlarged the strike. The general op- pression or grievances complained of, as will be noticed, was generally by subordinates who had power over certain laborers or persons em- ployed on the road. Noticeably, they were asked to work more hours than were contracted for; they were reduced in their time without no- tice ; they were carried by the railroads in the night, without provision being made whereby they could obtain sleep, to make repairs of bridges, or on parts of the roads which had been destroyed by accident, or they were not allowed pay for traveling at night, and in some instances even not given transportation on the road back to their homes. These grievances were, to a great extent, unhappy incidents of the dispute leading to the strike. It is also shown, as will be noticed in the testimony, that the Texas and Pacific Company had what is known as a black list, which con- tained the names of some of the persons. By no combination of capital or no extent of incorporated power can the listing of an American citizen as being unworthy of employment be justified. The power of Congress to deal with the situation presented by this strike, must be found in the provisions of section eight, Article I of the Constitution of the United States, by which Congress is empowered to provide for the general welfare of the United States, and to regulate commerce among the several States, and to establish post-offlces and post-roads. Congress has already provided, by section 3964 of the Eevised Stat- utes, " that all railroads or parts of railroads which are now or may hereafter be in operation shall be post-roads established as such under the authority of the Constitution." Having cited the express provision of the Constitution authorizing Congress to regulate commerce among the States, we need but refer to the statutes enacted protecting post-roads ; and those regulating com- merce upon the high seas, and on our navigable rivers, in defining the du- ties, obligations of, and penalties against, those engaged therein, as proof that ample power to control and regulate, so far as interstate commerce is involved, as well the rights and duties of the employers as of the em- ployes therein exists, and has been and may be further exercised. EXPENSES OF COMMITTEE. The committee have filed with the Clerk of the House an itemized statement of its expenditures, amounting In all to $4,002.4:0. Accom- panying the committee were Col. C. W. Coombs, deputy eergeant-at- arms, Mr. W. F. Eeber, clerk to committee, and Mr. A. C. Welch, official House committee stenographer. Mr. Eeber acted also as stenographer to the subcommittee which went to Atchison, Kansas City, and Sedalia; and this subcommittee also took the greater part of the testimony which was taken in Saint Louis. This is a unanimous report ; but it must be remembered that all legis- lation Is the result of compromise, and therefore individual members of the committee reserve the right to differ from some of the conclu- sions. • H. Eep. 4174 iii LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XXVn VIEWS OF THE MINORITY. The undersigned is one of those referred to in the report of the ma- jority as not being able to assent to all portions of that report. The report is divided into two parts : First, a narrative of the events ante- cedent to and during the strike ; and, second, conclusions arrived iat from a consideration of the testimony. The narrative portion is the re- sult of much labor spent in the study of the testimony, and the ar- rangement in consecutive order of the facts contained therein. The result is a clear and comprehensive statement, correct in the main. In one important particular, however, this statement is defective. By inadvertence, no doubt, one of the main causes of discontent on the Texas and Pacific just preceding the strike on that road is but inci- dentally mentioned in the report, and even that mention is not in its proper place in the narrative. Convinced that any history of this most disastrous strike must be incomplete which does not make prominent the grievances suffered by the employes on that road, their abortive efforts to have those grievances redressed, and the angry and discon- tented feeling engendered thereby, the undersigned has thought it im- portant to supply this deficiency by giving the matter somewhat more in detail. That such grievances existed is abundantly shown by the testimony. They were of various kinds, such as reduction of wages below the point named in the agreement signed on the termination of the previous strike, non-payment of wages at the rate of '' time and a half for overtime," as provided for in said agreement ; no extra pay for work in water, or travel on Sunday and at night ; small deficiencies in amounts of checks forwarded for wages earned, and other matters. The testimony taken by the subcommittee which visited Texas, jas to the existence and char- acter of these grievances, was so complete as to be conclusive, and, in fact, after a few attempts at overcoming it on the part of the railroad officials, all further effort to disprove it was practically abandoned by them. These grievances not being redressed, save in a few instances, the un- easy feeling left by the old strike was thereby deepened into discontent, and the way was the more easily prepared for the strike which followed. The failure to have these grievances redressed was very unfortunate. The responsibUity of such failure will be located by a moment's atten- tion to the testimony as to methods adopted by the workmen to secure redress. • It appears by this testimony that when a workman suffered what he felt to be a grievance, the orderly method was for him to make com- plaint of the injury to his local assembly. It was then investigated by the committee on grievances of such assembly. If his complaint was found just, it was then forwarded to the chairman of the executive com- mittee of the district assembly, to be by him presented to the officials of the company for adjustment. Many such grievances were thus investigated, found well founded, and forwarded to Martin Irons, chairman of District Assembly No. 101. No redress arriving, the parties aggrieved naturally supposed that their grievances had been presented and remained unredressed. In fact, a number who testified that they had complaints, which had teen pre- 'H. Rep. 4174 iii XXVIII LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND Wi:.ST. sented, and which had not been rectified, when subji-cted to cross-ex- amination admitted that all they knew about the matter was that the complaints had been forwarded and no redress had arrived. The supposition that the officials had refused redress was undoubt- edly strengthened by the promise of the redress of " many other griev- ances" contained in the circular issued by Mr. Irons to the subordinate assemblies on the eve of the strike, asking for a vote upon the ordering of the strike, and as stated the discontent and anger among the employes were greatly increased by this supposed failure to redress their wrongs. Upon the cross-examination of Mr. Irons at Saint Louis, he admitted receiving these grievances, and said that he had presented but one of them to the railroad officials at Saint Louis, and that one was promptly redressed. He claimed, in explanation of his failure to present them, that these grievances were not properly to be presented to the chief officials of the road at Saint Louis', but belonged for adjustment to the local officials stationed at the points where the grievances arose. Whether this claim be correct or not, it will be seen at a glance that, between the local assemblies and Martin Irons on the one hand and the chief officials of the road at Saint Louis and the local officials at other points on the other hand, the apparently well-devised machinery for the redress of grievances failed in its intended operation and effect. Had the full fact been made known tjo the workmen that their grievances had lodged somewhere between them and the persons they were designed to ultimately reach, no doubt a kindlier feeling would have existed . Without this knowledge, and believing, and with reason to so believe, that their complaints had been persistently ignored, they were incensed, and who shall say, from their, standpoint, that they had not cause to be incensed. At all events, all this largely prepared the way for a hearty co-operation by them in the strike when ordered, and largely contributed to their will- ingness to unite in favor of the strike being ordered, and no history of the strike on the Texas Pacific is comp ete without mention of this fa6t. As to the destruction of property and the assaults upon life which occurred during the strike, attention is called to the fact that perhaps in no State in the Union is there any lack of local law sufficient, if en- forced, to protect both person and property. Certainly, with possibly an exception, by the faulty wording of one of the statutes of the State of Texas, the committee found the local laws already in existence suffi- cient for such purpose. That these laws were not enforced in some places, for weeks even, cannot be disputed; but the fault 'lay not with the law, but with its sworn administrators. The protection of life and property within the confines of any State is primarily the duty of that State. The policing power is for the State to exercise, and if those charged with that power fail to execute it, the remedy would seem be, not the |nactment of more law*, but a change of officials. And yet the fact must be recognized that the problem of railroad management and regulation seems to be rapidly outgrowing State lines, ■ and is pushing to the front for recognition and solution. While the police powers are for the State, the security of uninterrupted transportation for the shipper of interstate commerce seems to be within the power of the General Government tp protect. Some legislation, crude it must be acknowledged to be, and but tentative, at the best, in relation to the transportation of interstate commerce, has been enacted by the present Congress. The practical workings of that legislation may suggest further and additional regulation and more complete remedies in the future. While we are wise, perhaps, in relying upon such workings for additional sug- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. XXIX gestions for legislation, still regret must be expressed that the report does not discuss more fully and exhaustively the various questions which present theniselves to any intelligent reader of the testimony re- lating to this question of the regulation and control of the carriers of interstate commerce. Here was a strike which presented, in one phase or another, every question w];iich can arise in connection with this subject. The strike was unprecedented in extent and completeness. It covered, among others, a road already in the hands of the United States court. It ex- tended to a demand for the severance of all trafQc with another road iu the hands of another United States court. All the roads aflfected were engaged in the transportation of interstate commerce. By the stop- page of traffic large quantities of interstate freight were detained, and some of it perished for want of transportation. If ever there was an occasion presented in which the whole problem of railroad transportation, the powers and duties of common carriers, and their relation to the public, the power of the General Government to compel the carrier to transport interstate commerce, and the 'extent, if any, to which it may, in the exercise of that power, lay its hand upon the carrier, and the employes of such carrier, through Federal legisla- tion, came up legitimately for discussion, it was the occasion in hand. No such discussion is had. But little, if any, consideration of the exis- tence or character of the power of the Federal Government in the prem- ises, and no discussion of the extent to which such power, if it exists, might be safely used, nor of the means by which it might be exercised, appears in the report. . The undersigned will not undertake such discussion. If other rea- sons for declining such undertaking were wanting the following facts would seem to be sufficient excuse. They are stated not by way of complaint, but by way of explanation. The committee immediately upon its appointment met and arranged for the prosecution of its work. It proceeded to the West, divided into subcommittees, and took testi- mony simultaneously at different points. It is confidently claimed that no committee ever traveled more miles, examined more witnesses, and took more testimony in a given time. The matter was probed to the bottom, every essential fact was obtained, and every effort made to ar- rive at an impartial ascertainment of the truth. This done, the com- mittee returned to Washington. One witness, whose testimony was thought by some to be desirable, was sick and could not be examined. He remained ill, and finally died, never having rallied sufficiently to appear in answer to the subpoena of the committee. Meanwhile the committee were not called together, and at the commencement of the present session some members of the com- mittee made urgent and repeated requests for a meeting. Finally a meeting was held, and steps taken to formally close the testimony. Another meeting for consultation was held, at which the undersigned could not be present. The first draft of a report was not presented to the committee for con- sideration until about the middle of February. It was referred to a subcommittee for revision. The undersigned first saw the revised re- port March 1st, and it was first read to the full committee March 2d. The undersigned expressed his dissatisfaction with the report, and his conviction that it was then too late to properly frame and supply the discussion which the importance of the subject demanded. It was then near the close of the session ; important legislation was being finally acted upon, and the duties of the members lay in attend- XXX LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ance upon the session. However, he obtained leave to add some sup- plemental views, and an adjournment was had, as he understood, until 2 o'clock in the afternoon of the next day. Befora the time fixed for such adjourned meeting had arrived the report was presented, and all opportunity to present and discuss additional views was at an end. No bad faith in this is charged. It was, no doubt, a pure inadvert- ence, but the effect was the same nevertheless. The effect of this late presentation of the report must necessarily be to prevent any consid- eration of the subject being entertained by the present Congress, and the only benefit to the country at large of the labors of the committee must consist in the fact that a large mass of testimony covering every phase of a widely-extended, fiercely-fought, and long-continued suspen- sion of operations on thousands of miles of railways has been gathered together for the study of the economist and the legislator. JAMES BUCHANAN. SUB-GOMMITTEE. * HOnSr. ^. G. OURTIN", Chairman. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Tuesday, April 20, 188C. The special committee appointed under resolutiou of the House of Representatives- on the 13th instant for the purpose of investigating the labor troubles in the South and Southwest met to-day at half-past 12, in a room of the Congressional Hotel, near the Capitol, to open the inquiry. The chairman (Mr. Curtin) stated that they Tvoald only use that room temporarily until they could obtain a suitable room in the Capitol. Mr. Parker read the resolution under which the committee was appointed, as follows : Resolved, That a select committee, to consist of seven members, bo appointed by the Speaker to investigate the cause and extent of the disturbed condition now existing between the railway corporations engaged in carrying on inter-State commerce anil their employes in the States of Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, and Texas. Said committee ehall have power to send for persons and papers, examine witnesses under oath, sit during the sessions of the House, and may visit or send a subcommittee to such places in such States as may bo necessary in order to facilitatesuch investiga- tion. It shall report to the House during the present session, with such recommenda- lions as it may deem proper to make; and the expense incurred, not to exceed the sum of $3,000, shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House upon vouchers ceirtified by the chairman and one member of the committee. TEERENCE V. POWDERLY, General Master Workman of the Knights of Labor, being sworn : The Chairman said : You understand that this committee is raised by the Con- gress of the United States for the purpose, if possible, of getting down to the cause of the unrest and disturbance that now exists in this country, and especially as to the the conflict between labor and capital, or employer and the employed. This committee are fully sensible, sir, that the course you have taken in your previous life and your disposition has been to endeavor to quiet the unrest of the people. Yon will please now give to this committee, in your own language and in your own form, your impressions, together -with, any papers that you may have, or cor- respondence or anything that wiU aid this committee in the investigation of the causes of the troubles. We know quite well, sir, that you have Intelligence enough to go on and give this committee any information you may possess. After you are through with your statement the m€inbers of the committee may choose to interro- gate you. Mr. PowDEBLY. Mr. Chairman, when your message came to me I did not under- stand its purport, and came without any papers and without any knowlege of what might 1)6 required of me, and your question opens up so broad a field that I have not given the question suffieient consideration to enable me to answer it properly, for It takes in a great many questions that are being considered throughout the country. I would rather answer questions that may be put to me, and if it is necessary to meet with the committee again after I had secured my papers I would be willing to do so. The Chairmak. What in your judgment and opinion is the cause of the disturb- ances now existing in those localities spoken of in that resolution ? The Witness. The causes as they are given to me are that the men who are now engaged in the difficulties in the West have a bill of grievances which they claim to have presented to the manager of the Missouri Pacific Railroad at Saint Louis. It has been stated that the entire cause of the present strike on the lines of the Texas Pacific and the Missouri Pacific and Iron Mountain Railroads, and the Missouri, Kan- sas and Texas, is from the discharge of a man named Hall. That immediately fol- .lowing his discharge and the refusal to reinstate him the employes of all the railways struck. This the employ^ of this entire system, known as the Gould system, claim is not true. That was one and only one of the many causes for the action taken. Here 18 an official statement coming from the committee of District Assemblies 101 and 78, Knights of Labor, -which I will read with your permission: "To the public : , , , ., , ~. . , "In view of the fact that the assertion is made day after day by railroad officials .and their apolpgists and defenders that tho employes of the Missouri Pacific Railroad ,had no cause for striking, no grievances against the company whatever, that they 3984 CONG 1 2 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND 'WEST. struck to punish the Texas and Pacific Eailroad, it is necessary that the particulars be laid before the world, in order to set at rest at once and forever the siUy charges ■which ignorance or malice now publicly and repeatedly proclaim. "Governor Martin, of Kansas, and Governor Marmadulie, of Missouri, in a letter to Mr. Hoxio of recent date, say: 'After careful investigation we are unable to find wherein the Missouri Pacific Eailroad Company has violated the terms and conditions of the agreement made on the 15th of March, 1685, touching its employds in our respective States.' " What was the contract of March, 1885 ? Its chief provisions were, first, that the wages of September, 1883, were to be the basis, with one and one-half time for Sun- days and over-time over ten hours ; second, no man's wages were to be reduced with- , out thirty days' notice. That contract was to be observed on all roads under the Missouri PaciJao management. But leaving the Texas and Pacific railway entirely out of the present consideration, that contract has been broken, violated, and ig- nored time after time, to wit : "I'irst. In many cases the September wages never were restored, as the agreement provided. " Second. Section foremen were reduced $5 per month without any notice. "Third. Boiler-makers were sent out on the road from Denison, and allowed only one-half time while traveling. "Fourth. Engine-wipers in round-houses were reduced from |1.26 to $1.15 per day. "Fifth. The car foreman at Fort Worth was reduced $10 per month, and then had to do the work of two men, for which the company had previously paid double what they paid him. " Sixth. The foreman in the mill at De Soto, Mo., was reduced $10 per month with- out notice. " Seventh. Car men at Parsons reduced about $10 per month and no notice given. " Eighth. Many men worked over the entire system eleven and twelve hours per ■day for $1.15 without anything for over-time, and on Sunday the same long hoursfor same sum, $1.15, without over-time. " Ninth. Check clerks in freight houses reduced $5 per month without notice. "Tenth. The men were discharged on no other grounds than because they bad taken iiart in the strike of 1885, and new men were employed, at less wages, in their places. A systematic method of discharging in detail and replacing with cheaper men was being carried out, which if allowed tp go on would have resulted in bring- ing the men back to the reduction basis against which they struck in 1885." Then follows some comment by the committee; and this is the statement made by the committee, and these are the grievances that they have complained of. The Chairman. What knowledge have you as to the truth of any of these state- inents? The Witness. I have never made a personal investigation into them. When this matter first came to my personal attention we were holding a meeting of the execu- tive board of Knights of Labor at Philadelphia, and had, several matters of impor- tance before us. We saw through the papers that there was a strike on the Texas Pacific, and that a strike on the Missouri Pacific followed It. But hearing nothing from our men there, or anything ofQc'al, we did not know whether there was any- thing in the report wo saw or not. I received a dispatch from the vice-president of the Missouri Pacific Eoad, Mr. Hopkins, asking some questions. Immediately follow- ing that, we telegraphed to the West for particulars, and received an answer some- what similar to what I have read now. Mr. OuTnwAiTB. From whom ? The Witness. We telegraphed there to the man whose name was given in the papers, Martin Irons. Mr. Page answerer) the dispatch ; and then some gentlemen (I do not know whether they were lawyers engaged by mortgage holders of Texas Pacific stock or stockholders) came to see me and asked if I could not do something to end the strike. We then telegraphed to the receiver. The Chairman. Do you know the names of the lawyers? The Witness. Mr. Dickson was the name of one of tJiem. Question. Have yon any documents or papers to show the names of the men who came?— Answer. I can very readily get the addresses of all of them. The Chairman. Very well. The Witness. We asked Governor Brown, \fho was receiver of the Texas Pacific, or one of them, if he would consent to meet with a committee appointed by our ex- ecutive — it would be a special committee of our board — for the purpose of arbitrating and settling the difficulties ou the Texas Pacific road. His reply was that there was no trouble with their employes. Their former employes had some disturbance, but there was no trouble with their present employes. This telegram was sent to him at the written request of the men Whose money was invested in the Texas Pacific road. They were anxious to have the matter settled, though the road was in the hands of the United States court. Following after that we hurried up our business, and I went West to obtain information and meet committees from the Union Paciflo LABOR , TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 3 Railroad and those lines which constitute the Gould system, and the i mployfis make the same statement that is made in the bill of grievances I have read. I then tele- graphed to Mr. Hoxie, manager of the Missouri Pacific road, asking an interview to arrange some terms of settlement, and he refused to meet with me in my official ca- pacity, but stated that he would meet with me as a citizen. I had no authority to act as a citizen, and of course did not meet with him. I came back East, and a few •days after that went to New York and had a conference with Mr. Gould. The history of that has been published so extensively in the papers that it is not necessary to refer to it further. There are little abuses that I do not think that the managers of the Pa- cific road know ofalong the line. Along the Iron Mountain Railroad they had a system of taking 25 cents a month from the wages of men who received $1 a day for what is known as the hospital fund. The man who receives |2 a day pays 50 cents a taonth, and in proportion as their wages increase do they pay to this 'fund. It is claimed that as soon as they are taken sick they are discharged and denied the right to enter the hospital or get relief from this fund ; and there are cases where men have made contracts to buy land or lots on regular annual payments, with interest, of course, and having paid all but the last installment, were discharged. In that sec- tion of country it is different to what can be done in the East. A man cannot go to the next town and get a situation, for the towns are too far apart, and the conse- quence was that these men had the property taken from them. One of them especially is spoken of, who was discharged when he had paid all but the last installment and the interest, was obliged to remain idle so long that he lost his property, and is now living in his own house as a tenant on account of failing to make his payment in accordance with the terms of the contract ; and not only did he lose the lot, but the house along with it. And it isclaimed that they have several instances of that kind. The Chaieman. Can we call any one before this committee that they had exacted the 25 cents per month from ? The Witness. You can, if we were correctly informed. Mr. Buchanan. You find this to be the case, and you say that yon do not suppose that the directors know of that ; is that simply an inference of yours ? The Witness. I do not believe that they do. I do not think they know of the true condition of aifairs. The Chairman. Can we not get the names of some persons who can prove the facts that you have stated? The Witness. You can got the names. The Chaikman. We certainly want those names. The Witness. Very well, they can be obtained. The Chaieman. I want to ask you this question. The Knights of Labor, of which I know you are the head, is a secret society. Now, outside of any secrecy, and wo do not desire to know anything of your secrets, I want you to tell the committee what is the purpose of that society, whether it is for the protection of laborers and their in- terests, and whether it is peaceful in all its aim's f The Witness. The aim of the organization, in a few words, is to protect the la- borer, to benefit his condition, and to secure a better feeling between him and his employer, and all our methods are peaceful. We have never counseled violence of any kind. The Chairman. That is a proper answer. I always supposed that was the purpose of the organization. The Witness (continuing). But men will once in a while do acts that violate the law. We cannot help that occurring sometimes where they are so much excited and mterestcd. The Chaikman. Will you please state to the committee whether the Knights of Labor is a society to protect the labor, not of railroads alone, but also those who work in mines and factories ? The Witness. It is our attempt to do that. Our association is.intended to be an educational one. We aim to have our members study the circumstances by which ■&ey are surrounded, and not theirs alone but also those of the men for whom they work, so that they may know what their proper relations to their employers should "'■be. And we claim that it will be no more than right tomeet on equitable terms and on equal ground and have a thorough understanding with each other. The Chairman. Please give to tMe committee about the substance of what you wrote to me as to what occurs when receivers are appointed ? The Witness. We find that when a road does not pay, or for any cause, whether Mismanagement or otherwise, there is a dispoBi|;ipn to place the road in the hands of Receivers, we find this to be the case : That when it is necessary to manage the men in any way — to give orders for the management of a railroad system— that the com- pany that had the management before it went into the hands of a receiver can do it. If we ask that they take .any notice of anything in the way of a grievance, we are referred to the receiver, who will say that the road is in the hands of the United States court, and that they have no power and can do nothing. In other words, if there is a reduction of wages, or if there is a discharge of men, or anything of that 4 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. kind, -we are referred to the United States court ; if there is any other business to be- transacted with the directors of the company, they simply apply to «>e receiver and he does not feel bound to apply to the court. The Chairman. Do you know personally of any wrong of that kind, and it not personally, can yon give us the names of persons who do ? The Witness. I cannot give you the names now, but I can get yoa the names. The Chairman. That is, they wreck a road and then put it in the hands of a re- ceiver? The Witness. I do not know. They fix it some way. Mr. Buchanan. They run it ashore whether they wreck it or not i The Witness. They bleed it or milk it diy and then place it in the hands of the- , United States court. If the United States court can run a railroad after it is rumed, it certainly can run one without any trouble of this kind. The Chairman. That is a logical conclusion. You have papers that would be of consequence to this committee? The Witness. I believe I have, but they are at our general office. The Chairman. We shall require any papers that will throw light on the subject. So far we have made a good start on what you say to-day. 1 do not ask you to divulge any secrets of the Knights of Labor, because I do not belong to any society. You have stated the object of the society is to protect the labor of the country as far as possible against the exactions of capital or incorporations. The Witness. To protect not only the labor but to protect the manufacturer as well. We desire that the work shall be honestly done and that he shall be able to- pay good wages. The Chairman. And that your methods are entirely peaceable? The Witness. We are liable to be misunderstood about that. Of course in a strike a portion of our members once in a while may break the law ; but I want to say that if in this investigation you discover that Knights of Labor along the roads out there have violated the laws of the land or our laws we will be as ready to assist in punish- ing them as we will be in upholding them where they have not. Mr. Buchanan. Your public utterances have demonstrated that. The Witness. I have been somewhat misunderstood in relation to some of my statements. When I say that I will be willing to expose everything in connection with our order if our contestant will do the same as far as his management of roads is concerned, I speak fairly and truthfully. I have no objection to showing everything in connection with our organization. Oursecret signs, pass-words and all, I can give to -your committee. I want it understood that as far as the executive board is con- ' cerned, we have from over four thousand assemblies indorsements of the secret cir- cular of mine that has been made public since it was issued. They bear me out in what I have said, so that you can understand from the tone of that circular what our membership would do ; and when I said that I was willing, that our organ- ization was willing, to meet our contestant before the courts, I had no idea that I was making a statement that was wrong. I believe that the laws of our land stand above every organization, no matter what its name may be, and above any corporation whatever ; that the law of the land is made for all alike, and that if a man violates the law, be be a Knight of Labor, a private citizen, or a member of the corporation, - he shall be punished for it, and that his connection with an organization shall be no shield for him. Andl believe, on the other hand, if a man possess millions and violates the law, that he, too, shall suffer as though he had not a cent. I have made that statement, and people have seen iit to say I had invited anarchy. If that is anarchy, then in the name of God what is law t ' Mr. Buchanan. You believe in the old-time declaration, that all men are created free and equal ? The Witness. Yes ; and that they shall stand the same before the law. I possess- as much in this country as the man who owns millions. I was born here. My inter- ests are here, and^f I hold only a handful of this earth's possessions, it is my all, and is as much to me as the millions are to the man who possesses them. The Chairman. The handful is a guarantee in the bill of rights— protection of life, liberty, and property. The Witness. I certainly think this has been misunderstood. Our declaration of principles has been summed up as the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; they believe in all but the last. A great many are constantly pursuing happiness and never catching it. The Chairman. That is not good philosophy. There I differ with you. The Witness. I do not say that a man should not catch up with it once in a while. Mr. Burns. The country generally, and the House of Representatives especially, seem to place, and I doubt not properly, a great deal of oonlidence in your integrity, your intelligence, and your patriotism ; and being disposed to consider questions- practically, I would ask you if you have given thought to the question of a legis- lative remedj' for the evils to which you have alluded? LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 5 The Witness. I have never worked it out properly. I have thought it over, but liave not followed it to its logical conclusion. Mr. BUBKS. Win you be able during the probable sitting of this committee to give us your views upon the question of a remedy for these troubles ? The WiTKBSS. How long will the committee be likely to sit t The Chairmak. About two months. The Witness. I think that we will be able to give you an official statement from ■our order before that. Mr. Burns. I would suggest further, that as you are doubtless as well acquainted on the Constitution as anybody, that it would be well to consider what in your judg- ment could be constitutionally done, or what might be done, or ought to be done, by -amendment to the Constitution. The Witness. I shall attempt to do so, and thank you for the suggestion. Mr. Parkek. What was the date of the commencement of this strike T The Witness. I do not know the exact day. It was the latter part of February {after conference with Mr. Turner]— the 27th of February. Q. Have you got data of the preliminary steps that led to the strike t — A. I have not. Q. Are there documents which can be produced that will show to the public the history of the steps which led to the issuing of the order for the strike? — ^A. I think you will find all this when the committee goes to the Southwest. Q. Can you tell us by whom the strike was ordered? — A. No ; I cannot. That can be reached there. Q. Was it ordered by District Assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were the authorities above the District Assemblies consulted upon it T — A. No. Q. That whole subject can be shown by document in all cases ? — A. Yes. Q. Which you will try to give us ? — A. We will give you every aid to reach the exact truth in the matter. Q. (By Mr. Octhwaite.) Can you inform us if any efEbrts were made to arbitrate the difficulties — any propositions from the employes before the strike took place ? — A. I cannot answer you very fully there, for I do not know all the steps that were taken. I simply know that they have made known their grievances to Mr, Hoxie ; that they laid their grievances before him on one, two, or three occasions. Mr. Outhwaite. Then there was an opportunity for the company to settle the matter? Mr. Chain. In this statement that you did not read, I find a declaration which I will read to you [addressing witness]. It says here : "The men asked for redress time after time, but in vain. The executive committee ■of the Knights of Labor sought to settle the matter, but were referred from one offi- cial to another and deferred from time to time. A committee was asked to arbitrate amicably its violations ; but this was refused." The Chairman. That ought to have gone into the record. The Witness. I never read that until just then. Mr. Crain (reading) : " The reply of the general superintendent of the Missouri Pacific Eailways, in which he refuses to agree to a conference on our grievances as proposed by the district master workman of District 101 can be produced." That is what you thought were comments ? The Witness. I never read anything but the bill of grievances before. I never read the comments. There was a statement made, and I believe that Mr. Hopkins was asked whether it was true or not. The Chairman. Mr. Powderly stated that he would not read the comments ot the as- sembly committee; and I think he overlooked the statement of facts contained in the comments and declarations, and simply read the statement of grievances as a part of his statement, I presume. ,■,.,■, ^ The Witness. I simply read all that were numbered, and let the rest go. The Chairman. The whole of this ought to go into the record. The Witness. T may state also that along the Iron Mountain Railway, and 1 be- Ueve in parts of Texas and along the other roads that the superintendent and fore- men are interested in company stores and compelled the men to deal m them. The «mploy6 is not told in so many words that he must deal with this particular store: but he is reminded in such a way that he understands that he will find it to his in- terest to do so. ,.,-,• Mr. Buchanau. Are they operated by the railroad company ? ' The Witness. Not by the railroad company, but by the superintendent. It a man has a complaint of any kind to make it goes up through the superintendent, and of course the employ^ does not send a complaint as to this practice up toough hm The president is so far removed from the employ FREDERICK TURNER, Secretary of Board. Mr. Jay Gould. In answer to that the long letter was received, referred to as being received at 6 o'clpokj and the executive board prepared the second letter. The letter of Mr. Gould w.as published, but I haven't it in the papers that I have with me. Mr. Wagner Swayne.ofthe firm of Dillon & Swayne, of New York City, counsel for Mr. Jay Gould's railroads, who had been watching the proceedings in that behalf, here said : As counsel for the railroad companies I would be very glad to supply that letter. The Chairman. We will be very glad to have it. We want everything in connec- tion with it. Mr. Chain (addressing Mr. Swayne). Have you that with you here ? Mr. Swayne. I have that letter. Mr. Buchanan. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to the committee receiving this letter from any person present who may happen to be possessed of a copy of it, but I do not understand that the committee has taken action on hearing counsel in this matter, and I desire to reserve the point on that. Mr. Swayne. I desire, Mr. Chairman, to apologize for addressing the committee. I supposed that it was understood that it was usual in such cases for counsel to be present. The Chaikman. I do not think there is anything more desired than to get the full record. Mr. Buchanan. I simply reserve the point as to the right of counsel to. appear. We have not yet passed upon counsel being allowed to appear. Mr. Grain. I think it is immaterial where that letter coines from. Mr. Swayne. I will have it found in a short time. The letter was subsequently produced and read by Mr. Swayne, as follows : Missouri Pacific Railway Company, New York, March 27, 1886. Dear Sir : I have your note of this date proposing an interview between your ex- eeutive committee and the o£Bcers of this company for the purpose of submitting to arbitration by a committee of seven what yon term the " Southwestern difSculties." You are doubtless aware that in the negotiations which took place here last August, between Mr. T. V. Powderly, grand master workman, and associates, and the ofScers of this company, it was agreed that in future no strikes would be ordered on the Missouri Pacific road until after a conference with the officers of the company, and an opportunity had to adjust any alleged grievances. In view of this fact, attention is drawn to the following correspondence between Mr. A. L. Hopkins, vice-president, acting for the company in my absence, and Mr. Powderly: New York, March 6, 1896. T. V. Powderly, Scranton, Pa. : Mr. Hoxie telegraphs that Knights of Labor on our road have struck aud refuse to allow any freight trains to run on our road, saying they have no grievance, but are only striking because ordered to do so. If there is any grievance we would like to talk it over with you. We understood you to promise that no strike should be ordered without consultation. A. L. HOPKINS. Philadelphia, Pa., March S. A, L. Hopkins, Secretary Missouri Pacific Railroad, 195 Broadway, NewYork: Have telegraphed West for particulars. Papers say strike caused by discham-e of man named Hall. Can he be reinstated pending investigations ? " T. V. POWDERLY. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 11 „ „ „ New Yoek, March 8, 1886. T. V. POWDERLY : Thanks for your message and suggestion. Hall was emploved by the Texas and Pacific and not by us. That property is in the hands of the United States court, and we have no control whatever over the receivers or over the employes. We have car- ried out the agreements made last spring in every respect, and the present strike is unjnst to us and unwise for yon. It is reported here that this movement is the result of Wall street influence on the part of those short of the securities likely to be affected. A. L. HOPKINS. No_ reply to this message was received, but this company's request for a conference was ignored, and its premises at once invaded and its property destroyed by the men of your order in great numbers, who also seized and disabled its trains, as they have since continued to do, whenever attempting to run. The board of directors of this company thereupon had a copy of the correspondence above given made and trans- mitted to Mr. H. N. Hoxie, the first vice-president and general manager, at Saint Louis, with instructions to use every endeavor to continue the operations of the road, and committed the whole matter to his hands. Mr. Hoxie's overtures, made through the governors of Missouri and Kansas, who stated that they found no cause for the strike, were rejected by your order. These and the subsequent correspondence between him and Mr. Powderly are well known to yon, and Mr. Hoxie's course has been confirmed by the board and the matter is still in his hands. I am, therefore, instructed by the board to refer you to him as its con- tinning representative in the premises. I am directed to add in behalf of the board, that, in its judgment, so long as this company is forcibly kept from the control of its property and from performing its charter duties, its business is done, if at all, not under the conditions of law, which are common to all citizens, but only at the will of a law-breaking force. Any nego- tiations with such a force would be unwise and useless. Terms made with it would not be a settlement of difficulties, but a triumph offeree over the law of the land. It would mean nothing in their judgment but new troubles and worse. This is the result of their experience. In the meantime the governor's proclamations enjoin upon your men to return to duty, and this company's continued advertisement offers them employment on the same terms as heiiBtofore. The board further suggests that, inasmuch as your order assumes in your communication responsibility for these men and power and control over them, the following from the proclamation of the governor of Missouri is express- ive of their duty and of your own : "I warn all persons, whether they be employes or not, against interposing any obstacle whatever in the way of said resumption, and, with a firm reliance upon the courage, good sense, and law-abiding spirit of the public, I hereby call upon all good citizens to assist in carrying out the purposes of this proclamation ; and 1 also hereby pledge the whole power of the State, as far as it may be lawfully wielded by its chief executive officer, to sustain the company and its servants in said resumption, and to' restraiu and pnnish all that may oppose it." When this proclamation shall be obeyed, and when the company's late employes shall desist &om violence and interference with its trains, the board hereby assures them that they will find themselves met by Mr. Hoxie in the spirit in which he has heretofore successfully avoided rupture and cause for just complaint, and in that jnst and liberal spirit which should always exist between the employer and the em- ploy6. By order of the board. Very respectfully, yours, ^ ^ jw > j^Y GOULD, President Miaaouri Pacific Eaihoay Company. Mr. McDowell. In response to that letter, about 6 o'clock in the evening the fol- lowing letter was sent : New York, March 27, 1886. DbakSih: We have received your reply to our communicatiou of this morning. The statements made in your reply a.re worthy of more consideration than can be given to them at this moment. . We are not in possession here of the telegrams or communications, or copies ot the same, referred to in your letter. We came here unprepared, with no thought of using them, and even though we had tbem here the field that would bo opened up for dis- 12 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. cussioa would be so broad that it would take a great deal of time and space to cover it, as contained in your reply. . . This would necessitate a review of the transactions of last year, beginning with the strike of March, 1885, continuing through the Wabash troubles, which brought on our meeting with you in August, down to the strike on the Texas Pacific and its ex- tensions to the Missouri Pacific lines. We consider that all of this is necessary at this time. Public interest, the interests of both parties to this controversy, will not be served by a longer continuance of the strike if there is a shadow of a chance to bring it to a speedy termination. With that idea in view we prefer to let this discussion rest and allow this matter to tie decided upon its merits by an impartial committee of seven, selected as indicated in our communication of this morning. Let them proceed to adjustthe differences, and having settled that matter, setting in motion at once the idle wheels and hands, we have no objection to that same com- mittee reviewing our actions in the matter, and we are willing to be judged, to re- ceive censure at their hands, if necessary, for any shortcomings that they may deem us guilty of. The needs of the hour require that this strike terminate speedily. If that is done, the other matters can be readily attended to. Very truly yours, T. V. POWDEKLY, a. M. TV. ofL. Jay Gould, Esq., President, ^c. Upon delivering this second letter to Mr. Gould's house, I asked to see him person- ally. We were together some half hour, and during the interview Mr. Gould ex- pressed the desire to meet Mr. Powderly and myself on thefoUowing day, at any hour of the day that would suit Mr. Powderly. We called at' about 11 o'clock. Mr. Gould received us in his parlor, and Vice-Presi- dent Hopkins joined in the interview. The 'discussion soon removed from the minds of each mistaken impressions, and Mr. Gould expressed himself so strongly in favor of the principle of arbitrating differences that it seemed clear to me that an agreement was sure to be reached. Mr. Gould's dinner bell rang, and Mr. Powderly and I excused ourselves, and he invited us to meet him again in the evening. We called again at 7 o'clock in the evening, and the discussion was a pleasant one, covering grounds that naturally would be discussed between two men, each so promi- nent in nis own walk in life. During the conversation Mr. Gould produced and read to Mr. Powderly, as if it were the result of the morning conference, a telegram that he proposed sending to Mr. Hoxie. This telegram contained, in addition to that which was afterwards pub- lished, considerable more Mr. Ceain. Have you that telegram f The Witness. I have ; but it comes in later. [Kesuming.] Referring to the arbi- trators taking into consideration damages against the strikers for injury to property ■during the strike, Mr. Powderly suggested that it would not be advisable to take up that branch of the subject in that way. The hour growing late, I then suggested that Mr. Gould read over his telegrams, keeping in the points that should be left in and leaving out the rest. Acting on this suggestion he read his proposed order, to Mr. Powderly, so far as to «nd with the following line: " We see no objection to arbitrating any differences be- tween the employes and the company, past or future." Stopping there he asked Mr Powderly if it was satisfactory so far. Mr. Powderly, after thinking carefully, answered, " It is." Mr. Gould said, "Then let it end there." Mr. Powderly at once arose to keep an engagement, and I suggested that Mr. Gould should rewrite his telegram in the tbrm of a letter to Mr. Powderly as an answer to his letter or letters of the previous date, and that I would remain until it was finished, take the letter to Mr. Powderly, and Mr. Powderly agreed that if his general executive board approved, the men would be ordered back to work. After Mr. Powderly left, Mr. Gould placed the letter in my hands, with the understanding that if the order to go to work was issued, that this letter and the order to go to work were to be given to the press that night. In case the order to go to work was not issued, Mr. Gould's letter was to be returned to him unused the following morning, he arranging in either case to meet me at his office at 9.30 the following morning. The order being issued, the letter was given, with the order, to the press. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 13 This is the original letter iu Mr. Gould's handwriting from beginning to end : [President's office, the Misaonri Faciflo Eailway Company.] m TT- T> ^ « ,, T„ New TOEK, Jfaj-cA 28, 1886. T. V. PowDERLY, Esq., G.M.W.: Deak Sir : Replying to your letter of the 27th instant, I write to say that I will to-morrow morning send the following telegraphic instractions: "H. M. HoxiB, " General Manager, Saint Lonia : ' ^ "In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employment of labor in the several departments of this company, you will give preference to our late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor wiU we discharge any person -who has taken service with the company during the said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employes and the company, past or future." Hoping the above will be satisfactory, I remain, yours, very truly, JAY GOULD, President. Mr. Buchanan. That was the letter which took the place of the original telegram that Mr. Gould had prepared ? The Witness. This took the place of the original telegraphic communication that Mr. Gould had prepared and was made specially the answer to the letter or the letters of the 27th, which I have just read. Mr. OuTHWAiTB. It was accepted by Mr. Powderly f The Witness. It was, and the order was issued to the men to go to work. At 9.30 I met Mr. Gould and in continuation of the conversation of the day before, in which the proposed arbitration bill before Congress had been discussed, I told him that Chairman O'Neill had met with us the evening before and that the committee had a copy of his proposed bill. Mr. Grain. Have you got a copy of the telegram that was sent to Mr Hoxie ? The Witness. The only copy that we have is the one he makes in his own hand- writing in his letter as the copy of the telegram that he was about to send. Q. Was this sent? — A. This telegram in this letter ? That was the understanding, that it was sent, and you will find it referred to in the memoranda. The Witness (resuming his statement). Mr. Gould asked that I would return to the committee rooms and obtain the copy of the O'Neill bill and bring it to him. I did so. We went over the bill carefully together. The publications of the morning pa- pers were referred to, but no objections made to them. The idea in discussing Chair- man O'Neill's bill was, to see if the proposed agreed upon arbitrations could not be had under this law if it were passed at once, or if it was not passed that that bill should make the basis of the agreed-upon arbitrations. After going over it carefully and while discussing the subject of arbitration, Mr. Gould showed me a dispatch from Judge Dillon in Boston, congratulating him on the settlement, and asking that the contract carrying it out should not bo signed until he could return to New York and draft it. Mr. Gould therefore suggested deferring that part of the work until Judge Dillou could return, on the Ibllowiug day. The Chairman. Who is Judge Dillon ? The Witness. At present counsel of Mr. Jay Gould. Mr. Buchanan. John F. Dillon, of the firm of Dillon & Swayne, I understand. The Witness (resuming). Towards the end of the interview Air. Gould received a Telegraphic message which seemed to disturb him very much, and remarked that something was wrong in Saint Louis over our settlement, and said that he proposed writing a letter to Mr. Powderly. I said to him, " Mr. Gould, don't at this stage split hairs. Telegraph Mr. Hoxie in taking the men back to work to be blind." He asked me then if I could not go to the Astor House and bring Mr. Powderly down in the place of his writing the letter. I returned at once to Mr. Powderly, told him that "something was wrong at the Saint Louis end of Mr. (Jould's wire," and he being unable to leave his bed, Messrs. Bailey and Hays were appointed a committee to see Mr. Gould with me. We called together, but with the hope that Mr. Powderly could be up by 3 o'clock, this interview was adjourned until that time. Just before 3 o'clock the "hair-splitting" letter from Mr. Gould was received, and Mr. Turner and I were requested to call upon Mr. Gould with the questiou from Mr. Powderly. The Chairman. Pardon me. Who is Mr. Turner f The Witness. Secretary and treasurer of our Order. Q. Who is Mr. Hayes ? — A. A member of the executive board. Mr. Buchanan. Do you mean 3 o'clock the same afternoon f 14 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The Witness. Yes, sir; it was 3 o'clock the same afternoon. The question that I was to carry from Mr. Powderly to Mr. Gould was, " Do I understand from your per- sonal letter of this date that your committee refuses arbitration, and must I so tele- graph Martin Irons?" Mr. CUAllir. Who asked that question ? nr ■□ The Witness. That was a memorandum of a question that was made by Mr. Pow- derly in his bed, and taken by us, as he was unable to attend. Mr. Grain. It refers there to a letter from Mr. Gould ; have you got that letter ? The Witness. I have not. . „ . Mr. Hayes (of the executive board. Knights of Labor). That letter is m Saint Louis. I guess Judge Swayne has a copy of it. Mr. Grain (addressing Mr. Swayne). Have you a copy of that letter ? Mr. Swayne. I have sent down to see where it is. The Witness (resuming his statement). Mr. Gould had gone and Mr. Hopkins kept this interview, and he answered Mr. Powderly's message : "You may say distinctly. No, we do not. He is not to so understand that letter, but he is simply referred to Mr. Gould's written communication to him, which Mr. Gould is prepared to carry out in every particular." The meeting with Mr. Gould was then deferred until 10 o'clock the following day. At 10.30 the full board, with myself, met with Messrs. Gould, Sage, Hopkins, and George Gould, and during the interview Sidney Dillon and S. H. H. Glark were in and out. The Chaikman. What Mr. Sage? The Witness. Russell Sage. (Continuing.) Mr. Gould opened the interview with a long dissertation on arbitra- tion as a principle; and a message was sent by him to Mr. Hoxie, telling him that he and his full board of directors approved of the general principle of arbitration, and advising him if he would arrange in some way to appoint arbitrators to settle differ- ences. An answer came back from Mr. Hoxie, rankly rebellious in tone ; but later in the day, in answer to a direct question, Mr. Hoxie telegraphed the message which was delivered by Messrs. Somerville and Clark, and which the executive board ac- cepted as the basis of their second order to go to work. The interview of Sunday morning was to be confidential ; but upon its resulting in th6 agreement of the evening it was by mutual consent given to the public. Now a copy of that report is here with the message and the answer and should go into this examination here. Mr. Chain. Did you see it ? The Witness. It was read to us both ways in the meetiug — both thp telegram and answer. Mr. Grain. Is there any way in which you can procure that report ? The Witness. I think Mr. Swayne likely has it. Mt. Grain [addressing Mr. Swayne]. Will you please let us have it? Mr. Swayne. Yes. Witness [after examining the paper handed him]. This is the dispatch to Mr. Hoxie : "H. M. Hoxie: ' ' Referring to Mr. Gould's message to you yesterday, a copy of which was con- tained in his letter to Mr. Powderly, in which he says, 'We see no objection to arbi- trating any differences, past or present, between the employes and the company.' Do you agree with this proposition and are you willing to open such an arbitration ? Our board think this would be a wise and proper thing to do." The answer that came back was as follows: "A. L. Hopkins: "My view is that the company should at all times promptly and fairly hear all complaints of its employes, either by hearing the employes themselves or a committee of their number, all of whom are of the same class as those complaining affected by the alleged grievance. If the matters of difference between the company and its employes, or any portion of them, are of such a character as to be susceptible of an arbitration which can be made legally binding upon both parties, I see no objection to arbitration in such a case." Later in the day the direct question was sent to Mr. Hoxie in the following tele-t gram: New York, March 3b, 1886. "To Mr. H. M. Hoxie, Saint Louia : "Mr. Powderly wishes to know if you will meet the General Executive Board of the Knights of Labor, or a committee of your employ^ from the Knights of Labor, LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 15 for tlio purpose of hearing what the cause of complaint was and for the purpose of making settlement of present diiBculties alike honorable to both sides, either on the basis of arbitration or by mutual agreement, the same to be binding on all parties." A. L. HOPKINS. Mr. Grain. That wa.i the vice-presidont of the road ? Witness. The second vice-president of the road. To this telegram the following reply was received : Saint Louis, March 30, 1866. A. L. HOPKJSS, Xew York City: Replying to your inquiry from Mr. Powdfirly of this date, I have to say that yes- terday I received from Mr. Gould the following message : " In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ment of labor in the several departments of this company, you will give preference to our late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during the said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the em- ployes and the company, past or future." To this I sent the following reply, dated Saint Louis, March 29: "To Jay Gould: "I have your message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderly, and also the letter of instructions, and will carry out the same to the best of my abQitv. " H. M. liOXlE." I am therefore willing to meet a committee of our employ^, without discrimina- tion, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such com- mittee is appointed, to adjust with them any grievances that they may have. H. M. HOXIE. The message from Mr. Gould was sent on Monday morning, after the interview on Sunday. In Mr. Hoxie's answer I see he said, " I have j|our message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderly, and also the letter of instructions." Now, in the regular course of mails the letter of instructions must have been mailed on Ihe Sat- urday before the arrangement of the interview, and what that letter of instructions could contain in line with the telegraphic order issued Sunday night is something that I do not know. This message was delivered to Mr. Powderly at the Astor House, and as a result the following message was sent by Mr. Frederick Turner, secretary of the Executive Board of the Knights of Labor, Mr. Powderly having started for home a few miniites after Mr. Hoxie's message was delivered to him : New York, March 30, 1896. Martin Irons, Saint Louis: Have been in conference all day, with the result that "Vice-President Hoxie agrees to the following: "Willing to meet a committee of our employes, without discrimi- nation, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such committee is appointed, to adjudicate with them any grievances that they may have." Have your executive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from the employes of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie to adjust any difference. Do this as quickly as possible. Board will leave for Saint Louis to-morrow. FREDERICK TURNER, Secreiary. Mr. Grain, [examining the paper from which the witness had been reading the dispatches]. I find this is in the shape of testimony and questions and answers. Was Mr. Hoxie before some committee f ^ ■,, The Witness. What you have there is the report of stenographers for Mr. Gould of the interview of the 30th, and which was published some days later in the New York World. Mr. BnCHANAN. Before you pass from this— you spoke of an interview in which certain correspondence passed, and you say something about an order to the men to return to work. Was, in fact, such an order issued by your executive board as » re- sult of the correspondence which had heretofore passed between your board and Mr. Gould ? — A. Such an order was issued at once. Q. Can you give us the date of that order?— A. March 2S. 16 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. In the evening? — ^A. In the evening, when the order was issued, and the letters signed, and the correspondence, and the result, and the order were given to the press. Q. And that order was projected on your understanding that a satisfactory solu- tion had been arrived att— A. It was; the letter on which it was issued, of the 28th, being written in answer to the last letter of the 27th and referring to it, and, as a re- sult of all the conference, made it perfectly clear to our minds that arbitration was agreed upon, and until noon of the next day no suggestion of any misunderstanding reached me. Q. And that suggestion arrived in the manner which you have already stated in your testimony t — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Grain. What was the result ? The Witness. The members of our board, Messrs. Bailey, Turner, and Hayes, went to Saint Louis. Mr. Hayes is here and can better tell you what occurred there. I was not personally a party to it. Later, another attempt was made to bring about a conclusion, that I was a party to, in New York. Mr. Hayes's evidence can be taken in regard to what took place in Saint Louis. Mr. Chain. There is one thing I want to ask about, the practical result of the con- ference. Did the men go to work, or did the strike end? The Witness. The order to go to work was issued, and the parties there immedi- ately telegraphed to know if it was authentic, as they were suspicious of the Western Union wires ; and, as I understand , the executive boards there were about to issue an order to go to work at once, and during their meeting a dispatch, resulting from the correspondence later on Monday, was received, in which it was stated "Complications have arisen here since morning." [Reading slip handed him by Mr. Powderly. ] The exact language was, " Complications have arisen since morning'; will have another conference in the morning." They received that dispatch while they were attending to the details of ordering the men back to work, and they deferred action until they could hear the further result. The executive committee started to Saint Louis to see that it was immediately obeyed. Upon it being telegraphed there the men were or- dered back to work. On the arrival of the executive committee they were unable to make any arrangements with Mr. Hoxie, and therefore the order to go to work, of the 28th, was withdrawn. Mr. Chain. Give us the particulars of the second attempt at settlement. The Witness. Casually I met with Mr. Cyrus W. Field, who has always been known as an intimate friend and associate of Mr. Gould Mr. Chain. What official connection has he with the Missouri Pacific f The Witness. I do not know that he has anything to do with it. He is a fellow director with Mr. Gould in a great many other roads. Mr. Field told me of his quick settlement of the difficulty that occurred on the New York elevated road with his employes, and regretted that this settlement could not have been brought around as reasonably and as quickly. I showed him the letter that I had just received from Mr." Powderly, and he asked me to lend, him the letter and he would immediately see Mr. Gould with it. I saw him shortly afterwards, and he told me he had seen Mr. Gould; and he said if he could see Mr. Powderly for about half an hour he had no doubt he could bring this matter to a quick conclusion. I at once endeavored to bring Mr. Powderly and him together for that half hour by going personally to Scran- ton on Saturday and telling Mr. Powderly what Mr. Field had said, and asked him to come to New York with me next morning, that he might again confer with Mr. Field and follow any line Mr. Field suggested. He was unable to come, being too sick, and he authorized me to represent him in reaching the conclusion, if possible. ^Mr.. Grain. Have you got the letter f — ^A. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Then let us have it on the record. The Witness (reading) : " Scranton, Pa., April 8, 188C. "Dear Mr. McDowell : It is unfortunate that this strike did not end two weeks ago. It seems that nothing can be done now to hasten the final proceedings. I am told that Mr. Hoxie has expressed himself very strongly against being dictated to by Mr. Gould. If that is true, then there can be no peace yet." The Chairman. How is that? Mr. BuRNES. Will you read it all over again, please ? The Witness (reading) : "Dear Mr. McDowell; It is unfortunate that this strike did not end two weeks ago. It seems that nothing can be done now to hasten the final proceedings. I am told that Mr. Hoxie has expressed himself very strongly against being dictated to by Mr. Gould. If that is true, then there can be no peace yet. "I have not heard from the members of the board since they left for the Southwest. I expect to see Mr. Turner soon. It seems now that the only thing we can do is to aid the men (financially) as much as possible. If they will not be permitted to return to work, why we cannot be held responsible for future consequences. I have done everything consistent with manhood to have lliis matter ended, but without success. LABOR TROPBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. IT "It would have been much better for Mr. Gould to settle it now and end it, than to prolong the struggle until every man in the Southwest becomes an open and avowed, enemy of his. ^ " I have vQry little faith in a national arbitration bill being the complete remedy ^believe the best plan is to have the parties interested agree upon a plan and bintl! themselves to abide by its operation, whether for or against them. Such a plan as. that 18 being successfully worked in hundreds of places. In this particular instance the men cannot arbitrate, the company will not treat with them. Mr. Hoxie said ha- would meet with the men who were at work. Why, these men had no grievance. It 18 the man who is out that has the cause for complaint or grievance. " I think that the best plan is for Mr. Gould to assert his authority, and meet witlb. me and settle this affair, but I will never seek an audience with him again. The final upshot of this affair in the South west will bethedisruptionof theorganization of labor- there, the men will feel wronged, and without the restraint of organization they wilt harass the company at every step. The trouble for Mr. Gould will not end with tha end of the strike, nor in the dissolution of the Knights of Labor on his lines. Hia. trouble is only beginning. Mark my words, and see how far wrong I am. Yesterday- was my first day at the desk since I saw you last. I am not fit to be at work, but caoa see no way out. "With kindest regards, I remain, sincerely, yours, ..„, ^ ., ^ "T. V. POWDEELY. " Wm. 0. McDowell, Esq., "Neiv York." By Mr. Grain: Q. That was your letter of instruction t — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was this letter [indicating] ?— A. That was the letter that was shown to Mr. Field, when Mr. Field invited the half-hour conference. Q. Didn't you say a moment ago, before you began reading the letter, that yon re- ceived a letter of instruction from Mr. Powderly? — A. Yes, air; this is the letter — the^ preliminary letter that was shown to Mr. Field and by him shown to Mr. Gould wheik. he invited the conference with Mr. Powderly. Q. And that is that letter?— A. Yes, sir; Mr, Field showed it to Mr. Gould, and then. I went to Scranton to bring Mr. Powderly together for that half hour. Mr. Powderly- being unable to come, wrote me this letter, in my presence, which letter I carried t<>. New York : "SCKANTON, Pa., April 10, 1886. My Dear Mr. McDowell : I regret very much to say that I cannot accompany yoa, to New York. My physical condition is such that it would be extremely danger- ous for me to attempt it. " I appreciate the efforts yon have made iu the direction of effecting a settlement; of this trouble in the Southwest, and I am pleased to know that Mr. Cyrus W. FielcL, has interested himself in the matter so far as to offer to act as mediator. Did I go to ■ New York it seems to me that there is but one thing that I could advise, aud that X; can as well authorize yon to say for me to Mr. Field as though I said it in per- son. Do not misunderstand me and think that I would even hint at the displacement^ of Mr. Hoxie as general manager of the Missouri Pacific Railroad. I believe, how- ever, that the only thing to be done now is for Mr. Gould to assert his authority as president of that company, and say to Mr. Hoxie that he will take the settlement of" this vexed question off his hands, allowing him to manage the other business of the company. That he — Mr. Gould — will undertake to put the road in running opera- tion witn the men now out there, the employes of the company. " If Mr. Gould will say to the men now in rebellion against the company — Go to work,, I will see that no injustice is done to you ; I will see that no discharges will be made for any part you may have taken in this strike, except in cases where deeds of vio- lence were perpetrated, and that he will listen to the complaint of the men, I think, that an honorable settlement can be reached. The Knights of Labor, as an organiza- tion, are not desirous of holding the men to their allegiance to it only so far as it will! be to their advantage. The organization will never, in any way, be a barrier to the success of the- company. Leave the organization out of the question and let Mr. Gould meet with his men, if he does not care to meet with a representative of our organization, and let him settle it in that way if he prefers to do so. I am certain:; that Mr. Soxie caniiot now meet with either the men or with a representative of the- Knights of Labor and «fifeot a settlement of the difficulty. That, I think, can ba done only by Mr. Gould himself. Will you therefore see Mr. Field and say to him. what I have written. I will do anything in honor to have this terrible state of af- fairs brought to an end, and will do everything in my power to so arrange mattered- that a recurrence of this trouble will never again take place. Witfc the Knights of 3984 CONG 2 18 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Labor driven from the employ of the company they will form another society of some kind, and with a new organization the same ground will again be traveled over some day in the future ; as it is now. Both sides can draw a lesson from this struggle that will prevent futur^ troubles from arising. "Do me the favor to act for me in the matter so far as you can.go in endeavoring to have this statement laid before Mr. Gould. "With kind wishes, I remain, yours, &c., > " ' "T. V. POWDERLY." The next morning at Mr. Field's house, with that letter before me, I with him pre- pared this letter : "123 East Twenty-first Street, "Nero York, April 11, 1886. "Dear Sir : With this I inclose a letter, handed to me in person by Mr. T. V. Pow- derlv, in Scranton, Pa., last evening. "By reterenoe to Mr. Gould's telegram of March 28, 1886, you will see that he and Mr. Powderly are absolutely agreed upon the following points : (1) No former employ^ who has'injured property shall be employed. (2) Men employed during the strike, before the agreement of the 28th of March, shall not be discharged to make place for any employ^ who has been out on strike. . (3) Both agree on the general principle of arbitrating all matters in dispute, past and future. These three points cover all matters, as Mr. Powderly and I understand, and if practically applied would settle the strike at once. I recommend the following agreement be signed by Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly and telegraphed to Saint Louis at once, and Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly to simulta- neously issue the proper orders to have the same carried into practical efiect. The following is the synopsis of the proposed agreement : (1) Recite — That said parties have agreed upon the above three points. (2) Mr. Gould is to agree that he will request his co-director, W. H. H. Clark, esq., to proceed to Saint Louis and personally receive and investigate any complaints that may be brought before him by any of the late employes of the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Company, with authority to act on the same. If he and such complainants fail to agree on any such matter, it shall be referred to a board of arbitration of three, five, or seven persons to be chosen in the usual man- ner. (3) Mr. Powderly is to agree that the strike shall cease instantly. _ In case W. H. H. Clark, esq., is unable to act, he is to select his substitute. The proposed agreement can be signed personally or officially, as Mr. Gould sees fit. \ Very truly yours, w. o. Mcdowell. Cyrus W. Field. Esq., New Yorlc City. Q. What Aid you mean by that last sentence ? — A. That the contract could be signed personally or officially ? Q. Yes. Was there an objection on the part of the railway corporations or Mr. Gould to arbitrate with the Knights of Labor or their official representative? — ^A. The paper had so discussed it, and in the proposed conference between Mr. Powderly and Mr. Hoxie, in Saint Louis, Mr. Hoxie had refused to meet him officially, but had said that he would see him personally, and if any objections of that kind existed in their minds it was to meet that. Mr. Powderly 's suggestion was that Mr. Gould should go there. Mr. Field considered that impossible, ana, it being impossible, I suggested the name of Mr. Clark, because he was a director in the company, the former general manager of the Union Pacific road, and a man who has always in his management of railroads held the good will of his men. Mr. Powderly. It was not my intention that Mr. Gould should go in person. A. representative would do as well. The Witness (continuing). Mr. Field took the letter as a satisfactory one, and immediately went out to find Mr. Gould and two or three other gentlemen that he wanted to call in conference. He left, word for them to come to his house. I re- mained at his house until I heard from him. Mr. Gould and Mr. Sage, in answer to , Mr. Field's invitation, called upon him afterward. Mr. Field came to me, and told me Mr. Gould said the strike was entirely over. That the only strike was at East Saint Louis, on roads that he was not interested in, except the Waljash, and that was inthe hands of the United States Court, and therefore subject to it, and that they were not interfered with by the strikers. Mr. Field was called away at that hour' by an en- gagement at Boston, and I have not seen him since. Mr. Grain. Was the strike ended in fact ? The Witness. No, sir. I have always felt that the most complete victory that Mr. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 19 Oonld could have over the men, or any railroad could have victory over its men, would be the most complete possible failure to him ; but that the true outcome of this thing as a result of the agreement on Sunday would have been the good will of both sides, antl any settlement that did not bring good will was a complete failure. Mr. OUTHWAITE. Thatdid not bring about a settlement ?— A. It did not bring about & settlement. Mr. BUENES. Have you satisfactory evidence of any kind that the local assemblies of Knights of Labor would have promptly obeyed the' suggestion of tl\e great master workman in i^esuming work if Mr. Hoxie had complied with the order sent by Mr. Gould to which you allude ? The Witness. I have not the least possible doubt of it. I have never heard any suggestion that they would not have done so. Q. Have you any evidence tending to show any secret instructions from Mr. Gould to Mr. Hoxie inconsistent with the dispatch incorporated in his letter to Mr. Pow- •derly? — A. The order issued on the road, and the telegram referred to on Tuesday, in answer to the telegraphic instructions of that same day in which Mr. Hoxie says to Mr. Gould, " I have received your telegram and letter of instructions." That is the only snggestion of that kind that I have received, except the orders issued on the line. Mr. Powderly calls my attention to the following order issued there April 1st, about long enough for a letter to have reached Saint Louis from New York. Mr. Powderly. I will say that our members were en route to Saint Louis when that was being issued. ' [The Mlssoari Facifio Eailway Company, Lexington Branch Division.! Lexington Station, April 1, 1886. The following is copy of circular received by me : [Circniar No. 26.] ^' To all Boadmasters : "On and after date yon will not employ as section foreman or foreman of extra gang any man who is a Knight of Labor. All foremen no w in your employ who are Knights ■of Labor must either present to yon their withdrawal cards or be discharged. We will not employ any man as foreman that belongs to the Knights of Labor. "See" that these instructions are carried out to the letter. You will be personally responsible for violation of above. The above does not refer to foremen or laborers who have in any way interferpd with the business of or destroyed the company's prop- erty. Such men will not be employed under any circumstances. " Yours, truly, " P. ROCKWELL, General Eoadmaatcr. "All section foremen must comply with above. "Yours truly, " P. SHEAHAN, Division Baadmaater." The Chairman. Who did you get this from ? Who had it in his keeping ? The Witness. Mr. Hayes. Mr. Buchanan. I suppose that we will have to prove the paper by Mr. Hayes. He is here and can be called later. It seems to be on an official letter-head of the Mis- ■aouri and Pacific Railroad Company. The Chairman. It is a little irregular to admit it yet, but it may he correct. Mr. Grain. Now, Mr. McDowell, can you tell the committee what was the cause of this strike — the originail canse, and then the incidental causes. This is what we want to get at. We are selected to investigate the cause and the extent of the trouble on the subject. ./. ;■ ^ The Witness. I would divide your question into two. The specific cause and the general cause. Q. First, do you know anything of your own knowledge of the specific cause of this strike ?— A. Since I have been called in to arbitrate, or rather on the agreement to arbitrate, the executive board selected me as one of the arbitrators, and therefore I have felt that I was in the position as possible judge, and agood deal of information has come to me that I knew nothing of until the time I was called in, being so far removed from the scene of the strike. As I understand it, the Missouri Pacific Road, and all the different companies that are controlled by Mr. Gould, are at the present time going through the experience that the manufacturer applies in his factory when he changes from day's work to piece work. Suppose you take a man who has pro- duced aliundred given articles in a day, and certain men would reason in this way : if you pay him by the piece at 10 per cent, less than by the day, the first day's w6rk will largely exceed that which he would do while on day's work, and his earnings would be nearly double. He will work so hard and fast that he will do almost two days' work in one. For the next day you catch him on that by cutting down your 20 LABOE TEOUBLES IN TUE SOUTH AND WEST. - piecework price one-half. Jovl have put him on the tension of the largest possihl* amount of work that he can do in order to obtain the same wages that he received be- fore. That he cannot permanently stand. Mr. Gould said to me, on the Saturday- evening in the discussion, that in one case of the Western Union by changing from day's work, and from doing their own manufacturing, to piece or contract work, the change had resulted in a saving of 80 per cent, to the company. Now, it was called to my attention, how correctly you can find better in Saint Louis, that a bridge car- penter reporting for work was «ent out on the line to work for an hour or two in one place and a little work at another place, and so on, so much that when he returned on Saturday night he only received pay for the hours of work, and not for the hour* of travel. That his week's work would only yield him four days. , Mr. Swayne here read Mr. Jay Gould's letter to Frederick Turner, dated New York, March 27-, and it was ordered that it should be inserted in the witness's testimony at the place where it was first proposed to introduce it. The Witness (resuming). The general cause of this uneasiness and strikes through- out the country, so far as it affects the railroads, was started by the successful strikfr of the horse-car lines in New York, which commanded so much public sympathy that it was speedily settled and the men were allowed |3 a day for twelve hours work. Mr. Grain. When was that? The Witness. Early in February, I think. Q. In this year ? — A. Yes. Mr. PowDERLT. Somewhere about the 20th of February, I think. The Witness. And the result was that whenever men felt they had a grievance throughout the country they joined together and made application to foj-m an assem- bly of Knights of Labor, so much so that the increase for the month of February was greater than the first eight years of the history of the order. The motto of the order, "The injury of one is the interest of all," tended to make every new man coming in feel that he had the laboring men of the country behind his grievance. And then again all over the land there is a feeling, particularly in railroad matters, that in every railroad organization there has been an evasion of the law. In other words, a com- pany organize a credit mobilier or construction company, and the securities of the road are issued to that construction company, which is another name for the owners- of the road ; and the law, which says that not a dollar of the stock of a railroad com- pany shall be issued except for a dollar of value, has been evaded by the construction company, or credit mobilier, being made the intermediary. Stocks are watered and become of perfectly uncertain va! ue, valuable only for speculative purposes, for trading purposes, and for the accumulation of large fortunes, but of intrinsically little sub- stantial value. After stock has been issued in that way, the management, straining every possible nerve to make large dividends on their capital and on their water, with undue charges for freight service, with undue exactions upon their employes, with the' carrying of thisvjvater instead of carrying only substantial values, with a fact that in the very organization of the company the law had been broken by indirectness, and that feeling of uneasiness which you meet in suggestion of anti-monopoly and in labor strikes and uneasiness generally is produced. Mr. Grain. Have you any remedy for thatf The Witness. Enforce the law. Q. Enforce what law ? — A. The law of every State says plainly that the stock of a railroad company must not be issued except for value, and when a construction com- pany is organized and gives 1 per cent, to 10 per cent, value for $100 stock where a contract breaking the law results in direct punishment the indirect breaking of the law should be punished double. Mr. Grain. But how would you do that ? Yon cannot prevent a railroad company making a contract to build a road. The Witness. I think you can. You may say that you cannot puniah a man who is guilty of murder. Mr. Buchanan. Have you any State law that forbids a construction company froin making a contract with a railroad company to construct its works? Mr. Grain. Though he does not state it that way, he means that the law forbids a company to make a contract with itself. The Witness. You cannct of course prevent the railroad company going in the open market and submitting its work for bid in the market.. But there is no open market. One is the construction company and the other the railroad company, and the same men constitute both. Mr. Grain. Your idea would be to prohibit that by law f — A. The law does prohibit it now. Q. How would that affect the condition of the employ^ ?— A. In this way : The fact that the railroad company was an honest organization and no securities issued except for actual value would naturally induce the men working with the road to make that property their savings bank, and the money that he has to be invested would go into it ; aiid the minute that you give the employ^ an interest you have remedied all of LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 21 this. The man who owns an interest in the property does not ask -whether he shall work eight or nine hours That property is his. and if he only owns one share he ■owns that which permits him, under the law, to be president of the company, and the minute you get his heart in his work, that minnte you have these difiSculties settled. Mr. BuRNES. Before you pass from that subject — I do not know whether it has es- •caped your attention or not, that 'in the matters under consideration with legard to the Missouri Pacific Railroad that a road has been built and the construction compa- nies and the watered stock, if such transactions were had, must have occurred a great many years ago, probably by other parties than those now in control of the company, and would not a law now of the kind you allude to reach the corporation whose business we are considering ? The Witness. To that I would say that the incorporation laws of the country have heen the outgrowth of the steam-engine, the telegraph, and that condition of public affairs which has done away with the shoemaker buying his own leather and Belling the product of his own labor, and has brought about co-operation by corporation to meet the demand of the present time. Those laws of incorporation form the most perfect system of co-operation that could be planned out as far as the law is con- ■cerned, and they have always existed that way. I simply say that this law, which has been on the statute book of every State, should be enforced. It has never existed in any other form. I am not familiar with the preliminary organization of the Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company. I remember when the National Trust Company failed, •or was wrecked in some way in connection with some investments of this kind, when «tock of this road was given by the receiver in the peculiar sale of the security of that company that has always been a puzzle, and that out of that sale or subsequent sales the present organization has been created. But you can take any road, without ex- •ception, in this country, and trace up its history and you come to that condition of affairs somewhere along the line. Q. No doubt about that. The only question is, how far the evil in that corporation can be reached.— A. Well, by finding out who has been originally guilty of producing that condition of affairs and making an example of them. Let the law be once vin- dicated by the punishment of the guilty. Mr. Bdrnes. For the information of the committee, and x>erhaps it is not within the knowledge of the witness, I will simply state as a matter of information that the State of Missouri contributed to the building of the Missouri Pacific Railroad $64,000 a, mile in State bonds, the interest upon which we are still paying. It was contrib- uted under a law that required the corporation to expefid 850,000 before it could get $50 000. The theory, tliereforo, is that a road which got $04,000 a mile from the State should have expended $64,000 of its own money; if so, the road as constructed cost $128,000 a mile. I suppose it could be duplicated now for $25,000 a mile. The WiTKESS. Well, there must have been a construction company there. [Laugh- ter, ] Mr. Buchanan. That is an indication that some thrifty citizens were around. The Chairman. That is a splendid exhibition of the finances of Missouri. Mr. Crain (addressing witness). The remedy you suggest Is rather of a moral than legal character, is it not f The Witness. No; I say enforce the law. Mr Grain You cannot enact a law, either State or national, which would compel an employ^ to put his money in a stock company, or which would require a director to allow him to do it. ,. , , . . , ^ j -u u The Witness. Enact a law which would make his investment secure, and fie would invest his money in that at which he works, as was done when the man was his own •capitalist, making his own shoes. . , , . ^■ Mr Buchanan 1 will ask you whether vou have ever considered, in connection with 'this question of over-capitalization, either of stocks or bonds or both, the ne- cessity or at least the desire, to earn dividends upon that inflated capitalization leads to the cutting down to the.lowest amount the wages of the employes and the increase to the highest bearable point in the rates on freight and fare of passengers 1 The Witness I have, and that is the natural result of that peculiar condition ot affairs Stimulation is given to the stock by extreme cutting down ot wages, ex- acting the highest prices possible for freight, by controlling newspapers, and so giv- ing out to thipublic the wonderful net increase in receipts, and the road is mortgaged up and up ; and after it is mortgaged, like the Union Pacific, as suggested in the luter- view, when the possibility was spoken of that they would not have enough money to pav their employes if they did not strike. . The Chairman. Are you familiar with railroad operations ? The Witness. I am; "I have been connected with them for years. Q«o yon think there is a railroad in the United States to-day in any ft^e East- ern States, or running across the continent, with the capital representing the actual cost of bnildiiie the road?— A. Well, voiir qnestion is a very broad one. Mr?C^ There's an intimation in the'dispatch or letter from Mr. Hopkins that 22 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. this strike was being kept up, or handled, or managed in the interest of parties who ■vrere short in these securities. The Witness. I only know that from the statement made in the dispatch. Q. Are you or were any of those men who engaged in this effort at arbitration in- terested in these securities ?— A. I have jio interest in them. Mr. PowDKRLY. I am innocent of that charge. Q. Do yon know anything of any of the other members of your board being inter- ested in them.— A. No. I am certain that none of the executive board are interested in a dollar of that stock. ■ Q. Did you or Mr. Powderly and the other gentlemen who were arbitrating this question with the representatives of the railroad company make inquiry into the causes which led to the strike ?— A. Not except as you have them from Mr. Powderly, and as I have giveu them to you in my examination. I only know what you know. I have not been personally in contact with the strike. I was simply called in to endeavor to reach a conclusion that would settle it. Q. I understand from the testimony that the general national executive committee are opposed to strikes; that the order never had any legislation upon the subject of strikes. That it is opposed to strikes ; and that to the local assembles is left the right to- determine and legislate upon every question that may arise. Is there any way in , which the action of the local assemblies is passed upon before the strike is ordered ?— A, You have Mr. Powderly here. He is the general master wokman, and ho can answer the question, as he is still on oath. Q, Before the local assembly can order a strike, has it got to be submitted to the executive board ?— A. There is no la^w within the organization upon the subject of strikes. It is an unexpected and unprepared-for thing. The whole sprit of the organi- zation is contrary to strikes, and until this condition of things we have mentioned arose, the Knights of Labor have not been carried into strikes. Q. Ought there not to be some provision of that character in your constitution f — A. That is like agreeing that a law shall not be broken. The Knights of Labor are not an organization to make strikes, or to have anything to do with strikes. It is an educational organization, and the condition of affairs alluded to has led the local as- semblies to do that which is outside of the spirit of the organization. Q. And your object in attempting to arbitrate was to remove these difficulties? — A. To bring this strike to a conclusion. The minute that these men were told to go to work we expected they would obey the order ; but they wanted something in the way of concession, and it was intended to settle it by arbitration ; that Mr; Gould 'should surrender as little as he would, and let the whole .settlement be made after the men were at work. Q. Do you not think, Mr. McDowell — that is the way it struck me from the letter* read here — do you not think that Mr. Gould himself was fairly disposed towards the organization and in this matter (as it appears from his letter and telegram and your report of his conversation), unless there was some secret correspondence with him and Mr. Hoxie ? — A. Yes, sir ; my full impression, from what I saw of Mr. Gould, was that meant to be fair, intended to be fair; that when he wrote the letter thab General Swayue has read he was then under an influence that he would naturally be in not having heard from that second dispatch to Mr. Powderly, and when they came to- gether these bad impressions seemed to be removed and he appeared to intend m every way to be fair. Tlie fact that I was with him on the Monday morning and no objection was made tended to confirm it. It has always seemed to me that Mr. Hoxie was on a high horse, from which he was unwilling to come down, and that whenlMr. Gould on the Monday found him rebellious on the agreement to arbitrate, instead of making it appear really an order, he simply put it in the form of a " please," in order to avoid the possibility of having Mr. Hoxie resign as a result of it, and to prevent it being claimed in the newspapers that it was a great victory to the Knights of Labor, then he turned round ana split hairs with the committee ; that he had agreed to ar- bitrate everything past and future, but this special arbitration he had not taken out of Mr. Hoxie's hands. Mr. Powderly had put so much confidence iu his saying that he (Mr. Gould) believed iu arbitration, that he had issued an order to the men to go to- work. Mr. Grain. You mean that Mr. Gould appeared himself to be controlled by Mr.. Hoxie? The Witness. That is the wiiy that it appeared to me; still I could not understand this letter, that must have been sent before the Sunday interview that is referred to in Mr. Hoxie's telegram of the 29th, referring to a letter sent a day before the inter- view. Q. Well, I understand you are of the impression that Mr. Hoxie is the man who is responsible for the continuance of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir ; and since I have talked with men that have been associated with him I have strongly clinched that impres- sion. Mr. Buchanan. During the pendency of your efforts statements were made in some of the papers 'hat you and Mr. Gould were working this matter together for the pur- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 23 pose of affecting the stock market. I do not wish to humiliate you enough to ask you if that be true, but I simply mention the fact to allow yoa to make any explanation you desire. The Witness. I never saw any statement to that effect in any paper. I never had any acquaintance with Mr. (3ould until I met him in connection with that work ; and I have never bought or sold a stock or share on margin ; and there ,-b not a word of possible truth in that suggestion. Q. Have you had any practical experience in railroad Inatters ? — A. I have been a railroad expert, and have been a railroad manager for the last fifteen yeijs. Mr. PakKer. You have spoken of occurrences commencing while the strike wa» pending; now, preliminary to that, have you knowledge as to how the strike itself occurred? The Witness. Until I was called iu that Friday I referred to I had no more knowl- edge of the Missouri Pacific in connection with this question than what one gets in reading the daily paper of every occurrence of that kind going on in the country. Q. Has it come to your knowledge since how this strike had begun ?— A. Only so far as you have it in my testimony already, and what Mr. Powderly told you yester- day. Q. Then you have no knowledge of who ordered the strike ? — A. I have not. Q. Nor upon what grounds it was ordered? — A. I have not. Mr. BuBNES. In looking to the cause of this unrest, you were interrupted at the time, I think, when yon were going on to suggest some of the general causes ; I would ask you if the system of pooling the earnings of railroads has anything to do with creating this feeling ? The Witness. No ; the best and most economical management is that which can be brought down to the lowest expenditure. The business should be done with the smallest investment, not only of labor, but of capital, and until you have exhausted the carrying capacity of single tracks yon should not make the products of the coun- try pay the capital and interest on a second line. Something is needed in the way of Government supervision of roads, and laws by which the benefit resulting from non- competition shall not be to a railroad if it is a monopoly. The Chaikman. How is that ; I do not comprehend exactly ? The Witness. Well, if you please, let us illustrate. Between Buffalo and New York the New York Central road had that line and had a monopoly. It was costing 60 per cent, to operate, and it was making 40 per cent, net, if you please ; but another road, the West Shore and Buffalo, is put alongside. By reason of that competition as many trains must be run on each line as upon the one before competition. Now, then, yon have p. 100 per cent, business, and you have two 60 per cents, expenses, or 120 per cent, expenses, and you have therefore 20 per cent, loss instead of 40 per cent, profit. Now, then, if you can regulate that in such a way that one set of men, and one set of trains, and one railroad can do the work, you not only secure fair returns to capital, but lower rates that should come to the traffic of the road, and better wages to the employes. And you have done a better thing than to secure two roads at absolute loss. Mr. BuRNBS. I would suggest that probably the satisfaction of the railroad em- ployes might not be iucrea.sed, but that the dissatisfaction on the part of the pro- ducers and laboring men and the balance of the country might be increased by this pooling system. In other words, if the pooling system is satisfactory to the em- ployes of the railroad, is it equally satisfactory to all other workingmen in other classes of labor ? The Witness. That which in railroad management produces the largest earnings with the least outlay of capital enables the roads to do the work at the minimum charge and enables' it to pay its employes well, produces the best condition of rail- road management. Q. Then are we to understand that actual competition between competing lines ef railway is injurious? — A. There is a necessity somewhere of Government control, so that the benefits of economy can be bad. To build two railroads where one can do the work is wasting the cost of one and is a tax upon the country. Q. That is not it. Put it in this light : Two roads are built and ready to be oper- ated. They are there ; the capital is in them. Now, ia the operation of these two ex- isting lines", is it held by the majority of the working people in the country that there should be competition between these lines or a pooling of their earnings ? — ^A. It is better that all the business should be done on one road, at the minimum of cost in doing it on one road, and the benefit given not only to the owners of the road but to the public. In other words, you must not double your expenditure to get economy. Q. Would you suggest the abandonment of one line of road and concentrate all the business on tiie other ? — A. I certainly would. Q. That would reduce their employes one-half ?— A. Yes, it would ; but they woiiJd immediately find employment in other walks in life where they would not be living on a tax upon the commerce of the country. , Mr. Buchanan. But are not the other avenues somewhat crowded at present ? ^4 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THfe SOUTH AND WEST. The Witness. I do not think there ever was a railroad that was ever pressed to one-half of its capacity. Q. That would lessen the avenues of employment ?— A. Yes ; but you can never ^ive prosperity to a country by increasing the number of tax-gatherers. ., . ' Mr. Parker. Does not this trouble arise in part on account of the competition of lilaborers ? The Witness. No. . ^^ ■,-, ^ , j.-^ ^ Q. Is not that one of the bottom sources-of this trouble ?— A. You will tind that -lifter much of the discussion that has taken place, employers have been readily cou- "ceding an increase, and that the great difficulties have not been on the increase of Tvages. Q. The serious disturbance at the West, is it not largely caused by so much compe- tition of labor. Say, for instance, that the railroad managers could only obtain the -xeasonable amount of labor they desire, does not that end all strikes and almost the possibility of strikes?— A. I think, as you put it, it does. Q. Is not one of the greatest sources of trouble the excess of men and the deficiency -of work; that they are pouring from other countries and increasing in our own?— A,. There is a great deal in that. Q. Now, as you have explained very fairly— and I am certainly obliged to you for 4t— your views on the other branches of the subject, I would really like to hear your views on some adjustment or disposition of this competition in labor and its disturb- ^ance of labor and capital. The Chairman. Let me, before that question is answered, ask: Do you not think a ;great deal of this comes from the ingenuity of the American people and the use of anacbinery, where they used human hands ; is it not a fact that ten men will do more ^now in the way of production than seventy before ? The Witness. I would like to say that that whole subject, when you get out of the •specified field here, is a very broad one, and it is one that since I was called in as ar- 'bitrator here has been a subject of discussion. ' One of the best suggestions that has been made to me is that a congress or conference between representatives from every ilabor organization should take place, and. that representatives from every commer- 'Cial organization should be invited to meet with them and thoroughly discuss this • question, in the hope of doing away with a contest between capital and labor. I look mpon them as natural partners, as mUch so as man and wife. Mr. Buchanan. And- yet there are some instances of disagreement even with them, i-ji Laughter.] iThe Witness. Such a discussion as that would be approached by railroadmen cer- tainly in a different spirit from that which they would manifest in a discussion with ■their insubordinate brakemeu, and legislation would be promoted that cannot be promoted by discussion that takes place when these troubles are existing. By that zuode you would take the difiSpulty out of the way, and would gather the wisdom of .able men who have been thinking on the subject. At the present time I do not feel rthat!l have had enough experience to recapitulate the results of such a discussion. There is one feature that has not been brought out by questions, and that is the fact ■of the railroad receiverships, railroad foreclosures, and railroad reorganizations. And il have some suggestions on that subject. The laborer, who, saving his money, has ^invested it once in a savings bank that has failed, from that time ceases to be an ac- 'Cumulator of money. He teels that he has lost and denied himself pleasures that he >could have enjoyed with that money, and the failure of a savings bank, therefore, ,Uas destroyed the disposition to accumulate and save on the part of workingmen. The ifaot that railroad employes do not put their savings into railroads for which they -are working is due, doubtless, to the fact of continued railroad foreclosures under ■mortgage. I have in my mind a case where the railroad company could not, under 'the law, issue stock except for value, and there was no law limiting the issue of bonds -without value^ and, so they issued them and distributed them at 5 and 10 cents on the "dollar, which as a great outrage. Now, a railroad organization requires two classes of securities. To meet the demands of investors who want safety and are satisfied ■with a small rate of interest, bonds are wanted. The other for one who is willing to take chances on a stock investment. In the matter of mortgage there are in America ■ -decision after decision that the mortgage can be foreclosed and all their interests closed ■out. Under the English law the decisions run this way, that theright the road acquires jn the land is simply a right of use for public purposes. The railroads have not the ■ real estate title in their road, and it therefore cannot be sold out under foreclosure ; • they make a debenture, and the control of the property and its management is given to the creditor whose lien is in default. You cannot foreclose its land, and theowner- lehip remains permanent. The application of that same principle here would be won- -derfully beneficial. The decisions have run in this country for a great many years in one channel, and the suggestion that is coming to men in connection with this is that there should be a department of the Government called the Department of Commerce .»nd Labor, and that that part of the shipping business now under the Treasury Ue- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 25 partment shall be given to this new department, that all questions of inter-State cotn- merce should be under the charge of this department. These receiverships that now fall into the court should be in this department, but in such a way that the security that was In default should -elect a management until their interest is paid, and the de- partment should control it as the Treasury Department controls national banks. A Member. That could only reach roads that run through different States. The Witness. It could only reach the railroads that pass between two States, but this means the entire railroad system of the United States. The advantages of con- fioUdatiou are so great that every railroad is falling into that line, and great compa- nies are growing greater all the time, so that it would really control the railroad sys- tem of America. Mr. Paeker. I would like to ask you whether you have considered this subject as to whether it is desirable to continue the importatif^n of labor from other countries, not pauper labor ? The WiTi^ESS. Well, It is pretty hard upon the laboring man when you do not put a tariff upon the competitive laborer ; still, 1 would like to think a little on that sub- ject before I was called upon to answer. The Chairman. I will put that question in another form. Do you not think that the time has arrived when we will be compelled in the protection of the interest that jon here testify to we shall have to determine who may come to this country and who cannot come ? The Witness. It does seem to me that our capacity to absorb Christendom is some- what strained. Mr. Buchanan. We are not troubled so much absorbing Christendom as we are ab- «orbing the Pagan. Mr. Parker. Do they not come from both way s ? Mr. BuKNES. I will ask you, Mr. McDowell, if it is not a cause of irritation that the proportion or disproportion between salaries paid to general officers and general superintendents of the corporation and the workmen of all grades is so great? The Witness. I do not think that that has ever entered into the minds of many of the workmen, especially.in the Knights of Labor. Q. Do you know anything aTjout the salaries paid to general ofBcers? — A. Not spe- cifically ; I do not know on these great roads. I think |25,000 is as large railroad- service salary as I ever heard of. The Chairman. Are not the salaries in that proportion as they run down to vice- presidents and superintendents ? The Witness. The pay-roll on the Pennsylvania railroad on the question of sala- ries would be the most autlientic one that you could get hold of, as it is one of the loads that pays its employes all along the road best. I have not particularly famil- iarized myself with that. Q. Have you any knowledge of the condition of things in the companies that cover the coal regions in Pennsylvania and Alleghany County, Maryland?— A. That is Mr. Powderly's home, and his information on that would be so much better thau mine that I would rather he should answer. Mr. POWDERLY recalled and examined. By the Chairman: Question. I would like to ask you, as ray memory does not sufficiently grasp as to your clearness on the point, when the Knights of Labor was first organized ?— -Answer, in 1869. Q. And how and for what reason?— A. Well, that would take a long statement. Q. First I will Jisk you where you were living at that time ?— A. At Scranton, Pa. Q. And what was your business ?— A. Machinist. Q. You are a mechanic ? — A. Yes, sir. Q Mr. Powderly , if you are a bachelor, do not tell me your age ; if you are a married man, you can.— A. I am not a bachelor, and was 37 on the,22d day of last January. Q. I think it important, from the direction the examination has taken, that we ehould understand when the order originated and the purposes an'd history of the Knights of Labor. . , ^ ^, „^ Mr. Powderly. Shortly after the close of the war, about eight months after peace -was declared, the garmeiat-cutters of Philadelphia organized an association to be known as the Gaiwnent-Cutters' Society of Philadelphia. The intShtiou was to pay the sick members a weekly allowance and to bury the dead. In fact, it was a benevo- lent organization ; they looked after the interest of their sick members. They bUilt up quite a treasury and continued to hold their meetiugs for four years. At the end ■of tiiat time one of them, one night, I think in October, 1869, when they were dis- cussing some measure, a member of the society said : " We have been coming here for four or five years : we have ged to get a record of them we invited them to a general convention, which met at Reading January 4, 1878. We met there and formed the first. General Assembly of the order. Then w6 had some fonr or five States represented; and we had some eleven district assemblies that up to that time were not known to each other. This man who formed the first local assembly of the Knights of Labor in Phil- adelphia was elected afterwards as first workman of the district, and at Reading, when the general assembly was formed, he was elected to the position of first grand master of the general assembly of Knights of Labor. Under his management it con- tinued for a year and nine months ; but his health failed. He pushed the organiza- tion with all his strength and worked so hard that he was completely worked out,; " and when we met in Chicago in convention he sent his letter of resignation or declen- sion. He declined to be again elected. He said he was not physically adapted for the work, and suggested two names, one of whom was elected liis successor ; and from that time to the present I have been in the position of chief officer of the Knights of Labor. It was then known as grand master workman. In 1883 the designation waa changed from grand master workman to general master workman. The organ- ization was intended to take in not only men who worked at the bench and in the mine, but every man who toiled by hand and brain, with a few honorable excep- tions. We left one or two honorable occupations out, because we felt that they were fully able to take care of themselves — we left out the lawyers and bankers ; we did not look upon them as dishonorable, but that they were fully capable of taking care of themselves. If you will permit me jnst another word here — we will not take in the saloon-keeper, and I will tell you why. We have seen trouble enough coming from saloon-keepers in an association of labor, and are endeavoring to make the traffic odious in the eyes of our members, without being a temperance organization. If the wife of a member begins to sell liquo*, we look upon them as both being engaged in it, and that they are both selling liquor ; and while we do not expect to get him divorced from his wife, he must be divorced from our order. *• Mr. Parker. I would like your opinion as to the present number in the organiza- tion. The Witness. I think our present membership will not exceed 500,000, although we have been credited with as many millions. The Chairman. Are women admitted to your organization f The Witness. They are — on an equal footing with men. Q. When were they first admitted into the organization 1 — ^A. In 1881. Here is a silk handkerchief; I go into a store and ask for a handkerchief. I am shown one of that quaUty and make and another one equally as good. I have never yet heard a man who would say to me, " This one you may have for 35 cents, and this one I wiU charge you 75 cents for." If such were the case and I were to ask him the reason, would he say that " This one that I sell for 75 cents was manufactured by a woman, and we pay her small wages ; the other one is made by a man. We must pay him higher wages, and we must sell the article for a higher price than the one made by a woman." No one ever hears of that being done. They sell the article that she makes for the same price that they do the one made by the men ; hence we claim that for equal work she should receive equal pay. She never asks that she shall be placed in a higher place than man, and we are willing to place her side by side. And I will state fur- ther that we have one assembly of women with a membership of 1,300, and a smgle expulsion has never taken place. They have managed the affairs of their craft— the shoe craft— in such a way as to reflect credit upon them. The Chairman. Mr. Powderly, of course there is a kind of limitation in the resolu- tion which was reported back to the House, and the basis of the investigation was confined to the States named, and especially the special examination into the troubles there. Are you aware of the condition of the miners in the coal regions of Pennsyl- vania, and the wages paid to them ? . . t i_ The Witness. We have a vast number of miners in our organization. 1 have gen- eral knowledge of their wages and condition, but I cannot enter into detail. I do know that they are having gome trouble with their employers, and that they would be pleased, and have asked it as a favor, that this committee extend its investigation into the mining interests of the country. ' j 4.i,„ „jf The Chairman. You said yesterday that you would give us the names of the wit- nesses to be examined in the West. c4.-\ „-+„o==o= The Witness. Mr. Hayes who will go there and procure the names of the witnesses, and will give them to you at any time. Would you permit me to go a step further r During a miners' strike I was in a city of Massachusetts one day and saw a man mak- ing a shoe in the factory. The old shoemaker's shop was closed. I asked this man if he knew who that shoe was intended for, and the answer he gave me was: I d" "^t know what kind of a hoof it is going on when ,t leaves my hands." If ' f f'^^ 7™! with me he would see the miners of my State wearing those shoes. In three or lour 28 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST ■weeks after the miners stopped work in the mining region from their strike this man in the shoe factory would be told to leave work one Saturday night, and if he were to ask the reason in this way: "I do not know why this is ; there are just as many feet an the country as there were before, and I do not understand why I am thrown out of work," the answer would be, " The supply of shoes is not required." And although 600 miles lay betwe'en these two men, yet they were so intimately connected with one another in this way that the loss of employment to one meant the loss of employment to the other. Mr. Pakker. What are your rules and practice as to the admission of colored men f The Witness. We admit them on the same footing as white men. We make no ■difference between color, creed, or religion. We have one assembly in New York in which the chairman is a Roman Catholic, the vice-president a Presbyterian, and the man who occupies the next place is a Hindoo. Q. And colored men are admitted upon the same ground and with the same right as their white brethren ?-^A. Yes, sir; and have local assembliesof their own. They seldom enter into an assembly wliere there are white men, but they have assemblies ■of their own, and are managing them very nicely. Mr. Buchanan. You are a machinist ? When did you last work at your trade? The Witness. I worked at my trade until March, 1877. Q. And since that time you have been engaged in the manner in which you are now ■employed? — A. Well, yes; principally. The ChaibmAn. Mr. Powderly was in that time, for five or six years, the mayor of Seranton. The Witness. I forgot that. Mr. Buchanan. I asked him that question, as some people speak of him as having a very easy-going time, as if he had uot been a workingman. The Witness. I work harder now than I ever did — sixteen or eighteen hours a day. Mr. Pakkeb. Then you can sympathize with those lawyers you proscribed. W. O. McDowell recalled and examined. Question (by the Chaibman). Mr. McDowell, how long have you been in this or- ganization ? — Answer. Eight years. Q. How did you happen to join it ? — A. As a boy I apprenticed myself to learn the machinist trade, and worked in a large factory, where there were at least one hun- •dred apprentices. A boy could soon learn to run a machine, and he would be kept on . the same one, and the consequence was that he was not learning his trade by being moved round to different parts of the work. We got to work one day and compared notes, and determined that we should change machines. The difSculty, however, was with the foremen. One of the boys was the son of a foreman, and we appointed him a committee to bring one of the foremen in to our meeting, and he joined us, and eventually the whole of the workmen in the factory were with us. Then, in place of our having no chance to learn our trade and to be moved from machine to machine, we were moved round. As we got a little money together we expended it in buying books on the work at which we were engaged, and in that way had the advantage of an organization. As time went on we found that there were other organizations that had struck out in a good deal the same way, and when the Knights of Labor formed their assembly at Newark, seeing one of their members, who was a machinist, under the influence of the Knights, leaving off liquor, I concluded it was a good society to belong to. The Chairman. There is nothing that you know of the organization inconsistent with obedience to the law and the administration of government in this country ? , The Witness. Nothing whatever. It is a perfect supporter of the law in every particular. Mr. Buchanan (addressing Mr. Powderly). With reference to those interviews with Mr. Gould in New York. You were not as full in your statement about them as lie has been. Are his recollections substantially the same as yours or otherwise ? Mr. POWDBKLT. It is correct. Mr. McDowell's recollection is the same as mine. The committee then adjourned till 11 o'clock to-morroy morning. Thuesday, April 22, 1886. The committee met at 11 o'clock a. m. in the room of the Committee on Elections. JAY GOULD sworn and examined. The Chairman. It is the desire of the committee, Mr. Gould, that you give your testimony in this investigation upon which we are engaged, and for the time I trans- fer your examination to Mr. Burnes. Mr. Gould. Mr. Chairman, may I ask what the resolution is ? LAI50K TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 29 Mr. BUENES. We are assembled, Mr. Gould, by anthoiity of tbe House of Repre- sentatives as a select committee to investigate the causes aud exteut of the disturbed condition now existing between railroad corporations engaged in carrying on interstate commerce and their employes in the States of Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas,, and Texas, and the committee have the further power to send for persons and papers The Witness. What is the date of that resolution ? r e ■ Mr. BUKNES. That resolution was passed through the House of Representatives oa Monday, ihe Vith of April. The Witness. Well, I am president of the Missouri Pacific Railroad, which runs, through some of those States, but at the date of that resolution we had, and at this- time we have no difficulties with our men, and we are not, strictly speaking, within the rule of that resolution. While I am very glad to spend my time talking to th^^ committee I hardly think they would want to spend their valuable time talking to me. Now, I would be glad to say to the committee that we had on the 15tb of April in the transportation department, 3,307 men ; in the machinery department, 997 men ; in the engineers' and firemen's department, 1,332; in the car department, 503;. in the road department, 3,5.56 ; in the bridge department, (545, and at our terminal facilities, 397, making a total of 10,737 men, not including our general offices. The operation of our road, and I speak from thirty years' experience as a railroad man, is going oik in a perfect, regular, and orderly way. Our trains are all runuing and the business- which we were chartered for is being transacted regularly. Here is a dispatch that I received since I left New York. This represents the business that was done up to- 12.35 p. m. of this day, which is April 21 : " Two hundred and ninety freight trains moved yesterday containing 4,637 loads,, an increase of 74 trains and 1,537 loads compared with the same day last year. Quiet at all points on the line. Trains doing well." Now, I submit to the committee whether we come within the ruling of this com- mittee? Mr. BuRNES. I believe that that question has been substantially passed upon by the committee, and that it is the judgment of the committee that we should investi- gate all the circumstances and all the facts bearing npon tbe troubles in the general sense of the term, and therefore we propose to examine you with regard to the cir- cumstances and facts antecedent to the resumption of business on your lines of road.. The Witness. Well, I thought it was only proper that I should state here to the committee the fact that at the date of this resolution we were operating our road in- a regular and formal manner, and transacting all the duties which our charter called. for. Mr. BuRNES. Your suggestion will be noted on the record, not from any legal neces- sity, but as a gratification, possibly, to you. I will now ask you the formal queationa relating to your age, residence, and occupation. The Witness. I reside in New York City ; I am forty-nine years of age ; and I am. president of the Missouri Pacific Railroad, and have been since 1879. Mr. BuKNES. Please to inform us if there has been any interruption to the com- merce passing over the lines of road you represent in Missouri, Illinois, Kansas, Ar- kansas, and Texas. If so, what interruption, and, so far as you know, the causes of, ench interruption? The Witness. Well, how far do you go back f Do you mean the strike? Mr. BuENBS. I mean disturbances on any railroad iib those States or either of them where disturbances have existed and where the stoppage of interstate commerce has been caused. The Witness. Do you want me to state simply what I know, or the facts which come to my knowledge as president of the organization ; because I ought to state tt> the committee that I left New York on the 5th of January, on my yacht, with my family, for a cruise to the West Indies. I returned to New York on the 23d of March. The strike — this strike — occurred while I was absent. And my knowledgeof it comes Irom such ofGcial information as would come to me as president of the company sine© my return ; and I would be very glad to go on and- give the committee everything I know of the succeeding history of it, but I think it is pioper that you should know that the facts are not within mypersonal knowledge. Mr. Bdrnes. We understand that necessarily you will be compelled to speak of many things from ofBcial information. You will, in^the course of testifying, discrimin- ate between that which you know and that which you have heard from other sources. We would like you to go over the whole ground and gi\e us not only what you know, but what you have reason to believe from official information. And you may submit documents or correspondence bearing upon the subject if you desire. The Witness. The first recognition that our company made, so far as I know, of the Knights of Labor, came out of the strike in April last year. That occurred also while I was away on a yachting cruise; but it resnlted in an agreement between the representatives of tbe Knights of Labor and the Missouri Pacific, and work was- resumed on the road and continued until August. In August Me. Powderly and his 30 ' LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. committee came to New York to see me. That -was the first time that I ever met him. They stated their grievance, which was that the Wabash road, then in the hands of receivers of the United States court, should reinstate a large number of men who were Knights of Labor who had left the employment of that company, and whose places had been filled or largely filled. The committee labored under the impres- sion, which many do, that I practically control" all the roads in the United States, and that even the sun did not rise or the moon set without some sanction of mine. They had such an idea, but I told them I had nothing to do with the road, and I ex- plained tnat to them ; that it was in the hands of a receiver. While this interview was going on my time came to leave. I turned to the committee and said, "Now, gentlemen, has not the Missouri Pacific lived up to her agreement with you f I want to know that." They said, "Yes, you have." "Well, then," I'said, "I want it now imderstood that when you think you have any grievances hereafter against the Mis- souri Pacific that you shall not strike, but that you shall come to me, man-fashion, and we will talk it over," and left. Q. With whom was this conversation held ? — A. Mr. Powderly and the members of the committee. They were the men he brought as a committee. I parted with them, I had no further communication with them. I went off on my yachting cruise in Jan- uary, fully relying upon the good faith of that arrangement being carried out. This strike came oa while I was away, and was, of course, a violation of that agreement, and of that good faith between us. The cause of the strike was with the receivers of the Texas Pacific — a road which was not embraced in the agreement which had been made by the governors of Missouri and Kansas, to which I refer, in April, while they were arbitrators, not embraced in that agreement, because that agreement was limited to the States of Missouri and Kansas. The Texas Pacific was in the hands of the United States court ; it was not under our control at all. In the course of the business the receivers discharged a man named Hall, and that act was taken as a pre- test, and a sole pretext for the strike on our road. Why, our men told ns they had no grievance. They told Mr. Hoxie that they had no grievance; but they were ordered to strike, and that was the only thing they knew. Then, Mr. Hopkins, vice- president, who was acting in my absence, and who was present at this agreement in August, and knew of it, naturally took up the idea that Mr. Powderly caused the strike on our road, contrary to the agreement, and he sits down and pens a dispatch to Mr. Powderly, just as a business man would do. Here is the dispatch, " New York, March 6," that was the day of the strike: New York, March 6, 1886. T. V. POWDEBLT, Soranton, Pa. : Mr. H. M. Hoxie telegraphs that Knights of Labor on our road have struck and re- fuse to allow any freight trains to run on our road, saying they have no grievance, but are only striking because they are ordered to do so. If there is any grievance we would like to talk it over with you. We understood you to promise that no strike should be ordered without consultation. A. L. HOPKINS. Mr. Powderly waits two days. The strike went on. Mr. Powderly then says : Philadelphia, Pa., March 8. A. L. Hopkins, Secreiary Missouri PaHfio Bailroad, 19b Broadway, New Torh: Have telegraphed West ffir particulars. Papers say strike caused by discharge of . man named Hall. Can he be reinstated pending investigation ? T. V. POWDERLY. Here is Mr. Hopkins's reply right back : „ „ „ New York, March 8, 18S6. T. V. Powderly: ' Thanks for your message and suggestion. Hall was employed by the Texas and Pacific, and not by us. That property is in the hands of the United States court and we have no control whatever over the receivers or over the employes. We have car- ried out the agreements made last spring in every respect, and the present strike is unjust to us and unwise for you. It is reported here that this movement is the result of Wall street influence on the part of those short of the securities likely to be affected. A. L. HOPKINS. Now to this message no reply was vouchsafed, and the board by formal resolution put the matter in Mr. Hoxie's hands. It was there anyway. It was the duty of the local management of the road to handle all questions in connection with the opera- tion of the road. The Eastern ofdces of the great railroads are their financial de- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 31 positories. They have nothing to do with the labor. So that Mr. Hoxie had the control of this anyway ; but the board, to make it doubly distinct, put it in his hands and he conducted the strike from that time on until after my return. In the strike which took place in March— let me explain to the committee what that was, and what the effect would have been if it had been simply a strike. We had at the date of the strike, on the 6th of March, 14,317 men. I will give you the figures— 14,315 employes. The Knights of Labor, the strikers, numbered 3,717 ; but they were not the men who were necessary to the operation of the road. They were the men in the machine shops men along the track, men who performed the lower duties on the railroad. So that if this 3,700 men had etruek and left the premises and the ofiSces and the law and ■order of the commnnity had gone on, we would not have missed a train. Our business would have gone right along, as we had all our train forces; but following this strike, following the leaving of our employ, what did they do ? They exercised more than the right of eminent domain. They seized our property without payino- for it. They seized our terminus. They took Saint Louis, they toot Sedalia, they took Atchison, they took Kansas City, they took Parsons, they took Fort Worth, they took Little Rock, they took Texarkana, the terminal point of the road, they took forcible possession, and said no man shall run a train over that road. That is what they said. Now what did Mr. Hoxie do when he found that state of things. He said, ■" These men have taken possession of our road ; we have got no earnings now," and he was forced to write an address to aU the men, suspending the pay-roll— the only thing he could do. He suspended Lis pay-roll, and thus 10,000 men who were loyal •to the company, who could run our trains every day, wore thrown out of employment. They were deprived of their power to earn their wages, and that was what followed the strike, the seizure, for you can call it no other name — something that the Czar of Russia would hesitate to do, with his million soldiers behind him. Here is Mr. Hoxie's statement : (Mr. Swayne, with the consent of the committee, read the statement for Mr. Oould.) The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Executive Department, Saint Louis, March 8, 1886. Wo the employ^ of the Missouri Pacific Railujay Cqmpany, leased and operated lines : That all may understand the present condition of affairs whereby some 10,000 men liave been thrown out of employment, the operation of about 5,000 miles of railway stopped, and the traffic of four States, affecting over 4,000;000 people, partially par- alized, I desire you to read and carefully consider the foUowmg facts, for which abun- •dant evidence can be produced, and which cannot be controverted: On the 16th of March, 1885, the strike then pending over this entire system was settled by the voluntary mediation of the executives of Kansas and Missouri, and a •circular issued which was sufficiently satisfactory to cause an entire resumption of work. During the sixty days subsequent to the above date committees representing the employes at different points, and also the various labor organizations to which they belonged, were met, and all grievances candidly discussed. Satisfactory agree- ments were then entered into, so that on May 19, 1885, it seemed that perfect harmony existed between us all as colaborersof these companies. Any infractions of the spirit or letter of the understandings or agreements made between the company and its em- ployes were speedily rectified as soon as brought to the attention of tha proper authori- ties. This apparent harmony and good understanding continued until September fol- lowing, when this company was notified by the Knights of Labor that it must not perform any work for, or interchange any business with, the Wabash Railway, with which that organization had difficulties pending. The executive committee of the • Knights of Labor stated at that time that no cause of grievance of any nature existed against the Missouri Pacific Railway and its associated companies, but that, to force the Wabash, which was in the hands of the United States court, it became necessary to involve the Missouri Pacific Railway on account of the supposed identity of the stockholders' interests. In order that there might be no possible cause for destroying the good feeling then existing between this company and its employes, the order above referred to was acquiesced in until the Wabash difficulties wore adjusted. On December 16, 1885, the United States court took possession of the Texas and Pacific Railway in Louisiana and Texas for the benefit of its creditors, and from that date the severance of that railway from this system has been as complete as if no amicable relations had ever existed between it and these companies. The employes working upon the Texas and Pacific Railway became the employes of the agents of the United States court, and the Missouri Pacific management ceased to have any con- trol over them. Messrs. Brown and Sheldon, the receivers, took possession of the Texas and Pacific Railway, appointed their own agents and made such arrangements with their employes as they deemed proper and fit, as to which the management of the Missouri Pacific Railway exercised no voice or Control whatever. „ -c -, It is learned that on March the 2d instant, the employes of the Texas and Pacific Rail- Way inaugurated a strike, giving as the reason that one C. A. Hall, of the car depart- 32 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ment of that road, in Marshall, Tex., was fliecharged without dn6 cause. On Thurs- day, the 4th instant, the Knighfs of Labor ordered the hoyoott of the Texas and Pacifie cars aud traiBc over these roads, and such arrauj;ements were thereupon made as not to permit that order to disturb the apparently pleasant relations with our employes. At 10 a. m. ou Saturday, the Gth instant, without previous notice, all of the shopmen,, most of the yardmen, and many of the trackmen stopped their work and volnntarily refused to continue as employes of this company, merely staling to their several fore- men that they had received orders requiring this from the executive officers of the- Enights of Labor, and alleging as their only reason the discharge-of an employ^ by the receivers of the Texas and Pacific Railway, an alien road in the hands of the United States court. Since the commencement of this strike, at many point8,'the local com- mittee of the Knights of Labor have notified our foremen and superintendents that they would appoint and place their own watchmen over our property lo protect it from loss and damage, and to take care of the same ; but as these self-appointed watchmen assume the authority as to who shall or shall not enter upon the grounds- and property of the company, except through tbeir own order, it is virtually dispos- sessing the company of its property, and assuming control and possession of the same, in violation of all rights of property, and contrary to the very basis of all governments. This company has for years had satisfactory understandings and agreements with certain labor organizations, which have in every instance complied with, their promises, and it has always been the object and aim of the management to comply fully with both spirit and letter of all such understandings and agreements. I would call your attention to the following conclusions from the above history of the past year : This company has made no objections to the existence of organizations and combina- tions of employes which the latter consider for their mutual benefit. It has recogiiized and met the committees of such organizations, and made agree- ments with the same without distinction and carried them out as exactly as possible, promptly adjusting all complaints and differences which have from time to time arisen. When loyal employes permit themselves to be governed and controlled by their discontented colaborers they necessarily suffer equally with them the consequences of ill-advised acts ; therefore the necessity of their individual efforts to restore the proper . relations betweeu the company and its employes. It must be well known and recognized that the capacity of .a corporation to meet its pay-rolls and vouchers depends upon its capacity to earn money, and that when its earning powers cease its ability to pay the employes and its other creditors ceases at the same time, as its daily and monthly payments are made from its daily and monthly receipts. The company is legally required to do all in its power to perform its obligations to the public and to the Government, and the management will take every proper meas- ure to comply with these requirements, ; and I earnestly hope that every independent, free-thinking colaborer, who has been or is an employ^ of these companies, will con- sider these facts and inform himself upon all sides of the subject, remembering that there has never before been an act so arbitrary, useless, and uncalled for as that of last Saturday, whereby a few men, to whom you have voluntarily given the power, are depriving many thousands of their colaborers of their accustomed wages, divest- ing this company of the capacity to pay its employes for their services, shutting up the avenues of trafiSo in four States, and preventing some 4,000,000 of people from ob- taining their customary supplies and the necessities of life, because it is claimed that one employ^ of the car. department of the Texas and Pacific Railway, at Marshall, Tex., a road over which this company has no control, has been discharged by the agents of the United States court. H. M. HOXIE, „, „ ™, „ „ •*'*'■*' Fice-Prendent. The Chairman. What was Hall charged with ? The Witness. General Swayne will read from Receiver Brown's statement. General Swayne read as follows : Saint Louis, March 9. A statement containing all the material facts in connection with the strike on the Texas and Pacific Railroad, made by ex-Governor Brown, receiver, has been received here. About December 29 Receiver Brown went to Marshall to supervise the transfer of the property aud to arran-"mpauy =fnlfr J^^*!'^ ^^S stock of this company beiepaired on this road, and aU foreien stock Injured on this road be repaired at the company's shops. ^ ri^i^l'J 1 5° employ^ be dischareed without a just cause, said employ^ havins the "??f ^} ^^^ *° investigation if le thinks he was unjustly dischargeS? ^ «.l ^*! all promotions, such as foremen, be made-from the ranks. onetnJ^ne-haJfS^e'T"''''^^^*'' *^' '"S"'^' ^"'^^ hours be paid at the rate of whlfipl^H =hl''ii'Sf ^^'T^^ to reduce expenses the men should be consulted as to , , S?." ^T * reduction of hours or a reduction of men. ai,^iiVr5 ■^i'°.°l^^y matter come up between the employes and the company it ^^^nflZlffrJ^?i.*'^'*-*t^?° committee of six, appoLt^d, three from t£e com- pany and three from the Knights of Labor; and the company and the Knights of Labor agree to abide by their decision." e n v,x^ ^mguia oi .^^^Jr' ^55^° lepliei to this substantially as he had verbaUy replied to the other committee, adding, however, that contracts made by the company were not binding upon the receivers. Mr. Brown then proceeds: ■- u^iumg " The reasons why the receivers could not make the proposed agreement are so ob- ?/^ ^^ require no explanation. The leading reasons may be briefly stated : 1. The power and authority conferred by the court upon the receivers to manage f^. f""?*''?!*^^?^?^'^^? T"^^^ *y *^** agreement in many essential and vital re- spects be delegated to the Knights of Labor. "2. That it proposes to deprive the receivers of the right to control and operate f< P^P^'^y under the weU-defined rules of law and common sense. 3. It creates a board of arbitration on all questions of reductions of wages which would never agree, and thus make it impossible to reduce expenses, no matter what the financial emergency might be. "4. It forbids the receivers having their own rolling stock repaired or the rolliuK stock of any other line injured on the receivers' Hue repaired in other shops. No mat- ter how badly or negligently the work may be done by employes, they are forbidden to discharge, or notwithstanding they may be unable to operate their own lines because their own employes will not make the necessary repairs. In other words, the receiv- ers would surrender their unquestioned right as well as duty to maintain rolling stock to a standard equal to the demands of business. " 5. The receivers are required to make all promotions from the ranks regardless of the question of fitness or merit. " 6. Although more than 50 per cent, of the employes of the Texas and Pacific Rail- way are not Knights of Labor, no method is proposed for their protection, nor have they reported any grievance, nor proposed any agreement or guarantee. The refusal Of the receivers to sign the foregoing agreement is the sole cause of the strike, and any other allegation of cause is an after thought, or certainly the grievances would have been referred to the receivers. Since the appointment of the receivers the wao'ea of the men have not been reduced ; no employ^ has, so far as the receivers know or believe, asked for his wages to be increased or his hours of work diminished, and, in fact, no employ^ has to their knowledge offered or referred any grievance of any character or description to the receivers, directly or indirectly." i On February 24, the foUowing dispatch from Marshall was received by George Noble, general agent for the receivers : " Please come to Marshall Immediately to settle trouble in shops. "T.J.BURNETT, "Member Executive Board EmgMs of Labor." 3984 CONG 3 34 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH, AND WEST. Upon inquiry of the proper anthority the receivers could not leam of any tionble in the shops, nor did they know who T. J. Burnett was, nor what connection be had with the Texas and Pacific Railway or its employes, and therefore reply was made as follows : Dallas, Tex., February 24. T. J. Burnett : I have heard of no trouble at Marshall shops. Am too busy to go there to-day. GEORGE NOBLE. Under date of February 28, Colonel Noble received a message from one Martin lions, styling himself chairman of the executive board. Knights of Labor, as follows : " Governor Sheldon referred me to Dallas. I cannot come to Dallas. Cannot con- trol matters here long. If not settled by 3 o'clock March 1, must call out Texas and Pacific Railroad employes. Answer immediately what action you will take. -"MARTIN IRONS, " Chairman Executive Board, Knights of Labor." Under date of March 1, Colonel Noble received the following message from Mar- shall : " Did you receive my telegram yesterday t Please answer immediately. , "MARTIN IRONS, " Chairman, ^o." " To neither of these messages," says Mr. Brown, " was there a reply, because we knew of no trouble in the shops and knew of no authority Martin Iron^ had to repre- sent our employes, and certainly he had no power or authority from the court, to whom alone we were responsible, to control or modify our actions, or to control the em- ' ploy^s in the shops, who were indirectly the employes of the court. Much has been said since the strike about the discharge of C. A. Hall, foreman of the freight-car shops. This, we apprehend, is an afterthought. Hall was an incompetent man, not accept- able to the employes, and about February 15 he obtained, as we learn, leave from the master mechanic to be absent three hours, and was absent three or four days without further permission, and gave no excuse for the same. The master mechanic, if these are the facts, properly discharged him. Mr; Hall made no complaint to the receivers, or to any superior officer of this action of the. master mechanic, so far as we are advised. The employes of the shop made no complaint of Hall's discharge. "At 3 p. m., Monday, March 1, at a signal for the men to leave the shops they left, undoubtedly upon the orders of Mr. Irons, and have not since returned to duty. The receivers, beUeving that a majority of the men went out against their wishes, and were satisfied with their relations to the company and the receivers, and left under some mysterious influence by Mr. Irons, and desiring to give them a full opportunity to return en masse directed the general superintendent to publish an order on the evening of March 1, giving the men until 10 o'clock of Thursday, March 4, an opportunity to return to their places, with an assurance that all who returned would again be placed upon the rolls, and those who did not would be discharged. The men did not return to the shops at 10 o'clock on Thursday morning, as invited to do by the general superintendent, and they were thereupon offered their pay, which they declined." Mr. Brown refers to the efforts of a committee of merchants at Marshall to assist in bringing about a settlement of the alleged troubles, giving a long correspondence he had with them, most of which has already been published, and closes as follows: " This is a fair, full, and complete statement of all the facts preceding, connected with, and subsequent to the strike, and there will be no contradiction of them from any respectable or reliable source, and upon these facts the receivers are willing to be judged by an impartial public, and by the intelligent and honest employes of the company." The Witness. I want that order that was served on the strikers on the 9th to fol- low next, as it is the formal dissolution of the connection between the company and the Knights of Labor— the strikers. I would like to have General Swayne read that next ; it is the starting point. General Swayne then read : On March 9, 1886, the following notice was posted in public places, in the offices, and on the premises, and served on each person who had left the comnanv's emnlov- ment: " ^ ' Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Office of General Superintendent, Saint LoiUs, March 9, 1886. To all who were in the employ of this company, and who have quit work since March 5, 1886: You are hereby notified that your action, as stated above, was a volun- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 35 tary abandonment of the service of this company, and that yon are no longer in its employment, your names having been stricken from the rolls. All such who are now on or about the company's premises are hereby notified that they must immediately leave the same, to the end that this company may resume the traffic of the country. (Signed) WM. KERRIGAN, Gme/ral Supermtendent. On March 10, 1886, being the next day, and from time to time thereafter the follow- ing notice, offering emplojiuent to those who had struck, was published in the daily newspapers at different points on the line, and posted in conspicuous places : " Wanted. — ^The Missouri Pacific Railway Company is prepared to furnish employ- ment to a number of machinists, carpenters, car-repairers, car-cleaners, engine- wipers, yardmen, switchmen, trackmen, and laborers in its shops aod yards at Saint Louis, Mo. , and other stations on its lines. " Good and competent men will be employed for the services above specified without reference to their past or present relations to this company, or their connection with any society or organization, open, secret, secular, or otherwise. Such as are accepted will be paid the rate of wages recommended by the governor and other State officials of Missouri and Kansas when the labor troubles in March, 1885, were adjusted, the same as have been paid by this company since that date. "Apply to E. K. Sibley, superintendent Missouri Pacific Railway, Sedalia, Mo.; H. G. Fleming, superintendent Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern Railway, Saint Louis, Mo. ; A. W. Dickinson, superintendent terminal facilities, union depot ; John Hodge, master car builder, Missouri Pacific shops; H. Bartlett, master mechanic, Missouri Pacific shops ; J. Herrin, superintendent, Palestine, Tex. ; C. .Clark, master mechanic, Denison, Tex. ; W. W. Fagan, superintendent, Atchison, Kans., or to the undersigned. "WM. KERRIGAN, " General Superinteiident," The Witness. Now, this brings the status of this strike down to the 10th of March. At that time these men, as I stated before this documentary evidence was put in, had seized our property. When we undertook to run trains they would kill the engines, take off some parts of the machinery, and if that was not sufficient they would uncouple the cars and throw the pins away. They would assault the brakemeu and the firemen and other men that undertook to get the trains out. So that day after day we undertook to resume the running trains and were met with this opposition. Our men were shot, and these governors, the two governors of the States of Missouri and Kansas, gov- ernors Marmaduke and Martin — who had been the arbitrators of this April agreement, 1885, under which we had acted up to that time, they were called in, as I understand it, by the Knights of Labor, and met them at Kansas City, and went over the whole f round with them; examined everything that they had to say and they went down to aint Louis and met Mr. Hoxie and heard all that he had to say. And after hearing both sides they prepared a formal report, which they submitted to Mr. Hoxie on the one side and to the Knights of Labor on the other ; and I would like to have General Swayne read all that. General Swayne read : "After careful investigation we are unable to find wherein the Missouri Pacific Railway Company has violated the terms and conditions of the agreement made on the 15th of March, 1885, touching its employes in our respective States. No complaint has ever been made to the governor of Missouri, based on an alleged violation of such agreement, and but one has ever been made to the go\«eruor of Kansas, and that, on investigation proved to be without foundation and was withdrawn by the party mak- ing it. We are therefore forced to the conclusion that the strike of March 6, 1886, could not have been, and was not based on a violation of the terms of the agree- ment of March 15, 1885, by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company in its dealings with its employfe in Missouri and Kansas. We recognize the fact that the Missouri Pacific Railway Company may justly claim that the strike of March 6, 1886, relieves it of the obligations it assumed in the circular of March 15, 188.5, but nevertheless, anxious that amicable relations be restored between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes, and especially that the far more important interests in- volved in the mighty commerce of the States of Missouri and Kansas should not suf- fer, and that the great highways of business and travel should be at once reopened to the public, we would respectfully and earnestly suggest and recommend that the agreement embodied in the circular of March 15, 1885, be restored in letter and spirit, and that the Missouri Pacific Railway Company re-employ in its service all of its old employes, wifhont prejudice to them on account of the late strike, so far as the busi- ness of the company will justify their re-employment. We make these suggestions 36 LABOK TROUBLES ITS THE SOUTH AND WEST. and recommendations in the interest, as we believel alike of the company and its em- ployes, and moie especially the greater interests or the commerce and people of the two States. "JOHN A. MAETESr, " Governor of Kansas. "JOHN A. MARMADUKE, ' ' Governor of Missouri." Mr. SWATNB. Now, Mr. Hosie's reply : The Missousi Pacific Railway Company, Executive Dbpartmbnt, Savnt Louis, Mo., March 20, 1886. Hon. John A. Marmaduke, Governor of Missov/ri, and Hon. John A. Maktin, Governor of Kansas : Dear Siks : I beg respectfully to acknowledge receipt of your communication of this date, stating that after a conference at Kansas City, with a delegation of our late employes, you consented to visit the undersigned and nrge the continuance of the agreement made between yourselves and other State officers and the management of thjs company on March 15, 1885, and, if deemed advisable, recommend such modifi- cations of said agreement as might be thought just to all concerned. I note with pleasure your conclusion after investigation, that the agreement of March 15, 1885, has been kqpt inviolate by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, and that the present strike could not have been, and was not, based on a violation, by the management of this company, of the terms of said agreement; and I have carefully considered your recommendation that this agreement, which you concede the Missouri Pacific Railway Company is no longer under any obligations to observe towards those of its employes who have abandoned its services since the 5th day of March, 1886, should be restored and continued. On March 10, 1886, this company inserted in newspapers on its lines and posted in public places upon its property the following advertisement : " Good and competent men will be employed without reference to their past or present relations to this company or their connection with any society or organiza- tion, open, secret, secular, or otherwise. Such as are accepted will be paid the rate of wages recommended by the governors and other State officials of Missouri and Kan- sas when the labor troubles of March, 1885, were adjusted, the same as have been paid by this company since that date." The above notice was designed as a continuance, so far as the rate df wages is con- cerned, of the agreement of March 15, 1885, and is still in force, thus anticipating the recommendation which you make as to the amount which employes should be paid. In addition to the foregoing action of the company, which is in accord with your recommendations as to wages, this company is further willing to pay its employes a rate of wages equal to that now being paid by other railway companies in the same section of country. The further provision of said agreement relative to notice in case of reduction of wages, is not objectionable to this company, and will be continued. Your next and final recommendation that this company re-engage in its service all of its old employes, without prejudice to them on account of the existing strike, so far as the business of the company will justify their re-employment, is acceptable to this company, with these qualifications : The men who have been engaged under the advertisement of March 10, 1886, will be continued in our employment. We cannot re-engage or continue in our employ any persons who have actually engaged in the destruction or injury of the company's property, or who have advised such destruction or injury. We shall give preference to those of our late employ^ who have famihes and own homes on the line of the road. It is to be remembered that the loss of traffic caused by the present strike will, to a considerable extent, reduce the necessity of employing as many men in our shops as heretofore. Thanking you for the consideration you have given the subject, and trusting your action will result in an early resumption of traffic, I am, your excellencies' most obedient servant, „. „. H. M. HOXIE, mrst Vtoe-President the Missouri Pacific Bailway Company. Mr. SWAYNB. I will read the reply of the Knights of Labor to the governor's let- ter. The Chairman. Are you reading from authentic papers f Mr. S WAYNE. They are papers agreed to on both sides. The Witness. I think that correspondence shows pretty conclusively that we have led the horses up to the watering trough, but we could not make them drink Our Bhops were open for them to go to work, but they would not go to work. That is not LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 37 onr fault. Now, I returned on the 33d of March from my trip, and shortly after my re- turn correspondence was opened between Mr. Powderly's committee and myself, which resulted in three letters, one from Mr. Powderly to me, my reply to him, and his re- sponse These letters 1 will put in, but I will not stop to take the time of the com- mittee to read them unless you want them here. When Mr. McDowell brought the last letter I told him that I would meet Mr. Powderly, I as an individual and he as an individual, and I would have a frank talk with him over the whole subject. And he brought him to my house on Sunday, the SJSth of March. At that time, bear in mind, when that interview with Mr. Powderly occurred, to which I shall presently allude, the road was in fuU operation at all points, with the exceptions of Fort Worth, Tex. , where the strikers held our trains by armed force, and Parsons, in Kansas. With these two exceptions the company had resumed full operations and the military, I think, had been called out ; so that it was only a question of a little time. I met Mr. Powderly and Mr. McDowell at my house on Sunday, and I had a frank talk with him. Mr. Powderly's secret circular, so called, had been issued, and my motive in seeing him was to brace him up, because the sentiments expressed In that circular were so different from the acts of his associates that I thought he needed bracing up ; and that is why I saw him and had the talk with him. They brought up this question of arbitration, which had been covered by this correspondence, and, which I had very promptly declined. It was in accordance with what Mr. Hoxie had been doing all the time. I could not have been more positive than when I made that dec- lination. Up to 2 o'clock we talked and then was my dinner hour. I told Mr. Pow- derly to come back with Mr. MoDoweU at night. They came back at night, and we resumed the talk. After we talked a little while Mr. Powderly said to me. Says he, "These men — now I want to talk — they are in rebellion to our order. They struck without cause and I have it in contemplation to-morrow to vindicate myself by issu- ing an order taking away their charter." Well, I sat back in my chair and I said to him, " Mr. Powderly, you have been so frank with me, that I willjbe equally frank with you. Now, I will read you a dispatch which I have prepared to send to Mr. Hoxie. I get down town in the morning at half past 9 o'clock. I shall send it then." And I took out of my pocket and read him this dispatch Mr. SwATNB. I would like to read a short extract from the charge made by Judge Pardee, of the United States court in Texas, who investigated the matter, as a part of the witness's statement. The Chairman. The committee will consider about that before admitting it, as Judge Pardee's statement may be taken. The Witness (continuing). I took this dispatch out of my pocket and read to him as follows : H. M. Hoxie, General Manager, Saint Louis : In resuming the movement of trains, on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ment of labor in the several departments of this company, you will give preference to onr late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ anv person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during the late strike. We see no objection ' to arbitrating any differences between the em- ployes and the company, past or future. /-.nxTT r» Now if the English language can be made to construe anything more out of that than is' in it I do not see how it can be done. I read it over jupt as distinctly as I have read it to the committee, and Mr. Powderly said, " I approve of that.'' He asked me to give him a copy of it, and I said, "Certainly, I will do that." And that brought our interview to a close. I went upstairs and wrote this dispatch in a note addressed to him, and cave it to Mr. McDowell to deUver to him. There was no right on the part of Mr. McDowell or of Mr. Powderly to give that dispatch to the pubhc until 1 had put it in Mr. Hoxie's hands. He was the manager of the road, and my communica- tions were with him. Now, they went downtown and changed their whole programme. The next morning the papers came out pubUshing this letter, and publishing the order to so to work, saying that "Mr. Gould has consented to our plan of arbitration. This is utterly untrue. I asked them so that there might be no misunderstanding about their interpretation of what was meant here: ''We see no objection to arbi- trating any differences between the employes and the company, past or future Now what I meant by that was this : Mr. Hoxie had the whole control of this subject, it was put in his han^ds by the board. This question of arbitration had been brought up by the O'Neill bill and in various ways. I have always been a "lend of arbitra tion-it has been rather a hobby of mine to arbitrate-and I said I saw "» °bj««tion to it We put that in Mr. Hoxie's hands, also committed it to his power, so that t^er? might be no mistake that he had entire control of this sub ect. That was what that iiS LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, meant in the conversation which I had with Mr. Powderly. He asked me this ques- tion, " Will you explain to me what that means " (meaning the clause on arbitration in the dispatch) ? (Reading from printed interview.) . " Mr. GOOLD. That means that we had already authorized Mr. Hoxie— put this mat- ter in Mr. Hoxie's hands fully ; that a question of arbitration, which is a matter of vast importance, vast detail to arrange— the principle, the great underlying princi- ple—that so far as the board was concerned here we saw no objection to that ; leav- ing that in addition to Mr. Hoxie, adding that to the authority he already had over this subject, increasing it to that extent. That is all this means, and nothing more. Now, that is the conversation between Mr. Powderly and myself. That is his qiies- tion and my answer to it. Now, on Monday following this Sunday interview when I saw these reports in the papers — these interviews The Chairman. They were published on Mbnday morning. The Witness. Mr. Hoxie was awakened in the night, and this put in his hands ; and, doubtless, he felt greatly annoyed ; most managers would have resigned at once ; and in the morning when I saw it I felt greatly troubled. I would have seemed to have been so discourteous. I immediately wrote this letter to Mr. Powderly. I supposed I would see him, and I took the precaution to write him this personal letter : [PeiBonal.] Missouri Pacific Railroad Compant, New York, March 29, 1886. , T. V. POWDBRLT, Esq., ' New York City : Dbab Sib: The papers this morning published the folio wing message: "President J. Gohld has consented to our proposition for arbitration, and so telegraphs Vice- President Hoxie. Order the men to resume at once. Signed, T. V. Powderly, G. M. W." They also publish an interview with you, which leads me to think that the ofScers of your order in Saint Louis may misconstrue your message into a consent on the part of this company to conform to the request contained in the letter from the secretary of your order, dated Philadelphia, March 27, which in my letter to you of the same date I declined to consider. You will remember that in our conference of yesterday I said to you that the position of this company was unchanged in this respect, and that the whole matter was left in the hands of the flrst vice-president and general manager, with the instructions contained in my telegram to him, which was written before my interview with you and read to you at the time. This telegram stated : " We see no objection to arbitrating any difference between the employes and the company, past or future." While I feel confident that your understanding of this matter is the same as my own, I write you this in order that there may be no grounds for misunderstanding hereafter. Very respectfully, yours, JAY GOULD, President Missoim Paoifio Bailroad Company. The Witness. Mr. Hoxie replied to that telegram : Jay Gould : I have your message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderly and also the letter of instructions, and will carry the same out to the best of my ability. H. M. HOXIE. Now, yesterday, I believe it came out in the investigation here that there was a letter of instructions. There was no letter sent, except the Powderly letter was sent. The instructions as he saw them in the papers were addressed to Powderly. That was the way it was printed, and that is how he came to refer to it. There have been no different instructions issned to those embraced in that letter. They have been lived up to by the company from that time to this, and notwithstanding the actions of these committees out there. As I said before, you might lead horses to the trough to water and draw it for them, but if they do not want to drink I know of no arrange- ment to make them. Mr. Grain. You say that there were no secret instructions and no letter? The Witness. On the contrary, we have lived right up to that resolution notwith- standing all the provocation we have been subjected to. Now that brings us down to this. Mr. Hoxie sees it in the morning papers and telegraphs me that morning. Mr. SWATNE. I would suggest ' fOblection was made to counsel making suggestion to witness.) Mr. Grain. I see no objection to suggestions being made. We permitted the same thing with the other side. We permitted Mr. Powderly and Mr. McDowell to consult, I see no impropriety in the counsel making suggestions in this way. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 39 The Witness. I have nothing in the world to conceal. I only want to pnt the com- mittee in possession of the entire facts. When I got down town I got this message to Mr. Hoxie. He says: "A copy of your letter to Powderly and of his order to Irons and to- the Knights of Labor now on strike, also appeared in this morning's papers." That was the letter which he referred to, you know. He had seen it in the papers. (Reading) : "A copy of your letter to Powderly and of his order to Irons and to the Knights oi Labor now on strike, also appeared in this morning's papers " — Before I had had an opportunity, yon see, to send it to him myself— "And the foUowing interview with Mr. Powderly, which is wired from New York : ' Mr. Gould recognizes our order,' he said, ' and addresses me by the title of G. M. W. (general master workman). There were some misunderstandings, which our conference cleared up almost immediately. Had Mr. Gould been at home, where I had a chance to see him, this strike, I am certain, would not have taken more than two or three days. I am satisfied he will be ready to have all differences discussed in the future before there is nece.ssity for a strike. This is a pleasant ending ot an un- pleasant business, and one aknost sure to come when the heads of opposmg conditions can come together to talk over matters.' Mr. Powderly is to meet Mr. Gould at 9.dU o'clock Monday toorning, and then the committee of arbitration will be appointed, as orisinallv SQggested by the executive board, three members by each side, and tney to choose a seventh. Mr. Powderly's order includes from twelve thousand to fourteen thousand men, employes of the Iron Mountain, Missouri Pacific, Missouri, Kansas, and Texas Pacific. It also includes the men on the local roads running into isamt ^°°'*- "H. M. HOXIE." That was the message which I got when I got down town, before I l»ad ??^* ™y message to Mr. Hoxie, and it greatly annoyeS me and I .^as °iad, to speak plain. [Laughter.] Now, I brought that up at the interview with Mr. Powderly the first ^^^m. G^'.°Mr. Powderly, as to my interview with you on Sunday, it was ve^ unfortunate that anything was said vrithont my approval. It ^f .«J?*^"*°7fi^^"* we would meet as individuals and that what transpired was *» ^^ «'"f"y """f^^?^ tial ; and if any part of that conversation came out, why, the whole interview ought *"''lS^P0^BKLY. Nothing has escaped me at all. I have not said a word about ""^Soi^'Tsawinthe papers the next morning a garbled statement of what took place, and I had not opened my month. "Mr. PowDEKLT. It didn't come from me. " Mr. GOTJU). Did it come from Mr. McDoweU ? , "Mr. McDowELi.. No. You know the reporters manufacture things when tney ^''"Mr.Gooi^. Hereisatelegram that Igot from Mr.Hoxle Itold youIwouUsend Mr. Hoxie that dispatch at half-past 9 yesterday morning when I got down town. 1 got this Jrom Mr. Hoxie. He says : . ^ ■ „ „;+t, m, PnwilfiTlv and also ^ " 'I have yonrmessage in relation to your interview 7^^*^^r.Powderiy and ^ also the letter of instructions, and will carry out the same to the best of my ability. Then follows the interview which I had read. . j^ " Mr McDoWElx. You wUl see on the lace of it that the latter part oi inai isiuo KgSrwor^S--rc^&^^^^^^^^^^ the Question whether he would not revoke the charter^ the laws of the organization., When l«8^i^*^*J^,^^'\o™ morning. I get down you now a telegram which I shaU send to Mr. f°:^ll^T°ZT veal thi displfch and town about 9.30, and I shall send it when I get there. And I read tne a^pax Mr. Powderly said that he approved ot it and asked if I ^""i"^?" ,,P™ Wore mv rfttt wMch ^I did. Now. it faUwrong to misconstrue '^^^^^Pjit me before m^ superintendents out there in the light "/^^"^^S l^d om thi^^^^ around and said another thing another day. Vl«nn^LnhM who sat by and took Now, this is the sworn testimony of the court stenographer, wno sai uy down the interview between Mr. Powderly a.nd mysem Mr. BDCHAiiAN. Do you know ^l^et^^^it '^''°"l''*!,io„e of that interview with Mr. 40 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. New York, March 3Q, 1886. To Mr. H. |il. HoxiE, Saint Louis: Mr. Powderiy wishes to know if you will meet the general executive board of the Knights of Labor, or a committee of your employes from the Knights ot Labor, tor, the purpose of hearing what the cause of complaint was, &.nd for the purpose ot mak- ing a settlement of present difaculties, alike honorable to both sides, either on the basis of arbitration or by mutual agreement, the same to be ^^^"'^ "hOPKINS ^' In answer to which Mr. Hoxie replied : Saint Louis, March 30, 1886. A. L. Hopkins, Neu) York City: Eeplying to your inquiry ftom Mr. Powderiy of this date, I have to say that yes- terday I received from Mr. Gould the following message : J . ., , "In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ment of labor in the several departments of this company, you wiU give preterence to our late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you wiU not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during the said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employes and the company, past or future." To this I sent the following reply, dated Saint Louis, March 29 : To Jay Gould : I have your message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderiy and also the letter of instructions, and will carry out the same to the best of ray ability. H. M., HOXIE. I am, therefore, willing to meet a committee of our employes, without discrimina- tion, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such com- mittee is appointed, to adjust with them any grievances that they may have. H. M. HOXIE. This message was delivered to Mr. Powderiy at tjie Astor House, and as a result the following message was sent by Mr. Frederick Turner, secretary of the executive board of the Knights of Labor, Mr. Powderly_ having started for home a few minutes after Mr. Hoxie's message was «lelivered to nim : New Yoke, March 30, 1886. Mabtin Irons, Saint Lovis : Have been in conference all day, with the result that Vice-President Hoxie agrees to the following : "Willing to meet a committee of our employes, without dis- crimination, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such committee is appointed, to adjudicate with them any grievances that they may have." Have your executive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from the em]^loy^s of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie to adjust any difference. Do this as quickly as possible. Board will leave for Saint Louis to-morrow. FKEDERICK TURNER, Seoretary. That closed our interview. Mr. BUENES. I ■will ask you if you have read all the conversation that was taken down and sworn to by the stenographer t The Witness. I have not. I have read such as I wanted to refer to myself. Mr. Burnbs. The whole of it will be considered as in evidence. Mr. SWAYNE. We also have what took place at Saint Louis, if you want it. The Witness. This is what was issued next day : St. Louis, March 29, 1886. To the Knights of Labor of the Great Southwest : FsLIiOW Workmen: We congratulate you, one and all, on your manhood and forti- tude during our late great fight for recognition and right. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 41 Now that the battle is fou^t and the victory won, let us wear onr laurels as men of dignity and modeiation. Every man to his post and to his duty with quiet and sobriety. Let us exhibit the san^e zeal for the upbuilding of the business of the West that we have just done in proving that labor is king. By order of JOINT EXECUTIVE BOARD OF D. A. NOS. 101, 93, AND 17. The Witness. Now that was their address which they issued on the 29th, when everything seemed to be lovely ; but the next pronunoiamento was one that they issued on April 6 : ADDRESS OF THE KNIOHTS. APPEAllKG TO BROTHER W0EKBR8 AND B1TTEHI.T DENOUNCING GOULD. Saint Louis, Mo., April 6, 1886. The joint executive board of assemblies 101, 93, andl7, Knights of Labor, this aiter- noon issued the following address : " To tlw worHngmen of the world : " Friends and Brothers : Hear us, for we plead for our rights. Men of equity, look upon us, for we struggle against giants of wrong. " Mad with the frenzy of pride and self-adulation, begotten as it is of the success of outrage and infamy, there stands before us a giant of aggregated and incorporated wealth, every dollar of which is built upon blood, injustice, and outrage. That giant of corporate wealth has centralized its power in and is impersonated in the eager fiend who gloats as he grinds the life out of his feUowmen, and grimaces and dances as they writhe upon his instruments of torture. " Oh, ye workingmen of America, who love your liberty and your native land ; ye great creators of wealth, who stand as the foundation of all national good, look upon your brothers to-day 1 "the enemt. " Gould the giant fiend, Gould the money monarch, is dancing, as he claims, over the grave of our order, over the ruin of our homes and the blight of our lives. Be- fore Viim the world has smiled in beauty, but his wake is a graveyard of hopes, th^ cyclone's path of devastation and death. " Our strong arms have grown weary in building the tower of strength, and yet he bids us build on or die. Our young lives have grown gray too soon beneath the strain of unrequited, constant toil. Our loved ones at home are hollow-cheeked and pale with long and weary waiting for better days to come. Nay, more that this, the graveyards are hiding his victims from our longing eyes. " Brother workmen, this monster fiend has compelled many of us to toil in cold and rain for 5 and 50 cents a day. Others have been compelled to yield their time to tiim for seventeen and thirty-six weary hours for the pittance of nine hours' pay. Others who have dared to assert their manhood and rebel against his tyranny are black-listed and boycotted all over the land. "He has made solemn compacts with the highest authority in our order and then has basely refused to fulfill his pledge. "He lives under and enjoys' all the benefits of a republican form of government and yet advocates and perpetuates the most debasing form of white slavery. He robs the rich and poor, the high and low, with ruthless hand, and then appeals to corrupt and purchased courts to help him take our little homes away. He breaks our limbs and maims our bodies and then demands that we shall release him from every claim for damage or be black-listed forever. " He goes to our grocers and persuades them not to give us credit because we re- fuse to be ground in his human mill. He turns upon us a horde of lawless thugs, who shoot among our wives and children with deadly intent, and then he howls for Government help when he gets his pay in coin alike. " GOUU) MUST BE OVERTHROWN. "Fellow workmen, Gould must be everthrown. His giant power must be broken, or you and I must be slaves forever. The Knights of Labor alone have dared to bea David to this Goliah. The battle is not for to-day— the battle is notforto-morrow-- but for the trooping generations in the coming ages of the world, for our children and ' our children's children. 'Tis the great question of the age— shall we, in the coming ages, 'be a nation of freemen or a nation of slaves ? 42 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. "The question must be decided now. The chains are already forged that are to hind us. Shall we wait until they are riveted upon our limbs 1 Nay, God forbi4 ! "Workmen of the world, marshal yourselves upon the battle-field. Workmen of every trade and clime, into the fray f Gould and his monopolies must go down, or your children must be slaves. Think of the little plants around your hearthstone that will be blighted by his curse. Think of the little home he is seeking to rob you of. Think of the wife 'from whose eyes he has wrung floods of tears, and from whose heart he has tortured drops of blood! "Who can look calmly upon his perfidy, his outrage and his crime ? for he has sought to incite felony among our rank and file ; he has bought the perfidy of vile men to entrap the unwary that he might Stain our fair name and gloat over our mis- fortunes. "'Once for all, fellow workmen, arouse! Let every hand that toils be lifted to heaven, and swear by Him that liveth forever that these outrages must cease. Let every heart and brow be turned toward our common foe, and let no man grow weary until, like Goliath, our giant is dead at our feet." "the Witness. This is the response which the three orders of the Knights of Labor made to the tendering of the hand of fellowship that we had held out to them. Now, . we commenced operating our road, and as I said when I met Mr. Powderly. on Sun- day the whole system was in operation, with the exception of Parsons and Fort Worth, and we gradually increased the movement of our trains. Our earnixigs the first week in April were equal to the same week last year ; the second week in April there were |36,000 more than at the same date last year. So that, as I said at the be- ginning, it seemed to me that the question of the committee at the time when the res- olution was passed did not apply to the Missouri Pacific. Mr. BuBNBS. Have you any other documents which you desire to submit t The Witness. There are seyeral of that sort ; but I only read this one, Mr. Chair- man, because this is an order which emanates from the three lodges which cover the Missouri Pacific system. The Chairman. We will accept that as a specimen of Western literature. Mr. BuKNBS. I understand, Mr. Chairman, the men are from Pennsylvania — not Western men. The Witness. I would like also to put in now this order, which I have ^ust read, of the 6th of April. Now, on the 11th of April I received this letter: ScRANTON, Pa., April 11, 1886. Jat Gouu), Esq., President Missouri Pacifio Bailroad : Dbab Sib : The events of the past forty-eight hours must have demonstrated to you the absolute necessity of bringing this terrible struggle in the Southwest to a speedy termination. You have the power, the authority, and the means to bring the strike to an end. I have done everything in my power to end the strike. The gentle- men associated with me on the general executive board of the Knights of Labor haVe done the same. Everything consistent with honor and mauhood has been done in the interest of peace. No false notions of pride or dignity have swayed us in our dealings with you or the gentlemen associated with you. In that conference with you on Sunday, March 28, I understood you to mean that arbitration would be agreed to ; the only method of arbitration that was discussed was in line with that suggested in the letter which I sent to you in the name of our board the day previous ; there was nothing particular .agreed upon, as you well know. You said thatin arbitrating the matter the damages sustained by the company during the strike ought to receive consideration. I said to you that it would not be the part of wisdom to bring that question up in the settlement of the strike. When I called upon you again that evening you had prepared, as the result of your understanding of the morning's interview, a letter which you intended to give me. That letter inr eluded a telegram to be sent to Mr. Hoxie, and in that telegram you said that the damages sustained by the company would be a proper subject for the arbitration board to discuss. This latter part of the letter or telegram you agreed to strike oflf after we had talked the matter over for some time, and I left you as you were about to go to your room to rewrite the letter which you afterward placed in the hands of Mr. McDowell to be given to me, for I had to leave at that time in order to keep an appointment at the hotel where I stopped. The statement which you have since then made to the efiect that yon had preparedthatletter before I called is not quite correct, or if you did have it prepared you changed it after we talked the matter over for some time. This I believe you will admit to be true. In the conference held between the members of our executive board and the directors of the Missouri Pacifio Company at No. 195 Broadway on March 30, you said to me that you understood me to say that the men along your lines would be ordered back to work atonoe,theyhavino'vio1ate'i the rules of our organization. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 43 I then reiterated the statement which I had made to youj and now repeat it ! " The men oat along the lines of yonr railway»-can be ordered back to work, but if they are given to understand that they are deserted, that we do not take any interest in them, it will not in any way mend matters; on the contrary, it will make things worse. There are, all along the roads out there, a great many men who have no regard for organization or law, men of hardy spirit, energy, and daring. Such men as have left the East and have taken up their homes out in a wild country such as that is will not submit as quietly as the men they have left behind in the East ; they are apt to do rasher things than they would do elsewhere, and I have no doubt we have some in our order ; in fact my experience with the men of that vast section leads me to think that the men on both sides outj there are more daredevilish than they are in the East. Even the business men of that country are of that stamp of character." Both you and Mr. Hopkins heard me make that statement, and I believe the latter agreed that that was his experience also. The danger of the strike spreading was also discussed, and I said to you that it would not spread, that an effort had been made to have the men of the Union Pacific take a part in it, but that the Knights of Labor on that road had a standing agreement with the management of the road that there was to be no trouble or strike until the last effort to effect a settlement had failed, and not then until the court of last resort had been reached. When I made that state- ment Mr. Hopkins remarked that they had better strifte then, for if thejy^ did not the Union Pacific would not much longer have sufficient money to pay their employes. The impression made on me was that you would be pleased to see a strike take place on the Union Pacific. This, I believe, covers the chief points of discussion. I did not hear either you or Mr. Hopkins say that the present trouble out along your road would not be arbitrated with the men who were not at work. It was my firm belief when I left you that night that you meant to have the entire affair submitted to arbitration at the first possible moment. That belief is shared by Mr. McDowell, who was present during the entire interview. When you sent the telegram to Mr. Hoxie you sent it as president of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. You sent it as the chief sends his message to an inferior officer, and it meant as much to a sensible man as the most imperative order could possibly mean. When I, as the chief officer of the Knights of Labor, send a message such as that it is understood to be my wishes and those wishes are respected by the subordinate officer to whom they are sent. It is not his place to put a different con- struction on them and give them his own interpretation. His duty is to obey the spirit of the instruction. The man in power need not be an autocrat in order to have lus wishes respected. " I would like to see it done " comes with as great a force from the man in authority as " I must have it done." That was the idea that I entertained when I left your house that night. I also explained to you at your house that night that the men who had entered upon the strike had not violated any law of the order in so doing ; that while I thought it would have been better if they had laid their grievances.before the general executive board before striking, yet there was nothing in our laws to command them to do so. I said that a district assembly of the Knights of Labor bore the same relation to the general assembly, of which I was the chief officer, that one of the States of the American Union had to the General Government' of the United States, and that while I could interfere, it was under the law which gave me jurisdiction over the entire order, and not under any particular law. I furthermore explained to you that the spirit of our organization, its genius, was op- posed to strikes, and that was the reason why our general convention never enacted any particular legislation for the government of them. I also said that the occasion had never before called for any interference from the general officers, hut that this strike would show the necessity for the passage at our next convention of laws that would place the subject of strikes under the control of the general executive board of the general order. When, on Monday, March 29, you sent me the letter marked "personal," you at the same time told a newspaper correspondent that you had done so. What your motive was in marking your letter " personal," and at the same time informing a rep- resentative of the press that you so addressed me, I do not know, nor do I question your motive. I felt it to be my duty to let the public see the letter, which contained nothing of a personal pature whatever. There are people who might be uncharitable enough to say that your intention was to give out the impression that there was some- thing between you and me which would not bear the light of public scrutiny. I have had no such dealings with any man since this trouble began, nor previous to that time. I am quite willing to allow the fullest light possible to shine upon my every transaction. I have nothing to conceal. You can settle this strike. Its longer continuance rests with you and you aione. Every act of violence, every drop of blood that may be shed from this time forth must be laid at your door. The Knights of Labor were not founded to promote or shield wrong-doing, and to-day the order of the Knights of Labor stands between 44 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. your property and ruin. We are wming to absolve the men along your railways from their allegiance to our order. We leave that to themselves. We will not allow any claims which the order may have on them to stand between them and their restora- tion to their former positions. The order of the Knights of Labor asks of no man to remain a member if it is not to his interest to do so. You may deal with them as citi- zens if you -will. We will surrender our right to claim these men as members if they ■wish, but we will not surrender our right to see this affair thoroughly investigated. You have said that the order of the Knights of Labor was a conspiracy, a secret menace, &c. I am willing, as the chief ofdcer, to lay everything connected -with our order bare to the world, if you will, on the other hand, lay open to the public the means and methods whereby you have piled up the wealth which you control, and allow the tribunal of public opinion to pass in judgment on the two and say which is the conspiracy. Do you accept the challenge 1 You have instructed your legal adviser to proceed against every man connected with the Knights of Labor for the damages sustained since the strike began. Two weeks ago I said : " Do not do this." To-day I say begin at once, lay claims for damages in every court within whose jurisdiction a knight exists. Proceed at once, and in every State where you can recover damages do so if the law will sustain you in it. Let the majesty of the law be vindicated ; it is just and right that it should be so. We are willing to face you before the law. We will fight you with no other weapon. For every violation of the law of State or nation we will enter suit against yon, and in this crusade against you do not understand that we mean to persecute. On the con- trary, we wish to see the law vindicated. If you have at a.U times obeyed the law in your dealings, in the methods by which you have acquired your immense fortune, then it Is time that the many offenses with which you are charged should be refuted. Yon have remained silent under many a damaging charge of injuring the State. We will be your avengers. If yon have been wronged we will let it be knowm to the world through the medium of the courts of justice. And let me say right here that no money will buy a verdict atthe hands of these courts. There are people who say that this struggle is the beginning of the war between capital and labor. That statement is false. This certainly means war ; but it is a war between legitimate capital, honest enterprise, and honest labor on the one hand, and illegitimate wealth on the other hand. This is a war in which we court the full- est investigation of our acts. Do you dare to do the same ? This war meanS no fur- ther strike, no shedding of blood; it is a war in which every business man, every commercial man, every professional man, every workingman will be invited to enlist. It will not be a war upon the innocent, and the battle-field npon which it will be fought out will be before the two courts of law and that which makes law, public opinion. There wiU be no mobs in this supreme hour to silence any man's opinion.' No converts will be made by physical force. "That flag which floats over press or mansion at the bidding of a mob, disgraces both victor and victim," and under such a flag as that we will not wage the battle ; but this battle of the people against mo- nopcuy may as well be fought out now as ten years from now, and what field so emi- nently proper in which to fight it out as before the courts ? Let us know whether laws were made to be obeyed or not ; and if they were not so framed, then the people must make laws that will be obeyed. No man, whether he be rich, or whether he be the poorest of the poor, shall in future shirk the responsibility of his acts and shield himself behind the courts. It was to see that the laws were obeyed that the order of the Knights of Labor was founded, and if the day has come to make the trial, so let it be. I do not write this letter to you either in the spirit of anger or revenge. For you personally I have no dislike. I believe that if allowed to follow your own impulses in this matter you would have had the strike ended ere this. Those who advise you do not mingle with the people, they do not care for the people. You have been warned that your life is in danger. Pay no attention to such talk ; no man who has the in- terest of his country at heart would harm a hair of your head . But the system which reaches out on all sides gathering in the millions of dollars of treasure, and keeping them out of the legitimate channels of trade and commerce must die, and the men whose money is invested in the enterprises which stock-gambling has throttled must make common cause with those who have been denied the right to earn enough to provide the merest necessaries of life for home and family. When I say to you that we will meet you in the courts, I do not speak rashly or ill-advisedly. I have taken counsel from the best legal minds of the United States. We are prepared to face you before the courts, and now await your action in the matter. This is no threat. I play no game of bluff or chance. I speak for five hundred thousand organized men who are ready to pay out the last farthing in order that justice may prevail. You have it in your power to make friends of these men by acting the part of the man, by taking this matter in your own hands. WiU you do so, and end this strife in the in- terest of humanity and our common country? It is your duty to brush aside every obstacle, assert your authority, and take this matter in your hands, settle every griev- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 45 tmoe, restore every man to his place, except those -who have been engaged in the de- strnotion of property, or who have broken the laws. Will you do this ? Ton can then make rules and agreements with your men which will forever preclude the pos- sibility of another snoh disastrous conflict as this one has proved itself to be. I remain yours, very truly, T. V. POWDERLY, G. M. W. K. of L. My reply includes copies of previous correspondence. It is as follows : New York, April 14, 1886. T. T. POWDERLT, Esq., G. M. W. K. ofL. : Deas Sir : At 12 o'clock to-day I received from Mr. William O. McDowell, whom you brought with you to our recent conferences, a letter in which he says : " By yesterday's mail I received a letter written by Mr. Powderly addressed to you, inclosed in a letter addressed to me. With this I hand to you the "letter addressed to you by Mr. Powderly, and a copy of Mr. Powder ly's letter to me inclosing the same." The following is a copy of the letter Mr. McDowell sent me as coming from you : Oenekal Assemblt, Order of Knights of XiAbor of America, Office of General Master Workman, Soranton, Pa., April 13, 1886. Mt Dear Mr. McDoweix : I inclose you a letter which you are to read and deliver to the man for whom it is intended. I do not care whether you deliver it in person or through the medium of another, only ask that it be placed in his hands. If you have succeeded in effecting a settlement with him do not give it to him. If you think there is a prospect of an immediate settlement do not give it to him ; but if such is not the case, then I want it placed in his hands. Allow him to either consent or to make a reply. If he consents to an honorable settlement then the letter will never see the light of day, but if he does not so act then it will be published to the world, and from the time he opens up the ball in a legal way we will continue to wage the battle with him. His wealth'cannot save him if this fight is begun. Let no one know of the ex- istence of this letter until after 5 o'clock of the day you deliver it; then, if he makes no reply, let it go to the world. Let him know the limit of time allowed. I sincerely hope that there will be no necessity for its publication. Hoping for the best, I re- main, very truly yours, T. V. POWDERLY. I have received your letter to me dated " Scranton, Pa., April 11, 1886," at the same time and by the same agency that I received your foregoing letter of instructions to Mr. McDowell. The animus and purpose of your letter to me cannot be fully un- derstood without knowing the contents of that one. I was peremptorily notified at the same time that I must answer your letter by 5 o'clock to-day, and I was gra- ciously given until that hour to respond. Your letter to me embraces two subjects, one relating to me personally and the other to the relation of the Knights of Labor to-* railroad company of which I am the president, and, in some degree, the representative of its public and private duties. I shall refer to the first subject very briefly. The circumstances above given, under which your letter was delivered, as well as its tenor and spirit, place the purpose in writing it beyond any fair doubt. It would seem to be an official declaration that the Knights of Labor had determined to pursue me per- sonally unless the Missouri Pacific Company should yield to its demands in what you call the strike on that road. j, ^ ■ ■^■ In aoswer to these personal threats, I beg to say that I am yet a free American citi- zen. I am past forty-nine years of age, was born at Roxbury, Delaware County, in this State. I began life in a lowly way, and by industry, temperance, and attention to my own business have been successful, perhaps beyond the measure of my deserts. If, as you say,, I am now to be destroyed by the Knights of Labor, unless I will sink my manhood, so be it. Fortunately, I have retained my early habits of industry. My friends, neighbors, and business associates know me well and I am quite content to leave my personal record in their hands. If any of them have aught to complain ot, I will be only too glad to submit to any arbitration. If such parties or any ot them wish to appoint the Knights of Labor or you as their attorney, such appointment is quite agreeable tome, but until such an election is made it wUl naturally occur to you that any interference on your part in my personal affairs is, to say the least, quite gratuitous. Since I was nineteen years of age I have been )n the habit ?f employing m my various enterprises large numbers of persons, probably at times as high as 50,0UU, distributing three or four million doUars Per month to dilferent pay-rol^. It would seem a littfe strange that during all these years the diflSculty with the Knights ot Labor should be my first. Any attempt to connect me persqnally with the Jate 46 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. strike on the Southwestern roads, or any responsibility therefor, is ecLually gratu- itous, as you well know. It is true I am the president of the Missouri Pacific, but when this strike occurred I was far away on the ocean and beyond the reach of tele- grams. I went away relying on your promise made to me last August that there should be no strike on that road, and that if any difficulties should arise you would come frankly to me with them. Mr. Hopkins, the vice-president of this company, who was present and cognizant of this arrangement with you, in my absence sent you promptly, when the present strike broke out, the following telegram: New York, March 6, 1886. T. V. PowDEKLY, Soranton, Pa : Mr. Hoxie telegraphs that Knights of Labor on our road have struck and refus^ to allow any freight trains to run, saying they have no grievances, but are only striking because ordered to do so. If there is any grievance we would like to talk it over with you. We understood you to promise that no strike would be ordered without con- sultation. A. L. HOPKINS." Philabblphia, Pa., March 8, 1886. A. L. Hopkins, Secretary Miaaouri Padfie Bailroad, New York: Have telegraphed West for particulars. Papers say strike caused by discharge of man named Hall. Can he be reinstated pending investigation ? T. V. POWDEELT. New Yokk, March 8, 1886. T. V. Powderlt: Thanks for your messages and suggestion. Hall was employed by the Texas and Pacific, and not by us. That property is in the hands of the United States court, and we have no control whatever over the receivers or over employ^. , We have carried out the agreements made last spring iil every respect, and the present strike is un- just to us, and unwise for you. It is reported here that this movement is the result of Wall street influence on the part of those short of the securities likely to be affected. A. L. HOPKINS. This dispatch you never answered. This correspondence places the continuance of this strike on your shoulders. You sat still and were silent after Mr. Hopkins's appfeal and allowed tide strike to go on ; allowed the company's property to be forcibly seized and the citizens of four States and one Territory to be deprived of their rightful rail- way facilities. Thus forced, the board of directors, prior to my return, placed the matter in Mr. Hoxie's hands by a formal resolution, and that disposition of it has never been changed. You knew this well, because you had a correspondence with him on this subject. Hence it was that when Me. Turner, secretary of your order, wrote to me on the subject, I fully advised him in my letter of March 27, that the matter had been placed by the board in the hands of Mr. Hoxie, and that I must refer you to him as its continuing representative. At the same time I reminded you that a standing advertisement of this company was at that moment inviting its former em- ployes to return to their accustomed posts ; and that regardless of their being or not being members of your order, and regardless also of their individual participation in the strike which your order had recently inaugurated. When, in spite of all this, yon desired to see me personally, I cordially met you, and having put myself in communi- cation with Mr. Hoxie, arranged with him for you the following, which was widely published by you at the time : New York, March 30, 1886. Maetin Ikons, Saint Louis : Have been in conference all day, with the result that Vice-President Hoxie agrees to the following : Willing to meet a committee of our employes without discrimina- tion, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such com- mittee is appointed, to adjudicate with them any grievances that they may have. Have your executive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from the employes of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie to adjust any difference. Do this as quickly as possible. Board will leave for Saint Louis to-morrow, FREDEEICK TUENEE, Secretary. LABOR TROUBLEfe IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 47 Ever since then Mr. Hoxie has Btood ready to receive any and all persons in the actual employ of this company, as a committee or otherwise, and confer upon or ar- bitrate any matter of difference or complaint, either between the company and them- selves or between the company and its late emijloy^s, and, for that matter, between the company and anybody else. No such committee or individual employ^ has, so far as known to me, ever made any such application. In this connect! on it will be re- membered that they left not becanse of any complaint whatever of this company's treatment of themselves, but only because of this company's refusal to comply with their demand that this company refuse to do what the law requires in the way of in- terchange of business with another company with which some of youi order had a quarrel. In the mean time this company has of necessity gone on to extend employment to such of those persons who recently, and without even alleged provocation, left its service, as saw fit to return. These returning employes have been very many, and in this way its rolls are already nearly if not quite as mil as its shops and equipment, crippled by acts of violence attendant upon recent action of your order, can employ. Mr. Hoxie advises that every such person applying to be received back has been em- ployed, unless believed to have taken part in recent acts of violence. This company still stands ready to make good in the fullest sense its agreement as expressly set forth. > In the face of aU this you notify me that unless by 5 o'clock I personally consent to something, precisely what I do not see, then personal consequences of a sort vaguely expressed, but not hard to understand, will at the hand of your order be visited upon me. Let me again remind you that it is an American citizen whom you and your or- der thus propose to destroy. The contest is not between your order and me, but be- tween your order and tiie laws of the land. Your order has already defied those laws in preventing by violence this company from operating its road. You held then that this company should not operate its road under conditions prescribed by law, but only under conditions prescribed by you. You now declare in effect that I hold my indi- vidual property and rights, not as other men hold theirs, but only at the peril of your letting loose irrevocably after 5 o'clock your order upon me. If this is true of this company and of me, itis true of all other men and companies. If so, yon and your secret order are the law, and an American citizen is such only in name. Already for weeks your order, in yonr attack upon this company, has not hesitated to disable it by violence from rendering its duty to the public and from giving work and paying wages to men at least three times your own number, who, working as they were by your side, were at least deserving of your sympathy. Having pushed this violence beyond even the greatest forbearance of the public, and found in this direc- tion cause to hesitate, you now turn upon me and propose that the wrongs you have hitherto inflicted on the public shall now culminate in an attack upon an individual. In this, as I have said, the real issue is between you and the law of the land. It may be, before you are through, those laws wiU efSoiently advise you that even I, an individual citizen, am not beyond their care. Very respectfully, JAY GOULD. The WiTNUSS. While this has been going on, the Saint Louis papers have published this: Washington, D. C, April 21. Push the strike. We have plenty of money to carry it through. JOHN xlAiJJiiS. I believe he is one of the executive board. Mr. BuBiTES. From whom did you get this f ,, „ • v i ^ The Witness. It was telegraphed tome from Saint Louis by Mr. Hoxie, wio askett me to lay it before the committee. This is signed by the same man that addressed the dispatch holding meresponsible for the murder in East Saint Louis. [Addressmg Mr. Swavne.1 Where is that dispatch ? . j- ^ x, * Mr BURNBS. It would hardly be fair to incorporate in the testimony a dispatch ot that knd, for the reason that it is hearsay, and Mr. Hoxie will be a witness. The Witness. I withdraw it then, ... * Mr Grain. So far as that is concerned, it has already gone out to ™.e country as coming from Mr. Gould. That being the case it would be nothing but right that Mr. Hayes, if he is here, should testify in regard to its contents. Mr. BUENES, Have you anything further, Mr. Gould ? The Witness. I have the other dispatch of Mr. Hayes that I wanted put in. (xen- eial Swayne was looking for Judge Pardee's charge in the case of the Texas Paoihc Strike, and he has now found it. 48 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Mr. BcKNBS. That may be heard afterwards. We may determine to pnt it in the record. It is posBible Judge Pardee may be examined as a witness in the matter. The Witness. I want to pnt in this statemeiit, which I wiU mark Exhibit A (which included all the correspondence already in the record, and the following stenographic report of the interview) : OFFJOIA.L STENO&RAPBia BEFOBT. The following is the oflBcial report of the conference held on March 30, 1886, between Mr. Powderly, Mr. Gould, and others, made by court stenographer F. M. Adams : The following is a report of a conference at 195 Broadway, between Mr. Gould, Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Somerville, Mr, Powderly, Mr. Hayes, Mr. McDowell, Mr. Bailey, and Mr. Turner, March 30, 1886, at 11 a. m. Mr. Gonu). Mr. Powderly, as to my interview with you on Sunday, it was very un- fortunate that anything was said without my approval. It was understood that we wonld meet as individuals, and that what transpired was to be strictly confidential ; and if any part of that qonversation came out, why the whole interview ought to come out, ■, ■. i Mr. Powderly, Nothing has escaped me at all. I have not said a word about any conversation. Mr. Gould. I saw in the papers the next morning a garbled statement of what took place, and I had not opened my mouth. Mr. Powderly. It didn't come ftom me. Mr. Gould. Did it come from Mr. McDowell ? Mr. McDowell. No ; you know the reporters ma;nufacture things when they don't get it. Mr, Gould, Here is a telegram that I got from Mr. Hoxie. I told you I would send^ Mr. Hoxie that dispatch at half past 9 yesterday morning, when I got down town. I got this from Mr. Hoxie. He says : " I have your message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderly, and also the letter of instructions and will carry out the same to the best of my ability." In fact, he is now proceeding to carry out the instructions which I gave him. "A copy of your letter to Powderly and of his order to Irons and to the Knights of Labor now on strike also appeared in this morning's papers" — Before I had had an opportunity, you see, to send it to him myself — "and the following interview with Mr. Powderly, which is wir«d from New York : ' Mr. Gould recognizes our order,' he said, ' and addresses me by the title of G. M. W. — General Master Workmen. There were some misunderstandings, which our conference cleared up almost immediately. Had Mr. Gould been at home, where I had a chance to see him, this strike I am certain would not have taken more than two or three days, I am satisfied he will be ready to have all differ- ences discussed in the future before there is necessity for a strike. This is a pleas- ant ending of an unpleasant business, and one almost always sure to come when the heads of opposing conditions can come together to talk over matters,' Mr, Powderly is to meet Mr. Gould at 9,30 o'clock Monday morning, and then the com- mittee of arbitration will be appointed, as originally suggested by the executive board, three members by each side and they to choose a seventh, Mr, Powderly's order includes from 12,000 to 14,000 men, employes of the Iron Mountain, Missouri Pacific, Missouri, Kansas and Texas Pacific. It also includes the men on the local roads running into Saint Louis. "H. M. HOXIE." Mr, McDowell, You will see on the face of it that the latter part of that is in the reporter's own adding. My understanding was that if the order was sent by Mr, Powderly to continue work, then the order and the letter was to be given to the press. Mr, Gould, I didn't understand that there was any order to be issued by Mr. Pow- derly, I had no understanding at all. Mr, Powderly said that he had in his mind the question whether he would not revoke the charter of 101 ; that they had disobeyed the laws of tjie organization. When he said that I said, " I have no ot|jeotion to show you now a telegram which I shall send to Mr, Hoxie to-morrow morning. I get down xown about 9.30 and I shall send it when I get there," And I read the dispatch and Mr, Powderly said that he approved of it, and asked if I would not give him a copy of it, which I did. Now, it is all wrong to misconstrue me and put me before my super- , intendents out there in the light o!f having said one thing one day and whiffled around and said another thing another day. It destroys all organization. Mr, McDowell, I had not finished when you interrupted me. My understanding when Mr, Powderly left was that 1 was to remain and would receive your letter ; and then if the order was sent out by the executive board for the men to return to work, LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 49 that the order and letter was to he given to the press. If the order was not sent out then the letter was to be returned and delivered to you. Mr. Gould. There was no understanding like that. Mr. PoWDERLY. As to the revocation of the charter, I asked the question, " Sup- pose I did do that, how much tetter would it make it ? These men out there would understand that nobody cared for them ; " and I asked the question, " Will it not make matters worse." Is not that the way I put it? Mr. Gould. Possibly you might. I.understood that that was what you were goihg to do. Mr. Hopkins followed it up by saying that a year ago, when this matter was arbitrated by the governors, and when they found that we were in the wrong, we stood by and let the newspapers say that we had eaten humble pie, and that we had been defeated — Jay Gould was defeated ; and now he says, when you are in the wrong and when you acknowledge that you are in the wrong, you ought to take the conse- quences this time — showing exactly the view we took. Am I not right ? Mr. Hopkins. And Mr. McDowell said these men were rebels; that they were re- belling against the order. Mr. POWDEELT. He said partly in rebellion. Mr. Hopkins. He may have said that, but that is the idea that I got. Your gen- eral order that j'ou issued to your people discountenanced it. Mr. PowDEBLT. I didn't admit that I was in the wrong at all. Mr. .Hopkins. No, sir ; I didn't admit that you were either. Mr. Gould (to Mr. Hopkins). Shall I read that letter [referring to a letter on the desk]? Mr. Hopkins. It shows how those people feel in regard to it. There is no use of reading the name that is signed to the letter. It simply shows the way they feel. Mr. Gould. Suppose you read it. Mr. Hopkins. This is a letter from Omaha, speaking of the condition of things on the Union Pacific. Mr. Hopkins read the letter. "The executive committee of the Knights of Labor of the Union Pacific — their headquarters being at Denver — went down to Kansas City the other day on the ' war path.' They were preparing for strike everywhere. They got back to Denver on the 20th. My informant writes me that their whole temper had changed. In con- versation among themselves they bitterly denounced the Knights of Labor of Mis- souri and Kansas as being ' without organization, discipline, sense, or decency.' They add that the Kansas City and Missouri Pacific strikes were ' without valid reason, in violation of the rules of the order, and in violation of all known rules of decency. Powderly,' they say, ' was right in going home ; that he could not defend the action of the men ; that their going out was a violation of the laws of the order ; that their demands were outrageously unjust ; and that they were tyrannical and aggres- sive ; their whole proceedings were in reckless disregard of the rules and laws of the order,' and consequently, ' the strike was only a bull-headed piece of foUy, ruin- ous to the men, and ruinous to the order under which they were pretending to act.'" Mr. PowDEKLY. There is not one word of truth in that thing from beginning to end. Not one of those men that were there at that meeting ever had the idea that there was a strike. They didn't go on the war-path, nor did they have blood in their eye. Mr. Hopkins. They went away with pretty nearly the idea that you expressed to us. Mr. POWDBRLT. They were of the idea that they were not to make any further trouble. They went back with the same mind. Mr. Hopkins. This is a simple opinion that he expresses about what they had in their minds when they went there. That is in quotation marks where they refer to the condition of things on our road. Mr. PowDBKLY. Those things come sepond-handed and sometimes get devilishly twisted. That man that you spoke of that I recognized in the office, speaking of "G.M. W."— one of those reporters spoke of that. Hesaid, " are these your initials?" I said "yes." He hitched all that stuff on himself. Mr. Gould. I don't see any impropriety if I address you, in addressing you by your title. Everybody knows that you are the president of that order. I think you are the right man in the right place; that is what I think. Mr. Powderly. That is the filling in of the reporter. Mr. Gould. But exactly what I did say I thought was so plain that it was not mis- understood either by you or me. Now I will read this: H. M. Hoxie, General Manager, Saint Louis: In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific and in the employment of labor in the several departments of this company, you will give preference to our late^ employ^, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ 3984 CONG 4 60 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AKD WEST. any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, Eor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during the late strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employes and the com- pany, past or future. JAY GOULD. Mr. PowDEKLY. Will yon explain to me what that means, then ? Mr. Gould. That means that we had already authorized Mr. Hoxie — put this mat- ter in Mr. Hoxie's hands fully; that a question of arbitration, which is a matter of vast importance, vast detail to arrange — the principle, the great underlying principle — that BO far as the board was concerned here we saw no objection to that, leaving that in ad- dition to Mr. Hoxie, adding that to the authority he already had over this subject, in- creasing it to that extent. That is all it means, and nothing more. Mr. PowDBELY. Is Mr. Hoxie correctly reported when he says he won't arbitrate? Mr. Gould. No, sir. Here are his exact words: " I have your message in relation to your interview with Mr. Powderly, and also the letter of instructions, and will carry out the same to the best of my ability." Mr. PowDBELY. The papers tell another story. Mr. Hopkins. That was not much like the reply that came back after you telegraphed to go to work. Mr. PowDBELY. How is that? * Mr. Hopkins. That does not sound much like the result of your message to the peo- ple to go to work. Mr. TuENEE. The report is that Mr. Hoxie flatly refused. Mr. Gould. There has got to be one head to a railroad corporation, with its vast rami- fications; and there has got to be order and discipline. We have got the lives of the people and their property in our hands and we are responsible for their safety. We have got to have a head. You recognize that. Mr. TUENEE. Certainly. Mr. Gould. There has got to be organization. Mr. TUENEE. I am only speaking of the reports in the papers. Mr. Gould. My rule has always been that if a man performs his duty by the com- pany, what he does out of school I have nothing to do with. If he is an Odd Fellow, or a Mason, or a Knight of Labor, or a Brotherhood, or anything, I have nothing to do with that. I am at the head of a corporation and we employ laborers to perform their requi- site part in that corporation; and I don't want to inquire whether a man belongs to one organization or another. That is their private right, and I don't want to interfere with it. When the board put this matter into Mr. Hoxie's hands he became the party to deal with. And on the question of arbitration, as a principle, I don't think there is anybody that will go farther than I would. I think it is a subj ect that ought to be carefully con- sidered, to protect the rights of both the corporation and the employ&, and the public rights which override the whole. It is the public duty of the corporation and every in- dividual member of it — of a railroad corporation — to operate the road for public use. It is the duty of all employes alike in that respect, from the president down. They clothe themselves, so to speak, with public duties. It is unlike the employes of a manufactur- ing company or any private organization. A railroad is a public thoroughfare, a public organization, and it has contract duties to the State and to the public; and from the president down to the lowest employ^, when they take service with the railroad they assume their share of those public duties. That is my view; and any law or act that can be got up that would secure to your people, to the employes, to labor, the right of arbitration and an equal right to the employers I am for. It wants to be carefully pre- pared, something that would work practical results. To that extent I think we are quite agreed. Mr. McDov7ELL. Have you had a chance to re-read the bill? [Referring to the O'Neill arbitration bill.] Mr. Gould. I have had a chance to read the bill, and I got a telegram from Judge Dillon that it was a subject of very great importance, and that he should like to have it carefully considered. Mr. McDowell. You showed that, I think, yesterday, and he was to be here this morning. Mr. Gould. Yes. Now, I am prepared to say, and I understood Mr. Powderly to ap- prove of that telegram to Mr. Hoxie. Mr. Hoxie is proceeding to carry that out and will proceed— I shall not change it— to carry it out in good faith; and I have not heard a wordfromhim beyond that [pointing to the dispatch on the desk], and he says: "I have received your message of instructions, and I will proceed to carry the same out to the best of my ability." LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 51 Mr. PoWDKELY. Well, you say you are willing to arbitrate. Mr. Hoxie is reported in the papers as not being mlling to arbitrate, and won't — most eniphatioally says he won't; and be says to you that he will. I don't see how we can get to talk the matter over at all. Mr. GotnLD. He has not said so. Mr. PowDKELY. If he has said that he will how can we reach him; how can we get to him; and what can we do to stop this thing right now? It won't do to say I am willing to arbitrate if I don't arbitrate. If Mr. Hoxie says he won't arbitrate after you say you are wUling, what can we do ? Mj. Gould. I have heard nothing from Mr. Hoxie, excepting he says he has received that telegram and he is proceeding to carry it out to the best of his abiUby. I have noth- ing farther. He has given me no views on the question of arbitration. Everybody knows my views, that I have always been in favor of it. In all our railroad meetings I have always advocated arbitration; in all our Southwestern road, over andoveragain. Mr. Hopkins. We did arbitrate this very thing. Mr. Gould. This very question was arbitrated a year ago, and the governors decided against us. It was arbitrated here since this strike, and the^overnors found for us. So that it is no new principle. Let us get the report of the governors. It would bear right on this question, because it shows that this question had been arbitrated — the question of this strike. Mr. Bailey. Who selected the arbitrators, Mr. Gould? Mr. Gould. They were selected by the Knights of Labor a year ago, and by the Mis- souri Pacific officers, I think. Mr. Bailey. In this last case? Mr. Gould. I think they were called in by the Knights themselves. Mr. SoMBEViLLB. It was the same committee? Mr. CrOULD. The same committee. Mr. SoMEEVTLLE. The same committee that has passed on the other? Mr. Goiild. I believe that your organization would stand much stronger if when yoa are wrong, when any part of your organization is wrong, you would just frankly tell them so. That is the way to hold discipline. Mr. Bailey. I don't think we have ever failed in telling them so, if it is proved to us that they were wrong. Let us arbitrate this question to see whether they are wrong or not. Mr. Gould. This strike was made because the receivers of the Texas Pacific discharged a man. There never was a complaint or any pretext that we had done anything; on the contrary, they said we had not; they had no cause against us. Mr. McDowell. The practical question right here seems to be Mr. Gould expresses himself in the strongest way as a believer in and in favor of arbitration. Mr. Powderly asks arbitration, and all agree to arbitration. Now, to have arbitration. If Mr. Hoxie is put out there, nominated, and these gentlemen are to go there and close it up — I say the aU-important thing seems to be that they are ordered to go to work, and the men are to go to work, and all these questions settled by arbitration, if there are any, afterwards, after they are at work — and to have that done. If this law only was a law, you would have it legal under the law. Mr. Powderly is a very sick man, and he wants to go away. Mr. GrOULD. I say on that subject that I am infavor of arbitration, as a principle of settlement of wrongs or claims between individuals. It is really what the law provides. Our law here provides a short method of arbitration for difierences. It isn ' t anything new. I I is a short way of getting at a result, and I am in favor of that as a principle ; and I told Mr Hoxie, who is the great head of this corporation, who has this whole subject under his control, that, so fe.r as the board of directors are concerned here, they see no objec- tion to arbitration between the employes and the company. Now this arbitration, as I understand it, should be between an individual and the company. We have got fifteen thousand employes, and what I said here applied to every one of those fifteen thousand employ^. That if they have any difference with the Missouri Pacific company, that individual, be he one or a hundred, so far as the board are concerned, we are ready to arbitrate those differences with those men. Mr. McDowell. I don't see that you differ in any way in that, whether the arbitra- tion is between the employes and the raUroad or between the Knights of Labor and the railroad-, do you, Mr. Powderly? Mr. POWDEELY. No. Mr. McDowell. Only in the method of the appointment of arbitrators. Mr. Gould. This very bill provides for individual arbitration. The individual can- not merge his rights. His rights are as an individual. He cannot merge them. It has got to be passed on as an individual. . . ^ ix.- Mr. Hopkins. You ought to recollect, in the first place, it is a very important tnmg I think that the very moment there was a shadow even of a difficulty that came up be- 52 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. tween the Knights of Labor, that we supposed were our friends, and this railroad com- pany, that instant a telegram was sent from here saying ''we are told by the employes that they have no grievance, are striking not on account of a grievance of their own, but by an order issued by an organization saying ' You must strike whether you want to or not.' And we said, 'Now, if there is any grievance, come and talk it over and see if you can't fix it up.' A few days after tliat we got an answer to that message; and three weeks after that, after our men had been, two or three of them, injured, at- tempted to kill them and injured them very badly; our bridges have been burned, our cars have been smashed up, our locomotives destroyed, and our business pretty much ruined, then Mr. Powderly comes on here and says, 'I would like to arbitrate.' " Mr. Bailey. Well, I don't think it is any use for us to be hair-splitting and cross- firing. We have made our nominations. I think the next thing to do is to say, "Are you willing to make yours, or does it end light here? " We l^ave told what we have done and what we are willing to do. We want to settle; we want to have everything done for the protection of the company's property and the protection of our people. Mr. McDowell. Mr. Gould, you were going to read that. Mr. Gould. Let him read first the report of the governors. Mr. McDoVFELL. I don't think I would. Every one here has seen it. ■ Mr. GO0LD. Mr. Powderly said he hadn't, Sunday. Mr. McDowell. I took the paper down there and he had it before him. j Mr. Gould. It seems to me an important matter to show that those men have been over this and what their verdict is. Mr. McDowell. It is settled. Mr. Gould. Let us see what they say. Mr. Geokge J. Gould. This is the letter of Governor Marmaduke and Governor Martin (reading): "After careful investigation we are unable to find wherein the Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company has violated the terms and conditions of the agreement made on the 15th of March, 1885, teaching its employes in our respective States. No complaint has ever been made to the governor of Missouri based on an alleged violation of such agreement, and but one has ever been made to the governor of Kansas, and that, on investigation, proved to be without foundation and was withdrawn by the party mak- ing it. We are therefore forced to the conclusion that the strike of March 6, 1886, could not have been, and was not, based on a violation of the terms of the agreement of March 15, 1885, by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company in its dealings with its employes in Missouri and Kansas. We recognize the fai3t that the Missouri Pacific Railway Compaoay may justly claim that the strike of March 6, 1886, relieves it of the obligations it as- sumed in the circular of March 15, 1885, but nevertheless, anxious that amicable rela- tions be restored between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes, and especially that the far more important interests involved in the mighty commerce of the States of Missouri and Kansas should not suffer, and that the great highways of busi- ness and travel should be at once reopened to the public, we would respectively and earnestly suggest and recommend that the agreement embodied in the circular of March 15, 1885, be restored in letter and spirit, and that the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany re-employ in its service all of its old employes, without prejudice to them on ac- count of the late strike, so for as the business of the company will justify their re-em- ployment. We make these suggestions and recommendations in the interest, as we believe, alike of the company and its employfe, and more especially the greater interests of the commerce and people of the two States. " Mr. Gould. Now, that.is the report of the two governors. Mr. Geoege J. Gould. To which Mr. Hoxie replied that he would do it, excepting alone people who had violated the law of the State; and that we would not discharge men whom we had employed since the strike. Mr. Gould. I understand you to say on Sunday, Mr. Powderly, that as fast as we furnished you the names of those that had injured our property, that you would see that they were expelled. Mr. Powderly. What is that? Mr. Gould. I understood you on Sunday to say that as fast as we furnished you the names of those members who had injured our property, that you would see that they were expelled. Mr. PowDEELY. I said that our organization always did; when a man violated the law or committed an act of violence, if they were found guilty of any conduct that was not proper, we should proceed against them. And I say now if men have been guilty of destroyingproperty, burning bridges, or anything of that kind, just as soon as we are satisfied that they did it, just so soon will we put them out of the organization. We cannot pardon anybody that does anything of that kind; we never have. We have put ourselves on record in Saint Louis. We took the charter away from an entire assembly because of their acts. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 53 Mr. Hayes. Suppose we select a committee from the employes out there; -will you notify Mr. Hoxie to meet them and arbitrate the matter? Mr. PowDEELY. In other words, if oar committee of the hoard will go out there will Mr. Hoxie grant us an arbitration ? Mr. Gould. Well, that I don't know, Mr. Powderly; I will submit any matter to him. He has got the full control of this, as I wrote you. It is all in his hands. And in addition, the question of arbitration is in his hands, so that he has the whole thing. Now I have no objection to ask Mr. H,oxie any point that you want me to. Mr. McDoWELi,. You are in telegraphic communication with him right here, aren't you? Mr. GOTJUO. The wires are down to-day. There is a tremendous storm. We have heard nothing from the West to-day yet. [To Mr. George J. Gould.] How are the wires? Mr. Geoeqe J. GOXTLD. The wires are in trouble between here and Pittsburgh. Mr. GOTJLD. There is a terrible storm raging between here and the West, but I can ask him to do it during the day, and I can get his views on that question. Mr. Hayes. Well, the matter being placed in the hands of Mr. Hoxie it is placed, of course, in his hands by the consent of the directors here. Could not the directors say to Mr. Hoxie to meet the hoard out there, or meet the committee, in order to bring this matter to a settlement ? Couldn't he obey that ? Mr. Gould. That action of the board was taken while I was away. I had an under- standing with Mr. Powderly last August that if there was any question came up of dif- ference, that there should be no strike; that Mr. Powderly would come right to me, and we would talk it down and adjust it; and Mr. Hopkins undertook to carry out that un- derstanding when this strike broke out. That was the result of his correspondence with you? Mr, PowDEELY. That is a matter that I am not clear upon. Now, jgn. gentlemen were present. Canyon remember about an agreement? I don't understand it thor- oughly. Mr. Geoege J. Gould. Mr. Hoxie has always said that he was willing to meet a «)ramittee of our employes. He said that while you were away. Mr. Gould. I didn't know about that. I have been away and I have not paid any attention to this thing. I did not even know that the governors had arbitrated the matter until Sunday. I happened to take it up just before you came in, and read it. I didn't know that they had passed on it at all. Mr. Hayes. You are aware that Mr. Hoxie refused to meet our chief under his title. Mr. PovFDEELY. He refused to meet me as a citizen. He refused to meet his own employ^. Mr. Hopkins. He did? Mr. PoWDEELY. He does. He told me emphatically that they went to see him and he refused admittance. I think you will have to investigate Mr. Hoxie. I would ad- vise it. I think you will find that it will do you good. Mr. SOMEEVILLB. Haven't you got Mr. Hoxie's assertion? Mr. PoWDEELY. Mr. Hoxie may say that. A man who gets up on a pole and then greases it all the way down after him, and then invites you up — how are you to get up? Mr. SoMEEVlLLE. You are doing now what you said a few moments ago should not be done — taking newspaper talk. Mr. Hoxie has not said that to you or to anybody else. Mr. Hayes. But the men who were there Mr. SoMEEVlLLE. But your are taking men's talk. You get it through the news- papers. Mr. PoWDEELY. They were out there. Mr. Gould. Do yon say that Mr. Hoxie has reflised to see a committee of our men ? Mr. POWDEELY. That is what they claim. Mr. Gould (to George J. Gould). Just make a dispatch and ask him that question. Mr. McDowell. As I understand it, the men have confidence in the agreement to arbitrate, or any agreement to arbitrate made here. They have not confidence in an agreement — not an agreement to arbitrate, but an approval of arbitration as a general principle, referred to Mr. Hoxie there. Mr. PoWDEELY. Th^re is a misunderstanding in some places, all around. Mr. George J. Gould. We have no Saint Louis vrire, sir. Mr. SOMEEVLLLE. They may be able to get it off in a roundabout way. Mr. PoWDEELY. Is there a storm ? Mr. SoMEEVlLLE. Ycs; vyires are working badly. Mr. Geoege J. Gould. The trouble is between here and Pittsburg. .- t j Mr. Gould (to Mr. George J. Gould). Can you whistle upstairs and see if Judga Dillon is back to-day ? 54 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Mr. p-EOEGB J. Gould. Yes; do you want him down, if he is? Mr.^ Gould. Yes. Now, another thing; the question of arbitration — two parties to an arbitration. If we are going to af.bitrate we should know from the men whether they wanted arbitratrion and whether they would submit to arbitration and abide by arbi- tration. Mr. Hayes, Prom your employes? Mr. Gould. There will have to be an agreement by the company and by each em- ployd. Mr. Geokge J. Gould (returning from the other room). Mr. Dillon is in Boston to- day. Mr. Gould (continuing). Otherwise it would be of no binding effect. Mr. Hayes. We say the employ & will arbitrate and are willing to give an agreement to that effect. Mr. Gould. Can yon present evidence to that effect? . Mr. Hayes. We can stand upon public opinion in regard to that point. If the em- ployes don't abide by it, then the organization is not worth anything. Mr. Gould. You could not bind any man unless he agreed to be bound. Mr. Hayes. No; we can't say to a man, "You must stay to work whether you like it or not." Mr. Gould. As I understand the law, in an arbitration the parties to be affected by it shall execute an instrument under seal obligating themselves to submit questions to arbitration and to abide by the result. Mr. Hayes. We are prepared to stand upon that, sir. ' Mr. Gould. Have you got any instrument signed by any individuals that they want arbitration ? Mr. Hayes. We will sign all the instruments. Mr. Someeville. Will they be bound by it? Mr. Hayes. 'Yes, sir. Mr. Someeville. They didn't seem to be bound by the decisions in the last case. Mr. Hayes. The people in the Southwest are ready at this moment to obey whatever command we say, in every respect. Mr. McDowell. There is only newspaper talk of rebellion. Mr. Someeville. They did not abide by the decision of the arbitrating committee in the second instance. It was in their favor in the first, and the second was against them and they didn't abide by it. The understanding and belief was that they would abide by the decision of those governors in both cases. They accepted the first, -which was for their benefit; they would not abide by the second. Is there any guarantee that they will abide by the decision ? Mr. McDowell. The best guarantee in the world is that they go right straight to work. Mr. Someeville. But that is not it. Will they abide by the decision? Mr. Hayes. This comes this morning : That Mr. Irons has returned irom wherever he was do wn along the road to Saint Louis, and awaits further orders. ' ' I have returned to Saint Louis. Please keep me posted. Martin Irons. " He is ready to obey any com- mand issued by this Board. Mr. Gould. In addition, Mr. Hopkins, you ask Mr. Hoxie — ^refer him to the portion of my message to him yesterday in which I say, ' ' We see no objection to arbitrating any differences, past or future, between the employes and the coinpany. " Ask him, "Do youseeanyolg ection to that? Ifnot, areyoupreparedto carry out that part of it also ? Ask him that question. Just let them see the dispatch after you get it up. And ask him further if he is willing to meet a committee of the men for the purpose of arranging such an arbitration. " Mr. Someeville. Considering. Mr. Gould. Considering arbitration. Just see what he says about it. Mr. Hayes. To meet the men for the purpose of considering arbitration or for the purpose of arbitrating. Mr. SOMEEVILLB. Considering whether arbitration can be resorted to. They may not want arbitration. Mr. Bailey. I can't see any sense in that. Mr. Someeville. You have recited here that Mr. Hoxie is not willing to meet them. Now he (Mr. Gould) is asking whether he is willing to meet them or not. Mr. Bailey. If he is, why don't you say, " Yes " plain, and name who the arbitrators are to be ? Mr. Someeville. You have asserted that he is not willing. Now, we ask him whether he is willing to meet them and consider this question of arbitration. They have got to meet before they can decide upon arbitration, haven't they ? Mr. Bailey. We are willing to name our arbitrators. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 65 Mr. SOMEETILLE. But whether he is wiUing to meet a committee of the employ^ to consider the question of arbitration and then appoint the arbitrators Mr. MCDOWBLI,. When the president and board say to him that they approve arbi- tration, I can't understand that he should then sit down to consider Mr. SOMBETILLE. You have said that he is not wUling to arbitrate; your people have told you so. Now we ask him whether he is or not— whether he is willing to meet the committee and take up and consider the subject. Mr. McDowell. I think Mr. Gould's message, as he made it before that last addition IS a satisfactaty message, and would bring a satisfactory answer. The addition at the end spoils it all. Mr. SOMEEYILLE. Mr. Hoxie may have put himself on record, as to the conditions under which he would arbitrate. Mr. PowDEELY. If these men have told me a deliberate falsehood I want to find it out. Mr. Gould (to Mr. George J. Gould). George, before that message goes I wish you would have it brought in here and let us see whether it is right. Mr. SoMEEViLLE. I think 1 have seen some place where Mr. Hoxie has asserted that he would arbitrate under certain conditions. I don't remember what they w«re ex- actly. I thought I had them here some place. Those conditions may have been that the men should go back to work; and put the question right where it was before, under the old agreement. They— the company— were quite ready to arbitrate before the men went put. Mr. Bailey. The old tribunal may not be satisfactory. Mr. SoMBETTLLB. Then appoint a new one. Mr. Bailey. If the conditions are that he will arbitrate under that old tribunal and under that only Mr. SoMEEViLLE. I think his conditions, if I recollect rightly, were that the men should go back to work. Mr. PowDEELY. They are very much aggrieved about something that took place on the part of Governor Marmaduke. They found the governor was drunk, and they got entirely disgusted with him. Governor Martin, they said, was very fair. In one case it was charged that there was violation of a contract, and he immediately investigated it and discovered that it was without foundation. Mr. Gould. Mr. Hoxie says (reading): "I decline to meet men who are out. I have not declined to meet employes. — H. M. Hoxie." Mr. Hayes. He declines to meet the strikers, in other words, but vrill meet the men who take their places. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. No; there are lots of men that belong to your order who did not go out. Mr. Hayes. That is the only sense of the message. That is not just to our men and not just to anybody connected with this company. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. He said in the start that the men should go back to work. Mr. Gould. They have got an opportunity to be employed if they want. Here is a notice that gives them a chance to go to work. The moment they go to work they are employes. Mr. Hayes. The moment we say to those men, " Go to work, ' ' they will go to work. Can we guarantee anybody that Mr. Hoxie will meet a committee of your road and arbi- trate this matter? Mr. Gould. We asked him the other question, and here is his reply. The other messaige that he is going to send asks him that question. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. Wait a few minutes and get the thing perfectly straight. Now let us get the message that was sent to which this was a reply and then we will follow it up. Let us see if we all understand it the same way. Mr. Hayes. We want to go out all right this time. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. We want to understand it all right. Mr. Bailey. I think Mr. Hoxie means that he will meet each individual. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. We will see what he means. Mr. McDowell. By telegraphic correspondence you can soon find out. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. I think that you will find he is perfectly willing to meet a com- mittee of the employes of the Missouri Pacific to consider the subject of arbitration. I think he said from the start that before the question was considered these men that are out should go back. Mr. Gould. Mr. Powderly, it seems to me now — I throw this out — whether the true solution of the whole thing would not be for either you yourself or some lav^yer who is familiar with it to sit down with Judge Dillon and take this question of this bill and get something that both approveand put itthroughand let it become the law of theland. Mr. McDowell. And in the mean time, while it is waiting, arbitrate on the basis of it. 56 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. , Mr. Gould. And in the mean' time, if we agree upon this bill, that becomes a rule to be adopted, and everybody should honorably accept something that tras for the future — that was new. Mr. Hayes. That suggestion is very good; I rather approve of that. Mr. Gould. Judge DiUon sent me a dispatch yesterday on that subject. He had seen the papers. He says: Boston, Mass. Jay Gould, 195 Broadway, New York : Congratulate you on the end attained. If you contemplate signing any paper com- mitting your company to arbitration or a permanent principle or rule of conduct, I hope it will not be done until I can see it. JOHN P. DILLON. [To Mr. George Gould.] What does he say? Mr. Geoegb J. Gould. He is in Boston still. He is not here. Mr. Gould. Is General Swayne here? Mr. Gkoegb J. Gould. Yes; General Swayne is here. Mr. Gould. Ask him to step down here a moment. This is the dispatch that has been prepared: "H. M. Hoxie: ' ' Mr. Po wderly is here. He said that he was informed while in the West by some of our men that you had declined to meet a committee appointed by them, of their own number, to discuss differences. Is this so ? Reply quickly. "A. L. HOPKINS." Also the following: "Referring to Mr. Gould's message to you of yesterday, a copy of which was con- tained in his letter to Mr. Powderly, he says: 'We see no objection to arbitrating any differences, past or present, between the employes and the company. ' Do you agree with this proposition, and are you willing to open such an arbitration ? "A. L. HOPKINS." Mr. McDowell. The first one we have an answer to and have not to the second? Mr. Gould. No; we have not to either one. I thought I would read this to you now, and we will see what reply we get. Mr. SoMEEViLLE (looking at the proposed message). To make that clear I would say, "In which he says," because it did not sound very clear to me when you read it. Mr. Gould. You might say further, that our board here think that a very wise and proper solution. I would add that. Mr. SoMEEViLLE. "A wise and proper thing to do." Mr. Gould. Yes. i Mr. McDowell. Mr. Powderly, the point of difference, if it is a difference, I don't know that it is — you are drifting in this discussion to an arbitration between the em- ployes and the railroad; and your communications have been as to arbitration between your organization and the road. Mr. PowDEELY. Yes. Mr. Gould. Now we are committed, you know — we are on record in regard "to that — Mr. Hoxie is, and I can't take these matters out of his hands; but it seems to me if you could agree with General Swayne — he being here I will put it in his hands; I will let General Swayne sit right down with you or with your committee and see if you cannot prepare a bill, and if you can prepare a bill that we approve of and you, I am ready to so state, and that will become a law for the future, even whether it passes or not. (General Swayne here enters the room and is introduced to the committee.) Mr. McDowell. Mr. Gould is referring the approval of the bill before the Labor Com- mittee of Congress, which was to be reported yesterday, favorably to them, to these gen- tlemen and yourself, to see if there is a basis on which they could agree Mr. Swayne. Is this the bill [taking the bill] ? Mr. McDowell. I suppose that is the bill. (At this point the respective parties retired for consultation and shortly after returned.) Mr. McDowell (to Mr. Gould). If you will give General Swayne instructions so that we may sit right down with him. Mr> Gould. What I suggested was whether you could not sit down and get up just such a bill as we would approve. Suppose you have an interview with him and go over it yourself, and take Mr Hopkins with you, for he knows the point. Go over that sec- tion by section, and then I will take it up with you. General Swayne, afterward. In reading over this bill it struck me that the bill should state just exactly what the gov- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 57 ernor says in his message, that all employes from the president down, in assuming em- ployment in the railroad company, clothe themselves with the puhlic duties appertain- ing to the operation of a railroad as a whole. (After retiring for consultation the parties again met and Mr. Hopkins read the tele- gram sent to Mr. Hoxie and his reply, as follows.) Mr. Hopkins. This is the dispatch to Mr. Hoxie: '•H. M. Hoxie: "Referring to Mr. Gould's message to you of yesterday, a copy of which was con- tained in his letter to Mr. Powderly, in which he says, ' We see no objection to arbitrat- ing any differences, past or present, between the employes and the company.' Do you agree with this proposition and are you willing to open such an arbitration ? Our board think this would be a wise and proper thing to do." The reply is as follows: "A. L. Hopkins: " My view is that the company should at all times promptly and fairly hear all com- plaints of its employes, either by hearing the employes themselves or a committee of their number, all of whom are of the same class as those complaining affected by the alleged grievance. If the matter of difference between the company and its employes or any portion of them are of such a character as to he snsceptible of an arbitration which can be made legally binding upon both parties, I see no objection to arbitration in such a case. " Mr. McDowell. There were two messages — or was the other one answered ? Mr. GoxiLD. The other one, I had the answer here somewhere; I don't see it here. Mr. Hayes. Mr. Gould, will you just read that again, please? Mr. Hopkins. Shall I read both messages or only one? Mr. SWAYNE. Read them both. Mr. Hopkins (reading). "Referring to Mr. Gould's message to you of yesterday, a copy of which was contained in his letter to Mr. Powderly, in which he says: 'We see no objection to arbitrating any differences, past or present, between the employes and the company. ' Do you agree with this proposition, and are you willing to open such an arbitration? Our board think this would be a wise and proper thing to do." And the reply to that is: "My view is that the company should at all times promptly and fairly hear all com- plaints of its employ^, either by hearing the employes themselves or a committee of their number, all of whom are of the same class as those complaining affected by the alleged grievance. If the matter of difference between the company and its employes or any portion of them are of such a character to be susceptible of an arbitration which can be made legally binding upon both parties, I see no objection to arbitration in such a case. ' ' Mr. Bailey. I don't think that answers what we want. Mr. Gould. It seems to me that is what two individuals would do ; they would come together and talk over their differences and see if they could not agree; if they could not agree, then they would arbitrate. Mr. Hopkins. There would not be any use of having an arbitration unless it was of such a character as to be made binding. Mr. Bailey. That is what we desire — to make it binding. Mr. GotJLD. What is an arbitration? Mr. SWAYNB. An arbitration is where two parties enter into a contract — jurisdiction by contract instead of jurisdiction by law. Two parties enter into a contract that A and B and C shall be a court, who shall decide their differences and that the result shall be binding. Mr. Gould. The law provides a form for that. Mr. Swayne. No, sir; there is no law in this country now that provides for arbitra- tion; but the general law of contract makes the conclusion which arbitrators have reached binding as a contract. It is civilly enforceable, but not criminally. This act of Congress, if it goes into force, will give to the decision of arbitrators — give to the court power to compel submission to the judgment of arbitrators. Mr. Hopkins, let me see those dispatches just one minute. (Mr. Swayne confers privately with Mr. Bailey in regard to the telegrams.) , Mr. Swayne. Now he says hejsees no objection. Mr. Bailey. I see no objection under certain conditions. I want the question put directly to him, will he meet a committee of our people and arbitrate? 58 LABOR TROUBLES IS THE SOUTH AND WEST. Ur. Hayks. I am opposed to this system of " considerins " the question of arbitra- tion. I think the matter has gone so far that it is a question of arbitration, and not a question of considering. When the court comes together, if there is no matter for arbi- tration, thon the arbitration ceases; but to consider the question whether there is a question for arbitration is entirely out of the question under the present circumstances. Mr'. SOMEEVILLE. It wiU have to be understood what is to be put before that court. Mr. Hayes. This matter, in reference to the company and in reference to all con- cerned, is in a serious position at this time. Is it going to benefit the trouble to con- tinue harping upon small technicalities, or is it going to be best for the interests of aU concerned to settle it as soon as possible? That is the only thing that hinges upon this question now. If the company conclude that they will grant arbitration, we will let them select the employ^ themselves, and our general executive board will go there, or somebody that wUl be agreeable to all concerned. If they do not do that they can- not, of course, meet to consider whether there is any arbitration necessary or not. Mr. SoMKEVlLLB. I thought yon said his reply was evasive. It answers the view of the dispatch that was sent him. ' Mr. Bailey. Not the question that we want answered. Mr. SoMEEViLLE. You have not asked it yet. Mr. Hayes. Tou are right. We have not asked him. Mr. SOMBEVILLE. This is an answer to the suggestion that Mr. Powderly was In- formed by the men themselves that he had refused to meet them. Mr. Hayes. I will submit this proposition. (Mr Hayes writes a dispatch and hands it to Mr. Somerville.) Mr. Somerville. To arbitrate what? Mr. Hayes. Arbitrate the present difficulty. I can't get it out of my head that there is some difSculty out there. When the board comes together and finds there is no diffi- culty, that settles it; but the idea of considering whether there is a difficulty when there are ten thousand men idle. Mr. SoMEKViLLE. Suppose you make that ' ' arbitrating or passing upon complaints ?' ' Mr. Hayes. Well, the present difficulty. Mr. McDowell. Mr. Gould's word is "arbitration." Mr. Hayes. I rather think that dispatch [referring to Mr. Hoxie's reply] coming from the West is an evasive answer; it is not direct. Mr. SOMEEVILLE. I dou't think it is quite fair to say so. You have got to bear in mind the assertion that Mr. Powderly made that Mr. Hoxie had refused to meet them. This is asking him whether he will. I think Mr. Powderly will agree with me that it should not be considered an evasion on the part of Mr. Hoxie. Mr. PowDEELY. I think it rests with your board to say what that means. Mr. SoMEEViLLB. We don't consider it an evasion. If you think it is, you ought t» say in what way. Mr. PowDBELY. I don't say it is an evasion. Mr. SoMBEVlLLE. I don't say you say so. Mr. Hayes says so. I don't think Mr. Hoxie meant it as an evasion. Mr. Hayes. I don't say that. I don't say that he did. Mr. SoMEEVlLLE. You have not put any direct question to him; you are putting it now. You simply asked whether he was against the general principle. Mr. Hayes. I would rather see this question go to this board. They are the supe- riors. Mr. Gould and the board of directors here can answer that question here, and then we could take right hold of the matter and find out. Mr. SoMEEVlLLE: This is the Associated Press dispatch from Saint Louis [reading]: Saint Louis, March 30. Martin Irons, chairman of the executive committee of the District Assembly No. 101, Knights of Labor, arrived from Sedalia this morning, and immediately repaired to a meeting of his committee, which is now being held, he presiding. He refuses to make any statement in regard to the strike, and will say nothing to reporters, except that the committee has taken no action, and will take none until the result of the conference now being held between Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly shall be known. (Mr. Powderly adds to the message prepared by Mr. Hayes to be sent to Mr. Hoxie.) Mr. SoMEBViLLE. Who do you want this addressed to? Mr. McDov^BLL. A good way to put that is, "Mr. Powderly asks." Then it will go from your president. , Mr. SoMEEVlLLE. Will you put that on there then — "Mr. Powderly asks?" (The dispatch having been finished by Mr. Powderly was directed to be sent, and the conference ended.) LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 5^ City and County op New York, ss: Frederick M. Adams, being duly sworn, says that he is the stenographer who took the verbatim report of the above interview, &c. That he has read the above transcript thereof, made from his said stenographic minutes, and that the same is correct. F. M. ADAMS. Sworn to before me this 20th day of April, 1886. HENRY "W. SACKETT, Notary Public, New York County. By Mr. Buknes: Q. You spoke of a resolution by the directors of the Missouri Pacific Railway with regard to the powers and duties of Mr. Hoxie. I would ask you if you have a copy of that resolution? — A. No, sir; but we will get one for you. Q. WUl yon be kind enough to furnish us with a copy of the resolution that was passed at the meeting of the board of directors? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you understand that resolution as limiting or in any sense curtailing your powers as president? — A. That happened while I wfe away. I left on the 5th of Jan- uary, and an acting president was appointed for the time being. And this all happened while I was away — ^between the 5th of January and the 22d of March. Q. When you returned, Mr. Gould, did you regard that resolution as an existing lim- itation upon your powers as president of the corporation? — A. Yes, sir. I did not re- gard that the duties or powers of the president had anything to do with that question. It was really with the firsjt vice-president, the general manager. During these years that I have been president I have not charged any salary. I have not charged for trav- eling expenses; and the understanding has been that there should not be any detail al- lotted to me. I have not the physique to stand it. So I have given the company the benefit of any advice I could, but have never taken any salary. Q. In the preparation of that dispatch which you intended to send on Monday morn- ing at 9 o'clock to Mr. Hoxie, did you feel at the time and intend at that time to leave him entirely free to act according to his judgment there; that is to say, did yon give it as the chief officer and intend it as a peremptory order, or did you understand it as advisory only ? — ^A. Not only as advisory. 1 meant it as putting the whole matter in his hands; to give him entire control, and hold him responsible for the result. Q. At what time on Monday did you send that dispatch ? — A. I sent it at half past 9 o'clock. Q. After you saw the publication to which you alluded? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I desire to ask you if you sent any other telegrams or any other advice, or caused any to be sent there to Mr. Hoxie on Monday or on the Sunday preceding ? — A. No, sir. Mr. OUTHWAITE. Include Saturday in that question. Mr. Buenes. Or Saturday? The Witness. No, sir. I simply stood on that dispatch. It means just what it says, and I have not changed a word of it to ^ this day. I have not crossed a, t or dotted an i. Q. In your testimony as to that dispatch you seem to favor the principle of arbitration in the settlement of troubles between employer and employe. Would .you be kind enough to give us the result of your experience and observation in regard to such principle ? — A. Well, I think that arbitration is getting to be a very easy and popular way of settling difficulties between individuals, between corporations, and between corporations and their individual employes. I have always been in favor of it, and as long ago as last August, when I had my interview vrith Mr. Powderly, I expressed myself in the strongest terms in favor of it; and I have never changed my position. I regard the employes of a rail- road company upon a different footing to the employes of a manufacturing company or any other business; and the reason I do so is this: A railroad corporation acts.intwo senses: first, as a private organization with ownership of it; secondly, as a public cor- poration with a contract vrith the State by which it has contract duties to perform; and these duties are to be performed not by the rails and the engines alone but by the entire organization, and they clothe themselves with these public duties from the president t» the lowest employ^ that takes part in the railroad; they clothe themselves with those public duties which pertain to the operation of the road as an entirety. Just as the rail- road itself has the right to take eminent domain, the property of the raUroad is held for the public. It was created to carry their coal and their merchandise and supplies and produce to market; and they have rights which are paramount and superior to any other rights. I have always claimed, and it has always been my view, that aU the employes, irom the presidfent down, that are necessary to operate that road as an entirety, clothe themselves with public duties to that extent, each in his respective sphere. So that 1 regard the labor needed in the operation of a railroad on a different footing from mere private manufactories. 60 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTHLAND WEST. Mr. BUENES. The public then, being so largely interested with reference to the man- ner in which the general officers of the railroads discharge their duties, and the manner in which minor officers and employes discharge theirs, I would ask you if you have considered whether there is any mode that would be fair to each and all, and that would place them, and place the whole of them, under the control of the Government? The Witness. Yes, sir. The laws do that now. It is only the apathy in enforcing them. The laws, if I am correct in my supposition that railroad laborers clothe them- selves with public duty, why the law would enforce their obedience; and the courts do that. You see where roads have been operated by receivers the rapidity with which strikes are overcome, because there is a respect for the United States courts. Q. Your idea, it seems to me, is, that this right of the pubUc in the manner of the discharge of these duties is because of the peculiar na,ture of the service; because of the interest that the public have in railroads.— A. Yes, sir; because of public duties. The people have a right to have a railroad operated. t_ • j • Q. And have an interest in the manner in which the officers discharge their duties. Now, any legislation which defines their duties and at the same time provides for arbi- tration between the railways and their employes, would be a practical protection of the public rights, would it not?— A. But it would be arbitration after men have struck and seized your property and put your life in peril. This arbitration should come before, and should give the power to keep them at their duty. Q. You are aware of the fact that in the country and in Congress the right of the Oovernment to regulate commerce among the States has been discussed. You place the right on the very high ground, as I understand it, that the people, being interested in the management of this sort of property, they have the fight, through Congress, to regulate it, as well for the protection of the public interest as for the protection of all the property used in operating a line of railway as a single or entire entity. — ^A. That is it. A railroad is not merely rails and the ties and the bridges or the locomotives. It is the entire thing. Now, it is somebody's duty to manage that. Now, whose is it? It is the engineer in his place; it is the fireman in his place; it is the brakemau in his place, and aU the other employes, each in his respective sphere to do his part. Q. Very well. I ask you, though it is probably not in the direct line of this examina- tion, if the General Government might not, as a practical measure, license, and thereby govern and control, all the officials (excluding the general officers onlyj who work and labor upon'the roads? — A. Yes, sir. Q. From the superintendent down? — A. Yes, sir. I think they assume that public duty anyway. It might be made more definite and positive by some enactment; and then if there is any inj ustice provide a mode of arbitration. We are all in favor of that. Bulfwe want the contract with the public carried out; we want the railroad operated and not interfered with by a strike. Q. Then you see nothing impracticable in the attempt at least to place a Government control, with certain limitations before mentioned, over the men employed in the gen- eral service, in the general organization? — A. Not at all, sir. The Chairman. Looking to the convenience of the public and the interests involved in the operation of the railroads, the Government exempted from conscription any per- sons connected with the railroads — engineers and firemen and the like. The Witness. Yes, sir. Q. That is in harmony with your views? — A. Yes, sir. I think the labor organiza- tion, and with all due respect to Mr. Powderly — I have a splendid opinion of him; no- body has any better — he has undertaken to do too much. I have been thirty years in the railroad business, and have been manager of the Missouri Pacific, and that has been about as much as I could do; but he is running the shoemakers and the bakers and other occupations, and trying to run not only the Missouri Pa^cific, but also the 136,000 miles of railroad in the United States, and regulate the bakers and all that ! Well now it takes pretty broad shoulders to handle all these varied interests. I do not wonder that my filend breaks down under it. By Mr. Buenes: I will call your attention to the fact that when the Constitution of the United States was adopted commerce and transportation by means of railways were unknown; and the water ways were probably the only avenues of communication and transportation then in existence, or contemplated by the framers of the Constitution. Under its pro- visions regulations were made requiring that certain classes of men, say pilots and en- gineers, should be regularly licensed under the authority of the Government before they could lawfully perform the duties of their avocations. Now our commerce is passing away rapidly from the water ways to the lines of railway, and I must submit to you the consideration of the question whether like agencies or appliances found necessary in the regulation of commerce on the water might not be made available, practically^ forthe LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 61 regulation of commerce on railways, with tlie modifications that the nature of the service might require? — A. Well, if you had an arbitration bUl with a provision that said what I think is the law, that this property is devoted to public use — it was so held by the Supreme Court in the Elevator cases at Chicago, if you remember, that that property was devoted to public use, and a railroad is of a similar character and they have the prior right — and an arbitration bill which would couple the proper provisions making that dis- tinction, that they had assumed public duties which gave them that right, I think would settle the whole railroad question. And the courts should be instructed to enforce it. So far as I am concerned, I am very glad to take it up and try it without a bill or with one. Q. It has been suggested that the railroads in this country, or most of them, exercise the right of eminent domain, and thereby hold and enjoy a part of the sovereignty of the people; that having invoked the aid of this sovereignty, and it being a part and parcel of the organization of railroad companies, they are compelled to operate their roads for the use of the public, and are sub j ect to control. May not these considerations justify such regulations by the Government as would compel a railroad corporation to adjust all questions of differences between itself and its employes on terms equitable to both parties? — A. Arbitration has to be arrived at by common consent. That has been my experience. Q. I will call your attention to the fact more distinctly with regard to arbitration. It is of course thfe healthiest and best mode of settling all difficulties if gentlemen wiU unite and arbitrate their differences without violence and without cost; but the trouble is, that we have to deal vrith cases which from some cause or other the parties will not voluntarily agree to arbitrate; so we must go a step further and ascertain if there is not some way to control, govern, and decide differences between railways and their em- ployes, and enforce such decisions on both patties, if need be, without consulting with either. Can the general welfare — the rights of all, the commerce and industries of the whole country — be conserved without it ? — A. You mean compulsory arbitration. Well, public opinion is all-powerful. If it is voluntrary arbitration, the public opinion will be brought to bear on it and would have greater moral effect perhaps than compulsory. I think it would be better to have it voluntary than have it compulsory. People like to agree themselves, and they will do it. The reasons are always public for the decis- ions, and the facts being known men are governed by them. Q. And yet for some reason you and Mr. Powderly and Mr. McDowell were in con- sultation and endeavored to bring about a-settlement of alleged grievances, and it was not brought about. — ^A. Oh, no. We were not endeavoring to do that. Q. Were you not endeavoring to arbitrate or agree upon some terms of arbitrating some difficulties between your employes and your road? — A. No, sir; we met, as I have said, to have a talk over the situation. That matter was in Mr. Hoxie's hands. It was placed there, and I have never changed it in any shape or form. I said it in my letters, and I have always said that. I was away at the time, and it was one of the matters of detail that I did not take up. Q. I will state it a littie differently. I am not asking whether you are at all to blame for your negotiations in New York, but for the reasons why your views of arbi- tration were not carried out in Saint Louis by Mr. Hoxie ? — A. Mr. Hoxie, on the con- trary, has always been ready to arbitrate. There is his declaration, and as I heard from him I did not need to, but I read the dispatch here that he had always been ready to arbitrate. We have always been ready to do that, and it has always been our policy; The point of difference that was made, and I want you to draw that distinction, the whole correspondence between me and Mr. Hoxie was that we were ready to arbitrate any grievances between the men and the company; that is, the men who were at work for the company. The misinterpretation that the Knights of Labor put upon it is as if they were the only persons in our employ; but you see there are ten thousand men on the Missouri Pacific that are not members of that order but are members of other labor organizations who deal with us directly; and as I read to you, on the 9th of March, after the strike had commenced, we terminated our relations with the organization of the Knights of Labor. They had taken possession of our road. In taking men back we took them as individuals; we didn't ask any questions as to whether they were Knights of Labor or anything else. In taking them back we did not propose to deal with the Knights of Labor as an organization at all. Mr. Powderly understood that distinction, because he distinctly stated that in that interview. Q. Is the suggestion that you, or that some of your officers in Missouri have exduded Knights of Labor, as such.'ftom employment on the Pacific Railway? — A. No, sir. No, sir; that is not true. Q. Have you any information or knowledgs of the issuing of an order by the general superintendent, or any division superintendent, to the effect that no Knight of Labor should be employed on the road? — A. No, sir. Q. You never heard of such an order?— A. I never heard of such an order issued. 62 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Have you heard of such an order by a'roadmaster? — A. I never heard of that order. Q. By whom was such an order made, if it were made? — A. It was made by Mr. Hoxie, if made at all. But after provocation; becanse they were wrecking our trains. They were letting them off the track and letting the rails spread and by various devices throwing our trains off, audit was as a matter of precaution. With these threatening proclamations out there I don't wonder that Mr. Hoxie would take the precaution to put men that he could trust on guard. It is our duty. Q. Mr. Gould, we were speaking of the order. Of course we are aware that there are good and bad men in all organizations and in all societies. I have no doubt there are good men and bad men in the Knights of Labor organization as in all other or- ganizations of men; and you have good men and bad men, doubtless, in your employ- ment. But if a chief officer in the service of your company recognizes this organization for the purpose of excluding its members from employment, would there be any impro- priety in the same officer receiving them and treating them with the ordinary courtesy and consideration that is due to every good man and every gentleman ? — A. I think that he shoiild receive them and treat them courteously. I told Mr. Powderly — the last word I said to him was — "Mr. Powderly, if you have any grievances, now, you come to my house or my office at any time; don't yon bring McDowell, but cbme yourself," because I was warned about McDowell that I would have to look out for a bill of $20,000 for him settling this strike, and I want«d Mr. Powderly to come himself. Q. If General Hoxie recognized an order excluding Knights of Labor from employment, might it not have been well to recognize their grievances? I don't know that Mr. Hoxie issued or approved the order excluding from employment the Knights of LaboT. — A. Well, he didn't. His letter to Mr. Powderly and his utterances since the strike are pos- itive and all one way. He didn't recognize them or decline to. Q. But, Mr. Gould, if Mr. Hoxie recognized Knights of Labor as such by authorizing his foreman or his roadmaster to deny them employment, was it not a recognition of the order ? I Witness. Well, I don't understand. Q. Now, if he recognized Knights of Labor by denying them employment becanse of their membership in the order, might he not and ought he not to recognize Knights of Labor when they come to protest against that very exclusion from employment? — ^A. Well, I don't know. I suppose you will see Mr. Hoxie. He is of age, and I will leave liim to say a little for himself. Q. Yon don't understand, I think, that I want only your opinion on this question. I am not asking what Mr. Hoxie thinks or what Mr. Hoxie would say, but I ask you if a gentleman in authority over railroad corporations recognizes the order of the Knights ■of Labor in a public card exchiding them from employment he ought not in fairness and justice to recognize them, in so far as they desire to present their grievances and complaints? — A. I think if they were employes of the company that he should receive them and listen to their complaint, and that if he did not adjust them that there should be arbitration; but I do not think that Mr. Hoxie should be called upon to arbitrate with a man that is not in the employ of the company. . That was not the position we have taken. Q. (by Mr. Cbain). . I would like to aak one question. Were there any other circulars or letters or orders similar in character to this published or received by you prior to that one? — A. I received several. Q. Prior to that tune? — A. I think so. No, later. We will look it up and see. I don't remember whether it was before or after. Q. This is dated April 6, and this order about which Mr. Bumes has been talking— and it is right that you should see it — ^is dated April 1, and you said that you don't wonder that Mr. Hoxie had doiie so after the threats that had been made? — A. I never had seen it. [Shown the order of general roadmaster Rothwell, dated April 1, forbidding «mpl jy ment of Knights of Labor. ] I only know that my telegram to Mr. Hoxie has not been deviated from by the board by the crossing of a " t " or the dotting of an " i, " and notwithstanding all the provocation, we have not changed. Mr. Ceain. , I do not understand you. A moment ago you remarked that you didn't wonder at Mr. Hoxie for giving orders similar to that one because of the publication of such threatening pronunciamentos. The Witness. The reply I gave was that they were throvTing trains off the track and interfering with the traffic, and that that might explain it; but I had never heard of this order, and never was consulted about it. The Chaieman. I will direct your attention and' the attention of the committee to ttie combination of crafts, trades, and professions. Have you got any information as to the first combination that was made with the railroads running from the East to the West, what was called "pooling." when the directors of five lines of railroads would LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 63 get together and regulate the price of the products of the West? Did not that com- mence before the men commenced to combine? The Witness. Well, perhaps you had better get that from the men who manage those roads. The Chairman. I expect to do so; but I want to know if the railroad companies can combine in that way and fix the price of the products of the earth thousands of miles from the point of delivery to the market; I want to know if the example has not been set by them to some extent, provided they do it. And you answer it properly. And I would further ask you another question, and we can get your suggestion, and it being a public question it would not be improper that we should understand whether railroads pay and what the difference is in the present capital of the railroads, their bonds and their stocks, and the actual cost of construction; but we can get at that in another way. I mean to say that the first combination, I think, Mr. Gould, was made by the managers of railroads before combinations were made by the men. The WirarHBS. You don't understand that I object to labor organizations ? I am in favor of them. The Chaieman. But the combination on both sides; I think your idea is eminently proper that when combinations occur on the one side and the other, and disagreements spring up between the managers and employfe of the railroad then comes in the arbitra- tion, and that we need a wholesome law in that way, and I am very glad to express my entire approbation of the Government dealing with the men as in tiie public employ- ment. The Witness. They can devote your property to a public use. They can devote the men also. A recess of fifteen minutes was here taken. When the committee reassembled, Mr. Gould's examination was continned. By Mr. Ceain: Q. It was stated yesterday, in testimony by Mr. McDowell, the reason why there was so much fiiction between railroads and their employes was in the fact that railroads issued stock largely in excess of the money actually invested. And he gave this charac- ter of explanation, that in evading the law upon that subject, men who organized a rail- road company would also organize a construction company — composed of themselves — the same men, in other words, controlling both companies, and in that way the railroad corporation would pay to the construction company immense sums in stocks and bonds and other securities. Have you any knowledge of such construction companies !— A. I never have. I understood that was his statement. I have had no opportunity of knowing of any such transaction. Q. Or any such transaction as the building of a road and evading the law which re- quires that every dollar furnished be expended, and the contracts shall not be made by the company with the company itself indirectly? — ^A. No, sir; I have not. Q. What is your knowledge, from the iuformation you gather officially, as to the real cause of the strike? — ^A. I think the cause of it was some of the leaders wanted to make big men of themselves, and their living off workingmen. They only get consequence when they stir up strife. Q. There were statements made in testimony here, based upon reports to the witness who made the statement, that along the line of the Iron Mountain road the employes • were taxed; those who were paid a dollar a day, 25 cents a month, and those who were paid $2 a day, 50 cents a month, and so on upward, for what was known as the hospital fund, and that when one of them got sick instead of being taken to the hospital he would be discharged. — A. I only know that we have a hospital service. That is an organiza- tion for the benefit of the men, and I supposed that the company contributes a portion of the expense and the men a portion, and that it is devoted to them when there is any- thing the matter with them. I don't know anything about the details of it. Q. But the point that was made by the witness is that when one of the employes be- came sick he would be discharged.— A. I know nothing of that kind, and of course if the hospital transaction is not satisfactory to the men, we would only be too glad to get out of it. It is a fund for the benefit of the employ^. Q. Then there was another statement made here, to the effect that the railroad would sell a homestead to the employ&on the installment plan, and about the time the last in- stallment fell due the employ^ would be discharged and thereby be prevented from making the final payment, and the property would revert by foreclosure to the railroad company. — A. That is ridiculous. , . -i j + o Q. No such thing occiirred ? Are you in a position to say positively that it does not '.— A. I know it is not so; and also the statement about stores. 64 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The Chairman. We will be glad to, have the full testimony as to how it was; that is all we want. , , , j. j.i, ■ j jj The Witness. When gentlemen present charges they should present something defi- nite and specific. By Mr. Cbain: Q. I understood you to say there was no strike when you and Mr. Powdwly met ex- cept at two points you spoke of— Fort Worth and Parsons?— A. Just at Fort Worth 9jTid Psirsoiis Q. What was the object of the meeting?— A. Why, the meeting grew out of that cor- ICSDOU d. GH C6 Q. What was the intention? What was the result that was discussed by Mr. Pow- derly '—A. They came down there and I was always willing to talk it over with them. Q. Talk over what?— A. Talk over matters generally, the question of arbitration; and they had a bUl in Congress— the O'Neill biU, I believe— and that was a subject of co^ver- Q. The subject was not this strike, then?— A. Yes; that subject was talked about. Q. Which you considered was ended? Did they so regard it?— A. I do not know how they regarded it. , „ , ., -u ^ Q. Your idea was that it was ended?— A. The fact was that the strike was substan- tially ended at that time — it was disappearing. ^- ^ Q. Yes, sir; and your idea was that you would just discuss in general the question of arbitration with reference to future emergencies ? After you have examined arbitration your idea is that the best solution of these troubles is voluntary arbitration?— A. Yes, sir. Mr. Ckain. Of course there cannot be any other kind really ? Mr. OUTHWAITK. One question I would ask you is this. There was a statement in fhat letter or telegram of Mr. Hopkins's something to the effect that Wall street influ- ences were keeping up or stimulating the strike out there. Can you explain what was meant by that expression?— A. No, sir; I cannot. Mr. Hopkins is of age, and can ex- plain what he meant by that. I can only say so far as I am concerned, I have not made a transaction in stocks, either long or short, or in any shape or form, since the 1st of Jan- . uary. I have not had a speculative interest in the market. Q. Do yon know of any persons connected with the board of dir.'ctors during the Mon- day following the apparent arrangement of the Sunday that made any investments?— A. No. sir. , Q. Or dealings?— A. No, sir; I do not believe there was. I am sure there was not. Q. In that telegram which you sent to Mr. Hoxie the expression occurs, "Between employes of the company past and future." Now, was it your understanding of that telegram that there should be arbitration as to the differences past and existing? — A. My idea of that expression was to clothe Mr. Hoxie with the full, entire power over that subject; and I said to him, I saw no objection whatever to arbitrating any question be- tween our employes and the company either past or future. I put it broad so that it it would cover anything. Q. Your intention was that that should be strictly construed, then, to comprehend only the employ^ of the company, and not allude to those who had recently been em- ploy^ and struck. Was that your construction of that telegram? — A. Certainly. These who were not in our employ were not our employes. Q. You can see that Mr. Powderly might have supposed that it might have related to the old employfe and those who had recently been your employfe. — A. He could not have understood it that way; it was too plain, and I read the interview we had with him until he asked me that question. "Q. That interview was taken down by a stenographer at the time. Have you pre- sentedittous? — A. Yes, sir; sworn to by the stenographer. The whole interview, every word. Q. Well, I would ask you this question, Mr. Gould: Wherein might the interests of the company or the public welfare have been injured by the acceptance of that proposi- tion, as Mr. Powderly seems to have accepted it by his subsequent action? — A. Why, he did. Q. From the telegram that yon sent and Mr. Powderly sent a telegram the next morning which indicates his view of the interview. — A. Mr. Powderly says he didn't give out the interview, but sent a telegram. Q. That telegram indicates his view of the result of the conference between him and you, does it not? — A. I do not know whether it does or not. Q. Well, suppose it does, then? — A. I don't want to suppose, then. I want to say what it does say. Mr. Powderly can tell you what he supposed. Q. I only want to know the right construction of it and trhat appears on its face. It appears that there you diverge. — A. I do not know how that was. Labok troubles in the south and west. 65 Q. When you separated you thought a settlement or an agreement had been arranged, did you not? — A. No; I don't say that. Q. Well, let me put it in another way — an apparently satisfactory conclusion of that interview had been reached, had there not? — A. Well, yes, sir; fairly so. Q. There seemed to be no points of difference between you and Mr. Powderly when you separated ? — A. There was no agreement made between us. Q. There appeared to be nothing further to confer about when you separated ? — A. No, sir; I had nothing further to confer with him about. Q. Well, then, it seems that the divergence occurred immediately thereafter. His telegram gives one view of the matter, and that a different view to your own view. — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now the question I want answered is, for you as superior officer of the road, and familiar with this question, to state what injury the road would have sustained, or what injury -would have come' to the public welfare, if his view, as shown by that telegram, had been accepted and acted upon by Mr. Hoxie ? — A. Well, Mr. Hoxie had taken his position, and that was that he was wUling to arbitrate any question of difference with his employes. Q. In what Tespect did Mr. Powderly 's telegram differ from that ? — ^A. Mr. Powderly 'a constmction was that this arbitration should be, not with ttie employ^, but vrith the Knights of Labor. Q. Who were or had been in the employ of the road ? — A. No; the organization. Q. Is that the way you understood it? — ^A. That is the way I understood it. Q. Suppose the other construction — ^have you the telegram now before you ? The WlTSTBSS. Here is what they want: "The general executive board would be pleased to have an interview with you at your convenience for the purpose of appoint- ing seven arbitrators. Three of the committee to be appointed by yourself, three by the general executive board, and the six to select the seventh member. ' ' That was their proposition; and that was declined. That letter has been read. Q. What I want to get at is the telegram that Mr. Powderly sent to which you took exception, which, as you state in your testimony, made you mad. Mr. CSAIN (to Mr. Outhwaite). Yon mean the one that ordered the men to work? The Witness. Yes; what made me mad was in regard to the interview between us and which Mr. Hoxie telegraphed as sfeeing in the Saint Louis papers before I sent my telegram to him Q. (By Mr. O0THWA1TE.) That included Mr. Powderly 's telegram, did it not?— A. Yes; it is the telegram follovring the interview, in which he says And the foUovdng in- terview with Mr. Powderly, which is wired from New York: ' Mr. Gould recognizes our order,' he said, 'and addresses me by the title of G. M. W., General Master Workman. There was some misunderstanding which our conference cleared up almost immediately. Had Mr. Gould been at home, when I had a chaiuce to see him, this strike I am certain would not have taken more than two or three days. I am satisfied he will be ready to have aU differences discussed in the future before there is necessity for a strike. This is a pleas- ant ending of an unpleasnnt business, and one almost sure to come when the heads of opposing conditions can come together to talk over matters.' Mr. Powderly is to meet Mr. Gould at 9.30 o'clock Monday morning, and then the committee of arbitration will be appointed, as originally suggested by the executive board, three members by each side and they to choose the seventh. Mr, Powderly's order includes iiom twelve to four- teen thousand men, employ^ of the Iron Mountain, Missouri Pacific, Missouri, Kansas and Texas Pacific It also includes the men on the local roads running into Saint Louis. ' ' Q. Well, Mr. Powderly sent west a telegram at the same time, which was published, ordering the men to resume their work. What I want to get from you, Mr. Gould, is an auswer, wherein the company would have been injured, either then or prospectively, or the welfare of the people been injured had the substance of the proposition as it seemed to come from the Knights of Labor at that time been agreed to. What was the objection t» it on your part?— A. The objection to it on my part was that the matter was in Mr. Hoxie's hands, and I was not going to take it up; that the board had put it in his hands, and I proposed to let it stay there. , . . Q. To go right to that question— wherein would the public interest and the mterests of the company have suffered by the representatives of the road acceptiug the proposi- tion of the Knights of Labor to arbitrate?— A. To arbitrate what? Q. To arbitrate the proposition that they made. We will not differ about that.— A. It is the question what arbitration there was to be. ,.^ , x j- j n. Q Yon know what you differed about?— A. I don't know that we differed. I didn t understand that we differed at all. I read my proposition over and Mr. Powderly saia he agreed to it. Q. During the interview?— A. Every word of it. 3984 CONG 5 66 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. I have reference to the differences which seem to have arisen on the Monday. First, they were ordered to resume labor, and they were about to do so. Then, next, that they did not, and there was still existing trouble.— A. They didn't obey the order. They didn't pay any attention to the order. On the contrary, Martin Irons telegraphed down to "hold the fort." They didn't obey the order; they didn't propose to. Mr. SwAYNE. Perhaps this is the telegram that was testified to this morning: " President J. Gould has consented to our proposition for arbitration and so telegraphed Vice-President Hoxie. Order the men to resume at once. "T. V. POWDEELY, G. M. W." Is that it? / The Witness. Yes, that is it. , ,.. Q. (By Mr. OuTHWAiTB.) Now, I want to get at what you understand to be the dif- ficulty that arose on Monday there between the employes and the company, or the Knights of Labor and the company, which prevented that proposition from being ac- cepted. — A. Well, there was no such proposition. Q. No such proposition ? It seems that Mr. Powderly thought there was a proposition, from his telegram, does it not? — A. I don't know. Q. I think the country were of the impression that a settlement had been arrived at when they read that telegram, and I simply wanted to get your side of the question, if you may so term it. — A. Well, I did not understand that any agreement was made with Powderly. There was none. I did not know what he was going to do after he went out. I had a discussion with Mr. Hopkins after he left as to whether he would do any- thing or whether he would have courage to do anything, and Mr. Hopkins said that he would not. Q. Didn't he have the courage to do something? He sent the telegram. — A. What he was to do was to tell these gentlemen that they had struck without cause, that they were in rebellion to the order, and to take away their charter. That was the reason that I gave him the dispatch, and the next morning when it came out and I saw what an entire change had taken place I did not agree to it, and would not have agreed to it. Q. Suppose that no agreement were arrived at, but suppose one of the party thought there was an agreement, and was willing to act upon the supposed agreement; what in- jury could have come to the company had they accepted and acted upon that state of the case ? — A. I do not know. I did not know what subj ect their arbitration would cover. If it covered the question whether we should discharge the men that we had employed during the strike to make places for these men, or whether it involved taking them all back, that would not be a subject of arbitration, for they were out of our employment. They had struck and taken possession of our property. Q. Then you didn't intend or want to have any arbitration or any effort to settle any difficulty between the Knights of Labor and your company, with the men who were out of your employment at that time? — A. Yes, sir; that ia it distinctly. Q. Did you know of that order which was shown to you as having been issued — the order for Mr. Sheahan or Mr. Eockwell? — A. I never heard of it till to-day, and did not know that such an order was issued. Q. (By Mr. Ceain.) I would like to ask one or two more questions. I understand you to say that your object in the meeting between you and Mr. Powderly was that you were to have a general talk over the late strike, that you considered it at an end, and a conversation on arbitration, &c. Is that correct? — A. Partly. I said further that his secret circular had just been issued, and I thought I would stiffen him up on the ques- tion. Q. You thought he was a good man and needed to keep up his courage? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that the strike was at an end except in two isolated places. Fort Worth and Parsons. Such being the case, will you please tell me why it was that you wrote this letter [exhibiting to Mr. Gould the original letter addressed to Mr. Powderly in his own handwriting] ? This letter of March 28, 1885: H. M. HoxiB, Oeneral Manager, <&c., Saint Louis: In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific and in the re-employ- ment of labor in the several departments of the company, you will give preference to our late employes, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not re-employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will w6 discharge any person who has taken service with the company during said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employfi and the company, past or future. Hoping the above will be satisfactory, I remain, yours, truly, J. GOULD, President. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 67 What I desire to call your attention to is the language: You say, "In resuming the ■movement of trains," which would seem to contemplate that the trains had stopped, *nd that they were going to be moved again, and in the re-employment of labor." If the strike was over and your trains were moving, what motive had you for using that language? — A. That was it precisely. Q. Then would you have needed any more laborers?— A. Yes, kir. As we resumed, and after, we have been taking them on ever since. For instance, we have taken on a thousand men since that day, five hundred of them Knights of Labor. We had on April 6th, nine thousand six hundred and fifty-two men, on April 15 we had ten thousand seven hundred and thirty-seven men, making — ninety-six ftom one hundred .and seven — making over eleven hundred that we had taken on. Q. Well, right at that moment there was no increase in business that day. What did you mean by re-employment of men? — A. I meant that we were resuming our business, and that we were starting our trains, and that we would take back the labor as we needed it. No man that he did not want, but as his business increased he would take on labor; and we have been doing so ever since. ■ I do not think that Mr. Hoxie re- fused to take Knights of Labor — -I think he telegraphed me that there had not been a single Knight of Labor who had applied that had been refused. In one of his dispatches I think he said that. Q. Now please explain what you mean by the language, "In resuming the movement ■of trains." I construe it as meaning tra,ins had stopped and that you were going to re- sume the movement. — A. They were not all moving, but we were moving more or less trains on all parts of the road exce])ting from these two points, perhaps two or three from the Iron Mountain; we were in full operation. Q. (By Mr. Bubnes.) Are there any able-bodied men in the employment of your railroad working for 55 cents a day ? — A. No, sir. I think a dollar and a half a day is the lowest rate, and up to three or four dollars. Q. This committee would like to understand something about the relations, one to the other, of these several railroads constituting the Missouri Pacific system. Fust, if you please, tell us what the Missouri Pacific is, its extent, its termini, its whole property. — A. The Missouri Pacific be^ns at Saint Louis, runs from Saint Louis through Atehison to Omaha — Kansas City, Atchison, Leavenworth, and Omaha — and it ovpns or controls a large number of roads in Kansas. Q. You may omit, at this time, the leased lines, but inform us of those that are act- ually owned by the Missouri Pacific Company, and whose stock is stock of the Missouri Company. — ^A. I believe 2,500 miles bear the stock. Q. From Saint Louis to Omaha and then over the Missouri, Kansas and Texas ? — A. No, sir; that is leased. Q. Is the Iron Mountain a part of the Missouri Pacific ? — A. It is owned by the Mis- souri Pacific. Q. But not consolidated with it? — A. No, sir; by ownership of the stock. Q. Then you have other lines connected with it? — A. Yes, sir; and we ownlarge inter- ests in other roads that are feeders to us. Q. Well, first, what corporation, what roads, what actual railroads are properly with- in the corporation of the Missouri Pacific BaUroad Company? — ^A. I would have to get a list of them. I will furnish yon with it. Q. I mean exclusive of all leased lines and of all those the stock only of which is owned by the Missouri Pacific. — ^A. You mean those that our stock represents. We will fur- nish you with that. Q. Yes, sir. Do you know the number of miles of railroad that the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company owns? — A. I think about 2,500 miles. Q . That you ovfn ? — ^A. Yes ; that is represented by our stock. I think our stock is about $12,000 a mile or a little over. Q. What is the bonded indebtedness on that 2, 500 miles of road ?— A. That I will fur- nish you with. Q. When did yon become connected with the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. I think it was in 1879. Q. The corporation had been organized many years before that, had it not? — ^Yes, sir, and foreclosed. Q. Do you remember when it was organized ? — A. I do not. Q. Do you remember when it was sold by the State of Missouri? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you remember the history of its construction?— A. No, sir. I never had any interest in it until I bought Mr. Garrison's stock. Q. The line was constructed from Saint Louis to Kansas City, I believe, before you had anything to do with it. — A. Yes, sir. Q. In giving the statement that you promised, will you add to it, or can you state now. all the particulars with regard to your leased lines and the lines the stock of which, 68 , LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. or the majority of which you control? — A. We will furnish you all that if you will fur- nish a list of what you want. ' Q. We want shown everything that is connected, and how connected, with the MLs- , souri Padflc system. The Iron Mountain road extends from Saint Louis to Texarkana? — A. Yes; and it branches to Cairo and Belmont, and there are some other local branches. Q. What is the relation between the Missouri Pacific and the Texas Pacific Railway- Company? — A. None, except as a creditor. The Missouri Pacific is a creditor. Q. Has it ever had any other interest except as a creditor in the Texas Pacific?— A.. No, sir. Q. Were you ever in the management of the Texas Pacific? — A. Yes, sir. I am pres- ident of the corporation. Q. I did~not know it, sir. When was the Texas and Pacific placed in the hands of a. receiver? — A. I think about last faU or winter. Q. Who is the receiver of the Texas and Pacific? — A. John C. Brown and Lionel A, , Sheldon. Q. The latter was once governor of New Mexico? — A. (by General Swayne). Yes, sir; Governor Sheldon. Q. Prior to the appointment of these gentlemen, what relation did they hold, if any, with the railroads with which you are connected ? — A. Well, Mr. Sheldon I never knew. Governor Brown was our general solicitor for the Missouri Pacific. He had beea formerly connected with the Texas Pacific, and before my connection with jt, I think under Colonel Scott, that he was general manager. It was because of his familiarity with it that the bondholders selected him as receiver. The judge added Governor Shel- don of his own motion. Q. The committee have felt disposed to consider the questioivof the effect of pooling, the earnings of different roads with reference to agricultural products and freights gen- erally. I If you can give us any information as to your views in regard to this system as affecting the public welfare, we will thank you. — A. I think this: The only thing that has saved the roads is the financial success in pooling. They would all be in the hands of the receivers but for that. Q. Well, why would that be the result? Because of competition? — A. Yes, sir; the low rate that is made by excessive competition. Q. Then competition is not the life of trade? — A. It is the destruction of trade. The result of excessive competition would be that you would have to put your labor down to 50 per cent, of what it is now. The moment a road cuts down the rate the labor has got to go down, because labor is a very large element in railroad earnihgs. We estimate that the direct labor is about 60 per cent., and if the railroad is not earning you cannot pay. The pay-roll has to be suspended because the road is doing nothing and we have- not the money to pay. Q. If pooling is beneficial to the railroads is it also beneficial to the people ? — A. I think it is. I think that the public is interested in having strong, able roads that can keep them up in first-class order, keep them well equipped and operate them right up to the handle. I have always known that real estate was improved and that people would rather live on roads that are strong properties financially. Q. Now let us take two roads from New York to Chicago, not side by side but run- ning 20 or 30 miles apart — say the Fort Wayne route and the Lake Shore — there is a sharp competition at Chicago and at New York. What is the probable proportion of the through as against the local earnings? What is the effect of pooling on the local business; that is, business originating or terminating at way stations? — ^A. Well, I am. not running those roads. Q. Can you give me any information or ideas in regard to it? — ^A. I could give my idea; but I think you had better see those gentlemen. They are better prepared to give you information in this matter; I could only give you my opinion. My idea is that the pooling arrangement is thesafest for railroadsas a financial success. You see that when they built the West Shore alongside the New Y(jrk tientral, a road that had always paid dividends ceased to be a dividend property. Q. The information I would like to have is your opinion with regard to the extent of the local earnings upon any of the great lines of railroad not side by side— the effect of local business with a strong railroad company. — A. I think that a strong railroad com- pany is much better for the country; much better for the patrons and the people than a weak one. Q. Well, now, what proportion in your estimation of the earnings of a railroad from Chicago to New York would be local, and what through ?— A. I don't know. The conn try is so cut up with railroads that there is the strongest competition. Q. I want your opinion on this point. We will take two lines from Saint Louis, lines running on different sides of the Missouri River. What is the proportion between theii local and the through earnings or receipts?— A. I don't know what that is. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 69 Q. Have you never looked into it? — A. No, sir; I can get the figures, biit I have not ^ot them. Q. Can you give us an approximate estimate? — A. No,' I cannot. Q. Will you furnish us such information after examination for incorporation into our record? — A. Yes, sir; I have no objection to that. Q. Now, Mr. Gould, we will take a shipment originating, we will say, in Atchison, Kans., for Saint Louis; if these two railway lines were competing, would not that shipment be likely to get to Saint Louis at a far less rate by either line of road than if the earnings were pooled ? — A. That would depend on the rates they make. Q. Well, in a business of any extent with competition between two or more lines, would not the rate of transportation and passenger fare be less if the two roads were •competing than if their earnings were pooled ? — ^A. I think your information would be better than mine, because you live there. Mr. BUENKS. I have the information, but I wanted it confirmed by the foremost rail- road man in the world. The WiTKESS. I did not suppose that this committee had the time to take up all the Afferent questions connected with railroads. Mr. BuENES. We are investigating a great many unseen, unknown, and perhaps un- knowable things, many occult things, and we have to get information, as yon observe, by taking testimony as to men's opinions, feeling, judgment, and as to what he hears -and sometimes what he thinks. The Witness. A man sent me a very singular book that was written in 1830. ' The man who wrote it was discussing the question of railroads and he discussed it in two ways. The first was as to whether it was practical or not; the second, whether they should use steam or horses, and also whether the two could be combined on the same track. The Chairman. It would be bad on the horses. The Witness. After considerable thought he made up his mind that they would run horses because the horses would kick up a dust, the dust would settle on the rails, and the steam when the engine came along would destroy the cohesion, and he goes back to several of the old writers, and as far back as Pliny, to show that steam would not oper- ate. A Member. How do shippers fare between terminal points? Do they pay the same rates for a short as they do for a long haul? The Witness. I don't know about the details of these arrangements. They are not in my department. I do not take up the details. The Chairman. I think we have a law that they shall not charge more for a short haul than for a long one. I think that is the law in every State, but they don't regard it much, and that is the trouble. Mr. Buenes. You are not advised about these general principles of railroad operation and earnings to which I have alluded? The Witness. I do not pay much attention to the general details of the business. Mr. Buenes. I do not think it is detail. It is a general principle that has been dis- •cussed so much that I thought it had attracted your attention. The Chairman. Suppose the railroad connection that you speak of between New" York and the West represeiited in their capital stock the actual cost of building the road it would not be necessary then to pool. Mr. Gould, you have not been constructing rail- roads. Do you know of any raUroad in the United States constructed through a reason- Wy populous country on the actual cost that does not pay well? The Witness. What one do yon refer to? I can only speak of those that I am ac- quainted with. . . The Chairman. The only railroad interest I have in the world is in one which I helped to build. We built it at a cost of $16,000 a mile, and it pays. It was never watered. The Witness. I would be very glad to read the deliberate opinion of this committee when they arrive at their formal report. Mr. Buchanan. Mr. Gould, you said early in your examination that the Missouri Pacific had lived up to its agreement of March, 1885, with the men?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, might it not be possible that specific instances, which really are in violation of that agreement, might not have come to your personal attention ?— A. I don't think that they would come to my attention. It is a subject that is not in my jurisdiction, •as I said when I commenced my examination; I said to the committee that there are very few of these facts that I could state as facts. Q. And therefore I ask you whether it is not of necessity correct that your testimony upon that point was that in general the road bad lived up to that agreement with the anen and that you did not undertake to exclude the possibility of particular instances of 70 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, the violation of the, agreement?— A. In August last Mr. Powderly and the comiriittee said that we had lived up to our agreement up to that time. Q. What I ask is the extent of the knowledge yon intended to be understood as hav- ' ing, and whether it was not possible that specific violations of agreement might have escaped your attention. That is the only point of my question. — A. I gave the basis- of my information on that subject to the committee; that was: first, the statement of the committee of the Knights of Labor themselves; secondly, the reports of the gov- ernors, who passed on it after the strike originated. I gave you that as evidence on which I based my judgment. But I say now as I stated at the time, that the labor de- partment is not under my control. It belongs to the general manager of the road. It is in his charge. It would not need even a formal resolution. It is not necessary to put it in his charge. It is his business. Q. Then if in fact instances did occur where without notice to the men their wages had been reduced, or other matters had taken place in contravention of the terms of that agreement, the probabilities are very great that they would not come to your per- sonal attention. — A. They are. Q. You state that the Texas Pacific is in the hands of a receiver. Do you know about the time of the appointment of that receiver? — A. It was last fall or winter. Mr. SWAYNE. It was about the 29th of December. Mr. Buchanan. Who was president of that road at the time of the appointment of receiver? The Witness: I was, and am still. Q. Then I will ask you this further question, if you were advised on whose petition the receiver was appointed ? I mean the petition that was filed in the court asking for the appointment. — A. It was the Missouri Pacific Company that filed the petition. Q. The Missouri Pacific road then filed the petition; and what interest had that road in the Texas Pacific? — A. We were creditors. We had advanced money t» them to pay coupons and operating expenses. Q. And it received for such advances of money, what? — A. We had received some collateral, which was likely to be worthless, and after consulting with the board of di- rectors and some of the largest bondholders they saw that it was impossible to keep the company up and go on, and that it was necessary to have a receivership, and to reor- ganize the company on a lower basis. Q. Has the Texas Pacific any issue of bonds? — ^A. Oh, yes. Q. Do you know to what amount? — ^A. A large amount, but I do not remember th& exact amount. It has a number of issues. Q. Was the Missouri Pacific, at the time it filed its petition to have the Texas Pacific put in the hands of a receiver, the holder of any of these bonds? — A. Yes, sir; some of them. Q. Was the petition based on those bonds? — A. It was based upon our advances. Q. Advances on open, unsecured account? — A. No, sir. We had some security, but not enough security, and the receivership was asked for the reason that it was evident the company could not be a financial success on its present basis. Q. I simply ask the facts. — A. General Swayne can give you the record. Q. Who else beside Governor Brown was appointed to the receivership ? — A. Gov- ernor Sheldon. Q. At the time of their appointment to the receivership were either Governor Brown- er Governor Sheldon connected in any way with the Texas or Missouri Pacific ?— A. Governor Brown was the general solicitor of the Missouri Pacific. Q. At the time of his appointment as receiver of the Texas Pacific Governor Brown was general solicitor of the Missouri Pacific? — A. I think he resigned before he waa appointed, or shortly after. Q. How near to the time of his resignation was he appointed receiver? — A. I think that as soon as he was confirmed he terminated his connection with the Missouri Pacific. The precise day I do not know. Q. The two were practically in connection. The resignation of the solicitorship and the appointment to the receivership ?— A. Yes, sir. He thought the appointment to receivership would be incompatible with his position as counsel. Q. In this application for appointment of a receiver is there also coupled an applicar tion for the sale of the road under the foreclosure of any mortgage? — A. I don't know what the papers are. I know that there are a number of bondholders who are endeav- oring to reorganize the road and to get up a plan x>{ reorganization. Q. Do you know whether any progress has been made looking to the sale of that road under the foreclosure of any mortgage?— A. Yes, sir; I think they expect an eariy sale. The reorganization committee have that in charge and had a meeting this week ; I don't know but they are in Philadelphia now. We expect to get a sale this summer, I believe. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 71 Q. When you testified that your operatives on the Missouri Pacific stated that they had no grievances you added they so told Mr. Hoxie. I suppose you testified to that from your general information and not from hearing the men themselves say so ' A. We have that from the report of Mr. Hoxie. » Q. You said something about Mr. Hoxie suspending the pay-roll upon the Missouri Pacific. How soon after the time when the men, as you say, "took" the terminal points of your road did this suspension occur?— A. The order was issued within two or three days after that. Q. And was that suspension as to the whole force of the road ?— A. It speaks for itself. I put it in. I put in the oflcial order itself. Q. You stated that when application was made to you by Mr. Powderly in reference to having the reinstatement of this man Hall you told him that Mr. Hall was an em- ploy6 on the Texas Pacific and not of the Missouri Pacific, and that therefore your com- pany had nothing to do vrith that question. Is my understanding correct?— A. I had no communication with Mr. Powderly about that. It was in a communication between Mr. Hopkins and him that that correspondence was. , Q. The simple fact that I wish to get at is whether it was stated to Mr. Powderly by any one in connection with the Missouri Pacific and in a position to speak of&cially that the discharge of Mr. Hall was a matter which the Texas Pacific alone had to deal with and with which the Missouri Pacific had nothing to do?— A. Yes, sir. Here is the correspondence. Here is Mr. Hopkins's message to him: "T. V. POWDEKLY: " Thanks for your message and suggestion. HaU was employed by the Texas and Pacific, and not by us. That property is in the hands of the United States courts, and we have no control whatever over the receiver or over the employes. We have carried out the agreements made last spring in every respect, and the present strike is unjust to us and unwise for you. It is reported here that this movement is the result of Wall street influence on the part of those short of the security likely to be affected." Mr. Buchanan. I think that has already been given. The only fact I wished to get at was as to which was the road upon which this discharge originally occurred. My rec- oUectiou is that you testified earlier in the day that the Missouri Pacific received from Eeeeiver Brown full accounts of the trouble on the Texas Pacific, and my recollection is that you read that in evidence. The Witness. General Swayne read it. Q. If there is no connection between the companies, how does it happen — and I ask in order that you may explain — that the Missouri Pacific received the report of Eeeeiver Brown? — A. I did not say that. Q. I understood you to say that you had received a report ? — A. I was asked as a cause for that trouble, I think, by the chairman, and Greneral Swayne read the report as it ap- peared in the newspaper. I suppose it was a report that Governor Brown miade to the court. Q. My recollection of the testimony is that you said that the Missouri Pacific had re- ceived a full report from Governor Brown? — A. We have nothing to do with the receive^ of the Texas Pacific. Q. I may be mistaken, but the fact will be shown by the record. — A. You certainly are as to that. Q. One other question, for the matter has been gone over pretty fully. Will you ex- plain, if you are in favor of arbitration and Mr. Powderly was in favor of arbitration ou the Sunday you met each other, why in fact arbitration did not take place ? — A. Well, I think that I have gone over that pretty fully. Mr. Hoxie had charge of these matters, and I declined to take them up myself. If yon read these letters which are in here they go over that very fully. The position that we took was arbitration with our individual employfe — ^that is, that were in the employ of the company; and Mr. Powderly under- stood that. Here is the final order: New Yoek, March 30, 1886. Maetin Ieons, Saint Louis: Have been in conference all day, with the result that "Vice-President Hoxie agrees to the following: "Willing to meet a committee of our employds, without discrimination, who are actually at work in the service Qf the company at the time such committee is appolntsd to adjudicate with them any grievances they may have." Have your execu- tive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from vtxe employ^ of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie to adjust any difference. Do this as quicKy as possible. Board will leave for Saint Louis to-morrow. FREDERICK TURNER, Secretary. 72 • LABOR TROUBLES IN T^E SOUTH AND WEST. ^ This was their final proposition. Was not that exactly what they understood ? Q. Was it intimated during this interview on that Sunday that it was your inten- tion to take cWge of the matter, and if possible have a settlement of these troubles in the West?— A. Why, I never dreamed of such a thing. I was perfectly positive about that. Q. And your intention remained that the decision of that matter should be contmued to Mr. Hoxie? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Not that the party arrived at some satisfactory solution of these troubles, at least on your part? — A. No, sir; I considered the strike as practically over. Q. In your dispatch to Mr. Hoxie which you showed to Mr. Powderly on that day you rtefer to "having no objection " to have certain matters arbitrated. (I am laboring under this trouble, that for some of the time during your examination I have been com- pelled to be absent from the committee. ) Will you state why those words were incorpo- rated in that dispatch if the question of arbitration had not been gone over? — A. I will read about that. I have read it to the committee. Mr. Buchanan. I am informed that that has been already gone over; if that is so I do not insist upon an answer. The Witness. The interview between Mr. Powderly and myself shows it exactly. Q. (By the CHAIRMAN.) Does it not sometimes occur that the power of the court is invoked and railroads are foreclosed under a receiver that the men who wanted it fore- closed were interested men afterwards? — A. My observation has been that it has been for the good of the road if the creditors fix up a good organization. Q. (By Mr. BtrcHANAN. ) Is it not a fact that roads operated under a receiver are more dangerous competitors to other roads than they would be if operated by their own- ers? — A. No; I think not. I think the court could not be corrupted. Q. Is it not possible for a road to be operated by a receiver under proceedings in court and so operated for a number of years, and receive as its earnings only sufficient to pay operating expenses and receiver's fees? Does that not often occur, without paying any interest whatever upon fixed charges? — A. I should not want to be a large owner in one of that kind. Q. Is it not in fact the case that often roads are operated by a receiver for a consider- able period where the receipts do not more than pay the operating expenses under the receiver? — A. I have been familiar with but very few receiverships. Q. You have no knowledge of that subject? — A. I have been personally familiar with but few receiverships. Then I think it has worked with advantage to the company. A. L. HOPKINS sworn and examined. By the Chairman: ,Question. What is your occupation, your age, and yoiir residence ? — Answer. I am second vice-president of the Missouri Pacific Railroad; I live in New York City, and am forty-two years old. Q. (By, Mr. Ceain.) Will you please state to the committee what you know of the cause of the strike in the Southwest, extending from Texas to Saint Louis? — A. I think all I know about it has already been stated by Mr. Gould. Q. What do you state to be the cause; he gave his opiniou; what is your opinion? — A. I must say I do not know what the cause was. I think I would give the same reply that Mr. Powderly did when they asked him in Kansas City. He said he could not find out. Q. Newspaper reports stated as the origin the discharge of a man named Hall who worked oh the Texas Pacific, and the employ^ of the Missouri Pacific wanted him rein- stated? — A. That is what Mr. Powderly telegraphed to me. Q. And all that has b^eii told by Mr. Gould is what you know in regard to these caQses ? — A. I had the same sources of information as he had. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN.) Were you present at any of those interviews between Mr. Powderly and Mr. Gould ? — A. I think I was present at all of them. Q. Including the one on Sunday? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. OuTHWAiTE. ) I wish yon would state to the committee any views yon may have upon the subject of arbitration as a means of avoiding or preventing or settling difficulties between employers and employes in such cases as this? — A. I have always believed in arbitration as a means of settlement, and I see no objection even to compul- sory arbitration, provided that arbitration is made compulsory "on both sides, and that it is provided it shall be between employes (those who are actually at work at the time) and the company or the officers of the company. I think that is the whole point in this matter. If Mr. Powderly had come to us in the beginning, wh,en this strike occurred or before it occurred, and had said, "A difficulty has arisen here and we agree to settle it with you, and arbitrate with you," I do not think there ever would have been any strike; and I think this is one of the cases of strikes that would havs been a,voided by a LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 73 rule of that character. If you can make the law bind both railroad company and em- ploy6 it would be impossible to have a strike on a railroad. That is the arbitration that I believe in — that this whole question shall be settled between the employes and the companies ; because the fact of the case is that the employ & have no better friends in the world than the managers of the loads. They have no antagonizing interests. The manager wants to obtain the very best success he can, and to accomplish it he must have good men and be in accord with them, and he must have pleasant and friendly relations with the men. When anything comes in to disturb that, if they both act up to that feeling there cannot be any trouble. Q. Have you given the bill that recently passed through the House of Representatives any examination or consideration? — A. No, sir; I have not had an opportunity to read the biU. Mr. OUTHWAITE. That provides for voluntary arbitration simply. The Witness. But I think that there should be a provision in any arbitration bill against striking and causing a stoppage of the traffic of the country in that kind of way. And if that was in there I think it is a necessity, in the first place, to let that be coupled with an obligation to arbitrate with its own employ^. I believe they could go to some- body who they knew to be perfectly disinterested and let them see whether the object that they have in view when they strike is worth while for them to all quit woi:k on that account or not, and, if the arbitrators decide that it is, that the company be obliged to submit. Q. What is your view as to the manner in which a strike might be prevented by law? You say that there should be a provision to prevent a strike? — A. I think that in these instances it should be made a criminal offense for the traffic to be stopped. For instance, suppose this thing had appeared on the Mississippi River where there is no railroads, and armed men had stopped the steamboats running, there woiild have been no question about it — it would have been so clearly a case of interference with interstate commerce that the Government would have gone in and interfered and let the traffic go on, and thus settled things. The Chaiemait. A man has a right to quit work. The Witness. But he has no right to prevent other people working. That is what I wanted to have allusion to when I say "strike." Nobody objects when they want to quit work; that is the privilege of every American citizen, and if these people had only done that and gone away from the premises it would not have seriously interfered with our business. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Explain more fully what part of the strike should be made criminal in a la,w of the kind you mention? — A. I think that where employ^ leave the service of the company and then prevent other persons taking their places to such an extent that the duties which the corporation has taken upon itself to perform, and is bound to perform for the public, are interfered vrith, and he goes in with his allies and seizes the property of the company, that the act then comes between the State and him- self as an individual, and should be a criminal offense. That was the action of these Enights of Labor. Q. What suggestion would you make as to the method of compelling the employers to at once arbitrate differences, if there were any, with the men? — A. I do not know where the power would exist. I think the corporations would voluntarily agree to the lesult of such arbitration. Q. I merely wanted to get as fully as I could what were your views, if .you have fixed views upon these subjects. Is there anything further that you have to say? — A. I think that is the whole point in it. One more thing I would like to say; that is, that it was an injustice in these men to strike toward the large number of their co-laborers who did not strike. We have on our roll various organizations, and their representatives met together. Mr. Arthur, chief of the Locomotive Brotherhood, looked the whole thing over and he declined to enter into any alliance with the strikers. The firemen came to- gether and they have had a meeting. They have looked this particular strike over and said: "Shall we join these men?" Then the conductors got together in Chamois and passed a resolution condemning the whole thing. Mr. Arthur declined to allow the en- gineers to join it, and here is what the firemen say [reading from a telegram dated Saint Louis, Mo., April 21, and addressed to Mr. Jay Gould, which was handed to witness by Mr. Gould at his request]: "The following from Parsons, Kans.: The locomotive fire- men have had an immense meeting here to-night and everything has been just as you would wish it. Not one word was spoken in favor of or indorsing the strike, but aU con- demning the action of those who ordered it. Of me personally, Grand Master Sargeant said: 'I believe Mr. Hoxie is our friend.' We had some fears, and I am therefore glad^ to be able to inform you of this pleasant result. The firemen have conducted themselves in a manner to command our admiration. ' ' That simply shows the verdict of the fire- men's organization on that strike. Now the Knights of Labor on our road that struck 74 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. are only 3, 700 out of 14, 000 employ &. Does it not occur to you that it ia a, strange thing we had no kind of complaint from any other organization but the Knights of Labor, and they did not make that complaint known to Mr. Powd'erly? Q. What is the date of the dispatch you read, and who sent it?— A. It was sent by Mr. Hoxie on the 21st. - ,.,, , ■ ,. Q. Then you have -instances in your immediate observation m which labor organization has been very effective for good?— A. Why, certainly. We have believed in them all the time. We havetried to help Mr. Powderly aU the while; we thought hecould help us and we telegraphed to him. . r it ^ Q. Do you know of any strikes that have occurred since the organization ot tlie loco- motive engineers in which they were engaged? — A. I do not remember any. _ Q. Do,you know of any strikes' among the men coming from the firemen's association or the conductors' organization you mention?— A. I do not remember of their having any strikes. , „ ^, , ., Q. You have stated that if Mr. Powderly had come to you before the strike it never would have occurred. Now, you do not mean by that to at all insinuate that Mr. Pow- derly was responsible at the inception of this strike?— A. Well, all I know is that Mr. Hayes wrote a letter to us that if we would do certain things then they would order these men back to work, aind we thought that they had authority over these men. We had previously been dealing with Mr. Powderly, in regard to this matter, and he assumed that authority. Q. Well, you have no further fact that would indicate at all that Mr. Powderly was in any way responsible for the beginning of this strike.— A. I do not believe he was; I think he is too sensible a man for that. I think he expressed his opinion to us that ho thought the strike was a mistake. Q. I want to ask you now about the portion of that communication from you to Mr. Powderly in which you state, " it is reported here that Wall-street influences might be affecting this strike." I cannot give your language. — A. I had received a report, sir. It happened jnst before I sent that message. A man came into my office and told mo that some Wall-street operators had sent men out to the West to influence a strike in the Southwest. Q. Now, will you please explain to the committee in what manner tha,t might bo effected? It is not necessary that you should give instances of the manner in which it was effected, but from your position overlooking the field, how could such a thing bo effected? — A. Well, if anybody who was short of these securities could have persuaded Mr. Irons to order a strike he would have known the effect of that strike would havo been to depress the securities. Such things have been attempted. I did not know Mr. Irons. A party could have gone and paid somebody to order this strike. Q. And if the strike were ordered it would depress the securities? — A. Yes, sir. Wo have found that Knights of Labor spent a good deal of time at a broker's office. We did not know what their relations were. Q. I will ask you if you know of any instances of the kind ? — ^A. I said it was reported. Q. You said you did not know as to that time. Do you know of any instance during the uncertain state of affairs that existed on the Monday after the Sunday upon which this conference took place between Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly in which speculation was indulged in in regard to the securities of the Missouri Pacific roads or the roads af- fected by this strike? — A. No, sir; I do not. Q. Can you state from recollection what the run of these securities were upon that day? — A. I have no idea. I had too much to do to pay any attention to it. Q. Were you down South during the trouble at any time from the beginning to the end? — A. No, sir; the thing was put entirely in Mr. Hoxie's hands, and nobody inter- fered. The whole board had the most implicit confidence in him. He is a man of great > experience, and a very able man ; and he has the respect of all the loyal employ^ on the road. Q; Were you present at that interview between Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly and Mr. McDowell? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you there at the conclusion of it? — A. Yes, sir; I was there all the time. Q. Can you tell me whether Mr. Powderly seemed to have the impression that the differences then existing were adjusted by what took place between him and Mr. Gould? — A. Mr. Gould read this dispatch over to him and Mr. Powderly said he thought that was what he wanted. Mr. Gould then said ' ' I have no objection to address- ing it to you." Mr. Powderly said he had an appointment and went a^ay, and the un- derstanding we had with McDowell was that he was to take it down and submit it to his committee, and if it was satisfactory to them he was going to telegraph out for the men to go to work. We did not know whether it was going to be satisfactory, and I re- member Mr. Gould asked me what I thought about it, and I told him that I thought it would be satisfactory. I said that I could see Mr. Powderly disapproved the action of these men down there in the strike. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 75 Q. Did it not have the appearance of an adjustment of the differences between the striking Knights of Labor and the Missouri Pacific?— A. No; because Mr. Powderly said that he did not insist upon recognition of the order at all. Q. Well, then, we will say of the recent employes ?— A. That is where the point is in it. The whole thing is, whether we were going to arbitrate with these men that struck and were out and throw these employes who were taking service with the company and the loyal men out. That was all elaborated and cleared up by the conversation that took place. Q. (By Mr. Ceain. ) The men who were in had nothing to arbitrate. It was the men who were outside that were complaining ?— A. The men had nothing to arbitrate. Q. It was the strikers that were complaining ?— A. Well, they were all going back at that time, and have gradually kept going back. Q. It was the men who were out that were complaining? — A. Their relations with us had ceased. They were no longer our employ^. The only arbitration we could have was with our employes. Q. The men already at work had nothing to arbitrate ? It was the outsiders that were wanting you to arbitrate with them?— A. Yes, sir; that is fuUy set out by Mr. Gronld. Q. (By Mr. Ottthwaite.) What objection could there have been to the company ac- cepting that supposed adjustment, as Mr. Powderly seems to have accepted it ?— A. Ton mean to say what objection there could have been on the part of the company to accept the original arbitration proposed. Mr. Powderly had telegraphed out there, ' ' Mr. Gould has agreed to our arbitration; " that means that Mr. Gould accepts the arbitration, the only arbitration that had been referred to the day before in the letter which the secre- tary had written to Mr. Gould; they were to appoint three and we three. Mr. Gould gave the reason why we would not accept that arbitration — that the board of directors had placed the matter in Mr. Hoxie's hands, and that he could not weU interfere. It would have destroyed all discipline on the road. Mr. Hoxie would have resigned at once. He understood the matter, and we did not know, we did not feel that we understood it well enough to arbitrate. Q. Can you give any substantial injury that might have resulted to the road or to the stockholders by accepting that proposition as Mr. Powderly seems to have understood it and telegraphed it? — A. I do not know that it would have resulted in any injury; but it was arbitrating with men who had seized our property. This strike had been going on then for about three weeks, and it seemed to me a good deal like a man breaking into your house and stealing your goods and you sendine a policeman after him and taking these goods back and him coming back and saying. Now, I am willing to arbi- trate about these goods." That is a position we did not want to take. They had been vrrecking our trains and burning our bridges and doing aU this damage to property. Mr. Powderly had expressed himself to us distinctly that as being no arbitration with these men who were out. We had no relations to arbitrate. Their relations were with the State; they were as breakers of the law. Q. Yon cannot suppose that Mr. Powderly meant by that telegram that you were to arbitrate simply with the lawbreakers. — A. The lawbreakers had been coming in as many as two hundred at a time with masks, and seizing our property; how could we know who they were ? Q. Then you do not assume they were Knights of Labor, do you ? — ^A. They did not deny that. Q. What I want to get at is, had that particular form of arbitration which Mr. Pow- derly seems by his telegrams to have supposed was agreed to been agreed upon, wliat sabstantial objection was there to it? — A. That objection was expressed in the letter which was written by order of the board to Mr. Turner. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) According to your knowledge and information, was there any list of grievances, or bill of grievances, presented to the railroad managers by those dis- satisfied employ^ previous to the strike ? — ^A. I do not know of any, and I have been informed by Mr. Hoxie that there were none. Q. You have told us of the efiect upon the employes and on the strikers who were not employes; now I would like to know the effect of the strike upon the producers and trades- men or trading men, the commercial men of the country where the roads are. — A. I should like to read here a large number of letters received from them. There are many manufactories along our roads dependent entirely upon our roads for their supplies, and the effect must necessarily have been very injurious to them. The manager of the Vul- can Iron Works, at Saint Louis, came to see me two or three days ago, and said that he would be obliged to shut up his entire works because we could not supply him with ore to go on with. They have a great many men employed and they were obliged to stop work at the ore mines; and all the men at the quarries also. The people of Saint Louis get their paving stone and building stone at the granite quarries, the only quarries of 76 ' LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. that kind in that country. The men there had to come out because they could not get any transportation. . Q. Was there a large amount of freight upon the roads and at the depots at the time ■of the strike? — A. There was a large amount. The yards were all full. Q. What was the effect upon that freight? — A. It was all stopped, and some of the perishable freight was destroyed. Q. How long was it stopped ? — A. I think the strike started on the 6th of Apnl, and we began to get trains moving after about two weeks, and have gradually resumed just as fast as the officers of the law were able to go in and prevent the strikers from inter- fering with the new men who wanted to go to work. Q. Do you wish to make any further explanation as to the question I have asked you. You speak of a strike; how much do you intend to include in the word " strike?" — A. Why, I intend to include simply the means that were used by these men who went out voluntarily to prevent others going to work. If they had gone away about their busi- ness they would not have seriously affected our movement of trains. Q. You intended to include all methods used in the country there to prevent the movement of trains ? — A. Yes, sir; no one has any o"bjection to any man or large number of men leaving their work. Q. You may describe in general terms what these acts were besides the stoppage of work.— A. That has been more fully described in the newspapers than I could tell it. Our engineers were always ready to go to work, and when the engine came out of the round-house the strikers would take some portion away or cut the hose that connects the tank with the engine, or uncouple the train; and in one instance at Sedalia a train started to go out, and just before they started, or after they had gone, with two sheriffs and one of our superintendents and a train-dispatcher as train-men, and when they got to the crossing the engineer and fireman leaped off the engine and they ran into a lot of rails that had been placed so as to throw the train off the track. These men were aU of them more or less injured, the officers of the law, and also our superintendent. A great many instances of that kind occurred. In one case a passenger-train was thrown from the rails, and the mail agent (jlist out of Parsons) nearly killed. Several depots were burned. Q. I understand irom your testimony that your management has no objection to the employment of union men or Knights of Labor — I mean as such. That is, you have no objection to them as such ? — A. We never asked anybody whether they were Knights ot Labor. Q. You make no discrimination in the employment of men? — A. Not at all. Ex- cepting if this circular that they have read here is correct. I never heard of it. Q. (By Mr. Ceaist. ) I will ask yon a few questions on the subject. You say that you believe in an arbitration bill there ought to be a penalty provided for all those guilty of strikes? — A. Yes; I think it ought to be made a criminal offense. Q. What do you mean, a criminal offense to kUl the engines or a criminal offense to quit work? — A. Oh, no; not a criminal offense to quit work; anybody has a right to do ,that, but the moment they interfere with other people taking their places and damaging property I think it should be made a criminal offense. Q. Is not that the law now in every State in the Union? If yon damage a man's property in that way you are guilty of a misdemeanor. — A. I do not know much about law. Q. It is called malicious mischief. — A. A judge decided it was not in East Saint Louis. A man run in and uncoupled a carriage, was arrested and tried for it, and they discharged him. Q. You spoke of compulsory arbitration. How would you compel a railroad? It ought to work both ways. — A. I do not know whether it jis within the scope of the statute to do that, but I think they should be subject to some punishment in case they ■did not conform to the judgment of the arbitrators. Q. Would you punish men for using moral suasion to' prevent men taking their places? — A. No; I do not think so. Q. Where are the general offices of your railroad ? — A. In Saint Louis. Q. Where does the president of the road live ? — A. In New York. Q. The first vice-president ? — A. In Saint Louis. Q. You are the second vice-president, and you live in New York. Is there any spe- ■cial reason why the officers should live so far away, or is it just a matter of choice and inclination ? — A. I do not think that there is any reason. Q. Have you got an office in New York ? — A. We have an office there but there are only three of us in it. The general office has a pretty large force. Q. (By Mrr'BuCHANAN.) You say you were present on this Sunday, I believe, of the interview between Mr. Gould and Mr. Powderly. Did you see this dispatch or letter that both have spoken of? — A. I did, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 77 Q. Was any alteration made in it in your presence? — A. No; in my presence it was not changed. Q, How did it read originally? — A. It read exactly the same, except that in this ar- bitration it should include the claims of the railroad against the order. Q. And you were not present when that change was made? — A. Mr. Gould went out and copied the letter, and Mr. Powderly suggested that he should strike that out, as the Knights of Labor had no money to pay, although they might have done the damage, and it was no use us leaving it in there; and he rather objected to it. Mr. se]> vation and from conversation with parties engaged in commerce and in building, and the correspondence of my business here went to show the same thing. Q. Is it not your opinion as a business man that this interruxition has broken the course of trade, and that instead of prosperity you Have uncertainty and unrest ? — ^A, Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you to inform me whether the merchant class, the manufacturing class, or the producing class, in this city, had any interest or connection with the dispute between the railroad companies and their employ^? — A. None whatever that I know of. ■ Q. Is it not likely yon would have known it if they had?— A. As one of the city authorities I had known nothing of the contests between the railroads and their em- ployes. I would have known of it if the business community had known of it. _ I was very anxious, very desirous, to see the commerce of the city not interfered with in any way. 104 LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did not this condition of things come npon yon withont notice or ■^^afuingt — A. Yes, sir ; altogether. When I first heard that the employes of the Southwestern system had struck or quit work, 1 was not disposed to credit it. I was very much surprised at it. Q. Much of the trafle and commerce from this city is to the sea, and it is also a great distributing point. Does not that trade and commerce generally come from other States f — A. Yes, sir. Q. It is inter-State commerce ?— A. Yes, sir ; it is inter-State commerce. Q. It is unnecessary to name the States. Other gentlemen have named the States. — A. It is nob only inter-State commerce, it is international commerce. Q. (By Mr. Okain. ) Is the city of Saint Louis in the county, or has it an inde- pendent government of its own t — A. It has an independent goveinment of its own. By the scheme and charter adopted in 1875 or 1876 the city of Saint Louis was sev- eted from the county. We have no county court. We have no county government at all. All the buildings which previously belonged to the county now belong to the city. Q. The city was detached from the rural part of the county and established an in- dependent government of its ownt — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you a sheriff? — A. We have no sheriff. Q. Have you any law of the State of Missouri that provides for the arrest of parties •who obstruct the business of others in your city ? — A. That is a question which the courts have been trying to determine lately. We have laws to prevent the breaking of the peace or the destruction of property, but I am not wpll enough versed in the laws concerning the interference with the property of others to say what they are. Q. Have you any law in this State which requires the sheriff or the county, when he sees the property of individuals or corporations injured or destroyed, to arrest the parties who do it f — A. That, sir, has been the province of the police, and they have always promptly arrested any parties whom they detected in the act of destroying or irijui'ing the property of others. Q. Tlien that would come under your city ordinances T — A. The defacing or injur- ing property comes under the city ordinances. ^ Q. Have you any city laws which provide for the punishment of malicious mischief, \fhich ihcludtis the destruction or injury to the property belonging to individuals or corporations ? — A. 1 cini not prepared to say that there is any such law ; but there is a law which makes it a felony for a person to obstruct a railroad train by placing missiles on the track. Q. Have you any law for the punishment of persons guilty of civil trespass t — A. The city ordinances provide for that, and all persons who are detected in that act are promptly arrested and brought before the city court. Q. You, as mayor, I understand, have no control over/ the police; it is controlled by police commissioners ? — A. I am president of that board, ex-officio. Q. Ordinarily in cities the mayor has supervisory control of the police ? — A. I do not know about other cities, sir ; but I have the right to order the police to do any- thing that is required. I give my orders direct to the chief of police to see that these ordinances are enforced. I have the individual power to order the police both in gen- eral and specific terms to enforce the observance of the city ordinances ; and I do it daily. Q. Is it not true that there were quite a number of men who were not reaUy con- neiited with the Knights of Labor that were connected with the injury to property dnfing this strike f — ^A. I have understood that to be the case; of course I cannot tell, I do not know. I do not ask a man whether he is a Knight of Labor or whether he is a hoodlum when he is arrested. Q. Were arrests made here? — ^A. Arrests were made and some of the charges were preferred against the parties in the court of criminal correction. Some few were sustained. These charges which were preferred before the police court, which is a city court, were, I believe, in some oases sustained and punishment meted out, and some of the parties were released. That depended altogether upon the evidence, like dby other cases. 6. Has it not happened that one or more leaders of the Knights of Labor protested against the use of violence to the property of the railroad system?— A. I believe that is the case, as far as I know, but I have had no direct communication with the ofBcials of the Knights of Labor. Q. I see in one of the new8i)apers where one man had quelled almost a riot. Mr. Buchanan. That was in East Saint Louis. The Witness. I do not know anything about East Saint Louis except from hoax- eay. We have the parties in custody who did the shooting over there. Q. Do you know who supplied them with the arms ?— A. I do not, except from- newspaper publications. Q. You do not know of your own knowledge ?— A. No, sir ; I do not of my own knowledge. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 105 Q, Then, as I understand, you did not furnish them T — A. We did not furnish them -with any arms on this side of the river. I am glad that you asked that question, heoause I have understood it was believed that I had furnished some arms to '^e deputies on the east side of the river. I never did so, and I never knew how they ohtainedarms. It was outside of my jurisdiction, and I never did it officially, and never did it individually, or any other way. Q. I understand from yonr testimony in connection with the movements of the city o overnment that everything was done to put an end to these disturbances t — A. Well, if by disturbances you mean the interference with life and property, it was. The city government took no official action in any way as to terminating the strike, but my idea has been that my duty was to preserve the peace and protect life and prop- erty. The relations of the employers with the employfe I considered beyond my province. Q. As long as they confined their efforts to moral suasion, and used no violence toward the employes or the property of the company, yon did not feel called upon to interfere f: — A. I did not. Q. But whenever anything beyond that was brought to your notice, yOn put the machinery of the city government in action to prevent it ? — A. We tried to prevent it, and we congratulate ourselves that we have prevented it pretty successfully. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) It was stated on the floor of the House of Representatives on the Slst of March that up to March 25 the loss of revenue to the Gould system by the strike was $-2,000,000 and the loss to the employes $1,000,000. Have yon any observations that would lead you to state whether these figures are accurate t — A. No, sir ; I have not. I only know that the loss of the city was very large. „ Q. The statement was also made that 260,000,000 pounds of freight, valued at $40,- 000,000, would have moved had there been no strike. Have you any information as to the accuracy of that ? — A. No, sir ; I have not. Q. Yon spoke of the nnconpling of cars. I suppose you mean with a hostile intent, to prevent trains being moved t — A. I suppose that was the olgect. Q. I suppose you refer to the uncoupling of cars by men who were not then in the employ of the company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that done within the city precincts? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You also spoke of killing engines or disabling engines. Was that also done here ? — A. Some of that was done in the city limits, out not a great deal, and it was never done in the presence of the police. Of course I understand that one who was employed on an engine can kill it very quickly, or one who is familiar with an en- gii:e can kill it quickly, audit was done on one or two occasions when the police were not present. Q. Do you know whether any of these acts that you have spoken of— nnconpling cars and killing engines — was done in the presence of employes of the road, or the police, or officials? — A. I do not know whether it was done in the presence of the em- ploy^. I think it was done in the presence of some of the employfe at times. Q. And were any steps taken by the authorities to secure the arrest of any of the parties who were engaged in that work ?— A. Yes, sir ; we made endeavors to arrest the parties, and did arrest one or two, and some we conld not find. It was difficult to identify the person who did it. Q. I think yon said that for eighteen days— that is, from March 6 to March 24— no trains were moved ? — ^A, With the exception of one freight train, that is my recol- lection. Q. Did the causes of the non-movement of trains exist in the city of Saint Loms or at other points on the lineSj or both ?— A. I think they existed at other points on the line, because the railroads were unable to find help to move the trains. We were al- ways prepared to furnish "them with whatever assistance was necessary or whatever protection was required to move the trains. Q. Did any of these causes, which for seventeen or eighteen days prevented the . movement of trains, exist within the city of Saint Louis f— A. I think not, sir ; and as an evidence of that I will state that when an effort was made to move a freight train on the 24th of March,, the necessary protection was granted to the railroad and their employes to move the train outside of the city limits, and m order to do that we did not have to engage one single extra policeman. Q The protection that was afforded was by the ordinary force?— A. Yes, sir. And during these eighteen days had the railroad company called upon yon to protect their property from injury at the hands of others?— A. The railroad companies on the 23d of March infbrmed the police authorities that they contemplated moving a train on that day. One sergeant and fourteen men were sent to the yard to protect that train out of the city limits. While the switching was being done and the tiain made up some cars were uncoupled and one or two derailed. The superintendent re- marked to the sergeant of police that he did not have enough men. The sergeant ot police replied that he could have an additional detail o^^en twenty-five, or ahundxed men within ton or fifteen minutes. The railroad supermtendent told him that it wouitt 106 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. not be necessary ; that he would not attempt to ran that train. That was on the 23d of March. On the 24th of March the railroad company notified ns that they contem- plated starting a freight train. I ordered the chief of police to have enongh men in the yard to protect that train out of the city limits, and if necessary to take the entire police force of the city to do it. The chief of police took about a hundred "men, I be- lieve, and did protect that train out of the city limits. He also protected one on the tbllowing day, the 25th of March, and from that time on there was no further inter- ruption. Q. From the 6th day of March up to the 23d had the railroad made any other call upon you for police protection f — A. None, sir, that we did not respond to. Q. Every call was responded to? — ^A. They called upon the chief of police for pro- tection ; he always had men at hand ; and if he had been unable to furnish the men I should have heard of it. Q. Then all the protection that was called for during all these days by the company was afforded ? — A. Yes, sir, Q. And you have ample laws, I presume, against disorder, breaking the peace, and the destruction of or injury to property 1 — A. Yes, sir ; we have. Q. And you as mayor have always been ready and willing and have used all the effprts in your power to enforce these laws? — A. Yes, sir; I have. Audi have en- deavored to prevent the breaking of the peace, and have also endeavored to preserve life and property. Of course the peace will be disturbed in quiet times by an occa- sional anray between individuals, but there has never been any distnrbaace of the peace or any congregation or assemblage of people since the beginning of the strike which I was not able to quell with the force at my command. Q. I am asking these questions to ascertain, if possible, why for eighteen days the transportation business of the public was interrupted, and to learn what steps were taken either by the parties whose business it was to carry on that transportation lOr the parties charged with the enforcement of the law for the protection of those parties in the carrying on of this business, and to have busiuess resumed?— A. Well, sir, the fact, of course, exists that ibreighteen days the commerce of this town was interfered with — that is, the commerce on the Southweertern system, the Missouri Pacific and Iron Mountain Bailroad ; as to the cause of that stoppage I am not prepared to say. Q. And mj question may go further and ask whether any of the responsibility for that suspension rested in the city of Saint Louis ? — A. I should say emphatically no. I said a few moments ago that all the protection which the railroads required was furnished them when they asked it, and at the time when they did run out the first freight train we furnished them the protection that was necessary. Q. Do yon know whether any effort was made after the city limits were reached to impede the progress of the train ? — A. I do not ; I have no personal knowledge of any kind on the matter, and have only official knowledge of the facts that I have stated. Q. The statement has been publicly made that an effort was made to impede the train, has il; not ?— A. Well, I do not know how far this first freight train that left Saint Louis went ; I believe the sheriff of Saint Louis County, which is the county adjoining the city, protected it through that county ; there was an interference re- ported by the papers at the town of Pacific, Mo. ; but that was promptly quelled. Q. How far is that from the city line ? — A. I have forgotten ; these gentlemen say 37 miles ; but my knowledge is only from newspapers ; I have no farther knowledge of the matter whatever. BEN JAMIN EISEMANj being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question. How long have you been engaged in business jn Saint Louis f — Answer. Since 1879. Q. What is the character of your business? — A. Wholesale dry goods business. Q. What is the name of your firm? — A. Eice, Stix & Co. Q. What was the amount of your business last year ? — A. Our business is in the neighborhood of $4,000,000 per annum. Q. How many people do you employ ?— A. I think we have one hundred and thirty odd on our pay-roll. Q. Was your business affected bjrthe strike in Saint Louis and East Saint Louis, and if so, to what extent ?— A. I think our business was affected in the strike here, to the amount of $25,00U or |30,000 in a direct way. Those are the damages that I reckon as the direct damages to our business. Q. And indirectly ?— A. Indirectly, I can't tell you ; it may be $100,000. Q. What were the prospects of business in your particular line— do you confine yourself to dry goods exclusively— dry goods and notions, I suppose ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What were the business prospects in your particular line before the strike took £lace?— A. I think the outlook for a spring trade was never better since I am in Saint rouis. Q. What is the aggregate amount of business done by.the merchants in your line, if LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 107 you have aoy approximate idea f — ^A. Yes, sir ; probably about $20,000,000, $2S,000,000, or $23,000,000. Q. Twenty-two or twenty-three million dollars a yeart — A. Yes, sir. Q. In the city of Saint Louis t — ^A. Yes, sir; in the wholesale way only. Q, Was business of other merchants in your line similarly affected f — A. From what I ]earn it was ; yes, sir. *Q. Where do you get your supplies from ? — A. We get our goods from all direo- tious, sir ; principally from the East. We import some goods, we get some goods from Southern mills, and some from Western nulls. We get them &om every direc- tion. ' Q. From all parts of the Union, and also from foreign countries 1 — ^A. Foreign coun- tries ; yes, sir. Q. Where is your principal trade t — 'A. Our trade goes to Missouri, Illinois, Kan- sas, Nebraska, Iowa, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Q. Now tell us, if you please, Mr. Eiseman, ho w you were affected by this suspension of traffic, how it affected you? — A. Well, in one way, that the railroads could not transport goods that we had sold — those roads that were blockaded against us — and, in the next, it kept a great many people &om coming to this market that otherwise would have come. Then, later on, when this East Saint Louis strike took place, we couldn't get the goods in that we needed to sell. Q. You were affected in obtaining your goods and also in dinposing of them J — A. Yes, of course; the effect of business — you have what you lose in business. YouwiU suffer in it for a year or two to come. When trade is diverted from a market, it will take a couple of years to get it back. Q. That is consequential?— A. Conseqnential ; yes, sir. Q. Was there anj material deterioration in the goods in transit ? — A. Yes, sir ; in a great many instances. Q. Do you know of any cases in which men were financially embarrassed by reason of the fact that they were unable to sell their goods bought on time ? — A. I don't know of any serious embarrassments that came to our notice. Q. Did the merchants and bankers protect one another here against embarrassments of that kind? — ^A. I think so; yes, sir. Q. It was a general understanding, I suppose, in consequence of the suspension of busiuess, that there would be a general carrying over ? — ^A. I suppose them that needed it got it. I don't know of any serious failures or embarrassments that have sprung out here from the effect of this. Q. You think, then, the average loss was about 25 per cent. You mean, of course, that the business that would have been done during that time of suspension ; or do you inclnde in that the subsequent market ? — A. I think the average damage was from 20 to 25 per cent. Q. The actual damage ? — A. The actual damage in the amount of sales. That don't mean in the amount of money lost; there are profits included in this, you know Q. That is, yon would have sold 25 per cent, more than you did ? — ^A. From 20 to 25 per cent. WILLIAM McMillan, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Grain: Question. Mr. McMillan, wiU you give your full name ?— Answer William McMillan. Q. How long have you been engaged in business in Saint Louiis ? — A. Since 1870. Q. What is the character of your Dusiness?— ^A. Freight-car works and foundry. Q. You mean furnishing them ?— A. Furnishing freight-cars of aU kinds. Q. Are you in business in your individual capacity, or are you connected with a corporation ? — A. I am connected with a corporation. Q. What is the name and style of it ?— A. Missouri Car and Foundrj- Company. Q. How many men does your corporation employ ?— A. Ordinarily about 1,000 men. Q. How many men does it employ now?— A. To-day rather a small force. Q. About how many T — A. About, perhaps, 250 all told. Q. Was your business (I mean by " your business " the business of your corpora- tion) affected in any way by the strike at Saint Louis and East Saint Louis ? If so, how?— A. It was very seriously affected; so much so, that we were obliged to shut down for about 18 days. We could get no switching Q By "shut down" you meant stop the works?— A. We had to close down our works for 18 days. That was the direct result of the strike. We could get no switch- ing done, either ont or in. And, as we are dependent entirely upon our switching facilities to do business, of course we were stopped. We could neither get our mate- rial or get at our cars. Q. Your men did not strike during that time ?— A. Not during that tune. We were obliged to lay them off. 108 lab'or teoubles in the south and west Q. You were compelled to discharge .them, of course ! — A. We laid them off for the time being. Q. Did you pay them for that time being ?---A. Those who needed their money ; not otherwise. , Q. That is not what I mean ; did you pay them for their time l^r. Buchanan. The time did not run on 1 A. Oh, no, sir. Q. Then they themselves were losers to the extent of 18 days' work, excluding Sun- day ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were the average wages which you paid your employ^ ! — ^A. I should think the average would be about $1.75. They ran from $1.25 to $3.50 a day. Q. And did yon discharge — or "lay off" I believe is the term you used— your men tempo^-arily during that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Your bookkeepers and other employes? — No, sir; nor the foremen. Q. Just the men? — A- The laborers and inechanics. Q. You spoke of your force being reduced now. What is the cause of that? — A We have had a strike ourselves. Mr. Crane. I will take the sense of the committee as to investigating that. Mr. Stewart. If it is the result of the other strike it is proper. Q. Was it a result of the strike? — A. Yes, sir; a direct result. Q. State all about it, please. — A. On the 21st of the month Q. Which month ?-rA. Themonthpf AprU, just past, we were waited upon by a com- mittee of three Knights of Labor, outside of our concern entirely, who made a de- mand on us that we should stop famishing repair material to the Gould system, and upon, our refusal to do that, informed us that if we refused to comply with their dec mand, they would order our men out on a strike. We did refuse decidedly. And the same night they held a meeting and ordered our men out — ordered them to strike next morning at 10 o'clock — and hearing of this through a reporter who had been present at the meeting down there, I went down at 9 o'clock in the morning and called our men together in one of the shops and told them of the demand that had been made upon us, and explained to them fully and carefully why. we couldn't grant it. And then I gave them till noon, at our expense, to consider the matter, in- fofiming them that I hoped they would all be at work at 1 o'clock when the bell rangi They were not at work at that time, biit decided to refuse to go to work until this request of theirs — or demand — had been complied with. Q. What was that demand ; was it only what you mentioned awhile ago ?T-Ye8 ; that we should stop furnishing repair material to the Missouri Pacific Kailroad. Q. Wasn't there something said about some other grievance ? — A. No, sir, nothing else. I asked the men especially, in order to ascertain whether this was one or many things, to tell me if there was any grievance or complaint of any kind, and they re- sponded through their spokesman that there was nothing; that that was the only-^ and absolutely the only — grievance they had. They asked me at the meeting if I would receive a committee of the employes. I said I would. They appointed a com^ mittee of seven, one from each department, to see me, and they came to my office and were there about half-past twelve the same day, and I had a full talk with them and explained fully the position we occupied towards the Gbuld system ; explained to them the importance of their trade to us ; that they were one of our principal ous- toiners; that we were under contract with the Missouri Pacific Kailwayto furnish this material ; that it would be impossible for us to break our contracts ; that, in ad- dition to that, if w.e antagonized the Missouri Pacific or the Gould system, they would very properly refuse to do any business with us ; and not only that, but that the other railroads w;onld naturally-consider themselves aggrieved by such treatmenl; of one of their numher, and our business would be ruined, if we took any suclt ppsition. In addition to that, I showed them clearlj that they would only injure theinselyes and us ; that the stoppage of these supplies to the road would not affect the railroad a particle ; that the end which they had in view of reaching the railroad, injuring the rail- road, would not be accomplished by the proposed operation ; that they would ir(jure themselves and injure us, but not injure the railroad, as the most of the repair ma- ^^^ which we furnished the road was very small and insignificant, not amounting to _|300-^this small material that they complained of that we had furnished for re- pairs—that it was utterly insignificant ; that they could get it from forty different concerns in other parts of the city and country, and that it would not affect the mat- ter in the least degree. The committee seamed to be entirely satisfied with my ex- planation, and to a man^ I think, were in favor of returning home. Q.That is, the committee of your own men?— A. The committee of seven of my own men ; that they were all in favor of returning to work. But they left me. I talked to them, perhaps an hour and a half, and listened to everything they had to say. They, however, were subjected to some other influence when they returned to the meeting that was held, and still determined to hold out and not to go to work unless I granted this demand. That was on Thursday. On Saturday they appointed LABOR TROUBLES IK THE SOUTH ASD WEST. 109 another committee of three to see me — ^three of the same parties, only representing three departments this time, instead of seven — and I tad an honr and a half with them on Saturday, and went over about the same ground. I explained to them how impossible it was that I should grant their request, and then informed them that I thought I had given them ample time to consider the matter. I did not want to con- sider them as being out of employment, but would prefer that they would all return to work Monday morning ; that I would make no discrimination if they would do so : that they might all return to work Monday morning without exception, but I would put a notice up on our building on that date that we would resume work on Monday ' morning, whether we had twenty or four hundred men, and if they were not on hand that they must take the consequences ; that their places would be filled as soon as we could get the men. They held a meetiog on Sunday at 10 o'clock. They informed me of this, and wanted me to go and speak to the men. I declined to do that. I had said all I had to say to them and didn't wish to repeat it. At their Sunday meeting, I understand they decided to still hold out, and on Monday morning we started with about 45 men and we have been running ever since, with a gradual accretion to our force until to-day we are probably running with 125 to 140. Q. Did you get your extra men from the ranks of your former employes f — A. I should say hall' of the men with us now were with us before; they were not Knights of Labor, and have dropped in gradually. Q. Did you discriminate in your employment of men against members of the organ- ization known as the Knights of Labor?— A. No, sir; we havehad no application ftom them. They are standing out, and it is through the influence and action of theii- committee that our men are out, and the members of the Knights of Labor organi- zation have not come back. But our men who are not Knights of Labor have grad- ually returned, although not all of them, by any means, yet. Q. K those men who are Knights of Labor that are out on a strike would request you to employ them would you do it t — A. "We wUl ask no questions of them at all, with regard to whether they are Knights of Labor or not, excepting that we will not receive back into our employment the men who have been leaders in this movement, whether they are Knights of Labor or anybody else. We do not propose to give em- ployment to that kind of men. Q. I understand, however, from your former testimony, that the influence was prin- cipally from the outside of your employes f — A. The first demand made on us was by three outsiders — entirely. Q. No, but when you spoke of. your men they seemed nearly to a man, you said, to be in favor of advising the men to go back to work, but were put under some outside uflnence ? — ^A. When outside of my influence, they went down to their meeting, and when they had their meeting they decided to stand out. Of course I don't know wh at influence they were subjected to there, of course. I might influence three or seven men on that committee so that I would feel they were, right Q. I thought you meant outside influence ! — ^A. I don't know what influence was brought to bear on them there, but judging from the papers I should say it was by parties haranguing them and representing that they were wrongfully treated, and so on. Q. Ton stated that that was the sole cause of that strike — your refusal to go on and comply with the contract which, really, did not involve more than $200 ? — ^A. That is all. Of course it might have been only, the beginning of their demands, because we were expecting to go right on and repair cars for the Missouri Pacific, and we were under contract to do it ; and we were at that time arranging to have several cars put in for repairs and they might have struck again on that work ; but their demand was in regard to this small material of not over |200. Q. Has the result been damaging to you f— A. Oh, it has been a very serious dam- age to us of course. ^r,- , j. i, Q. In what way ?— A. Well, our business has been paralyzed. We have not been able to touch a new car, of course, since the strike tooTi place. Q. Have you been sued on any contracts ? — A. No, sir. Q. Your damage, then, is in the loss ot^ A. The loss of business. Q. Have you any idea, from your former business, of what that would amount to°— A. Well, I should say that the strike damage might be, perhaps, p0,000 or $15,000. Of course our expenses and everything go on just the same as thongh we were work- ing a large force. _ ■,-, ^^r „ Q. (By Mr. Stewaet. ) Except your pay-rolls ?— A. Except our pay-rolls. Of course we cannot work 125 men to an advantage in our concern. It would be a great deal cheaper to stop work entirely, but we do not intend to do that. . • »t Q. HaTe you had any communication with these men since that time T— A. JNo, sir. q! They have made no proposition to yon since? — ^A. No, sir. O. Have you made any to them f— A. No, sir. , , ,, , , * Q. I understand you to say that you would be wiUing to tate them back, except 110 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. those who were leaders ?— A. Except those that we know have heen instrumental in getting up and keeping up the strike. Q. Why disorimiuate 9,g;ain8t them?— A. Because we should be put tmg them ma position to do the same thing again on any trivial excuse. Q. Couldn't you make an arrangement whereby they would bind themselves not to do that, in the character of arbitration ?— A. The demand they made on us was so utterly without reason, and was so explained to them before they took the step, that there is no excuse for it. Q. That may be, and yet would it not be better for you as well as for the men that you should come to some amicable agreement provided they would rescind their propo- sition ?— A. Tou understand that from this time pn we simply could only treat with these men as individuals, not as employes, because they are not our employes. Our employes now amount to a hundred and twenty odd men. Q. You would' not stand on any ceremony which might bring about an amicable adjustment, which would redound to your advantages as well as that of the men t — A. I should be very slow to treat with them at all as a body now, after what has taken place. 1 might do it, but I should want some very good reason for it. Q. Would that be business ?— A. Yes, sir; I think so. Mr. Stewart. That is hardly a question for this committee to consider. The Witness. I would explain that we consider that each man must stand on his own footing in seeking employment. We might or might not want all those men. We have employed fifty or sixty new men, and we certainly do not waiit other men to fill those places, so we could not take them all, we would only have use for those that would fill the unoccupied places. Q. What I want to arrive at is this : would yon exact any pledge or promise from these men if they were to come back, individually or otherwis^ that they would not seek to enforce oa your part the observance of such a contract ? — A. No, sir ; I would not ask them anything about it. I explained to them that I could npt do this thing, and why I could not, but I would not exact any pledge or propose any, or ask their opinion on the subject. If a man came for work, if he was not an agitator, I would take him without question. I would not ask what he was^ or what part he had takenj I would consider that by coming back he expressed his regret at having quit. Q. (By the Chairman.) As I understand it, you say these men were a committee of Knights of Labor who ordered them to quit your works ? — A. Yes, sir ; a committee of Knights of Labor. The only notice we had df the strike was from a committee of the Knights of Labor, outside of our own employ"68 entirely, who made this demand on US, with the threat if we refused to comply they would order our men out. Q. Yes, and they did order them out ? — Yes, sir ; they did order them out. Q. I suppose you don't know who the men on that committee were? — A. I'have their names. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Please give them, and the names of that committee; also of the seven men and of the three men? — A. George Co well, H. H. Palmer, and J. Keating. Q. (By the Chairman.) Can you give us the names of the committee of seven and committeeof three, so as we can get it on our minutes? — A. Yes, sir; the chairman was Cyrus Bundy ; the members of the committee were D. Cambell, F. Hanger, A. Holeson, W. Kaiser, Nick Wilkman and A. W. Finch. The three that came the second lime had the same chairman, Bnndy, and Cambell and Kaiser. Q. Did you understand from the committee of seven or the committee of three that they were Knights of Labor f — A. No, sir ; the committee of seven were partially Knights of Labor and partially not. ■ One represented each department. That was the principle upon which they were appointed. The seven men represented the seven departments of the works. Q. Do you understand that they were Knights of Labor? — A. I understand some of thein were Knights of Labor and some of them were not. Q. But those who were not obeyed the order to go out? — A. Yes, sir; the others, through sympathy, went with the rest. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You say the seven men expressed themselves as satisfied with your reasoning and thought they had better stay ? — A. Yes, sir ; and one of them was so decided in the matter that he got up in committee and made a speech on my side. Q. Did any outsiders harangue these men after they had assembled? — ^A. I under- stand they did. I of course don't know anything about that except what the papers say. There were three or four different speakers represented in the public papers as having addressed the men in an, incendiary manner." Q. Who were they ? — A. One man by the name of Barry. Q. Is he a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes; he is one of the executive committee, I think, from abroad; I think from the Saginaw region; I think the same man who was at the head of the Saginaw troubles last year. Q. Who else ? — A. I think that Bailey was handling the matter, because these men LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Ill toW us that they were advising with Mr. Bailey, who was aoother memher of the ex- ecutive committee. Q. Mr. Bailey of the executive 'committee? — A. Yes, Mr. Bailey of the executive committee and a man by the name of Rickford were quoted as the prominent ones in making speeches, and another man by the name of Williams. Q. Thej" were Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) And yon say that these men having no grievance struck at the dictation of the Knights of Labor from some other State t — A. Well, these six meu that came to us I think were connected with the Gould system; that is my im- pression. Q. They struck at the dictation of parties who had no relation to your business? — A. No relation whatever to my business. It was distinctly stated to us that it was because we were doing work that they claimed ought to be done in the shops of the Gould system. That was the direct point they made, that we were furnishing this small repair work which really ought to be prepared in the shops of the Missouri Pacific system, and in that we were aiding the Gould system to defeat their strike. That was the point they were making. Q. Are these men that struck and left your employment out of employment t — ^A. I thiuk they are all out of employment. They are holding meetings from day to day, waiting for me to yield. Q. Ever since that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long ago was this ? — A. This was last week. They struck Thursday of last week and we resumed Monday, and this is now Saturday; . Q. Do you know whether they are receiving any aid for their support ? — A. Yes, sir ; they are taking up subscriptions in that part of the town that I know of. I have seen lists of the subscription to the fund. Boarding-house keepers and so on around the neighborhood. They are also engaged very largely in standing around the cor- ners and preventing new men from coming into our place, by persuading and intimi- dating them. All the new applicants have to run this gauntlet in coming in here. Many of them are taken away after working a day or two for us by intimidation. Q. (By Mr. Pakker. ) What do they call these men who came back to work ? — A. " Scabs." Q. (By Mr. Crain.) The men who return to work? — A. Yes, sir; the ones whore- turn to work are called scabs, and threatened at every turn by these men out on the strike will all sorts of vengeance if they continue to work. They even visit them at their homes and threaten them to their wives. One of our men who was going away to-day had his box of tools on his back, and my superintendent asked him what was the matter, and he said they had seen him down at his house and had threatened his life, and his wife was frightened and didn't like it. He was a good workman, and the foreman assured him that he would go home with him at night and walk down with Viim in the morning. Q. (By Mr. Parebr.) That was the "moral suasion" they used, was it? — A. That was their "moral suasion." Q. As I understand it, the three men outside, with whom you have never had- any relations, who dictated to you what your course should be, and who were upon this committee, did it upon the ground that your business would be broken up unless you co-operated with them in compelling the Gould system managers to accede to their demands there? — A. Yes, sir; that was it exactly; and that in the face of a perfectly plain argument on our side that it would njt afifect the railroad at all ; but they car- ried it out in the face of it. Q. You spoke of $15,000 loss ; did you intend to include in that the damage accruing to you by the strike? — ^A. Well, our damage would be irreparable if the companies with which we have contracts were to cancel the contracts. Our only hope and safety is in the good nature and consideration of the railroad companies. Q. Then the necessary damage that must come to you is a great deal above that amount? — ^A. It depends entirely upon the course of the railroads to us. If they do not cancel the contracts the damage, of course, would be comparatively slight. If they were to cancel them it would be almost ruinous. Q. And as to the deterioration of your business, and delay and trouble in getting new men A. That, of course, will take' us months to correct. Q. And those are all great elements of damage?— A. Of course. I would explain to the committee that, for instance, we have five or six hundred oars to build for the Missouri Pacific stiU under contract. We also have four hundred cars to build for the Chicago and Alton. Those cars ought all to be delivered by this time ; but owing to the strike on the Gould system and the impossibility of our doing work at that time, and other causes of the same kind in connection with them, we have been unable to fill our contracts at the time we agreed to. Now, of course, the delay is going to be still greater, and we are dependent upon the consideration of the railroads as to whether they wiU give us the necessary time to complete those contracts. We do 112 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. not doubt tliat they will, because they will naturally take into consideration the circumstances of the case. Q. (By Mr. Grain.) Ton spoke a while ago, when I was examining you in chief, about not employing the leaders. Do you include those seven men on the commit- tee? — A. Oh, no, sir; some of them were on our side and were opposed to the strike in the beginning. As I told you, one of the seven got up in my ofSce and told the other men of the committee that my position was absolutely correct, and that I couldn't do the thing they asked me to, and urged the committee then and there to decide to report in favor of going back to work. Q. (By Mr. Parker. ) Is it your position that you would ' employ as individuals those that came to you, those that you felt you eould trust? — ^A. Yes, sir; thatis-it exactly. Q. Amongst the leaders, you include, then, the men who have made speeches ? — A. Weil, there were three or four men out of 350 that I would absolutely decline to take back into the works. Q. What was their conduct which makes you determine upon that course of action ? — A. Well, for instance, this leading gang of men in the corners of the streets to prevent people from coming to our works ; taking an active part in preventing our running our works when they have left us. We think that is a direct attack upon our business and deserves the punishment of the law ; and we certainly do not want to take such men into our employment to foment further trouble. By Mr. Stewart:, Q. It is not necessary to argue that case. , Witness. As I was saying, the first thing we will do will be to repair cars of this railway company. Mr. Chain. I want to ascertain whether the mere fact of men coming and present- ing their grievances, and afterwards taking an active part in the strike would pre- vent their being taken back. Mr. Stewart. They have not presented any grievance in this case. Mr. Grain. I understand' that he includes among those he calls leaders the original seven and three men who came to him on the committees. I want to know now who he calls the leaders. The Witness. I think lean show you my feeling in regard to that. After I had met the men in person at the wor^ks, all of them, I then met seven and talked to them and urged them to go back to work. I then met the three men and talked to them, and urged aiem to go back to work, and still told them that their places were all open to them without any exception, and would be en Monday morning. Q. I understand you to mean that you pnly excluded those who have been leaders of gangs of men who have been preventing new men from taking employment? — A. Men that I would consider incendiaries. Men who, if I took them into our works, I would consider likely to provoke another division between us at the first opportunity. Those men I would not want there. Mr. BuCHNAN. This material you spoke of, what was the character of that ma- terial? — ^A. It was small material for repairing freight cars, for oars that were dam- aged to a very small extent and not worth sending to the shop to be repaired. Some little repairs required in them, such as a few bolts and nuts, or perhaps a transom or Q. Or repairing engines ? — A. No, sir; just for repairing freight cars. Q. You spoke about your being dependent npon the course of the railroads as to whether these contracts would be forfeiited or not. Are any of the ofiScials of the road prominently connected with your company ? — ^A, No, sir ; not at all. Q. I didn't know what the fact was. I am a perfect stranger to the members of your firm, and did not know but the stockholders in your concern might he prominent railroad ofBcials. — A. No, sir. GIBARD B. ALLEN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Odthwaitb). State your name, business, and occupation. — An- swer. Girard B. Allen ; nearly 73 years of age. The Chairman. And well preserved. — A. Yes ; well preserved, you may put that down emphatically. Q. How long have you resided in the city of Saint Louis ?— A. Nearly fifty years. Q. You may state what business you have been engaged in recently, and what po- sitions of trust you have held or now hold ? — A. I have been a manufacturer. Q. You are president of the Fulton Iron Works, are you not ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And also of the Missouri Republican Publishing Company? — ^A. Temporarily. Q. Any other companies? — A. I am associated largely in steamboat interests — An- chor Line. ■ Q. Please give us any other. — ^A. My interests are somewhat maltlfarious. I can- not grasp them all at once. Those are the leading points, however. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 113' Q. Yon have other interests in the industries of the city of Saint Lonis, then, I nnderstand you 1 — A. I think I have, indirectly. I cannot call them all to mind at once. Q. You may give a statement of the effects of the strike as they have come under your observation. — A. The recent railroad strike f Q. Yes. — A. I think it was a very unfortunate thing to our business at large. Very detrimental to the interests of the city and the community at large. Q. You may tell in what directions you have observed that it was injurious to th» business of the community and the interests of the city. — A. Chiefly from general observation and infdrmatjion. Q. Of course you here in the city would have no difBoulty in observing that f — ^A, None whatever ; ample means of doing so. Q. Well, now, will jrou be so kind as to detail some of the ways in which that effect has manifested itself t — A. The difficulty of merchants shipping their goods and reoeivingtheir goods. I suppose that will embrace the potential features of it. Q. Has it affected the iron business directly T — A. I think it has affected directly all branches of trade, and the iron interest, being a very large and important one, necessarily suffered very materially. Q. Can you give us any estimates in figures of the damages that have been done T — A. I am unable to do that, sir. Q. Can you give us any approximate estimate as to the damage? — A. No, sir; I conldD't. I have made no attempt to make calculations in that line, and do not wish to do any guess-work. Q. I doi?t know whether you had any personal information as to the origin of the strike — ^the cause of it f — A. None but what I gathered from general information and from newspapers. Q. This steamboat line which you speak of— is it a Mississippi River line? — ^A. Th» Anchor Line runs between here and New Orleans. Q. Has it been observed that this strike has affected, injuriously or otherwise, th» welfare of that line t — ^A. It has been, just to the extent that the strike threw a damp- ness on busineos generally, and necessarilv that spread out into the interior, and merchants at remote points would not make their purchases here on account of th« uncertainty of receiving them. Q. Do you know of any instances in which large building enterprises have been affected by the strike t — A. I think it has affected the buildmg interests very mate- rially. I had comtemplated building, myself, on a somewhat large scale, and aban- doned it ; and I suppose a great many others were influenced by the same motives. Q. You abandoned it because of the strike I — A. The uncertain condition of the labor market. Q. And of course the uncertain price of materials resulting from thatt — A. That was a feature of it, sir. Q. Well, if you have any further facts to state, or information to give us, Mr. Allen, we will be glad to receive it. — A. I should be pleased to do so, sir, out nothing strikes me at this time. It might be drawn out by questions, but nothing occurs t« my mind now. Q. (By the Chairman. ) I am very curious to know what the population of this city was 50 years ago, when you came here t — ^A. About 10,000 people. Q. And you lived to see it grow to 450,000 f — A. I don't know about the four hun- dred and fifty, sir. I suppose it is there or thereabouts. Q. That progress was made by the industry and enterprise of the people who lived here, nntU it has become — and I ask you if it has not become— a great distributing point for the Southwest ? — ^A. It has, sir ; a very important distributing point. Q. Well, then, is not an interruption of that prosperity and enterprise a terrible blow to itt — A. A very severe one, sir. Q. Of course you have nothing to do, Mr. Allen, or know nothing about the reasoa for the disputes between the railroad companies and the employes, but I jnst ask yon this question, whether this strike has not injured very much the future prosperity of this city f — ^A. There is no question about the injury it has done. Q. Of course you know nothing about the quarrels of the railroad companies and the persons they employed T — ^A. No, sir ; except to form an opinion from general ob- servation and intelligence on the subject. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) The question the chairman asked you suggests one other question to me. You spoke about the growth and prosperity of this city. Has it not been your observation that when labor is fairly remunerated, and is therefore oon- !}ented, that business of all kinds is prosperous T — A. Beyond all doubt, sir. Maj. C. C. EAINWATEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : '-.:■ Question (by Mr. Grain). What is your full name T— Answer. Charles 0. Rakt- water. Q. What is your business T — A. Wholesale merchant. 114 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are yon not engajred in the cattle businea, also f — A. Yes, sir, I am ip,t6rested in 4he cattle busineBS. Q. How long ha 9-e you been in business in Saint Louis? — A. About twenty ye.tT8. "Q. Mr. Rainwater, what character of business are you engaged in in Saint Louis I— A. Wholesale. Q. But what kind of a wholesale business f — A. Wholesale hat business; hats, caps, gloves, &c. Q. Has your particular business and business in that line done in Saint Louis been affected by the strike ? If so, in what way and to what extent, both as to yourself and as to the general business ? — A. Well, our business has been affected in common with other classes of business on account of the inability to ship goods during the time the embargo upon freight transportation was effective — during the month of March — a large portion of the month of March. Q, What is the extent of the wholesale hat business of Saint Louis, approximately f — A. I presume between two and three millions of dollars worth are sold annually in that line. Q. What per jentage of loss, if any, has your line of business sustained by reason of the strike ? — A. I don't think I am prepare J to answer that question definitely. Q. Can you approximately f — A. We, felt a very serious loss of business. On ac- count of our inability to ship, a great many orders were countermanded ; a great many •customers went to other markets ; many bills we had sold, ready for shipment, on account of our inability to ship, were finally countermanded, and we had to put them back into stock. Those were the immediate losses we sustained, which were only, in jny judgment, a proportion of the losses of the country on account of the strike. Q. Cannot you approximate in percentage what your loss was during the period of the strike, 3 weeks, or whatever the time was ? — A. Well, I conld state as to the per- "centage of orders countermanded, but that does not cover the question, and wonld not be an answer to the question. It is immaterial to us whether an order was coun- tennanded, or whether a customer started to come here and couldn't get here to buy g«ods. One case would be because the customer could not get here; the other case, it would be because the order was countermanded. •Q. Well, I suppose we have got enough on that subject. Let us pass to the cattle business. How has the cattle trade been affected, if it has been affected at allf — ^A. :It has undoubtedly, Q. How — to what extent? — A. Shippers couldn't ship their stock here during March "to put them upon the market over this particular system of road which was involved in the strike. Q. Do you mean shippers from any particulai; State ? — A. Well, the country that is , tributary to this system of road. And a very large portion of the cattle coming to this imarket comes from the Southwest, which is supplied by the Gould system of roads. Q. Which States? — A. Arkansas, Texas, Indian Territory, Southern Kansas, New Mexico, and a portion of Missouri. Q. Did it affect the price of the meat on the market here, for consumption ? — A. I couldn't answer that question definitely. I think ildid. I am under the impression it did, but don't know positively. Of course the market fluctuates, and it is attributed by most people to that cause ; the supply was not as great as usaal ; of course there was more or less of an advance on account of the scarcity of the supply in the market. Q. Was there an entire stoppage of the transportation of cattle i — :A. For awhile, yes, sir ; that is my information. Q. I suppose you can't form any idea of the amount of damages done in that direc- tion ? — A. I cannot answer. Q. It also affected the producers in outside States ? — A. It affected them more seri- ously, perhaps, than it did the people here. They couldn't ship their stock and pro- -duce, Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) From what points are the cattle brought he^e?— A. I suppose mostly Southern Kansas, Arkansas, and Texas. ^. (By Mr. Buchanan.) And you ship them to where? — A. They are shipped to (Eastern points. I speak of cattle coming here mostly for home consumption. Of •course, a large portion of the receipts here are butchered for home consumption, and ,go into our packing factories and are prepared for the market in that way. . ■Q. (By Mr. Parker.) St. Louis is a very important horse market, is it not?— A. Yes, very ; and mules ; mules especially. Q. Isn't it the greatest mule market in the world ?— A. It is so regarded. Q. They are distributed to all points In the United States where they are used, and also to the islands and abroad? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What has been the effect here upon that business ?— A. Well, it must have been itlie same as upon all other kinds of business. The inability to get the stock here, as :a matter of course, would seriously affect it. ■Q. Is the source of supply of those animals largely from the system that has been feet A mighty mean place for a wreck. And other acts of violence had been coni- mitted, and°this mob that had been there two days before, some of these parties withs whom 1 was conversing, some of the members of this committee, I knew bad been en- gaged in it. I had had that information from other parties. I asked them who is 120 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. lesponsible for these things f you as a committee controlling it ? and they denied it. Yet I knew that the very men who talked .to me, some of them, were engaged in that ■business. I so stated to them. I said, " You deny as a committee any responsibility, and yet as individuals you are engaged in it." That was the suggestion that was made, and that was what they seemed to want to impress on my mind, that their •rganization was not responsible, but they were simply responsible as individuals fei doing it. I said, " You cannot maintain that position. You, in fact, are the leaders ; this committee here are leading this business. This is a settled scheme by which you propose to stop this traffic. You say here in the committee-room— this is the key to the situation, and this situation must be unlocked. Yon cannot maintain it. It is violence ; it is against the proclamation of the governor of the State ; it is against the decision of the courts of the State, and it is a position that yon cannot maintain any longer. It is impossible to maintain it and preserve the peace." Then I said to them, " I don't believe you want to put yourselves in the situation ©f outlaws, and I want to see what your disposition is, and the railroad company will start its trains at 2 o'clock this afternoon, and they will be started without anybody to guard them. There will be no force on them at all — simply the force that usually mn the trains — the engineer and fireman, and the usual force that run the trains will "be there, and nobody else, and I don't want you to interfere with these trains, because if you do you place yourselves right square in the teeth of the law of this State, and yon become outlaws ; you have no right to do it." This gentleman, Buchanan, then took the position, and another man by the name of Hollis, who was present at that time, that they were entitled to the rights of belligerents ; that it was justifiable revolution. I told them it was rebellion against the State authority, and they could mot maintain such a position ; but he said it was revolution, and proceeded to argue the question with me, and Mr. Buchanan went so far as to bring his dictionary to show ine the distinction between revolution and rebellion, and argued it at some length; and I listened, and said, " It is useless to argue it ; 1 can't argue that question with you." And I said, "I hope that there will be no interference with these trains. The last thing on earth we want is trouble. We want to go along peaceably and quietly, and this is the second visit I have made to try to do so, and I hope we can start these tf ains out without any more interference. If we do, there will be no further trouble lere, but you cannot maintain the other position." At 2 o'clock we started the train — that is, the officials did. I had nothing to do ■with if except they said they would start the train at that hour. We agreed upon that hour. And it seems that Mr. Golden had been directed by the sheriff to place a deputy sheriff upon each train as it started, but of which arrangement I was not aware. I told him tc simply put his usual force on that train, and he did not under- stand, because the sherifl had given him other directions. Hence the first train car- ried a deputy sheriff. That train was made up in the yard, and it took perhaps an iLOur to make it up, and there was no interference with it whatever, and that train went out with the deputy sheriff on it, and I had said that nobody would be on ex- eept the force that usually run trains." While that train was being made up and going out there was a general meeting of the assembly, I think they call it, composed of the whole body of strikers, that lasted while that train was going out. Of course, as soon as that train went out they went to making up another. That other train was made up. They simply ran the engine down, and while the engine was being run down the assembly came down — that is, they came outof tbeir meeting at their hall, which was close to the railroad, and came light across the crossing north of thedepot and banked it up there with perhaps some ' 260 men, and when the second train came down they killed it. It was allowed to pass into the center of the crowd and then they swarmed on it like bees and killed it by opening the mud- valve and letting the steam and water out that way and by running into the cab of the engineer and breaking what they call the water-glass on the en- gine and that drove the steam and water right back into the face of the engineer, who lad to get out of the way or be 'scalded. And in doing that they broke the window- lights out ol that engine. In that way they killed that engine and ran it back. As soon as the crowd_ gathered around I saw some disturbance close to the engine, and I saw that the engineer was about to get into a confiict with some of the strikers, and I ran into the crowd and made my way to where they were, and they separated theU and I got onto the engine and it ran back with me standing on it. My idea was to get onto the_ engine and talk to the people from right there, but I couldn't beat that steam talking. [Laughter. ] And they ran that engine back, and I came down and got onto an engine that was killed before, that was standing in the yard, and the peo- ple assembled about me, perhaps over a thousand of them, curiosity hunters, strikers, and so forth, and I talked to them there and told them that I had appealed to their committee not to kill that engine, not to commit that act of violence ; that one engine had been permitted to go, and this one had been killed, and it was an act of absolute revolution against the constituted authorities of the State, and I didn't believe that the people wanted to take that position ; and I said to them, '' I will take an appeal from LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 121 this committee to yon. I don't believe you as citizens ■want to do this thing. I don't believe you realize what you axe doing ; " and I might have talked with them and ar- gued with them some fifteen or twenty minutes on the subject, and warned them not to repeat the offense, and I said to them, ' ' I want to give you another opportunity. I don't like to rest the case here, and the railroad company will start another train down here, and I want you to let that one go. Let us stop this lawlessness right here, and not let it go any farther." ^ I got down off the engine, and in a tew minutes this man Hollis came to me from the committee and said to me, ' ' You violated your agreement with us." I said, ' ' What was thatt" Why, he says, "There was a deputy sheriff on that train." I didn't know it up to that hour. I had not been aware of that fact. I said I didn't know there was any depaty sheriff on the train ; but he gave his name. Mason, I think, was bis name — a man who seemed to be peculiarly offensive to them. And he said I had violated my faith with them in that particular. I told them I was not aware of the man being on the train, and if he was it was a misunderstanding. I did not so in- tend it, and I said he woiild not be on the next one. "You will not have that excuse the next time." But it demonstrated to me that the committee had been engaged in the act of killing that engine there, and he was making that point with me ; so I said to him, " He will not be on the next one, and I will see that that arrangement is car- ried out." I did not intend that he should be on this one, but I told him it did not make any difference, as a matter of fact, as a matter of law, whether he is or not ; but he made that a reason or excuse for killing that engine. Then he made this>proposition to me (I had said that the other train would follow right down): He said, "If you and Mr. Golden will come into our committee-room and have a consultation with us, and you will agree not to let any trains be made up or runout until after we get through, we will make no fuMher interference." I said, " I am willing to go up and see you. I will see what Mr. Golden said about it." So I went up and saw Mr. Golden in the upper end of the yard, and presented the sub- ject to him, and said to him : " My idea is to give these men all the chance in the world to do right, and I believe it would be a good thing if no trains were started out from here until to-morrow morning ; to give them a night to think it over in. They have had a pretty good tussle, and I believe they wul think well over it, and per- haps not give us any further trouble. Suppose we give them until nine o'clock to- morrow morning to think the situation over, and see what comes of it V He said, 80 far as he was concerned, that would be acceptable to him. I said, " They want you and me to go and see them," and I asked if he would go, and he said certainly he would go. And while we were standing there another member of the committee came up — I think Woods — a pock-marked fellow, whom I recognized as a man I had met in the committee-room, who told us they wanted to see us down there on the same matter we were talking over at that time. He gaid to me, " The fact about that is, that this man Mason, this deputy sheriff, has threatened to kill some of our men ; " and he says the boys came down there with a determination that if that fellow made a break they would tear him to pieces. And he developed their spirit by that suggestion. I didn't make him any answer. He went on down, and when we got down I stated to Mr. Hollis just what we had concluded, and that if he would meet there at 7.30 o'clock that evening we would wait until nine o'clock before any trains should go out. So that ended the affair for that evening, except that in a minute or two Mr. Buchanan, another member of the committee, came up on this same engine that I had been talk- ing from, and cried out to these men, " Disperse 1 disperse! Go to your hall! The adjutant-general of the State and the superintendent of the road have agreed that no trains shall go out until to-morrow morning at nine o'clock, and agreed to meet us in our committee-room." And I made .a similar statement, and the men dispersed, in obedience to his request, and went to their homes. That evening at half-past seven Mr. Golden and myself went up into their commit- tee-room. There were some armed guards at the round-house, and the request they made was that these guards be taken away from thie round-house. He complained from the fact that the armed guards were there, and said that some of their wives had been stopped by these armed men, who were not men of good character, and so forth, and wanted them removed. Mr. Golden declined to remove them. He said he thought that the company ought to be able to determine whether they needed guards or not, and did not think they were required to consult them about the matter, and declined to remove the guards. Then they said they had nothing further to say ex- cept that they had no further object in calling us than to make that request and to get time to consider these matters a little over night. Mr. Golden then said to them, "' We have got a wreck down here along on the side of this track, and the first train we are going to take out to-morrow morning is going down to that wreck. We nnder- took to take a train down there at 7 o'clock this morning, and that engme was kiUed and disabled, badly disabled, and we will take that train down in the morning O fBv Mr Stewart.) The traib they were going to send down in the morning was whit is called a wreck train, was it!-A. Yes ; " and we want to know whether you 122 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. tave any objections to tKat train going down or not.'' They put their hesds together a little bit and decided that they had not. He reasoned with them about it, and said, " It is as important for you people that that train be taken up as it is for us. It is a bad thing along the traek anyhow, and you fellows are going to be blamed for it whether you do it or not. People will say that is what the strikers have done." So they concluded they had no objection to that ; they had no objection to that train going out. I said, "I have nothing to say about this matter of guards. All I am trying to do is to test the question whether you want to obey the law or not," and I said, "Can't you let this train go to-morrow, and all other trains, without any further trouble ?" That ended our interview. They made no statement as to what they would do, except as to this wreck train, and the next morning the wreck train went out without trouble, probably about 10.30 o'clock. Before that, however, another thing occurred. I was in Mr. Golden's office, and Mr. HoUis, of the committee, who, I think, belongs to the general committee of this Assembly 101, some office in the general organization or a member of the committee down there, came down to the superintendent's office, together with another member of the committee, named Mr. Quarrels, and Mr. HoUis and he requested a second time that those guards be taken off up there, and we had a little talk with them about that again. They made the request to me, and I told them 1 hadn't anything to do with the question of guarding the company's property. That if they wanted to place guards there I supposed they had that right, and that I would not interfere in any way with it. He then talked with Mr. Gtolden about it and another gentleman pres- ent. Mr. Golden pointed him to the fact that a train had been Wrecked down there ; a great many of these engines had been killed ; a great deal of damage had been done to property. He Said, "It don't make any diffeience whether you are doing this or somebody else ; it demonstrated the necessity of having guards there, and It don't make any difference. I have a right to determine the question of guards and will keep them there." He looked up at the clock, and says, " It is now after nine o'clock, and we have kept our word with you," and Mr. Hollis says, "We will keep ours with you;" and when that wreck train went out it went out without any trouble. The next engine went out, and at the usual place they swarmed on that engine and killed it the second time. I telegraphed to the governor that all authority was set at defiance there and there was absolutely no disposition upon the part of those people to obey the law. My ex- perience with them had demonstrated that this committee was the committee that was controlling the whole matter and doing the whole work, as the controlling in- fluence ; that they would trample upon the authority of the State until force enough was brought there to compel obedience to authority, and he directed me to order such force as was necessary to compel obedience to the law, and I ordered out the first regi- ment and placed it there, and from the time it got there the law was obeyed. The company, the next dajr after the troops got there, started their trains, and they have been running their trains ever since. That is about the story as to my connection with it. I had no connection whatever with it here. I was not here at all, and don't know anything about It. Q. You may state, from all that you know and from all that you heard from the committee to which you have alluded, at the head of which was Mr. Buchanan, what you regard as the cause of the trouble.— A. Well, sir, I think that the cause of the trouble was as stated by this committee ; I think they were ordered to strike. There would have been no strike in Kansas. I am perfectly satisfied that no strike In Kan- sas would have occurred if it had not been ordered by the general committee. ,Q. What do you mean by the general committee ?— A. I mean the committee— I think Assembly 101 — ^that operates along this line here. I don't mean the national committee ; they did not order it ; there was an Assembly, 101, 93, and 17, perhaps, three assemblies, that operated in ordering this strike. If that order had not come from those higher authorities there never ^ould have been any local difficulty iii here. There was no cause for it as they stated to me. It never would have occurred. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Who was at the head of the committee?— A. I think Martin Irons^ wasn't it ? Ho has been the man to whom they have looked for their orders. Martin Irons was the man. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs.) The gentleman you spoke of as Mr. Buchanan, and as appear- ing to be at the head of the committee with which you had a conference, remarked, you say, that they had made up their minds that freight trains should not run if they could help it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You also said that Mr. Buchanan stated that the Knights of Labor and other organizations had nothing to do with this lawlessness ?— A, Yes, sir. Q. Now, did yoa understand the first statement that I have stated to mean that Mr. Buchanan had made up his mind that freight trains should not run ?— A. Well, I took from the two statements — the statements themselves appeared to be conflicting, and their position appeared to bo conflicting. They seemed to have determined that these trains should not rnn, and that was how they proposed to accomplish their purpose, LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 123 and yet they seemed to only take indiyidnal responsibility for it. That is what they desired to take. Q. In the first interview this committee took the positioo that they, as representa- tives of the order, were not responsible in any sense ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That the men only who were individually engaged in that offensive work would be responsible for it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. But subsequently you testified that Mr. Buchanan informed you that they had made up their minds that freight trains should not run if they could help it. Did you understand him as referring to himself and his associates t — A. I think he referred to his associates when he made that statement. I think it was the statement like some others that were made in unguarded moments, and from the fact that this committee would meet, and then they would meet the assembly, and then a certain line of con- duct would follow, from the fact that they would agree with us to certain things, and then those agreements would be carried out^from all those facts I came to the con- clusion, without any question in the world, thatthe committee, as a committee, was di- recting the whole matter. I made up my mind to that without any doubt, and that was the point that I was looking at, and was trying to determine whether or not to hold that committee responsible for what was done, or simply to hold individual men responsible, and I made up my mind that it was a conspiracy. And I may state, as a matter of fact, that four of those men there were tried for conspiracy and bound over at the last term of court, or before the justice of the peace down there. I made up my mind that the committee were directing the affair before I dispatohedfco the gov- ernor at all, and that they were trying at the same time to avoid that responsibility by charging it upon individuals. That was my conclusion. Q. We understand yon to testify that they took the position that so far as the or- ganization or lodges or assemblies were concerned they went no farther than to simply order the men to quit work t — A. That is what they said. . Q. And that there the responsibility stopped, so far as the organization was con- cerned ? — A. That is what they claimed. Q. Then you think, from all that you heard, that some power seemed to be given this committee without any further action from the lodges, so far as yon know, to act in the matter ? — A. So far as the outside was concerned, Q. That is, so far as you know on the outside, there appeared to be some vested power or force in the committee, who have, as such, control, without referring the matter back to the lodge f — A. Yes, sir ; they seemed to take that Tcsponsibility ; at least they had the directing of affairs there, and that from the outgrowth of it, so far as these acts of violence, such as the stoppage of trains and all that, was concerned, it seemed to be an arranged affair. It was done by arrangement, and that arrange- ment seemed to start first in the committee-room. Q. Did this committee of the order give you any reason or did they make Jtoy sug- gestion that indicated any other cause for the strike than the discharge of this man HaUf — ^A. No, sir; there was a good deal of general indignation expressed — feeling against Jay Gould. Jay Gould seemed to be the center of their indignation, and their general statements against the man were quite frequent and bitter. But the only complaint that they made outside of the Hall matter was this $1.50 a day for the la- borers, and it was stated in that connection that that was not one of the causes of the strike. It was a grievance Uiey had that they would like to have adjusted if it could De done. . . , Q. Did they mention any particular acts on the part of Mr. Gould that were injuri- ous to or against their interests ?— A. Nothing but his general grasping nature. Th& fact that he had acquired great wealth by improper means. Q. Did they tell you what means'— A. No, sir; only in a general way, and I made the statement to them at the time in the discussion of that question that if the matter could be confined entirely between the employes of the railroad company ana Mr. Jay Gould, and its effects did not go any further than as between them, the pub- lic would have very little to do with it. But that its effects could not be confined to them. That this freight down here in the yard belonged to somebody else. It be- longed to the people mthe western portion of the State and in the Southwest, who were suffering for it, and it was those people I was appearing for and not Jay Gould. I hadn't anythingto do with Mr. Jay Gould, but I wanted the people to get their freigbt^ and wanted this embargo raised so that traffic could go ahead. That was the point that was discussed. , ,, ^ ^- „ j „„ O How many engines were killed ?— A. We countpd them up at one time and my recollection is there were thirteen at that time, and I think there were two engines killed after that. , ^, . <> » »,t„+ „ +ntoi Q This killing did not amount to a total destruction of the engine J— A. N ot a total detraction of the engine at all. I suppose the engine that was killed the morning Wore I got there wsS killed by having one of the ends of the steam head broken out by a piece of iron being thrown in while the engine was in motion, and tJf motion of the engine simply tore that out and bursted it so that it would cost probably $250 t» 124 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. repair the engine. Some such killing as that was done in some instances, but in most i);istan<5es it was simply letting off the steam and putting out the fire so that the en- gine was hauled back disabled for the time being, but not permanently disabled. But where some malicious person would throw a nut or something into the parts of the engine it would cripple it then, in addition to killing it until it was repaired. The parts of the engines that were taken away were afterwards found secreted up in different parts of the building and were restored to the engines, and they were put into working order with very little expense. Q. (By the Chairman.) Is it the law in Kansas that the locality where acts of vio- lence resulting in damage to property occurs can be compelled to pay the damages -done by a mob ; is there such a law here ? — A. I think so. I believe that is what Atchison concluded. I saw some averments to that effect. Q. You have a statute of that kind t — ^A. Yes ; a general law. Q. Is that the law 1 We would like to get it to see it. — A. (By a voice in the room. ) It is with incorporated cities. Q. Is that city incorporated? — A. Yes, sir ; it is incorporated. Q. In addition to what you say about being there in the interests of the people, you regarded yourself as representing the peace of the community and the sover- eignty and power of the State f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And you invoked that power ?— A. Yes, sir; I invoked that power. Q. You regarded it as necessary T — A. I regarded it as necessary, or I never should have done it, and I regarded it as necessary to invoke a sufficient power to demon- strate to those men that we intended to do what we said we would, orwe wouldhave a good deal of trouble. I came to that conclusion, and I invoked it. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) Do you know whether any members of this committee were «mployfe of the railroad compaiiy ?— A. Yes, sir ; they were employes of the road. Q. AH of them ? — A. I think every one of them were employes of the road at the time of the strike. I know that Mr. HoUis was an employ^ of the road in something of a responsible position, and also Mr. Buchanan. And I had heard Mr. Buchanan's wages stated, but I simply state it as a matter of hearsay, that he was getting some $3 Si day as an employ^. He was some sort of a skilled workman. I heard it stated his wages were very good, some $3 a day. Q. And they stated to you that the only reason why they struck was this general order, and that that general order was issued because Hall was disohargedin Texas ? — A.. Yes, sir ; it was the Hall matter that they went out on, as they understood it, and they had simply received orders to quit work. WILLIAM P. MUDGET, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnes). State your full name and place of residence. — Answer. William P. Mudget ; Greenleaf, Washington County, Kansas. Q. Your age and occupation. — A. Forty-four ; attorney at law. Q. Are you connected with the Missouri Pacific system of railroads?— A. Locally, ■Q. As one of the local attorneys of that corporation? — A. Yes, sir. Q. We are investigating the causes or the cause and extent of the troubles exist- ing between the Missouri Pacific Railway and its employes. If you can give us any information or any facts bearing upon such cause or the extent of the troubles, you will please proceed to do so in your own way. — A. I can make a statement as far as my local territory is concerned, as far as our county is concerned. The first cause of the strike or the troubles between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and the strikers or the Knights of Labor or either, as I understand it, at the time of its com- mencement and ever since, was on account of the discharge of a man by the name of Hall, in Texas. That was the general talk in our vicinity among those who were members of the strikers, and also among those who I know to be members of that organization called the Knights of Labor. I heard of no other cause at the time. Q. Did you talk with many of the employes of the road?— A. I talked with quite a number; yes, sir. Q. Were any of them dissatisfied with whom you talked?— A. At the time this trouble commenced, this strike ? Q. Yes, sir j at the time you mention. In other words, had they any personal or individual grievances ? — A. Not that I heard of. Q. Did you hear of any at all ?— A. Not at that time. Afterwards I heard of com- plaints among some of them about the section meu on the line getting only $1.15 or |l.80 a day. That was some twenty days after this trouble had commenced. Q. Please state any grievances that they may have presented to you at anytime. — A. That was the only one that they presented at that time — that these men were not paid as much as they ought to have been paid. That was later. But at first they claimed that the strike originated because they were ordered to do so by certain district assemblies, and some of these men belonged to this district, some of the men who took part in the strike at first, but they were not subject to the local organiza- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 125 tion at home, bat they were ordered, they said, to do so from their organization from abroad, I think In Kansas City or Sedalia. Q. Aid this complaint made in regard to wages was a complaint with regard to the violation of any contract to pay more wages than were paid, or was it simply a com- plaint that the wages paid were not adequate for the services rendered T — A. They didn't seem to have any complaint further than that, so far as their own individual object went, but it was on account of another class of men, section men, who, as a rule, did not take part in the strike, especially the foreman, Mr. Reynard, and several of the other men kept at work. They didn't have any complaints; in fact, Mr. Rey- nard told me so. Q. Did yon hear any complaints with regard to the forcible assessment for the maiz^- tenance of a hospital t — ^A. In our locality! Q. Yes, sir. — A. No, I don't know that I ever have. Q. Have you heard any of them complain with regard to purchasing land from the company and the interference on the part of any one connected with the railroad company in the defeating them from making the final payment, in consequence of which they lost the land? — ^A, In our town t Q. Anywhere on the line of the road t — A. No, sir ; I never heard such a complaint there made about land in our section. Indeed there is not much land there now be- longing to the company in oar section. It is owned by other parties. Q. Do yon know of any one in the employment of the railroad company now, or at any other time when such land might have been pnrchased, who made payments oa land parchafied of the company and subsequently lost the land T — ^A. From the Mis- Bonri Pacific Railroad f ,' Q. Yes, sir t — ^A. No, sir. Q. The Missonri Pacific or leased lines T — A. No, sir. Q. You know neither of any such case, nor have you heard any one complaining that they had lost their homes in that way ?— A. No, sir. There has been, ot coarse, a great deal of trouble out there concern ing the Saint Joe and Western Company aboat land grants in former years, but not with this company. Q. What was the extent of this trouble in your county f — A. Well, it was very formidable there, of course ; stopped the running of trains there for about a weekj Q. Was there no violence offered to any train in your town? — A. Except they stopped the running of them — killed the engines. Q. Yes, but none were killed out there 1 — A. Yes, sir; at Greenleaf. Q. How many engines were killed at Greenleaf f — A. Some seven or eight; I think ten ; I can't tell you how many, but there was quite a number. Of course it was quite , excited at one time, but soon quieted down. Q. What was the effect of this stoppage upon the general welfare of that country ? — A. I presume it injured the business of every buiness man in that country more or less, because freight couldn't get in and grain and other produce couldn't get out. It injured the farmer, injured the business man and every person, more or less, and every person's business, from the time that this embargo was on the road. E. E. HADDOX, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Bdknks). State your fnll name and residence.— Answer. E. E. Haddox; Greenleaf, Washington Coanty, Kansas. Q. Your age and occupation. — ^A. Thirty-seven years old ; I have no occupation at present. . ,. t i. i_ ■ Q. What has been your occupation hitherto T — ^A. I have been in the butcher busi- ness. Q. Have you ever been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway or Cen- tral branch railroad J — ^A. I have. Q. State your connection with either one of those corporations. — A. I was em- ployed by the Missouri Pacific some six years ago as a train man. But not for three or four years since that time. . . xr Q. And yoa have not been connected with the road for the last two years i — ^A. jNo, sir. Q. Were yon a conductor 1 — A. I was a freight conductor on the road. Q. Can you tell us anything with regard to the cause or the extent of the troubles between that railroad management and any of its employes ?-rA. I don't know as I can, exactly. The only trouble- ever I heard was directly— was the discharge of Hall. Q. Do you know of anything locally out there T-^A. Nothing locally out there that ever I heard. No complaint about wages or anything about that. Q. Did any of the employes ever complain to you about being improperly treated T — Q. Any complaint made that the railroad company had failed to live up to its con- tract with any of them t— A. Not to my knowledge. , ^, . * Q. Did you hear anything in regard to a forced contribution for the mamtenanco 126 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. of a hospital ?— A. I never beard any coiaplaint made about it. I beard tbat they assessed a small amount of wages each month for tbe support of that hispital, Q. Do you know what amount ?^A. It is between 30 and 50 cents a month for some of the employes ; I don't know how much it is. Whether it is a general thing or not, I don't know. Q. Do you know whether it is done arbitrarily by tbe company or with the consent of the men?— A. X don't know; I know I paid it when I was on. I thought it was satisfactory. Q. You paid it, did you?— A. Yes, sir; I never heard any complaint directly. Q. (By the Chairman.) That had nothing to do with the strike, bad it,?— A. Not ■as I know of; no, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs.) Will you please state your official position. — A. I am mayor of the city of Greenleaf, also justice of tbe peace. i Q. (By the Chairman.) Did you make any efforts to restrain tbe violence and the orippling of engines ? — A. There has been no violence since I have been in office — the last two or three days, or a week or two. J. W. BEACH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : ■* Question (by [Mr. Burnes). State your full' name, place of residence, and occupa- tion. — Answer. J. W. Beach ; G;:eenleaf, Kansas ; banking business. Q. Mr. Beach, if you know anything in regard to the cause or extent of the troubles alluded to here, you will please state what you know about it ? — A. I know nothing at all in regard to them only what I read in the papers. Q. We don't care about that ; have you known of any local trouble or difficulty at Greenleaf? — A. I have not, no, sir ; I have beard no complaints made to me at all. Q. No complaints have been made to you by the employes of the company ? — A. No, sir. Senator A. J. HAENI, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). How long have you lived here? — Answer. I have lived here eleven years. Q. Have you ofdcial position in the city ? — A. Not in the city. Q. You are State senator. — A. I am State senator for this district. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am a wholesale hardware merchant. Q. You have been here during this trouble between tbe employes and the rail- way ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Not to question yon in detail, I wish you would state generally to tbe committee 60 far as you have any knowledge of tbe caase of this disturbance, audits effect upon your business here locally, tbe business of Atchison, and the country about here t — ^A. So far as the causes of the strike are concerned, I happened to be one of the commit- tee appointed by a citizens' meieting here on tbQ second or third day of the strike to confer with the Executive Committee of tbe Knights of IJabor at this point and the Missouri Pacific officials at this place, with a view of trying to compromise matters and get the road to running. In connection with this committee we met the Execu- tive Committee of the Knights of Labor of this place, and endeavored to get from them the reasons for the strike and whatthey demanded as a compromise. And they gave as their reasons that they were ordered out by District Assembly 101 ; that in the discussion, when they voted upon going out, there was quite a difference of opin- ion. The members of this committee said they could not tell us all that did take place because it would be a breach of the secrets of their organization, but that a good many of tbe members of tbe Knights of Labor in their lodges were opposed to going out, but that finally a majority won, and it was decided to vote to go out upon tbe order of District Assembly 101 ; that the real reason of District Assembly 101 giving this order was the discharge of thisman Hall in Texas; that they looked upon it as a direct insult to the organization of the Knights of Labor. It was apparently done to try to defeat them as an organization on the line of the Missouri Pacific system, that what local grievances they had were embodied in about these facts. That unskilled labor was receiving but about |1.15 a day, that they should have |1.50. That the Missouri Pacific Eailroad Company at this place were sending sqme of their engines to other machine shops to be repaired instead of repair- ing them here. That they also were sending some of their cars to other places to be repaired which should be repaired at these machine shops, and that was about all tbe local grievance they bad. I then put the direct question to the chairman of that executive committee whether if we would secure from Mr. Pagan, the superintendent here, the man in authority on the Missouri Pacific system, whether we would get from him a promise to raise the wages of unskilled labor to 181.50 and repair these engines at home, whether they would then go to work and stop the strike. And they said no, the strike would not be stopped if these things were granted, not until an order came from District Assem- bly 101. That they must abide entirely by ir struotions from the executive board of LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 127 101. That is about as much as I can tell you in legard to the causes ; as to the effect of the strike, it was seiious here. Q. (By Mr. Stewabt.) One moment before you go to the effect. Do you say that they assigned these grievances as a cause of the strike ? — A. No, sir ; the reason of that strike was because they received an order from District Assembly 101. Q. Then they did not assign these grievances as a cause when they struck ? — A. No, sir. Q. But as grievances that they thought ought to be remedied ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. This assembly, 101, is that the assembly wherein Martin Irons figures so largely ? — A. I believe it is ; yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs. ) I understand that Martin Irons lived in Saint Louis f Mr. Stewart. I have heard his name so much that I wanted to know whether he is the man connected with that assembly. Q. (By the Chairman.) Do you know whether such an order was in writing! — A. I do not, sir. Q. Could you tell us where we could get that order ? — ^A. I could not, sir. The in- formation I got was from the executive committee of the Knights of Labor of this town. Liberty Assembly. Governor Stewart. Will you state what were the effects upon the business here and the business done, so far as you have any knowledge ? — A. The effect of the stoppage of trains was serious. It was in my business, especially the month of March in our business. I am now speaking solely of tbe hardware trade. March is the largest month, as far as sales go, in the year with us, especially in regard with hard- ware. I handle agricultural implements, and we ship more dollars' worth of goods in March than any other month in the year. The lock-out occurred at a time when a great many goods were in transit, which were delayed in consequence three, four, and five weeks, and even longer than the strike. In addition we had a great many unfilled orders that we were to ship during the month of March which we could not ship. Some of the orders we lost by having them shipped over the Saint Joe and Western, and merchants ordering them to other stations. Some of them were shipped to Kansas City by way of the Kansas Pacific to such points as Clifton, Clyde, and Beloit. At the end of the month, when we figured up the business, we found a de- crease from the same month in the year preceding, or two years preceding, of about 33 per cent. Part of that business we got back during the month of April after trains began running again, and some of it we lost. Q. What was the outlook for business this spring 7 — A. It was good with us. Q. State the effect as to other branches of business, so far as you know. — A. With such shippers in other lines as I saw it was fully as serious as with me, and with .the fruit-shippers and some of the men who handled perishable goods it was more. Of course we handle no perishable goods, ami there was nothing lost by that. ^ Q. Do you know anything about the cutting off of supplies to consumers in the in- terior — ^to farmers T — A. Yes, sir; I know that it was a fact that none of the Western men could ship grain this way, and it has made collections very dull. Of course the grain buyers did not buy very much grain, and it stopped the moving east of our crops, and in consequence it made money very scarce for the time being and made collections very dull. We haven't got over that effect yet. Q. You have stated, to go back, in your position as a representative of the business interests of this city, that these employes who stated various reasons for their griev- ances — ^not reasons for the strike, but grievances that existed — that they thought might be redressed. Have you stated all these f— A. There was one more grievance that I have tried to think of that I can't remember. Q. Have you heard Colonel Burnes's examination of the other witnesses f — ^A. Yes, sir; i heard him examine the last two witnesses. Q. His examination does not suggest any grievance to your mind t — ^A. No, sir ; I heard him ask a question in regard to the hospital ; I never heard any complaint of that kind. J. G. FOX, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by the Chairman.) State your age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. Forty-five years old; I am in the wholesale drug business in Atchison, and have re- sided here about 25 years. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You heard the testimony of Mr. Harvi. I wish you would state your knowledge in regard to the same line of topics. — A. Well, my understand- ing of the cause of the strike is the same as testified to by Mr. Harvi. I attended a meeting of the citizens which was called about or shortly the strike was inaugurated, a meeting of the citizens and the strikers to consult together to see if some means could not be found whereby traffic might be allowed to go on here. At that meeting one of the members of the executive ' board of the Knights of Labor here made a speech in response to speeches that had been made by citizens. In that he said that ' no effort that we could put forth here would bring about a settlement of the strike. 128 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. He said that this matter was their "pie," and advised us to keep our fingers out of it ; that they went out upon the order of their District 101, and would not return to work until they had received orders from the same place. I was not a member of the committee to which Mr. Harvi referred, and did not consult with the Knights of Labor as a committee to bring about any adjustment of the difficulty, and consequently I cannot testify on that point. , Q. Did yon have any conversation with any of those gentlemen in regard to the troubles? — ^A. Yes, sir; ItalkedtoMr.Walkum, amember ofthe executive committee, nearly every day for thirty days. Q. What did he say ? — A. Well, along in the first organization of the strike, Mr. Walkum was very bitter, but finally became convinced that they were wrong and ex- pressed the wish to me at various times that the strike should quit, and that he should use his influence to have it quit. Q. What did he say as to the cause ofthe strike f — A. He said in this way, that the cause was the order from District Assembly 101. Q. Did you ever hear any other cause assigned by any of them ? — ^A. I did not. Mr. Walkum at this meeting, if I remember correctly, stated that they had no local grievances which conid not be amicably adjusted with the railroad authorities here, and that the cause of the strike was this order. Q. One question before you say anything about the effects of the strike. Do you know anything about any acts of violence here upon raUroad property, obstruction of trains, or anything of that sort f — A. I saw them capture a train one day. I know that the belts were cut in the machine-shop one night. I went down next morning and saw it had been done. My attention was called to the two engines in which the steam-chests were broken by, as stated to me, pins having been put in so that the arm would strike as it was going past. Q. And the piston went through and knocked the head of the chest outf — ^A. The- pin, as I understand, is put in so that when the stroke comes towards the steam-chest there is not room for it to make the entire stroke, and it strikes the pin and some- thing has to go. , Q. In other words, they put the pin inside of the steam-chest ? — A. No, sir; jusfc outside of the chest, so that this piston would strike it. Q. Any other acts of violence? You saw them cut belts and kill engines ?-t-A. I saw the belts were cut. It was stated that they cut them ; I don't know who cut them, of course. Q. Well, they were cut in connection with these troubles ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How about the effects of the strike upon business in a general way ? We don't care to go very much into the details of that. — A. As Mr. Harvi stated, it was quits' serious. It was not so much so in our business, because we handle very few perish- able goods ; but there was a large portion of our territory that we could not reach at all for thirty days. Our business for March showed only a falling off of about 10 per cent., but' when we made efforts to get goods to our customers, paid freights to Saint Joe, and shipped around by the Saint Joe and Denver road, and prepaid the freight, in all instances where we could reach freight in that way; still there was a large ter- ritory we could not reach at all for about thirty days. Q. In fact, the effect was to cut off your communication with the surrounding ter- ritory — that which adjoins you f — A. A large portion of it, yes, sir. Q. That condition of things continued how long ? — A. Well, I think three or four weeks. We were cut off nearly all that time, and part of that time once in a while- we got a train, and then it would be stopped again. Q. Have you ever heard of any statement of grievances or complaint other than what you have stated?— A. Yes, sir ; Mr. Walkum and Mr. Cooper at this meeting to which I have referred stated some local grievances that they had here, but I under- stood them, to say ihey could have been adjusted without a strike. Q. You have stated all you know about the grievances? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) I would like to ask you as to the extent of the business of this company here, the number of employes, the kind of employment in which they serve, as far as you understand it. — A. I don't know in detail. I presume Mr. Fagan can tell you. Q. Haveyongot machine-shops here?— A. Yes, sir; we have machine-shops. Q. Do they employ quite a number of men f — A. Yes, sir ; I suppose a hundred or more. W. W. FAGAN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by the Chaikman). Will yon first state your name in full.^Answer.^ W. W. Fagan. Q. And how long you have resided here ?— A; I have resided in Atchison for eight years past. Q. Your occupation ?— A. Superintendent of the Central Branch Division of the Missouri Pacific Railway. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 129 Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Mr. Fagan, you may proceed first and state as far as yon can every fact that yon deem material in discovering the cause of the tronble between the Missouri Pacific Railway and its employes so far as they have come underyour knowl- edge, or so far as you have official information.— A. Prior to the 9th day of March of this year 1 had no notice whatever of any complaint in our establihhment. On that date the executive committee of the Knights of Labor, consisting of Mr. Cooper, Mr. Mayne, and Mr. Walknm, called at the office. I asked them to state the cause of the striUe which had occurred the day previous. Q. That would be the 8th f— A. That was on the 8th ; yes, sir. They stated that they regretted very mnch that the strike had taken place, and that they had done what they could, not only personally, but as a committee, to prevent it. I then asked them what their demands were. The first was that the common laborers should be paid $1.50 per day. The second was that tho Missouri Pacific Railway Company should not discriminate against the Atchison merchants, neither in the way of rates nor facil- ities. I asked them if they had any further demands. They said they had not. I then asked them if they had any grievances among the shop men. They said there were none at that time. I asked them if they had at any time presented any griev- ances, locally, that had not been adjusted to their satisfaction, and they stated there were none. They further stated that they were ordered ont on a strike by Assembly 101 ; that they were morally obligated to obey their commands. I believe that is about the substance of the complaints they had to make to me. In fact, they are the only demands or statement of grievances to me that they made, either personally or by letter. Q. Did they or any other employes present any additional grievances at any time other than this ?— A. No, sir. ^ Q. Had any grievances been presented to you prior to the 8triko%T-A. Some few of a minor nature, which, I believe, had all been adjusted to their sS^tfactiou. Q. Were those complaints individual or general ? — A. Individual. Q. Do yon know or have you reason to believe that there is any other cause than the order of Assembly 101 and the circumstances detailed by you f^A. None that I know of; no, sir; none of any importance. Q. Can you tell ns the facts with regard to the assessments upon the men for the support of a hospital, the reasons for it, and how it is done t — A. Well, there is an assessment made ou each employ^ for the purpose of maintaining a hospital, which is to be used for the benefit of sick or injured employes. The assessment is based on the amount of wages paid each party, and varies from 35 to 50 cents each per month ; which assessment is made on the men after they have been in the service of the com- pany fifteen days. In case any of them are taken sick or are injured they are sent to the hospital, and attendants and medicine furnished free of charge, as well as trans- portation given each way. Q. What, if any, complaint has been made by the employes with regard to this assessment? — A. None to me, that I can call to mind. Q. When they begin service, as a rule, is it known to them that they are subject to this tax t — ^A. Yes ; we endeavor to keep notices to that effect posted up on all the bulletin boards at the shops, &c. , Q. Let me inquire with regard to your mode of payment of the men. How do you pay, and when f — A. We pay the 18th and 22d of each month. Q. For what t — A. That is for the preceding month. Q. For the month of March you woald pay within the 18th to the 20th of April? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Pay up to the first day of April f — A. Yes, sir. In the event a man is dis- charged or leaves our service of his own accord he gets his money at once, just as soon as proper time-checks are made and certified to, these checks being payable by any agent of the company. Q. You need not state unless you see proper, but I would like to know what mo- tive—assuming that money is plenty and abundant and the company has the money — what beneficial object can be accomplished by withholding this payment until the 18th or 20th of the succeeding month, instead of paying at the end of the month? — A. It is a difficult matter to preparathe rolls ready for payment, to get in your time- books, make your pay-rolls, forwara them to the office, and have them properly and- ' ited and prepared for payment prior to the 15th. We commence paying, as I under- stand, at Saint Louis on the 5th of the month, when the car starts and pays over the entire line as fast as they can get over it with an engine and car. Q. Are all the employes paid by one paymaster ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is, on certain divisions. . Q. And one pay-car goes over the entire lines ? — A. Yes, sir ; there are certam dis- tricts over which one paymaster goes. They have three paymasters, I think, on the system. . . ., . . , Q. Do you know of any other reason than the one yon have giver, for this custom I— A. No, sir. 3984 CONG 9 130 LiBOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. It is simply for tlie necessity of time to make up the pay-rolls and have them audited and placed in the hands of the oaymaster ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) State, if you please, about what you understand to be the number paid by this paymaster each month. — A. I can't state that. Q. (By Mr. Bdknes.) Is there anybody here that knows ?— A. I think so. Mr. Ker- rigan would possibly know. I can give you the number of men .on my division only. Q. Have you knowledge of any general contract existing between the men and the railroad company with regard to their employment or their work ? — A. There was a contract in existence prior to the 8fch day of March ? Q. Have you read the contract ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you furnish us with a copy of it ?— A. I don't know that I can, possibly I may be able to procure one sometime during the day ; 1 have not one with me. Q. If you should be unable to furnish a copy, will yon please state what your un- derstand'ing is of the provisions of that contract ? — A. Well, it was stipulated in the contract that the men employed, the different classes of labor, should receive a cer- tain amount per day for their services; that none of the men etnployed should be dis- charged from the service of the company without just and sufficient cause. In the event an employ^ was discharged, as he thought, without cause, we were required to' investigate the matter, the investigation consisting of three persons, one to be ap- pointed by the aggrieved party, and the superintendent and master mechanic to act in the premises. If upon investigation it was found that the party was discharged ■without cause they would be paid half their wages from the time they were suspended nntil the investigation took place. If it was found he was discharged for cause, he should receive no My for the t'ime pending the investigation. Those, I believe, are the main points. *" Q. After the maljng of that contract do you know of the discharge of any men? — A. Yes, sir; we dKharged a great many during the year, possibly a hundred within the life of the contract. Q. Were any of them discharged without sufficient cause, so far as you know?— A. I think not. Q. Was the cause in every case, so far as you know, communicated to the party dis- charged? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any of them make protests against it and demand the arbitration that the contract provided for ? — A. None whatever. Q. Was any such arbitration ever made in any case ? — A. Not to my knowledge ; not with the shop men. Q. Since that agreement has your company paid the prices stipulated in the con- tract ? — A. Yes, sir ; on the Central Branch Division there has been no change what- ever in the rate of wages, with one exception. At the i ime this contract was executed we had a man in our wood-working shop whom we were paying $70 per month ; his pay was changed to $3 70 per day; in other words, we changed him from a monthly man to day service, to work by the day. The total amount for twenty-six days would be practically the same. Q. No complaint was made with regard to that change ? — A. Not to me. I under- stand from one of my foremen that he complained somewhat, but continued in the serv- ice and demanded no investigation. Q. Mr. Fagan, if you will state the number of men in the employment of the Mis- souri Pacific Railway, on the Central Division, in the service of the company here, I will be obliged to you. — A. That is on the dky of the strike, on March 8? Q. Yes ; at the time of this strike. — A. Only about 187 iu the locomotive and car department. Q. How many in the other departments ? — A. I do not know. I cannot give you that, Mr. Burnes,- without reference to the records in the office. That was the total number of men affected or implicated in the strike, and I presume you would not want the others. Q. The other parties didn't strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Well, I merely wanted it to show the extent of your business here, the number of employes you have in the employment of the company here, so that the committee might understand the extent and nature of th6%mployment. As 1 understand it, it is a very important point in the economy of your system ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And yon have concentrated here the machine-shops and the repair shops— re- pairs and all that ? I would like to know about what you have got here. — A. I wUl take pleasure in furnishing the statement before you leave the city, the number in each department. (See Exhibits A and B.) Q. Just furnish it as fully as you can, and we will incorporate it in the proceed- ings, and the number of cars moved. I would like to know if in the contract alluded to of March a year ago there was any stipulation in regard to the number of hours that men should work ? — A. There were none. Q. Was there anything said with reference to when a laborer should begin in the morning? — A. No, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 131 Q. Has there ever been any deduction made for late arrival, based upon the inter- ■vening time necessary for an employ^ to travel from bis residence to his sbop ?— A. "Well, not to my knowledge. I don't know of any such cases. Q. Have any such complaints come to you from any of the men ? — A. No, sir. Q. I call your attention particularly to bridge men. Have any deductions been made from them 1 — A. Well, 1 can't answer that q^uestion from the fact that the bridge department is under the control of Mr. Peck, at Pacific. It is not under my control. Q. Can you state the extent of the troubles here?— A. Yes, sir; a portion of them, if you will allow me to refer to this memoranda or history [producing letter], 1 will give it to you by dates. Q. As well in regard to the property of the corporation as to the business of the corporation, the general business of the road t — A. The strike occurred at Atchison, Jlarch Hth, at 8 o'clock in the morning. There is a matter here pertaining to informa- tion furnished by our master mechanic. I presume you would accept that in this con- nection t Q. Certainly, sir. — A. Our master mechanic was informed that he might retain one foreman to help him, and such men as were necessary to keep passenger trains running. On his return to the shops after dinner — this was on March 8 — the Knights of Labor had taken charge of the shops and engines, and he was informed that they would allow no one to work on frei^t engines, designated two day and two night wipers, and one boiler washer, one foreman for the car department, and two laborers to look jifter the coaches. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Who designated those?— A. The committee of the Knights of Labor. On his return from dinner he found that they were in charge, no others "there, the balance of the men bad left. Engine 171 at that time had an air-pump to xepair, and the committee of the Knights of Labor sent a machinist to do the work. I mention that as illustrating the difiicnlt matter it was to do anything on that date ■without their consent. At 5.45 of the same date the committee of strikers prevented onr master mechanic at Downs from firing up an engine which we proposed to send to Cedarville for a train of live-stock. At 12 o'clock noon all the men in the mechanical and coal departments osed very bitterly by Mr. Cooper and Mr. Chambers and other gentle- men, and was advocated by Mr. Walkum. Mr. Cooper has stood faithfully by his or- ganization aad Mr. Walkum has run. Q. (By Mr. Ccetin.) I suppose he is going yet? — A. I believe he got a pass and got a job and got out. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) We desire to understand something as to the extent of the in- terruption to commerce. It seems to me it is well to know something of the trains here arriving and departing from Atchison in connection with the Missouri Pacific system; or, taking them alt<^ther, how many trains in the day, and what the volume of your commerce is, and the extent of your business here? — A. Well, as to the trains, the time- table shows there were seventy passenger trains arriving and departing here every day. Q. Seventy? — A. Yes, sir; and about one hundred freight trains. On the Missouri Pacific, I suppose, are thirty-four. I believe the time-table shows thirty-four freight trains arriving and departing every day. I don't know how many — well, I suppose one hundred altogether during the entire day. Q. That would make one about every seven minutes? — A. I do not know that. Q. That is as I just figured it. — A. As to the volume of business some of the shippers can testify to that. Q. Do you know the aggregate business done here in the course of a year ? — A. No, sir; I have published it often enough, but I never took pains to remember it. Q. WUl you state your views in reference to the through business touching or pass- ing this point, the inter-State commerce between this and other States, merely passing through Atchison? — A. It is very heavy, sir. Q. Do you know anything of the personnel of the Assembly No. 1 01 ? — A. It is a myth to me. It is something that is powerful, but I never saw it. Q. You are not acquainted with the members? — A. No, sir. Q. You don't know, then, their occupation? — A. No, sir. Q. Are they not all railroad men ? — A. I have been informed that they are. Q. Have you any knowledge or information from any representatives of the railroad as with regard to that subject, as to the occupation of those men in 101 ? — A. Not from railroad sources. Mr. Cooper and Mr. Dawson and these people have told me that No. 101 is composed of laUroad employes. Q. Have you had any conversation with any of the representatives of the railroad company with regard to this question concerning which he testified as to the desire of the Knights of Labor to be recognized as such by the railroad company? — A. Yes, sir; as I said Mr. Fagan said the company was not inclined to recognize them or treat with them as Knights of Labor, but as railroad employes. Q. Well, if these employ & in Assembly 101 were railroad employ ds, were they not treated with ? — A. Well, I suppose they would have been, but as Knights of Labor, they said. Q. Were they not treated with as Knights of Labor? — A. I suppose they were if they were treated with. Q. Did you understand Mr. Fagan as approving the proposition?— A. He simply echoed the sentiments of his chief. Q. Wait one moment. Speaking of his chief, as approving the proposition that there would be no objection to treating with the employees, prior to their strike, as Knights of la]jor. — A. I won't say anything about that, about the Knights of Labor; but they told me they were always ready to treat with the employees. Q. Whether they were Knights of Labor, or not? — A. Yes, sir; so long as they were employees, and came to them as employees. Q. Was anything said with reference to treating with their representatives, the exec- utive committee, or ofiScers? — ^A. No, sir; I never heard Mr. Fagan talk about it. Q. You know nothing of any negotiations between the officers of the railroad company and locomotive engineers or firemen ? — A. Not at all, except from hearsay from out- side. Q. (By Mr. Cuktin. ) Have you a chamber of commerce or board of trade ? — A. Yes, sir; board of trade. Q. Wlo is the chief? — A. John N. Kain. Q. Isn't it likely he could give nsa volume of business? — A. Yes, sir. I spoke a while ago about grievances; that the Knights of Labor said they had none here. After 3984 CONG 10 146 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the strike was on several days they prepared a statement of grievances which I can for- nish if you desire. Q. I would like to have it. — A. Here it is. [Witness produces paper.] This Was handed to me by Mr. Cooper, I think, on March 10; I think that was the date._ The statement about the discrimination in grain rates here is not in that. That was in the ' first one. Q. (By Mr. BirpjfES.) Do you know anything about that discrimination? — A. No, sir; nothing at all; I printed lots about it. W. S. ANDERSON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Mr. Buenes). Mr. Anderson, we "have had a great deal of testimony upon nearly all the points involved in the investigation we are making, and would like to draw your attention specifically to two subjects: First, the alleged grievances by the Missouri Pacific Railroad here in this part of the country. — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And secondly to the business interests of the country that have suffered by this interruption of commerce. — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may tell the clerk your name, age, and occupation. — A. My name is W. S. Anderson; age, 32 years; occupation, retail grocer. There has been some complaint about a former agreement they had' with the railroad company dated some time a year ago last December; that it was not lived up to. That was one thing, and the real cause of the strike was the failure on the part of the railroad officials to treat with them as an organization — as Knights of Labor. In my opinion the strike would have been settled in twenty-four hours, provided the railroad company had treated them as Knights of Labor at anytime. They agreed virtually to everything but recognition, which they would not surrender. The effect on business here of course was a bad effect, and all the classes of business that it didn't affect directly it did indirectly. Take it on an average, it affected business, I should think, 40 per cent. — 30 at least. Q. You give it, then, as your deliberate opinion that if the authorities of the railroad had manifested a willingness to treat with the representatives of the Knights of Labor concerning the grievances of the men that there would have been no strike and no trouble? — A. There would have been none in the first place if they had done it. The strike was only the outcome of the railroad company in Texas failing to meet them in any capacity. Q. What evidence have you that the ofBcers of the railroad company were asked to treat with them as such and the company relused, prior to the strike? — A. What I have been told on pretty good authority. Q. On inl'ormatiou? — A. Yes, sir; stated by committees, men here at Atchison, who are nearly all railroad men; they belong to District Assembly No. 101. Q. Have you mixed and mingled freely with these men who are employfe on the Pa- cific road? — A. Yes, sir; I have. Q. Do yon feel at liberty to give your opinion as to the motives and the excitements and the agencies that led some of these men into deeds of violence? — A. That part of it I don't know anything about. Q. Is there anything in the teachings of your order that is calculated to encourage lawlessness or disloyalty to the Government or hiws? — A. No, sir; on the contrary, it is to the reverse. Q. You are of opinion that the men, then, who left the employment of the Pacific Rail- road here left mainly because of their devotion to this organization known as the Knights of Labor; that they left because of alaelief that the railroad authorities would not treat with their representatives as such? — A. Yes, sir; the men belonging to our lodge did particularly. Q. Are all the railroad employds here Knights of Labor?— A. No, sir; notallof them. Q. What proportion of them, do you suppose? — A. I should think three-fourths of them; just about three-fourths. Q. What proportion of them are not naturalized citizens of the United States?— A. Of the Knights of Labor? Q. Unnaturalized citizens of the United States?— A. That I couldn't say, sir; but the majority of them are; I am satisfied of that. Q. Foreign-born? — A. No, I don't know about that. Q. I mean foreign-born and not naturalized ; that have not sworn allegiance to the Government of the United States. — A. I don't know whether they have done that or not; I know they all vote, or nearly all'. I should think, though, there would be about three-fifths, divided between American and foreign-born. Q. What proportion of the foreign-born is naturalized yon don't know? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Is there not a considerable number of them that are not naturalized? — A. No, sir; th^re is not. I LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 147 Q. You think the great majority of the foreign-born members are naturalized and American citizens? — A. Yes, sir; a great many I know, at least, are, anyhow. Q. There is another question I would like to ask you. What is the cause of the ex- clusion of lawyers from your society? — A. Why, there is no particular reason, only we look at them — we only regard or want their services when we get into trouble, and they are not actual producers. Q. Well, physicians are not producers, yet you admit doctors. — (No answer.) By Mr. Stewakt : Q. Is the retail grocer a producer? — A. Yes, sir, to a certain extent; he is necessary. Q. I thought he merely exchanged? — A. He is a necessary evil. By Mr. Buenes: Q. You could hardly call a preacher a producer? — A. No, sir; hardly. There are very few preachers belonging to it. There are a, great many physicians and doctors and a great number of merchants, all classes of merchants, especially retaU merchants. By Mr. Stewaet: Q. I suppose you being a retail grocer, as a Knight qf Labor you have no direct interest in this matter? — A. In this strike? Q. Yes, sir. — A. No, sir. Q. It didn't concern your business directly? — A. Only as it concerned other business. Q. Only as it affected your trade? — ^A. Yes, sir; no other interests whatever. Q. It would have affected your trade as a grocer whether you were a Knight of Labor or not? — A. Yes, sir; about the same. Q. So far as that is concerned, you had no personal interest in it? — A. No personal interest. Q. I suppose as the restUt of that you had nothing to do with the negotiation between the employes of the railroad and the railroad authorities, had you? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. So you don't know what transpired as between the railroad employes, do you, from any personal knowledge of yours ? — A. I attended the meeting of the Knights of Labor at Kansas City when Mr. Powderly was out there, and I heard thestatement made there by the executive board of District 101 ; and I heard Mr. Powderly and the other gen- tlemen. Q. You never were present at any interview between the employes of the railroad ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do yon know or do you state that the employfe of this road presented these griev- ances, or any of them, to the authorities of the road at any time before the strike? — A. I undeistand they did; yes, sir. Q. Do you know it? — A. No, sir; I don't know it. Q. Then you can't testiiy that that was done at any time or place? — A. No, sir; only what I heard the district down there say what they had done. Q. What is that district; I don't know what that district is? — ^A. Why, it is District 101, composing something over one hundred local assemblies along the line of the Mis- souri Pacific KaJlroad. Q. Does it reach into Texas? — A. Yes, sir. It only takes in one assembly in Atch- ison. There are five assemblies here. Q. Didn't you understand this trouble originated in Texas? — A. Yes, sir; it did mostly. That was the last resort. ' ■ Maj. JOHN M. CROWELL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: I am about fifty years of age. I reside at Atchison, and have been for a number of years in the service of the Government. I have been mayor of Atchison. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) Major, we understand that you have had several interviews with the representatives of assemblies of the Knights of Labor concerning grievances against the Pacific Railway, and, if so, we would like to know what grievances were presented to you and what they said about it and when they said it. — A. Well, sir, the morning that they went out, or after they went out, I met some of my friends that 1 am very weU acquainted with belonging to the Knights of Labor who worked in the shops a number of years. Mr. Dawson was one; he worked in the shop. I said: "What is the trouble; have they cut you on your pay?" "No, sir," he says. "Well, why have you gone out?" He said they had gone out because they had orders to go out. I said: "What orders?" He said they understood that somebody had been dismissed, as I understand it, in Texas, and of course on that account they had orders to go out here; that he had no complaint to find about the pay they had, because he had thfe same pay he had for a long while back. That was one man particularly. I talked with sev- 148 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. eral other gentlemen. I can't recall their names; and on the first of the strike, when they went out, they were of the same opinion. They didn't know why they went out, except they were ordered out. That is what the most of them told me, Mr. Bumes. Q. Did any of them present any grievances, personally or individually? — A. No, sir; mot along the first of it they didn't. Q. Have they since? — A. Yes, sir; some of them said they hadn't done as they agreed to with them; that they had made reports oftentimes, as I understand, to Mr. Fagan here, that there ought to be a raise of wages to some of the men, not these head men, but some of the men that didn't get large pay, about $1.18 or $1.25. This was after it had gone on fifteen or twenty days. Q. But prior to that time you had not heard any of them complaining? — A. No, sir; the company had been doing just as they had agreed to do after the strike a year ago. Q. Is there anything else you know with regard to the probable cause of the trouble between the employ & and the company? — A. No, sir; I do not, sir. I met in consulta- tion with the mayor, in connection with the Law and Order League, aijd Mr. Cooper was sent for, and we had some consultation with him and the citizens. He talked very well indeed, soonaflierhecameto Saint Louis, but he said, as I understood him, that they had got their head in the lion's month now, and .they had got to fight it out the best they could. That is the remark he made. That is Mr. Cooper, the head man of the Knighte of Labor. Q. Well, Major, had you personal knowledge or observation of the violence that en- sued here? — A. No, sir, not particularly; I did not, only what I heard; but I saw some of them over here stopping the trains. That was before we organized our league. Q. How is that law and order league organized? — A. It is organized for the protection of property and for the protection of lives; anything that may come along. Q. The upholding and enforcing of the laws? — A. What is it, sir. Q. For the enforcement and upholding of the laws? — A. Yes, sir; that was all. Q. Do you admit citizens to membership in that generally ? — A. It is according to what kind of citizens they are, sir. ^ Q. Well, if they are good citizens? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Do you allow lawyers in it? — A. Yes, sir. ' Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Do you allow Knights of Labor in it? — A. Well, I don't know but what we might take them; if we knew them we would take them; I wouldn't un- less I did. I know there are some men I wouldn't object to taking in who are Knights of Labor. Q. Have you received any in the organization? — A. I don't know; perhaps there are one or two men. we have that belong to the order. Q. , One or two members? — A.,I think so; I didn't know it until afterward. Q. If you had known it'probably you would not have admitted them. — A. Well, we would have to know them pretty well, Mr. Burnes, before we would take them in. They might be good men. Good men belong to the Knights of Labor, but they might ' have a sympathy with the trouble and would not act as promptly as they would other- wise. I know^a great many men belonging to the Knights of Labor are very good men and good citizens. There are very few, I believe, of the Knights of Labor that will commit depredations; but I believe they have some. I was told by the Knights of Labor we would have to watch the shops and the property, that they couldn't control some of the men they had in their organization. Q. Well, you find in all organizations, don't you, some bad men and some good men ? — A. Yes, sir. The church I belong to is that way. Q. Even the political party whfch you belong to? — A. Political parties wear out — yes ; my political party — we are out now and have nothing to say. Q. Occasionally yon find some good Democrats? — A. I have found a few. I was a good friend of yours. Q. I know that, sir, which I always reciprocated. — A. Yes, sir. LOUIS KIPPEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Mr. Cuetin). What is your full name? — Answer. Louis Kipper. Q. What is your business?— A. In the hide and leather business, and also manufactur- ing harness, saddles, and horse-collars — saddlery goods. Q. (By Mr. Buenks.) State your oflcial business also. — A. One of the county com- missioners. Q. (By Mr. Stkwaet.) Well, Mr. Kipper, you have already stated you reside here and are in business ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. I don't know whether you know anything about the origin of this difficulty here ; if you do, you can state it. — A. Well, all I know is that the strike commenced, and I have talked with some of them in the beginning, and it seems very few of them knew -the reason. All the reason I heard at the time waa that there was a gentleman die- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 149 charged in Texas. I understood they wanted to make it a test-case. That was my un- derstanding at the beginning. Q. When the strike first commenced? — A. Yes, sir. Q. "Whom did you talk with at the time, some of the leading men? — A. No; some scattering few men; not any of the leading men at the time. Of course business men were alarmed, because they don't like these strikes. Q. No, I should think not. You say some of them didn't know what the matter was? — A. That seemed to be the general opinion at the time amongst the Knights of Labor from what I could learn at the time. They were generally satisfied here, and they preferred not to go out; they preferred to attend to their business, from what I understood at the time; that they merely had to go out because they were ordered out; that it wasn't at their own free will and accord. That was my understanding at that time. Q. Afterwards did you hear any complaintsabontgrievances that were unredressed? — A. Well, they had a citizens' meetingandl was present; someof the gentlemen claimed that they had some grievances; amongthem was, as I stated here before, that the Mis- souri Pacific Kailroad discriminated against our grain men; and one claim was that they sent out some engines — some locomotives which should have been repaired here; they sent to Sedalia; and one of the leaders, Mr. Walkum Q. Wjilkum ? — A. Walkum. He kind of acknowledged — the reason, he says, it is our principle when one of our brothers is hurt the whole is; the whole Knights of La- bor and the whole system strikes. He says "We aim to make it a test case." That was the main reason, and others of course stated they had other grievances. Q. That is what Walkum stated? — ^A. That is what Walkum stated. Q. Do you recollect what Mr. Cooper said? — A. Mr. Cooper I didn't see at that meet- ing. Q. They didn't quite agree about the grievances ? — A. H seems not. It seems they didn't quite agree; I didn't understand that they agreed about the grievances — that they quite agreed at that time. Q. WeU, did you afterwards hear of other grievances that were not stated at that time? — A. Thegeneral impression was, from what I could learn, that the parties here had no particular grievances. That was my understanding. Q. Your business is in what direction? — ^A. Well, it is all over — Kansas, Nebraska, Miasouri, Colorado, Texas. Q. Your dealings are with other States a good deal ? — A. Yes, sir; at the same time a good -deal in Kansas. Q. You have, I judge from what you say, a large business? — ^A. A pretty fiur business. Q. And how is it affected by this strike? — A. Well, we lost some by the strike. Our volume of business, however, since the first of the year has been larger than the year before; but it is no doubt the delay in shipping, getting goods over the central branch, and the Omaha extension of course damaged us some. Q. What is its general effect on business here? — A. It damaged it considerably. Q. I don't understand that it is necessary to go into details on that subject. We have heard already from other business men. The same effect of course was produced in all branches of traffic in the country ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Because transportation was snsp^ded, that goes vrithout saying? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you on any committee to have interviews with the railroad people or any- body else vrith a view to bring about a satisfactory adjustment? — A. WeU, that first cit- izens' meeting, it was to ascertain if some compromise conld not be made. A committee was appointed, and then I had to go out West. . Q. And you didn't act with them? — A. I didn't act; I wasn'there at that time to act on any committee. Q. Is there anything more in connection with this matter, any further knowledge that you have in relation to the causes of the strike or its effects, that you can now think of-if so, please state them? — A. Well, not more than I have stated. Of course the strike done a good deal of damage, and, as I have stated before, I have learned that there was no particular cause among those men here only what came through others from other parts of the country. . Q. Well, in yonr judgment, was there any sufficient cause for the strike? — A. I don't ihink there was. That is my opinion. I don't answer that question direct; that is my opinion. Q, (By Mr. CUETIN.) What effect has it had upon the increase of building in the ^a.^yf ^A. Well, I guess there were not many houses buUt on that account — on account of the strike; I think that is sure. It surely damaged the city. Q. It damaged the city in thatrespect?— A. Yes, sir. Well, I will tell you my opin- ion- Those general strikes are liable to efliect the trade of the country. Now, I am a Mend of the working-class people; I want to see them get good wages, but let me teU 150 LABOR TEOUBJpES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. you if these labor troubles continue, and discourage enterprise in the men who have cap- ital in their investments in enterprises, they are liable to go into some corner and loan their money on interest and keep quiet. Q. ^By Mr. Stewaet.) You think strikes, in other words, will discourage enter- prise,? — ^A. Ithink those labor troubles discourage enterprise; I do believe it. I believe it is best for the laboring class of people not to go in too deep; I think they are damag- ing themselves; it is my opinion as a friend of the laboring class of people. Of course, I am a working man myself and I know how it is; at least I have worked pretty hard in my days. Q. (By Mr. Btjenes.) Mr. Kipper, do you mean to be understood that men borrow money without meaning to put it to something useful or beneficial ? — ^A. Sometimes they will have to; because I know how it is, colonel. We would rather loan than to borrow, but some people have not got it and they have to borrow. What I mean to say is this: Suppose you have got a project and want to invest in some manufacture; yon have got two or three hundred thousand dollars and you have about made up your mind to build a factory, but after hearing of that trouble, you might say, "I tell you we better let it alone; we can loan that money and get a fair rate of interest, and we are no't liable to be mixed up with such trouble, and we can get land security that is not liable to be burned up or to be destroyed, and we need not be affected by this kind of troubles; I guess we better leave that alone, we better keep our money." Q. It simply diverts capital from one pursuit to another? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewaet.) In other words, capital is timid?— A. Yes, sir; that is so. SAMUEL C. KING, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question. (By Mr. Stewaet. )» You reside here? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What is your occupation? — A. Principally farming; conducting farms. Q. And this is your residence? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have farms, of course, lying outi? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Youwerehereduring these troubles? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you know of their origin, and soon? — A. From the printed accounts and from conversation with the strikers. Q. Well, we will leave the printed accounts for a matter of record and bring you di- rectly to your interviews with the strikers. What did they claim to be the difficulty? — A. Claimed that a man in Texas had been discharged because he was a Knight of La- bor, and that to support his claim to be reinstated they had struck here. Q. Who said that to you? — A. The first man who said it to me was a Mr. Walknm. Q. Walker?— A. Walkum. , Q. That is not our friend who walked away, is it ? Mr. CUETIN. That is the man. Mr. Stewaet. That was his statement? The Witness. Yes, sir. Q. Who else said tihat; anybody you can recall?— A. Yes, sir; some six or eight other members; Mr. Kelley, Mr. Smart;; Mr. Dawson, and, Ithink, a Mr. Christy, a gentleman whom I have talked with a little on this subject. . Q. What other reasons, if any, did they give for the strike than the ones you have stated?— A. In Walkum's case, to begin with the first man I talked about it,, I asked him why he didn't take advantage of the arbitration law for which Governor Martin had been so much landed. He replied that he couldn't stand on arbitration in this case,, it would be useless, It would be silly to undertake it; that they proposed to pull down Mr. Gould and all such manipulators, and let the devil take the hindmost. That was his language. They would go in now for all there was in it. Q_. Was that Walkum?— A. Yes, sir; in the conversations with Mr. Dawson and Mr. Christy they deplored, the strike and regretted very much, indeed, that they had to go into it; talked as though they then opposed it. This was after the inauguration of it, but they simply went in in obedience to the demand of the organization. Q. Thatwastheonlyreasqnassignedby them?— A. By these two gentlemen, that is, Messrs. Dawson and Christy ? Yes, sir; that is what I meant. In my conversations with Mr. Smart, I asked him what grievances they had here, and why they undertook to fight for other persons in other States. He stated that there were grievances here, but they never had been formulated up to this time; "that the company had tacitly and cun- ningly violated the agreement of March previous. In what manner, I asked him, how did they do it ? He said that they had lessened the hours of labor from time to time, and whenever, through any circumstance, a member of the order left the shop, the place was never filled by a member of the order; it was generally left vacant; that when engines or other of the machinery were disabled here that they were sent away rom the shops here, and the men who did the work hare didn't follow them, claiming that the men here necessary to do this work ahonld have gone with the work to the shop LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 151 where the machinery should be repaired. That is about the substance of all the griev- ances that they stated to me, but it -was after the strike. Q. Do you recollect about how long after? — A. Why, Mr. Walkum's was upon the day following the strike. These others were some two or three days afterwards as I would meet them casually. Q. And you say at that time this Mr. Smart, if that is the man who specified these grievances ? — A. He specified the grievances. Q. He stated to you they never had been formulated ? — A. Not until after the strike, but they were talked of and were in existance. Q. But had never been formulated or presented to the railroad company ? — ^A. That is what he stated. Q. Just one word from you, if you please, as to the effect of the strike upon the busi- ness here and in the surrounding regions? — A. It has, in my opinion, and I have min- gled very much with people here — with all classes — it has created widespread depression and distrust, and fears of anarchy as the result is in everybody's mind. Q. That is, I suppose, what led to the formation of the Law and Order League? — A. Yes, sir; that was the true design of it, to save property, if possible, in case of anarchy. Q. I suppose it is difficult to estimate how long this feeling of distrust will continue; that is, the effect of this strike and its continuance is a matter of inquiry ? — A. I can add, as one proof of it, that I am interested in the sale of some property adjoining the property that several parties living there had previous to the strike applied for loans on their small holdings; that the loans were made, the parties loaning the money looked upon the in- vestment as a good and safe one. Since the strike applications have been made, and I have been interested with the parties who wanted these loans; gone to some of the par- ties who had the money to loan, and they stated that the circumstances were — the times were too dangerous, and particularly as this property was suited to railroad men, resi- _ dences for railroad men, they were fearful and that a loan would not be good there. Q. Whether or not this trouble has had any effect to depress the value of real estate in this city and neighborhood? — A. My impression is that it has temporarily. JAMES COMPTON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question. By Mr. Bubnes: Mr. Compton, state your name in full. — Answer. James CJompton. Q. And residence. — A. Near the city of Atchison. Q. Tour age. — A. Forty-nine. Q. And occupation. — A. Well, I was until lately in the master-mechanic's office. Q. When did you quit that service, Mr. Compton? — A. I didn't quit it; I was com- pelled to. Q. Yon were discharged? — A. Yes, sir, after this strike occurred. Q. Do you know why you were discharged? — A. I do not, sir; there was no cause Q. I will get you to state if yon know any facts vrith regard to the reduction of wages • and payment to the men. — A. Well, as far as I know, there has been no reduction of wages since the agreement in March, 1885. Prior to that of course there was a reduc- tion. There has been no reduction except service. Q. State what that reduction was. — A. From ten hours a day. When I quit here I wdrked only eight hours. Q. The hours of labor were reduced, you say? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did that carry with it any reduction of compensation? — A. Oh, certainly. We were paid so much an hour, you know. Q. Oh, yes, sir. — A. And it was that much less. Q. To what extent was that done? — A. That was universal, sir, all over the shops, except men paid by the month, and of course they worked ten hours a day. Q. When was that done first?— A. Well, really, I couldn't give the dates. Q. Was it as much as a year ago or six months ago? — A. It was within that time. Q. As far back as six months?— A. Yes, sir, I guess so; in fact, I have been working nine hours every day since early in the fall, and eight lately. Q. Did the men desire to work more hours ? — A. Oh, yes sir. Q. I will get you to state if you know any other cause of complaints or grievances on the part of the employes of the Pacific Railroad ?— A. WeU, there were several petty cases come up once in awhUe, you know; didn't pay much attention to them, but there were complaints; when they were presented formally I don't know. But there was the apprentice boys. They asked for a progressive scale of wages. They had been askmg for the last six months or more to get their wages raised, and only on the 1st of March they sot a small raise, from 5 to 8 per cent, in addition to what they were gettmg. Since then they have left and gone to other States, and are now getting $2.80 and J3 a day the same boys, the same men. They were in the service and were worth that. 152 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. money. Another almost universal complaint is this hospital; if you know, that is almost universal. Q. What is the extent of that tax upon them ? — A. Well, it is 25 cents for each indi- vidual for anything less than $100 a month; 50 cents for over. Q. What proportion of the men, so far as you can estimate them, derive any benefit from that fund ? — A. Oh, a very small proportion; there is very few men will go to the. hospital at all; very few. There ain't over, I should think — there ain't over 2 or 3 per cent, taking advantage of the hospital. Q. Then I understand you to say that although there has been no special complaint made or protest made against it that it has been a constant . — A. A constant grudge, sir; yes, sir. Q. It has been calculated all the time to make the men feel dissatisfied ? — A. Yes, sir. It has been ever since 1880; that was when it commenced. Q. Have you any idea of the proportion of married and unmarried men in the service here? — A. No, sir; I have not. I should judge though that the married men predom- inate considerably. Q. Those who are married have homes ? — A. Mostly all of them have homes. Yes, sir; mostly all. Q. None of them would want to leave their families, I suppose, in case of sickness ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of surgeons of the railroad treating any of the employ&i? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do the surgeons charge for their services ? — ^A. Yes, sir; they do. Q. They charge for their services? — A. Yes, sir; in every case I have knovni. I never knew of a case they didn't charge for it, except the first visit. I believe they paid the first visit gratis, but after that if you go to them they charge you for it, and in some cases they charge you from th^ very first. Q. Charge for medicines ? — A. Well, I don't know. When they get medicine they get it from the hospital. It don't cost them anything. Q. The hospital, as I understand, is at Sedalia? — A. Yes, sir. Q. A patient at-Atchison would not send to Sedalia for medicine? — A. Yes, sir; some- times they do. I have done it myself. Q. If there is anything else that you can inform us in regard to, please do it ? — A. I would be very happy to, but my mind fails to bring up anything of any importance. Q. You have mixed a good deal with these men, have you not? — A. Yes, sir; very largely. Q. Do you find them inclined to lawlessness in general or dp you find them law-abid- ing men? — ^A. Most assuredly; they are law-abiding citizens, every one of them as a general thing, and every one of them regrets what has taken place. Q. To what cause would you attribute the acts of men who have violated the law here in the destructionof property?— A. Well, it is pretty hard to say; I coiildn't satisfacto- rily answer that question; sort of a revenge, I guess. Q. Do you regard it as a sudden impulse — suddenly excited — or as a growth of petty grievances? — A. It is partly both, I think. Q. Partly both? — A. It has just been coming on by degrees, and when it was stirred up, you know, the thing was all boiling over. Q. As a rule, I suppose, you find the members of this order of the Knights of Labor very much attached to the order?— ^A. Well, sir, my experience is very limited; I have been only with them a few weeks, but as far ^s I have seen they are very much attached to it. ' Q. Now, with that attachment for the order, what would be the effects of a sudden appearance of a Knight in authority from a distance, or a neighboring town?— A. Well, I couldn't say. Q. Haranguing the la,boring men or the Knights here and urging them to acts of vio- lence?— A. I don't think he would do it in the first place. There is no Knight who would go and agitate them to violence, I don't believe; there is not a Knight in the order that would do such a work; I don't think he would be obeyed if he was to do it. Q. Then you don't believe this destruction, kilUng of those engines, and the taking charge of the property of this corporation was done-by the Knights ?— A. Not altogether, I don't. There may have been some of them there; I don't know. Of course I didn't see anything done myself. Q. Mr. Walkum has been mentioned as a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he a Knigh^ of Labor?— A. I believe he was; I know he was.' y. Did you hear his speech over here to the men? — A. No, sir; I didn't. Q. Or did you hear him talking to the men? — A. No; I did not. Q. (By Mr. Stewaet.) Do you know anybody that has been benefited here inAtch- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 153 ison, either iu the employment of the railroad company or in town, by this strike ? — A. No, sir; I don't know a,ny one. Q. Then it has been an evil ? — A. So far as it has gone. Q. Nothing but an evil ! — A. Nothing but an evil. Q. Then it was not a wise thing to strike, was it? — A. No; I don't think it was. Q. (By Mr. BuENES:) Mr. Compton, I will ask you if you know anything of the de- railing of a train at Omaha .Tnnction? — A. I don't know the first thingahout it, sir; I wasn't near them at all when these things were carried on. A. N. CHRISTY, being duly sworn aiid'examined, testiiied as follows : By Mr. Cubtin : Question. Give your name in full, your occupation, y our age, and your place of res idence. — Answer. A. N. Christy ; age, fifty ; foreman painter. Q. Mr. Christy, do you tnbw of the discharge of workmen or employes of the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad in the last year when there was need for them — when there was work for them to do, and when the discharge took place without notice ? If so, please state it. — A. None in my department in the last year. There were some laid off. There was plenty of work in the yards if it had been brought in the shop^ Q. There was plenty of work?— A. Yes, sir, plenty of work; 1 furnished Mr. Ferris, the master mechanic, a list of it. Q. Do you know how many were so laid off? — A. There were five painters laid off for a short time. Q. Were they re-employed? — A. Yes, sir; they were re-employed; they were re-employed after they discharged six machinists. Q. Why were the machinists discharged ? — A. I can't tell you that. Q. Do you know from them why they were discharged? — A. I-do not. That was one of the grounds that they said for laying off my men, to have them discharged; I don't know why it was. Q. They laid off your men, you thiuk, in order to disohajge the machinists ? — A. That is what they said ; I don't know. Q. Well, how could such a thing be necessary ? — A. I don't know how it was. Q. There is no competition between the machinists and painters ? — ^A. No competi- tion at all. They wouldn't reinstate them until they discharged these ; that is all I know about it. Q. Who has charge of increasing or diminishing the force of men?— A. Mr. Fagan has now, I believe. Q. Had he at that time ? — A. Yes, sir. I wish to say we had an apprentice boy, and they agreed'to raise his wages ; they raised it three times, I believe, 10 cents ■ every two months, and after that they stopped, at $1.70 ; he had been working with $2.50-a-day men for the last year, and did the work just as well as they could. I never could get any more for him. Q. He was discharged ? — A. No, sir, he wasn't discharged ; he has been discharged since the strike, Q. Do you know for what reason ? — A._ I don't. If they gave him any reason I don't know it. By Mr. Stbwabt: Q, Were you one of the strikers ? — A. No, sir, I don't consider myself a striker ; I was laid off the second day of the strike. By Mr. Curtik : Q. You mean by laid off, that you expect to go back again ? — A. I don't know ; I got my discharge papers since ; I don't know whether I wUl go back again or not. By Mr. BunNBS : Q. You didn't go out, you say, as one of the strikers ?— A. Not exactly. Q. Tell us how you went out. Let us be frank in all these matters. — A. I went back to work when we were ordered back. I came out then; I didn't want to work there with a lot of deputy sheriffs watching over me. Q. The deputy sheriffsdidn't interfere with you, did they?— A. No, sir; they didn't interfere with me. Q. You didn't like their society ?— A. No, sir ; I did not. I would just as soon go to wqrk in the street with a ball and chain. I am no convict. JAMES HEMNER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burxes : Question. Give the clerk your name, age, residence, and occupation.— Answer. Jaraes Heiimer ; section man ; age, forty-eight years. 154 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q; Have you been inside the hospital at Sedalia? — A. No, sir ; I never was. Q. Never have seen it ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know how it is provided for? — A. I do not. Q. "Well, what do you know about this, if anything f — A. I will jnst state my case, In January, 1885, I worked, I think, six days in the fore part of the mouth for one foreman, and I was taken sick, and he came to the house and asked me when I would be able to be out, and I told him I didn't know exactly when I would be out. I told him if he wanted more men he had better hire ' a man in my place, which he did. When I went back to work a week afterward the place was filled ; when I went and called for my place the man he had hired the foreman had changed for another place on the road, and there was another man taking his place, and I called for my place, and he stated he had all the men he wanted ; he was fall handed ; and I didn't say anything about it ; I didn't make no complaint, and I let the thing stand for a few days afterward, probably two or three weeks ; I didn't look for it any more. He said he had all the men he wanted. Another foreman said he wanted a man or two, and I went there and went to work — working, I think, six. days in the fore part of the month and four days in the after part of the month, and 35 cents was taken out of each check. I got |10.80 for the time I put in in January ; the amount was fl.OS a day, all counted up. Q. Then, you paid that tax twice ? — A. I paid that tax in that month twice ; yes, sir. Q. How much of the month did you lose from sickness? — A. I worked on the first days of the mouth and the last days of the month ; between that time I lost through sickness. Q. You probably worked only four or five days in the latter part of the month ? — A. I think six days in the latter part of the month and four iu the first ; I wouldn't be positive, but it was ten days in all that I worked. Q. In the fore part of the month you worked under one foreman on one division or section ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And iu the after part you worked on a diflferent section under a different fore- man! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know the name of the foreman f — A. Yes, sir; I know the name of the foreman very well. Q. State his name. — A. I worked in the fore part of the month for John Ratigana. Q. And in the after part of the month ? — A. I worked for James Metcar. Q. When the pay-roll was made up 35 cents was deducted ? — A. Off each check. And then last fall I went down to the doctor — the company doctor here — and told him I wasn't well, and I wanted some medicine ; I told him I didn't want to go to the hospital ; I had a family, and I thought I would be all right in a few days. He says to me, " I am not prepared," he says, " to treat you except yon paytfor the prescrip- tion, but," he says, " I will get the medicine for you." Well, I paid him for the pre- scription, and he sent to Sedalia for the medicine. Q. What doctor was that ? — A. Dr. Harlan. 9- Ishe the.Bfurgeon of therailroad?— A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Curtin : Q. Does he live here ? — ^A. He claimed to me he was only, employed to examine men and send them to the hospital ; hp had no right to treat them any further than that. That is what he stated to me. ' ■ ' By Mr. Stewart : Q. Governor Curtin asked you if he lives here in Atchison !— A. Yes, sir. Q. Do I understand you to say he charged you for the prescription f— A. Yes, sir. Q. And the medicine he obtained from the hospital at Sedalia ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. But that was not charged for ?— A. No, sir ; there was no charge for that. By Mr. Curtin: Q. What did he charge you for the prescription ?— A. A dollar. A. S. BENT, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Buknes : Question. Mr. Bent, state your full name, age, residence, and occupation.- A. S. Bent ; age, twenty-seven.; occupation, locomotive engineer ; residence, Q. Are you engaged now as locomotive engineer ?— A. No, sir ; I am not. Q. When did you quit that service ?— A. July 1, 1885. Q. On what road did you work at the time you quit ?— A. Well, at the time I was employed it was the Missouri Pacific, but I was under Mr. Fagan, of the Central Branch Missouri Pacific ; was doing yard service, switching in the yard here. Q. How long had you served on the Central Branch Division ?— A. Well, I think a« near as I can recollect, I was about probably altogether six months. I was trans- — Answer. Atchison. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 155 ferred. I was tranaferrecl to the Central Branoli Division uniler Mr. Fagau. but be- fore that I had worked on the extension of the Pacific. Q. Why did you quit the service f — A. I was reported by their yard-inaster here, Connors, the general yard-master. The instruction through W. W. Fagan was to the master mechanic to put me off pending investigation. I was off, I suppose, for the lapse of a couple of weeks, may be not more than a week ; and I received a letter stating that I would have to be discharged from the service of the company, and re- gretting it, and that he had discharged me on the ground — the charge against me was by the yard-master, and that was incorrectly switching and for incompetency ; and when I saw he was going to discharge me — under their contract with the engineers that no man should be discharged without a fair and impartial hearing, I notified our chair- man of the grievance committee, Mr. DeWitt, of the action. He told me to make out the necessary papers and serve them on the master mechanic and superintendent, and I did 80. This agreement with the engineers states that no engineer shall be dis- charged from the service of the company without a fair and impartial hearing. I went and saw Mr. Fagan about it, and he told me that I didn't come under that clanse for the reason that I was not a brotherhood man, and that contract was made by and between them ; and I called Ms attention to the clause in the contract where it says any engineer ; it doesn't say a brotherhood man shall be discharged ; and he was to consider it, and I made my application for a hearing. The next day Mr. Fagan served on this committee as directed on this agreement — he appointed Mr. Robinson, who at that time was not on the Central Branch Division at all, but was running be- tween Omaha and Kansas City. Consequently under the contract he had no power to act in the matter ; but at the request of our chairman I allowed the matter to go. So Mr. Robinson took those papers off in his pocket, probably for a couple of months, and he returned them after- wards, notifying Mr. Fagan that he couldn't serve on the committee, he would have to appoint some other man. Mr. Fagan received the papers. On my side again I ap- pointed an engineer on our division, Allison ; he was a member of the grievance com- mittee, and received the papers from Mr. Fagan. I looked them over, and it seems though, I don't know what you call it, but Mr. Fagau or Mr. Robinson or Allison throws up the investigation. It stopped there. The company had received their side of the statements, but I never had made a statement, nor I never had a chance to bring any grievance before the company. I was discharged on a statement of two men and the only statements that I had made were with the papers that Mr. Allison had. I went on and tried my best to get an investigation in this matter, because I knew I had been discharged by pure prejudice on the part of this yard-master, because I would not be bulldozed by him, and the cause of that was this : that we got into this trouble — was on the orders of our superintendent, Mr. Fagan, who issued orders in regard to the running and switching in the Atchison yards, stating the number of cars that should be considered as a transfer or load for our switch engines from the lower yards; that eighteen cars were according to the instructions, stating that at any time there was any more than Ihat number of cars put on they Q. I don't think that is material. We are not trying anything of that sort t— A. That is the fact that I didn't have the right to be heard because I wasn't in the brotherhood, when I couldn't be because, and I hadn't run long enough and there- fore Q. Will you state if you at the time were a member of this organization known as the Knights of Labor ?— A. No, sir ; I wasn't. Q. When did you become a Knight of Labor f— A. I can't just exactly state the date, but it was some time last fall. Q. After all this occurred!— A. Yes, sir; after all this occurred. B. K. CHASE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. Mr. Chase, state your name, age, residence, and occupation.— Answer. My name is H. K. Chase ; my age is twenty-five ; I am a bridge carpenter. Q. Mr. Chase, I wish you would state now to the clerk just the grievance that yoii have against this railroad company; how they have improperly treated you, in your estimation. , , ,. , A. Well, sir, in my estimation they have treated us improperly by discharging men without cause and by not allovring us time for traveling at nights, being hauled over the road at night time. For instance, If you went out on the road to do a job we natt to work all day on the bridge and be moved that night ; we couldn't stop that night at a hotel or boarding-house ; we had to travel that night to get to the job the next morning, and were allowed no pay for it. , . , « , xr ' • O. Was allowed no time for traveling to or from the job ?— A. No, sir. Q. Paid just for the time you were at work ?-A. Yes, sir ; just for the time we were at the work. The foremen had orders not to allow us to move m the day time, it we werefinished with the job they had to go on some repair work. 156 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you see that order? — A. Yes, sir; I seen that order. Q. To what extent was that order' enforced to your knowledge ?-^A. To the best of my knowledge, it was enforced by all the foremen ; they carried it out as best they could. Q. And enforced it against all the men engaged in your line of business? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know whether such an order applied to section men ? — A. No, sir ; I don't think it applied to them ; I don't know much about that department. The section men were not traveling like we were. Q. Is there anything you can inform us in regard to this matter ? — A. In case of a discharge the men are never allowed any hearing. Mr. Kelsner was discharged out of our department. He wanted to know what he was discharged for, and they wouldn't give him any hearing or listen to anything ; told him he was discharged, and that is all. Q. Are there any others? — ^A. Mr. Gardner, one of their foremen, was discharged the same way, and Mr. Blackner. Q. Were there other men employed in the place of those gentlemen ? — A. Yes, sir ; they were. If they had a job of work for us to do out on the road, if we were in here, they would keep us all day to work insteiad of sending us out in the day time. Tie men would have to wait until 10,45 at night ; they would g6t there 4 o'clock in the morning, ride all night ; then we had to go to work in the morning, and we received no pay or overtime for that at all. Q. Have you personal knowledge of such trips as that ? — A. Yes, sir ; I went such ttips as that myself. i Q. But were you required to go to work the next morning ? — A. Yes, sir ; I went to see the general foreman, and asked him for time, and he told me he couldn't allow me no time for night work at all. Q. Are you well acquainted with the labor in this department ? — A. Tolerably ; I have been in the bridge department here for three years, a part of the time engaged as shipping clerk, the latter part of that time. Q. You understand something, then, with regard to the competency of the men iu that service ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think I do. Q. These men who were discharged, were they competent for the duties they were called upon to perform ? — A. Yes, sir ; they were competent carpenters. Q. Were they sober and industrious men? — ^A. Yes, sir; they were ; all the men in our department are all sober and industrious men. Q. Were the men discharged heads of families or single men ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Heads of families ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. CURTIN : Q. Where did they live ? — ^A. Mr. Kelsner, at the time he was discharged, lived here in Atchison, and the other two men lived in Atchison. Mr. Gardner still lives in Atchison, and he asked repeatedly for a hearing ; has also written to the superintend- ent, and asked him, and he paid no attention to it. Q. When did that occur f — A. Mr. Gardner was discharged last summer and Mr. Kelsner also last summer. Q. You still remain in the employment of the company ? — A. I was in the employ- ment of the company up to the time of the strike ; yes, sir. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Are you one of the strikers ?— A. Yes, sir ; I went out with the strikers ; I was afterwards notified that I was discharged. Q. You say these men applied for some information as to the cause of their dis- charge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go with them when they made application? — A, I heard Mr. Gardner make an application ; yes, sir ; and Mr. Kelsner, too. The other man, Mr. Blackner, I didn't hear. Q. To whom did you hear him make the application ?— A. To our general foreman. They have changed the title. Two years ago there was a superintendent; they have changed the title Q. Who discharged these men ? — A. Mr. Hatcher. Q. Was he the general foreman ?— A. He was at that time ; yes, sir. Q. And you went with these men when they demanded that ?— A. At the time these two men were discharged I was shipping clerk in the department ; was there all the time, right in the office. Q. You don't know anything about the reasons that brought about their dis- charge f — A. No, sir ; I never knew why they had been discharged. Q. When they transport you nights do they furnish you any berths or car to sleep in f— A. The regular gang on the road they have a car with a bench or bunk fixed up LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 157 in it, and if they have got any coats or quilts they can roll them up and go to sleep on them. When men are taken on down here on the train at night which leaves at 10.45 at night they go in the coach, but have nothing but their coats or blankets to sleep on. Q. Do yon mean to say when these bridge men are sent from this station they are not famished with any sleeping accommodations ? — A. The regular gang on the road has a box car to carry their tools in, and there they have rough boards fixed up so they can lay their coats on them and sleep on them. By Mr. Cuktin : Q. Can you state how often these transfers occur? — A. Well, no. By Mr. Stewart : Q. How many times a week during the three years you were in the service were you in that way kept np all night f — ^A. Well, L would average propably in the two first years, I would be out on the road probably three days out of the week, nights Q. You mean three nights out of the week yon were traveling. — A. Yes, sir ; I was out on the road the two first years most all the time. In the last year I wasn't out so much, because I was shipping clerk. Q. Then you were traveling most of the time during the first year ? — A. I was working in the day time and moving at nights. They always moved us at nights. Q. You say there was no complaint brought to the authorities of the roads ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. To whom T— A. To our general foreman, Mr. Hatcher, the first year ; Mr. Mitch- ell was our superintendent ; complaint was brought to him, and he never paid any attention to it, and Mr. Hatcher, after his title was changed to general foreman, complaint was made to him several times. Mr. Tanner is now general foreman. S. M. TAYLOR, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes : Question. State your name, age, and residence. — Answer. S. M. Taylor is my name ; residence, Greenleaf. Q. State your connection with the Missouri Pacific Railway. — A. Well, I have been working for the Missouri Pacific Central Branch for about ten years — ten or eleven years altogether. ' Q. In what department?— -A. Well, different departments. The last department was the car department. Q. What were your duties in that department ? — A. Truck repairing and general repairing. Q. I will direct your attention especially to the contract between the railroad com- pany and its employes in March, 1885, and ask you if you know of any discharges in violation of the provisions of that coritraot ? — A. Well, I can only speak for myself. Q. You were discharged? — A. Yes, sir; I was discharged. Q. State the circumstances under which you were discharged, and state especially whether you had any warning or any notice prior to your discharge, or whether you were informed of the accusations against you? — A.. I wasn't. I went to work — ^the strike ended a year ago on the 16th, the boys went to work on the 16th. By Mr. Ccktin : Q. Of what month?— A. Of March, a year ago, the 16th of March, I worked until the— about the 24th or 25th, I think it was, when I was discharged. That was the first notice I had was the discharge. Q. You were discharged, then, about the 26th of March, 1885 ?— A. Somewhere about that ; I couldn't say exactly. Q. Did you make application to the railroad company or any one in authority in the corporation for information as to the cause of your discharge ?— A. Yes, sir ; I did. I went to the superintendent of the car department to find out what the reason was, and I have never known what the reason was ; what the cause was I never knew. Q. Don't know now, do you? — A. I do not j no, sir. Q. You simply know you were discharged ?— A. I was discharged, yes, sir. Q. How long did you say you had been in its service?— A. About nine or ten years, I think ; that is the Central Branch of the Missouri Pacific. I worked for it when it was the Central Branch. ^^^^ «.-o- Q. Well, I will ask yon if you participated m the strike of that year?— A. Xoa Q If vou were one of the strikers in March, 1885, and if so the fact that you were connected with it was of sufficient cause for your removal, within so short a time after the contract was made, that you should not be removed ?— A. No, sir; I don't think it was When the boys wanted to strike there I did aU I could to keep the boys from striking as they went out and after they went out 1— there was a tram coming in 158 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. from tlie west. "VVho flagged tbe train I don't know ; I don't know who flagged the train ; who stopped the train, I couldn't say. Bat Mr. Fulton came to me and he says, "Taylor, you are getting your foot in it for holding the train." Well, I says, " probably we are." I hadn't stopped the train ; it was stopped when I went up. Mr. Hardee came to me and he says, "Mr. Taylor, those are the railroad commissioners, they can do more in settling this strike at Atchison than any man here." I says, "Mr. Hardy, if you will give me your word those are the commissioners, so far as I am concerned I am willing to let the train go." He says, "I will," and I says, "the train can go so far as I am concerned." Q. Did you go out of the employment of the company prior to the 15tb of March, Itieti, in that strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did the company request you to continue in its ejnployment during the month of March? — A. Nb, sir; they did not. Q. Up to the 2Hth ?— A. No, sir ; nb, sir. I was out. I lost time from the time the strike went out until it was settled. ' Q. Well, it was settled, as I understand it, on th6 15th of the month?— A. On the 15th; thiey went to work on the 16th. Q. You went to work and worked about ten days ? — A. Ten or twelve days ; I couldn't say exactly. Q. And were you then discharged ? — A. I was then discharged. Q. You spoke of Mr. Fulton saying you had made a mistake in stopping or holding the train. Was that the Mr. Fulton who testified here ?— A. I couldn't say ; I didn't see the man — J. C. Fulton. Q. What position did he hold then ? — A. Foreman of the round-house— master me- chanic, or whatever you call it. i Q. Who was it discharged yon, Mr. Taylor?— A. Mr. Monday was my foreman at the time. He came to me and he says, " I have got something to tell you that I hate to do." I says, "What is it, Jim?" > He says, "I have got to let you go." I says, " You have no need to do that. All I ask you to be kind enough to tell me the reasons." He says, "I ean't do i[ ; it comes from further than me." I got my time chfck. Mr. Blackner, I think, was the man that sent the time up ; I couldn't remem- ber. I took my time check and got it cashed. Q. Did Mr. Fulton have any authority over you?^A. I think he was just the same ;then as there now. I think the master mechanic or foreman has the charge of the car departments, and Mr. Monday was the foreman — the man I was working for, the man that kept my time, Ii suppose. Q. Then was Mr. Fulton in command over him ? — A. Yep, sir. Q. He was the superior officer of the gentleman you allude to ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Mr. Taylor, when you gave permission JFor that train to move on, who was there — what workmen ? Somebody stopped thfe train ? — A. What workmen ? Q. Yes, sir; what employes ,of the road ? You say you gave permission for the train to go on.— A. I couldn't say, 1 am sure ; I couldn't say who was there. Q. How came it to be that you were mentioned as giving permission to that train to go, if you had nothing to do with stopping it? — A. I don't know, sir; I don't know how it came to be my permission — why I was picked on. Q. What were you there for? — A. WJiat was I there for ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. I just walked up there to see the train, to see what train it was that came in^ Q. What led you to make that rather peculiar remark, if yon had nothing to do with stopping the train — that it might go on ?— A. Because they had led me into the strike, and there was another man by the name of HcGrath that had been in it. Whether he was there at thai, time or not I couldn't say. I couldn't say whether he was there or not. But why they asked me that, and I hadn't stopped the train, and I said in just them words, " that I am willing for the train to go on if you will say so." I think Mr. Hardy will say just as I have said. Q. Somebody said to you something about getting your foot in it?— A. Yes, sir, Mr. Kulton ; but I hadn't stopped the train. Q. Don't you suppose the railroad men understood you were instrumental in pre- venting the ruViniug of its traiu, and wasn't that the reason why they discharged you ? — A. I always laid it to that reason why I was discharged, in my own opinion. By Mr. Cubtin : • Q. Do you know the man irho did do the flagging of the train?— A. No, Sir; I don't. By Mr. Stewakt : Q. You say they said they would pledge their yord, whoever was there, that the railroad commissioners were on the train? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That the train might go on? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 159 Q. Suppose the oommissioners hadn't heeu there, would you have said that it couldn't have gone ont — A. I wouldn't have said any more than I did say; I didn't stop the train. Q. Your reply would indicate that you were unwilling to ha;ve it go if the commis- sioners were not there ? — A. If they want to term it that way of course they can ; I didn't stop the train. Q. Well, I am asking you to explain the peculiar expression that you used unless you meant if the commissioners were not there the train couldn'b go on. If that was your attitude, and the railroad authorities understood it, my point is this: ' whether that was not the reason that led to your discharge f — ^A. I think it was ; that is my opinion. Q. You were an old employ^ of the railroad, had been in the employment a good whUe, and they understood when there was a strike that yon were not content with quitting work but you undertook to stop trains, therefore they didn't want you ; wasn't that itf — A.- That might have been, I couldn't say. Mr. BuKNES. I want to ask you if at that time you were a member of the Knights of Labor? A. NOj.sir. Q. You were not then holding any position in the order? — A. No, sir. Q. Now, just one word more in that connection : this contract of March 15 having been made, you resumed work, having been out on a strike ?j-A. I resumed work; yes, sir. Q. Did you resume work with the consent and approbation of the authorities or any authority of the road ? — A. Why, ray foreman told me to go to work. That was Mr. Munday. All went to work together. Q. You went to work about the 16th of March and worked on until the 26th, dis- charging your duties as before? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of any complaint having been made against you with regard to stopping a train with which was connected the postal car ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did any authorities of the Post-Office Department visit, you for the purpose of investigating about that ? — A. No, sir. Q. In any way ? — A. No, sir. ROBERT ANDERSON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Bdknes : Question. State your name, age, occupation, and residence. — Answer. My name is Robert Anderson; I reside at Greenleaf, Kans. ; occupation, day wiper. Q. What is a day's work at Greenleaf, how many hours? — ^A. Well, sir; average £rom eleven to thirteen hours. ' Q. Well, when a man is hired there what is expected of him, what is the contracij with regard to the number of hours ? — A. As I understand it, ten hours. Q. If a man works more than ten hours state what jBou know with regard to his ■compensation for the extra time? — A. I don't know of any, sir. Q. Don t know of anyone that worked more than ten hours ? — A. I don't know of any that got any compensation, or anything more. Q. Have you known men working more than ten hours ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You don't know of any of them getting pay for it ?— A. No, sir ; I don't. Q. Do you know of any cases where the authorities of the railroad company have been notified? — ^A. I don't know as they have. Q. Has any claim ever been made for this extra pay by any one ? — ^A. I don't know as it has, sir. I have worked in the company's service a year and worked from ten, eleven and a half to thirteen hours all the time. Q. Why did yon not present a claim for this extra service f— A. I don't know why I didn't ; because the rest didn't, I suppose. Q. How many men within your knowledge worked eleven and twelve hours instead often?— A. We generally have three men in the daytime and four at night in the winter season ; two men in the daytime in the fummer season and three at night. Our hours are from 7 to 7, but in case of an accident, or more work, why we are held over some nights untU 8 o'clock, getting engines ready to go out. Q. You don't know anyone who has made claim for that extra work ?— A. I don't think there has any one in our shop; no, sir. CHARLES REDDING, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. BURNES : Question. State your name, age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. My name is Charles Redding ; 1 am thirty years old; residence, Atchison ; I have worked for the Missouri Pacific Railway for the last five or six years ofl:'and on, I think, at different times. 160 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are you a married man, or single?— A. Yes, sir ; married man. Q. How have you worked ? — A. In the capacity of trainman and switchman. Q. State if you continued to work throughout the period of the strike here.— A. Well, I started to work ; tlie first work I have done for the company for two years was after the strike was settled this last time, that is what I mean, on the Ist of April. The strike was declared off, and we started to work. I spoke to Mr. Connors, that is the general yard-master, and he told me if I would come down on the night of the 2d of April he would give me a job switching in the yard. I had switchedfor him before, so X came down and went to work and continued so until the 11th of April. On the evening of the 11th I came down to go to work. I will state here that I had just been attending a meeting in the afternoon and didn't have on my working clothes; I didn't have time to go home and change my clothes and get to work on Sijne. I concluded to wear the other clothes that I had on that night. I went to the yard. In the mean time notices had been served on all Knights of Labor em- ployed on the Central Branch and the Missouri Pacific to quit work. At that time I had three, if not four, notices in my pocket that had been served on me. I have not any of them now. When I got to the union depot — it is customary with night men going off, day men going off, and night men going on, to stop around the union de- pot — I stopped there, and the day men were switching a passenger train. I took those notices from my pocket with the intention of tearing them up, and"the boys were standing there. Of course they were anxious ; if anybody has anything in their pocket they are ^nxious to see it. I just gave them to the boys^ and started on then to go to my work. Mr. Connors, the general yard-master, called me back ; he says, "Redding, are you going to work to-night?" I says, " I don't know anything to the contrary." So I went down into the yard to go to work. He called me back again, and he says, "If you are distributing notices to the men to quit work, you better quit." " Well," I says, " Mr. Connors, I didn't ; I have not done anything of the kind." I says, " Those old notices that I had in my pocket, I had taken them out with the intention of tearing them up ; I didn't take them out with the intention of giving them to anybody at all. My intentions were jost in regard to that; I in- tended to keep in the employment of the company if I could. " So I told Mr. Con- nors I thought he had done me an injustice, and he told me that was all right. We had quite a long talk about it, and it seems the longer I talked to liim the more in- dignant he got. So I went home. I thought I would see Mr. Fagan in the morning. I went to see Mr. Fagan and told him. I think Mr. Everest was in the office at the time. I gave them a clear story there abou^it, and Mr. Fagan promised me he would see Mr. Connors about the matter ; but when the Globe came out in the evening it had a full account of Mr. Redding being discharged from the employ of the Missouri Pacific company, and also Mr. Connor's search for concealed weapons ; and why, I had nothing to do with it at all. I went to the Globe, I went to the Patriot, and I went to the Champion. I answered all three of them that I had nothing to do with 't. So that ended the matter, and Mr. Fagan has failed, or Mr. Connors has failed, to nake any mention of reinstatement or any compensation or anything of the kind. My intentions were to stay with^the company. I had several notices to quit, but I didn't feel, under the circumstances' that I was in, that I could afford it. While my family is not large, yet my means are small, and it was a job, and I thought I would stick to it._ Further, Mr. Connors came two or three days previous, or after, I should say, after this had taken place at the union depot — I think I can prove my statements right in the presence here by Mr. Vandergrifft, if he is present. Mr. Connors came to me there threatening, and warned me to have nothing to say about him. I tried to offer an apology to Mr. Connors that I had never uttered his name with any direspeot,liis nor Mr. Fagan's; I have always had the greatest respect for^r. Fagan and Mr. Con- nors, and I do think Mr. Connors has done me an injustice. Q. What were those papers you had in you pocket f — A. If youreooUeot — of course I don't know that yon do know — I think it was the 12th of April that the strike was declared on again. The notice was this: "All Knights of Labor employed on the Central Branch and Missouri Pacific are requested to quit work." I believe that is the amount of it. Anyhow we were requested to quit by the executive board. Q. This was by the executive board ? — A. Yes, sir ; I had got, I think, three or four of the notices and had them in my hand, was going to tearthem up and was going on to my work ; had no idea there would be anything of that character arise in Mr. Con- jior'smiad at all. Q. You had no disagreement with Mr. Connors before that, had you? — A. No, sir; never had ; always had the greatest respect for Mr. Connors. Q. Don't you think he evidently thought yon were Sistributing those notices from the execntivo committee t — A. Undoubtedly it is ; but if he had listened to mo a mo- ment I would have explained everything to him. I think ho was very hasty. By Mr. Curtin: Q. Did you ever present your case to Mr. Pagan ?— A. Yes, sir ; I did on the day after I was discharged. t LAIJOU TJIOUKLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 161 Q. And what did lie say to itf— A. He said he would see Mr. Connors. Q. Did you ev6r see him afterwards t— A. I never have. Q. Never presented it to Mm ?— A. I thought I would have some notice of it through Mr. Connors. I have seen Mr. Connors very often since. Q. Mr. Fagan is here now and has heard your case ?— A. He heard it before. Q. It is a pretty bad case. He ought to have heard yOu. By Mr. Stewaet : Q. The upshot of your case is that you were distributing these documents there Mr. CuETm. He has explained that. Mr. Stewaut. The officer of the company saw you distributing these documents?— A. I don't know that you can call it a distribution. Q. You gave them to the yard men there in their yard ?— A. By their request. Q. You took these documents from your pocket and handed them out and the officers of the road discharged you on that account, and that is all there is of it, isn't it ?— A. Well, that is the way they claim it. I took them out to tear them up. Q. That don't make any difference, they saw you handing them out to these people ; then you said you didn't mean anything about it, and they probably didn't believe you ; isn't that about it ?— A. I suppose that is about it. Q. That is where it seems t6 me to be. By Mr. BuRifES : Q. I will ask you if you had any thought or intention of distributing those papers. amongst the men for the purpose of creating dissatisfaction amongst any of them ? A. No, sir ; I had not. Q. Now, I will ask you if, as a matter of fact, Mr. Connors discharged you, or if anythingpassed between you excepting just the heated words you have mentioned t— A. No, su- ; there was nothing passed between us, only he told me I need not work any more, and that settled it. I went home. He attended to his business and I at- tended to mine. Q. He told you you need not work any more ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. CuRTiN : Q. Did you intend to be influenced by any of those papers?— A. No, sir; I did not. Q. You did not ?— A. No, sir ; I did not. I thought I had a good job and I was going to try to keep it. By Mr. Buenes : Q. I understood you partially to say that Mr. Connors said if you were going to do that you might as well quit ?— A. Well, he says, " If you are distributing these you better quit ;" and I says, " I am not doing it, Mr. Connors." Q. Then what did he say ?— A. Well, he says something to the extent that " Yju better quit anyhow." And that was all ; he didn't want to multiply words. By Mr. Cdetin: Q. Is Mr. Connors here, now, in the city f— A. I don't know, sir ; I have not seen him for the last two or three days. Q. I mean to say, is he still in employment here?— A. I think he is ; he is general yardmaster here. T. N. GARDNER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes ; Question. State your full name, age, residence, and occupation. — ^Answer. T. N. Gardner is my name ; residence, in Atchison ; I am fifty-five years of age. Q. And your occupation ? — A. Bridge-builder and carpenter. Q. Will you state, Mr. Gardner, if you know of any grievances on the part of the employes, or the late employ<5s of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ?— A. Well, I don't know a very great many grievances in that department ; there was a few that had a complaint to make when I was on the road. Q. State what they are, so far as you have ieard them from time to time. — A. The principal thing was in regard to making overtime without getting any pay for it ; causing the men to ride a great deal nights without getting anything for it. We always had our instructions to make arrangements if we could to always move from one job to another of a night, and the men would get no time for that. Q. Were there many of such instances ? — A. Well, that was most always the case ; that was generally the rule ; sometimes there would be an exception, of course. Q. Do you know of any complaint being made with regard to these things to any man in authority on the Missouri Pacific road ? — ^A. Well, I have spoken to my immediate superior officer ; I have spoken to him about it several times, or I did when I was on the road, and he said that was the orders from headquarters, and if the men didn't like it, why they would have to quit and they would get men who would. 3981 CONG 11 162 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Well, 1 believe that is the rule of making complaint througli your superior offi- cer up to the chief? — A. Yes, sir. ^ Q. Do you know anything else that any employ^ might properly complain of?— A, Well, not particularly, as 1 know of. Q. Do you know anything further as to the cause of the trouble had in the country over this line of road ? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Ccetin : Q. Where are the headquarters of these men who have to travel at nights so much- work all day and then travel at night and work the next day ; where were they from generally ; from here ? — A. The most of them were from here. Q. How many persons were engaged in that way who had that traveling to do ?— A. There are some six or seven gangs in the bridge department on this division here, and some of them, of course, lived out on the line of the road ; bnt they don't have a regular division to work on. For instance, the gang working down here would sometimes be sent to the extreme end of the road and those working at the extreme end of the road would be sent down here. Q. What is the distance to the extreme end?— A. About 300 miles, somewheres in that neighborhood. Q. Now, if. they would be sent all the way down that would consume more than any night? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would they be allowed any pay ? — A. Not for the night. Q. But they would be allowed day pay? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is, suppose they traveled 300 miles, they would be allowed the day butnot the nights ?-r-A. No, sir. Q. No pay for the night at all?— A. No, sir; except when working at a wrecker something 6f that kind. • X know sometimes we have gone out to do a little repair- ing on a bridge ; we would start out here at night ; it would take us all night, per- haps, and we would work the next day and come back the second night. We would be out really thirtj'-six hour and the men get paid for only ten hours. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Do you know what the rule is on other roads in regard to that same subject?— A. I don't know particularly ; I don't know that th6re is any regular rule about it. Q. Do you know what the practice is on other roads? — A. This is the only road that I ever saw it practiced on ; I have worked on a good many different roads. Q. Do you mean on other roads they pay them for the nights? — A. Yes, sir; I have worked on other roads where they did. Q. You don't understand, do you, that this had anything to do with this strike?— A. Not at all. Q. It had nothing to do with it ? — A. Not that I know of. By Mr. Burnes : Q. State if these circumstances that you have detailed have a tendency to make men dissatisfied with the company, that is, compelling them to be away thirty-six hours and getting paii for ten ? — A. Most assuredly it has a tendency to make them dissat- isfied. They made a great many complaints to me about it and didn't think it was right, and, of course, when men are working under protest it is kind of uphill for a foreman to get a good day's work out of a man in that way. Q. I suppose the oftener these things occur, the more nights they are out traveling and working the next day, the more intense their feeling in considering the sub- ject? — A. Yes, sir. Q. They talk more about it ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Cuktin : Q. I understood you to say there were six gangs ?^A. Sometimes six and sometimes seven. Q. How many would be in a gang ? — A. From five to eight and ten men in each gang. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Do you 'know how many hours a day the superintendent here works? — ^A. I do not, sir. By Mr. BuENES : Q. Do you know his salary ?— A. I do not, sir ; that doesn't interest me very much. L. E. YATES, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. B^knes : Q. Please give the cl^rk your name, age, and residence. — A. Age, forty-nine ; live in Hiawatha ; druggist by profession. Q. Doctor, we ■will get yon to state, to the committee what you know in regard to LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 163 the complaints and grievances furnishing a cause for the late troubles between the Missouri Pacific Railway and its employes in this State, and with regard to the de- etruction of property, violence, or anything else resulting in damage to the company or to commerce among the States? — A. I know nothing in regard to the causes of the troubles, except what has been in the daily papers, and I have had no talk with the Knights of Labor, except what we had in an open meeting of citizens there in our town, the troubles there that occurred Q. You allude to Hiawatha T — ^A. Yes, sir; the troubles there and the destruction of property ; Mr. Hunter was personally present, and he oan'tell you more than I can. Q. Can you tell ns what was said in those meetings by employes of the railroad or any one of them ? — A. Well, sir, there were several of the former employes of the railroad company in the meeting ; Mr. Pearson and other members of the Knights of Labor were there, and there was no explanation by them as to the canseswhioh led to the troubles. The meeting was gotten up for the purpose of trying to secure the return of the ends of that division to our town. The property had been destroyed there, and the Mis- souri Pacific folks had taken the end of their division away and moved their depots or engine houses to Oil City, and the citizens got together for the purpose of appoint- ing a committee to see the Missonri Pacific officials and get the division returned and the property there. Q. Yon don't remember, then, what any employ^ of the company said in that meet- ing t — A- Well, I don't know that I can give the exact language ; I talked to Mr. Pear- son in the meeting there more than to any one else ; I asked him in reference to the destruction of property. Q. Who is Mr. Pearson ? — A. He was, I think, the blacksmith of the railroad com- pany there ; he had charge of the repair shops, and was a prominent man among the Knights of Labor. I asked him several questions with regard to the destruction of property, but he disclaimed that the Knights of Labor had anything to do with the destruction of property. I asked him if it wasn't a fact that what had occurred had not occurred since the strike had taken place, and he said it did; and I asked him if the property was destroyed while they were out, and by reason of the strike ; he at- tributed the injury to the property to the acts of individuals, but as an organization they counseled against it. Q. Are you in the employ of the Pacific Railway Company? — A. No, sir; I never was in the employ of any railroad company in my life. Q. Not as surgeon, I believe ? — A. No, sir. STEPHEN HUNTER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. State your full name, age, residence, and, occupation. — Answer. My full name is Stephen Hunter ; I am forty-two years old ; a resident of Hiawatha, Brown. County, Kansas, and I am city marshal. L. R. YATES, recalled, testified as follows : By Mr. Curtin : Question. You only stated what you were told, doctor ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And you thereifore are without knowledge as to whether the property was re- ' turned which you were told was taken away. — A. I don't know anything about the property being returned at all ; I don't know that it was returned. By Mr. Burxes : Q. You don't know that it was taken ? — A. No, sir ; as I said at the beginning, I know nothing about the destruction of property myself; I wasn't about the works at .all. STEPHEN HUNTER, recalled, testified as follows : By Mr. Buenes : Question. You are city marshal of the city of Hiawatha ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. I will get you to state if you have any knowledge as to the injury for the de- struction of property in Hiawatha belonging to the Pacific Railway Company.— A. Sight away after the strike, I think it was the same day, the chairman of the executive board of the assembly there came to me and said that they proposed to put a guard over the Missouri Pacific property; they wanted some authority from the city, as there was a good many tramps around the railroad yards ; they wanted some author- ' ity to fire them out ; they wanted the president o f the council— our mayor was absent- to make a kind of special police of them. He did so, and they were supposed to be guarding the property. After this order was issued by the railroad company I went to one of them and asked them what effect that would have upon their guarding the 164 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ptoperty ; they said it would have no effect -whatever, as they didn't propose to pay- any attention to it. A night or two after that the water was let out of the railroads tank right there in the yards at Hiawatha ; the pnmp was injured, the water was let out of the engine in the round-house, and the water was also let out of railroad tanks- this side of Hiawatha and the other side of Hiawatha outside of the city limits while they were professing to guard the property. When we found out that that had been done we, the mayor and council, took what little authority away from them that had been given to them. Things ran along very quietly then, as the trains couldn't go out of Atchison or Omaha until March 21, 1 belipve, when there was a man came there, special agent of the company, and undertook to run out a train, and, getting the engine turned on the turn-table, the cylinder head was knocked out of it by placing a bolt on the guide-bar. I believe that is about all of the destruction of property that has happened there. Q. You don't know who did this, or let out this water ? — ^A. No, sir ; as far as the injury to that engine is concerned, there is a man under arrest and I suppose he will be tried to-day or to-morrow for that. I don't know whether he is guilty or not. He is under bond to attend at court. Q. Was he in the employ of the company ? — A. Yes, sir ; he worked at the round- house. Q. What is his name?— A. His name is Thomas Brumpson. By Mr. Stewart : " Q. How many men were detailed to guard that property f — A. Four, I believe^ wr; I guess it was six. ■ By Mr. Burnes : Q. Was this man ouo of them — Brumpson ? — A. No, sir. H. SHERMAN, being duly sworn and examined, testified aa follows: By Mr. Burnes : -Question. Give your name and place of residence ? — Answer. H. Sherman, Hiawatha. Q. Mr. Sherman, we want to have you tell us everything that you know with regard to Iho cause of the existing troubles between, the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employers, and as far as you can give us information concerning any grievances which you know to exist between the two. — A. Well, as regards my- self, I have been employed as yardman at Hiawatha for some three years iiast, aud about October a year ago we made application for a raise of our pay, and we made' it on the strength of the agreement of March a year ago. Q. Mr. Sherman, you need not speak of anything occurring prior to March 15, 1885. — A. I thought that might have made my dates so that you can understand them.! But since the strike of a year ago last March, we had understood that there was to be so much money paid to each individual as regards to his employ in the various branches of trade' in the road. For instance, a switchman was to get so much, a trackman so much, and the brakesmen and employes generally on the system, was to get" a system of pay which we all understood would be paid as soon as Governor Mar- maduke and Governor Martin had made their agreeriient. Now, I wish to be nnder^ stood that I was not a Knight of Labor at the time that this agreement was made ; consequently I don't really claim that I should receive the pay that they agreed to pay at that time, but I do claim this, that they agreed to pay one employ^ a stipu- lated price for his work. Why shouldn't another receive the same, no matter where he is located on the road ? Q. That is, if he does the same work. — A. Yes, the same class of work ; now in Kan- sas City they receive for ten hour's work $2 a day. We at Hiawatha receive $55 a month; while we make every day in the month. At Kansas City, they made $i a day, while we nlade $55 a month, and the question arises in my mind, why they shonid make that difference in our pay, after they had agreed to pay us equal pay for the same class of work on all divisions of the road. Q. What would be the difference between |2.00 a day and $55.00 a month ? — A. Quite a good deal. You can figure that up. Thirty-one days would bo $62 in the place of $55. Q. Thirty-one days? — A. Thirty-one days would be $62. By Mr. Stewart : Q. You don't count Sundays, do you ?— A. You do most as.4'viredly in railroad work. You agree to work for the railroad company, and you work thirty-one days if there are thirty-one day s in the month. If there are only twenty-eight days, you only work twenty-eight days. Q. As a matter of fact you do not work thirty-one days, do you?— A. We work every day in the montli, Sundays and every day. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 165 Q. When hired by the month T — A. Yes, sir; Snndaysand Mondays are not known. Q. Do you mean to say that any one in authority in the railroad company compels jou to -work thirty-one days in a month containing thirty-one daysT — ^A. I mean to say this : If we don't work that, that our services are no longer required. Q. Just go on. — ^A. Well, I am waiting for you to ask me questions. Q. Just state it again once more, what wages you received at Hiawatha J — A. Fifty-five dollars a month. Q. And that meant every day in the month, whether it was twenty-eight days in the month of February, or thirty-one in May T — A. Every day in the month ; made no difference about the month. • Q. Now, you say the same class of employes in Kansas City received |2 a day T— A. Tes, sir. Q. Counting twenty-six working days in the month in Missouri, a Missouri em- ploy^ would receive $52 in a month, but he would have his Sundays to himself. Working in Kansas at |55 a month, he would not have his Sundays to himself? — A. No Sundays at all. Now you understand me this is the commencement of the strike, -or I should say a year ago. Understand, this was since March a year ago. I will -explain further in regard to the wages paid at the present time. ' Q. You have been speaking of the condition of things with regard to prices prior to the strike of March, 1885 1— A. Yes, sir; 1886. Q. Well, now, tell us how it has been since the 16th of March, 1885. — A. Well, some time in October, 1885, the men employed there asked for a raise of pay in the yards. They referred the case to the yardmaster, and he answered them very indif- ferently. I couldh't repeat the words. I wasn'r employed there at that time; but I do know pretty near what was said ; and it was let go for a few days. Finally again the same men called on him for an increase of pay, and he says, "If you don't like -this job, you can quit ; there ar^ plenty of men to take your place." A man who re- plied to him was since killed on the 27th of November. However, whatever his re- ply was, I don't suppose will make any difference to this committee. Q. No. — A. But about the last days of November, Mr. Drake waited upon me, being the only man employed there then that had asked for an increase of pay, and he of- fered me $60 a month. Before that our committee as Knights of Labor had asked for the regular pay that was promised to be paid on the 15th of March previous. That was a year ago last March. Aiid Mr. Drake said that $60 would be as much as he could pay. I told him that I had no authority whatever to receive his statements. That the Knights had made a statement to him by letter. He said he didn't wish to recognize the Knights of Labor ; or, I don't know that it was in them words, but he said that those men were not employed by the company, but he wanted to treat with men who was •employed by the company, and I being the only one in relations to the order, which I represented there, I didn't wish to treat with him, and I told him I couldn't answer 3iis question whether I would accept it or not. Had he offered me $100 a month I wouldn't have accepted it under the conditions under which I was placed there. By Mr. Buenes : Q. What wages were yon receiving at this time in October of which you speak ?^ A. Fifty-five dollars. Q. Fifty-five dollars a month ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I understand that he offered you $60 ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. But under the circumstances you declined to take it? — A. I couldn't take it, in allegiance to the order which I represented. Q. Do you understand that the order regulates your wages? — ^A. In a certain measure they do. » Q. Who ordered you not to work at $55 a month ? — ^A. I was discharged. Q. But you were offered $60 a month. I understood you as intimating that you would have accepted it hut for some occult influence or power over you, exerted by the Knights of Labor ? — A. We were told, as I understand, from March a year ago, that we would receive the same rate of wages for the same class of work in all de- partments on the entire system. Q. You understood the contract as meaning that? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And the reason yon would not take it was because you believed that the con- tract was being violated ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. In offering you $60 it was being violated in refusing $60 to those who were as much entitled to it as you were. Is that what you mean? — ^A. That is just exactly what I mean. Q. When did you quit working for the Missouri Pacific Railroad ?— A. The 24th of December, I think. I may be mistaken. However, I was discharged about a week •before this strike occurred. By Mr. Stewart: Q. What strike? — A. Tliis present strike. Q. That occurred in March, 1886. You say you were discharged in December? — -A. Well. I may be mistaken. 16G LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You say you quit work in December?— A. I thiut proliaWy in Fpliruary. 1 ■wouldn't 1)6 certain. By the Chairman : ' Q. Before the strike ?— A. Just before the strike. By Mr. Boknes : Q. Now tell ns why you quit ?— A. I was discharged. Q. Why were you discharged ?— A. For good reasons. Q. Sir? — A. For good reasons. t j-j i Q. Then you had no cause of complaint against the railroad company ? — A. I didn't complain on account of my discharge. Q. They gave you the reasons, did they ?— A. Yes, sir. I am not making any com- plaint about that part. By Mr. Stewart : Q. You speak of the terms of the contract requiring certain wages to be paid; did you ever read the contract?— A. Well, yes, sir, I read it; but of course I couldn't repeat it. Q. Are you certain that the contract requires that ? Do you say it does ?— A. Well, it is generally taken that what we read in the papers is supposed to be a fact, pub- lished between two governors. Q. I notice in what is presented here to the committee a statement of grievances, which was formerly given to the public, signed by James H. Cooper, John Mayne, and C. W. Walkem, committee. The only points are the eighth, ninth, and tenth, relating to wages, and they are as follows : ''That we be paid not later than the 10th day of each month. Ninth. That unskilled labor receive not less than |1.50 per day, and the freightloadersshallreceive$45.25permonth. Tenth*. That all yard foremen, switch- men, and helpers receive wages equal to present Chiqago rates." — A. Well, what was it?' Q. I don't know anything about that. Now, do those three points cover your claim that you say you made, or are they different? — A. Well, the Chicago rates in regard: to yard work I understand are more than that. Q. What was your business here ? — A. I was a switchman at Hiawatha. Q. That is the only point that is made in regard to switchmen by this committee. They don't seem to entertain the same view exactly as you do about what their griev- ance is. Their grievance is not what you stated, but that your rates do not compare- with those of Chicago ; not with those of Kansas City or anywhere else. — ^A. Well, the rates, as I understand it, at Kansas City should be those of Chicago, If they ■were not, it would most assuredly be a violation of the agreement between Kansas- City and Chicago. Q. Now, you say they offered you |60 a month when you made complaint ; why didn't you take it? — A. Because I was not authorized to. Q. Not authorized by whom ?^A. We had applied to our yardmaster. Q. Not authorized by whom? — A. Well, I will explain that if you -will allow meto. Q. You can answer it without telling a long story, can't you ? — A. I want to get at it in my own way, so that I can explain it. Q. Very well ; go at it in your own way. — A. We applied to our yardmaster for an increase of pay, and he acted very indifferently. In fact, he as much as refused us, though not in those words. We carried it to higher authority, and were treated very indiflerently there ; and then- carried it to the general superintendent, and received no answer. Mi. Drake waited upon us and made those offers in the mean time. Rep- resenting the Knights of Labor, as one of them, we had made our grievance knowni through them to Mr. Hoxie, to whom we are entitled to receive our grievances. We had said what we wanted and what we thought we ought to receive, and got no answer except through Mr. Drake. He offered us tnis $60, and being a Knight of Labor and a committee appointed to wait upon those gentlemen, I didirt feel that I was author- ized to receive any proposition over the head of that committee. Q. Now, I asked you before, authorized by whom? — A. By the Knights of Labor. Q. Then the question as to what you should do depended not on yourown judgment of what was right, nor upon the judgment of the employes of the railroad, nor on the railroad company, but on the Knights of Labor ?— A. The judgment of what I was to- receive rested upon what we thought, as Knights of Labor, was right. In accordance with what they agreed to pay us. Q. I know ; but the Knights of Labor include a great many people that are not em- ployed by the railroad company. — A. I know, a great many people. Not exactly saloon keepers, but everybody else. Q. So that the upshot of it vras, yon proposed to refer your compensation to the judgment of the clerks and shopkeepers The Witness. No, sir. Q. (Continuing.) Retail grocers, and anybody else that constituted the Knights of Labor. Was not that so ?— A. No, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 167 Q. You say you couldn't do it without their actiou, and they were constituted not only of railroad men, but of everybody else. Isn't that the size of it? — A. No, sir; we don't propose to give our grievances as railroad men to all classes of people. Q. What you mean is, that railroad employes could not make an agreement with the railroad company -without the consent of the order. — A. They could. Q. They did not f — ^A. They could ; they done so. Q. As you say, you were not authorized by the Knigfhts o f Labor to accept that proposition. Do you think it was a fair proposition ? — ^A. The Knights of Labor are represented by all branches of trade. Q. I understand that; and you wanted the consent of the Knights of Labor to your agreement. Yon didn't feel authorized to act without }0U acted with their consent ? — A. In our own branch of trade yon must understand. We were represented of course by all branches of trade, but each and every branch of trade will work in its own in- terest. , • Q. Do you think it was for your interest to refuse the $60 per month f — A. I didn't think it was to my interest to accept it under the circumstances. Q. Sisty dollars a month is better pay than $55 a month, isn't it I — A. WeM, I don't know. Q. Your personal judgment was rather in favor of taking, wasn't it ? — A. I will not answer tnat -question. Q. You do not wish to answer the question ? — A. No, sir. Mr. Stewart. I don't press it. That is all. By Mr. Burnes : Q. Mr. Powderly told us in Washington that a motto, or one of the cardinal princi- ples of your order, was to the effect that a wrong done to one was the concern of all. I ask you if in yonr declension of that offer and in your action with regard to yourself you were actuated simply by that sort of devotion to the principles of your order ; if you felt that there was inequality and injustice being done to any of your brethren, and that therefore yon regarded it your duty to decUne that personal favor, as you might call it, to yourself, that wasdenied to yonr associates? — A. I decline to answer you, Mr. Burnes, in this light Mr. Burnes. You need not give a reason for it. If you decline, that is all right. Just stand aside. T. J. SHERMAN, being duly sworn and examined, testifies as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. Mr. Sherman, just state the cause of grievance you have against the rail- road company. — Answer. Will I state from a year ago, and from then onf Q. Yes, commencing -with March, 1885. — A. In March, 1885, I commenced work where I have been, and where I went away from work the Ist day of March. That was before the strike of 1885. When the strike was ordered in 1885 the men went out on a strike. I requested of my foreman whether thejr had any grievance in regard to the trackmen or section men. " If they have, I will strike ; if not, I will work." He said they didn't have, so I went on, right straight along, with a lay-off now and then. The first lay-off was the 16th of January. 'Those men working on the gang I was working on was cut down to half-time through the winter. The way we was cut down was this : We would be prdered, say, Friday night ; our foreman had or- ders; told us, "We won't need yon out any more till Monday." Probably before Monday come there would be a snow storm. We would be called out at any hour of the night, and at one particular time they was called out at 6 o'clock in the after- noon. We goes out, shovels snow from that till 3 o'clock, get a half an hour leave, then, by taking it ourselves, and one of the of&cials of the road was going to kick us out of the caboose for going in to eat at that time ; and so we worked until 5 o'clock in the morning. It took, say, an hour to run in and an hour to go out. We got one day for it, §1.15. Well, in about a week afterwards we-was laid off in the same man- ner, and shoveled snow all day and ordered out at 5.30 a. m., and so we was hurried out at 5.30. We went out at 6 o'clock (we had to be up at 5.30, all the same), and we worked from that uutU 6 o'clock the next morning ; and we got straight time for it, just two days for twenty-three hours, or a little over straight ; and this was in February, I believe. And then they called us again one night, about 10 o'clock. I says to the foreman, says I, "Are we going to ^et time and a half for this, as it should be, or are we not ? If we are not, I wiU stop in the bed; if we are," said 1, " I wiU go out." He says, "If yon will go out, we will give you time and a half," so I goes out under them terms. So we worked all that night, or part of the night and part of the day, and he asked the road-master on the Atchison Division^it was on the Omaha Extension— what time he would allow his men at night, to see if he could give them a day and a half or not. He says, " .Just straight time," and I happened to hear him sav this myself; I know it positively ; so I made np my mind I wouldn t 168 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. go snow-raiding any more, if that ■was the case. So on the 5th day of March, I be- lieve it was, my gang — at that time, at the latter end of February, I was walking track at night — from the 5th of March they wasn't ten minutes after I heard the boys all walked out I walked out, too ; and so I stood out until the 28th day of March. The foreman come to me and he says, says ho, " I would like to get you men to go out and wotk a day; the track is getting dangerous." Said I, "No, I won't do it; I am working for Sherman now." And he says he didn't' know what to do; the track was getting unsafe for passenger trains. Says I, " It is a pity." And he goes to our open executive board and gets an order from them for us men to go out to fix up the tjack. That was on the 2cith of March. So I goes out, under that order, right away. In the evening he says, "What is the matter with going out to-morrow?" " No, sir ; not unless you get another order. You have got to get an order a day to get ]ne out." So I didn't go out any more. So the Slst of March, I believe it was 12.40, the strike was declared off. All the men applied for work — hafl an arbitration. I applied to my foreman for work, and I was accepted and welit to work. I worked, I believe, until the 8th of April, and was again declared off. I came out again and am out now, and that is all I know. Q. You have never been paid for this extra work? — A. No, sir, never; I got for . those eight days — I have got the date for it here [producing memorandum book] March, lor them eight days, I got paid $7. That is the extra time I got for that ; I received that this month. Q. That is, you worked eight days and got $7 ? — A. I worked eight days and got $7. Q. Did that include the night work? — A. That was not extra work at all, but reg- ular work; it was regular every night; there was no trouble about that; but I only received f7 for that eight days' work. Q. What ought you to have received?— A. I had ought to have received $8.90, I believe ; I am not very good on figures. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Who kept your time ?^A. The section foreman he says, I see him to-day ; I was speaking to him about this eight days ; he says he had eight days there for me and sent it in for me ; I guess they euchered me out of it at Hiawatha, or some other place ; it is lost, anyhow. Q. What is the name of that foreman ? — A. Jim McDermott. Q. Do you think he sent eight days in ?— A. Yes, sir, I am positive of that ; I have confidence in the man so far, anyhow. J. H. COOPER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Buunes : Question. State your full name, residence, and occupation. — Answer. J. H. Cooper; age, forty-seven ; occupation, blacksmith. Q. What position have you occupied with reference to the Missouri Pacific Rail- way? — A. I was acting as foreman of the blacksmith shop. Q.' When did you quit the service?— A. On the 8th day of March. Q. What do you know, Mr. Cooper, in regard to the action of the management in sending away cars to be repaired and the discharge of employes here in consequence of it?— A. I think about the middle of last May I was told' by the foreman of the round-house that the company was about to send all the Missouri Pacific engines away from down here to Cypress, and I inquired about it and found that it was true. I then wanted to know if they intended to send the men with them, and I couldn't get any information. I then gent word down to Mr. Johnson, at Cypress, and inquired if there was room there for the men, and he came up and he said that they were in the same boat there; that the Missouri Pacific Railway Company or the Wabash Company had taken the engines away from the Cypress round-house and had taken them over to Wyandotte, and they left a surplus of men on their hands. After those eiigines had gone a short time Mr. Ferris complained that he had too many machin- ists, and he came to me on one or two occasions and complained about it— had too many machinists. Wanted to know how to get rid of them. The company had made a contract of their own on the 15th of last March. , We made no contract ; they made a contract. We had no contract to violate. They had a contract to violate. The contract was made with the governors, and they concurred in what the governors dictated and signed it, and that was the contract. About these engines. The com- pany having too many machinists here, it was a continual bore, it seems, to Mr. Fer- ris—that was the master-mechanic. He came to me, as I said before, on several oc- casions, and finally we were put on nine hours, and it came on down to eight hours, and sometime in Febrtiary the painters were laid off indefinitely ; and the men who had been growling, to use that term, had become dissatisfied, and they declared they wouldn't put up with it any longer, and they called a meeting and about one hundred or one hundred and twenty-five of them met. that evening, and they agreed that the grievance committee should go and have a conference with Mr. Fagan and see if they liABOR -TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 169 could understand anything about thia matter — why this continual cutting of hours was kept up— and I went down with two others and met Mr. Fagan in his office, and we talked thero, I think, -two or two and a half hours about that matter; and I asked him if It was because the Lord had sent the snow out on the Western prairie that men were cut in their wages. He said, "No; not altogether." I asked him then if it was on account of hard times. He said partly ; something to that amount. And I also asked Mr. Fagan if it was right to cut the men when the company was not mak- ing a very large revenue ; if it would not also bo right to raise the mens' wages when the company made $100,000 or $125,000 a month ? That seemed to be a new idea to him. He laughed at it. And then I asked him if we would agree among ourselves to lay those machinists off— he told Ine that they had six more than ho thought neces- sary — I asked him if we would agree among ourselves to lay those machinists off, whether he would put the painters back to work again, and he said no; and he talked on a little Vhile after that, and he asked me what report I was going to make. "Well," said I, "I am going to report that on general principles we can down you; but on figures you have got the advantage of us." And then I propounded the ques- tion to him again. Said I, "Mr. Fagan, you give me an indefinite answer iabout those men. Now, I want you to tell me, if we will agree among ourselves to. discharge those machinists, will you put the painters back to work ?" And he wheeled around in his chair and says, "I will." And I went back with that understanding. And it was about the 16th or 17th, I think, but I remember it was on Saturday evening, and we all went home from work as usual. And I met Joe Blackburn on the street on Sunday, and he says, "There is an order up that there will be no work on Monday, being the 22d day of February." Well, of course 1 had no complaint to make ; I was • paid by the month; I was one of these thirty-one-day men, or forty days. I went whenever I was called. But some of the men came there IJ miles, with their dinner- buckets, and was very much dissatisfied to see a notice up on the door dated the 21st. It was not up on Saturday evening when we went away. And I will tell you, to be honest about it, I don't HJelieve you could have gotten the men out on this strike when the order came to go out, if it had not been for these cuttings we had here dur- ing the last wintei'. I was opposed to this strike in the beginning. I can tell you about as much about the beginning of it, I presume, as anybody else here. About January, we received an order from District 101 , some time in January, with two propositions. One was the recognition of the Knights of Labor, the other was to make a demand on the com- pany for $1.50 a day for unskilled labor. We voted on the first proposition unani- mously that we would stand by the board in making that demand. On the second proposition there were two dissenting voices. We sent that back to the exeontive board which would meet in Marshall, and about the time they met in Marshall there was one Hall discharged down there, and that was exactly the straw that broke the eamel's back, the discharge of Hall. The other grievances, from what I can under- stand, had been accumlating all along the road for the last year, and this man Hall's discharge brought the matter to a conclusion. Well, this assembly that I belong to here belongs to District 101, being on this same system of railroad. Now, mind you, we are banded together for mutual protection against the encroach- ment of monopolies, and we claim that we have the same right to band together and bind ourselves together asmen, for self-protection, that Jay Gould has to pile up his millions. And I also claim, gentlemen, that when they cannot declare a dividend on watered stock and growl about it, wo have just the same right to -growl about our bread. Those are my sentiments and that is my evidence. I know that this and other companies have made a rule, and this company up to a short time ago had a black list, where, if a man dared get up and speak his sentiments, he was put ; and that black list was sent out over the system. A man would come along and inquire for a job of work. He would see us in the shop and say, "can I get a job here?" and we jrould say, "what are your qualifications ; what kind of work can you do?" He would tell me, and per- haps I would want a man, and I would say, " come around to-morrow and I will tell yon," and in the mean time he would go and examine the black list — we had one up Iiere — Mr. Ferris had a black list and the Knights of Labor have been organized on this system and on other roads in this country for that one purpose, of keeping them from imposing upon us. Now here is a man had a case of injustice which frequently occurred on the railroad. -Railroad men are not all saints and the men t'jat worked for them, the blacksmiths and the laborers, are not all saints. They are all human beings just the same as our first parents. It is human nature, and human nature has never changed. And, as I said before, men are liable to do wrong in high and low positions. The gentleman has spoken here about there being bad men in the Knights of Labor. Great God, they are in the church. They are in tlie best of families. There are black sheep in all families and we can't keep them out ; but we are banded to- gether, as I told you before, for our own protection, and so now as a band of brothers, and when this order came here from District 101 to go out on this strike we went out and stood together shoulder to shoulder and did all we could to carry our point. Oar 170 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH ANp- WEST. object is to violate no law. Our object is to protect the men that are on the sections-, and men of that description, and those are the men, some way, whom the company as a general thing, somehow or other, always find opportunity to down and keep them down. They take advantage of their ignorance and keep them down. Now, our ob- ject is to take those men, teach them what their rights are. A man cannot be a gobd neighbor without being a law-abiding citizen, I don't care what is said to the con- trary, and he has got to be honest and industrious and sober. If he is a drunken man we will expel him from our order. If we don't do it it is our fault. We don't take in a man unless he is a good man. I heard you ask why we don't take in lawyers. In the first place, we don't because they are not producers of anything ; in the second place, they are too sharp for ns yet awhile. We may take them in after awhile when we get more power ; we calculate to run this Government some day after awhile. By the Chairman : ' ' Q. You say you don't take in lawyers ? — A. No, sir. - Q- You take in doctors ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What do they produce except children ? [Hilarity.] A. Yes, sir ; but lawyers are too sharp for us. They get around with all their technicalities and we are not able to cope with those men. B,ut, when we become educated, and when we make educa- tion universal and compulsory in this country, we will have men who are not law- yers who are just as sharp as those who are lawyers. I don't think all the brain in the country is on the side of those who use their brains altogether. I think they have a good deal of brain, but it is also to be found in men of muscle. And I am finding no fault with you gentlemen. 'Mr. Bnrnes here just asked the question and I thought I would answer it. Now, we have had those grievances on tliis system here for two years, to my knowledge. Here for the last six months they have been working and prodding at us all the time. There has been a continual irritation around these shops. I was on the grievance committee, and I know I dislike as much as anybody to go with a grievance to anybody. I went on several occasions to Mr. Ferris and qnce or twice to Mr. Fagan. And I must say here that he always treated me very gentle- manly and respectfully aild courteously and never rofused to accede to anything ex- cept the last time, and that was in curtailing me one day more than necessary on Washington's birthday ; something I never heard of before that time. By Mr. Buknks : Q. That is a legal holiday. Go on. — A. I don't believe I have anything else to say. I will answer any question you may wish to ask. Q. I would ask yon if you have positive knowledge yourself of the black list you have been speaking of? — A. I am prepared to prove it, if Q. It is not what you can prove ; but if you have absolute knowledge of it your- self. — A. No, sir ; I never went myself to see the list. I was told bj^ the chief clerk It was in the office. , He said it was there. Q. So that what you have said with regard to that black list is' from information entirely ? — A. It is what the chief clerk told me. . Q. Well, I wanted that to be understood clearly and fairly; that is all.-^A. Yes,. sir. Q. Mr. Cooper, I will mention to you the names of Mr. Plains, Mr. Dunham, Mr, Fingley, Mr, Wilson, and Mr. McDonald, all machinists, and ask you if yon know of their discharge from the service of this company, and if so, for what cause ? — A. The first that you mentioned there. Plains, is the only one that I know of who was dis- charged. He was discharged for — well, I think he was discharged almost for nothing, to tell you the truth about it. I will tell you the circumstances and you can judge for yourself. The company had a rule here of laying men off sometimes one or two days at the last of the month and sometimes on Saturday. And one of those days it be- came necessary to send for three or four men to work on an engine that they were finishing, and it seems that Plains had worked on that engine the day before. But they sent and got another crew to work on that engine. I must also state that Mr. Winch had told me he had done a piece of work wrong on that engine the day before, on Friday, I think, and for that reason he sent and got another man in his place on Saturday. When he came to the shop on Monday they had a man working there who is a very disagreeable man, named Wilson. He came to the shop the first thing in the morning and complained about sending oif and getting a new crew of men to work on that engine Saturday. He had worked on the same engine on Friday and tie other gentleman seemed to think it was Plain's fault and he was discharged. That is the only reason I know. The other men were laid off at the time I was telling you about when the 'proposition was made to Mr. Fagan to lay off sis ma- chinists and replace the painters. Q. You have no reason to believe that they were discharged for transactions prior io the contract of 188.5? — A. No, sir ; if you will read the names over I will tell you. Q. W. Plains, A. Dunham, H. Fingley, J. E Wilson, and A. McDonald.— A. They were all laid off according to agreement, except Plains. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 171 Q. And you have detailed the circumstances under which Plains «fas laid off?— A. Yes, sir. Q. So that you think the other men were properly discharged ?— A. Yes, sir ; we made an agreement with Mr. Fagan, and carried it out to the best of our ability. Q.. You spoke of a vote thtVi was taken on the two propositions sent by Assembly 101. — A. On the first proposition it was a unanimous vote. Q. And the other proposition had two votes against it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were those two negative votes from railroad men or from business men here in town ? — A. Well, I don't know whether the business men voted on that proposition or not ; I don't know ; there was a squabble about that. Q. Do you know whether those two votes were cast by the railroad men or business men ? — A. I do not ; now, here, I will tell you ; we had to send a per capita tax, and I think it was agreed, although I will not be positive about it, that none but railroad men, and those belonging to the District 101, should be assessed that tax. By Mr. Stewabt : Q. You have stated the several grievances that you said existed here ; have you stated all that existed on the system within your knowledge ? — A. I couldn't tell you ; I have just stated that as a fact ; I never kept a scrap-book. Q. I understand one of them to have been that the hours of labor were reduced to eight and nine hours, was it not ? — A. So they did, and that was contrary to the agreement; because the agreement said — Governor Martin told me he inserted that with his own hand— that a man should have thirty days' notice. Q. I don't know anything about the reasons that influenced the railroad company; but suppose the railroad company or an individual has more men employed than they can give work to, a manufacturer, for example, isn't it better that the hours should be cut than that a lot of men should be discharged ?, — A. We granted them that priv- ilege. Q. Well, then that is all right. Now, you say that there was some complaint made about the painters, and you went to the superintendent and asked him to do a cer- tain thing, and he accepted your proposition ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Sq that grievance was remedied. What else was there? — A. Let me tell you about sending these engines away and not sending the men with them. If they had sent the men with the engines we would not have had that trouble. Q. Do you say that the Knights of Labor have the right to such a control over the railway systems that they determine the policy of the road as to where its engines shall be repaired ? — A. No, sir ; I don't think that is right at all. Q. Now, supposing — I don't know anything about the facts — supposing that good economical management and proper management wauld- make it better that engines should be repaired in one place than in another, would there be anything wrong on the part of the railroad managers in putting their repairs in such a place ? — A. We ac- eeeded to this proposition ; that if they wanted to put a fire-box in there, they could do it cheaper in Saint Louis, and we wouldn't say anything about it. Q. You mentioned the fact, as I understand you, to have been a grievance that ihey sent engines down there without sending the men with them ? — A. That was sending the engines away that were in good order. Q. Are you certain in your own mind that, as manager of the road, if you had the responsibility of managing this road, yon would not have donp the same thing ? That is, do yon know all the reasons that operated on the mind of the manager to cause them to do exactly what they did with reference to that subject ? — A. I don't know anything about that. Q. Then you are unable to state whether this is such a grievance as would justify any action on the part of the employes, are you not ? — A. It looks to me like a clear ' case of fraud. That is the decision our committee came to. Q. Where does the fraud come in ? — A. In sending the engines away and keeping the men here. They should have bent the men away with the engines. Q. Would not that depend on whether they had a surplus of men at the place where they sent them ?— A. But they ought to have sent the men with the engines they sent ^way from here. Q. I don't undertake to reason the case, hut if one does not understand all the reasons that operated, how can one judge as to the propriety of the act when they do not understand the reasons which influenced those men to do as they did. Do you understand? — A. No ; I don't. I should say I did understand the reasons. Q. Do you think there were existing grievances on this line to justify the strike ? — A. I don't think there was. I think the strike could have been arbitrated. Governor Martin got me to go to Mr. Fagan and ask him if we could not agree to settle our grievances here, and he told me he had telegraphed to Mr. Kerrigan, but never re- ceived any answer. He told me Mr. Kerrigan wired him in case of a strike here he should wire to that office for instructions. I believe that was what he told me. Q. I need not ask yon, I am sure, because it is already apparent, not only from yonr 172 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Btatement but your appearance, that yon had no hand in or have made no justifica- tion of the aots' of violence or destrnction of property here or anywhere else ? — A. No, ' sir ; I tried ta avoid that as far as I was able. Q. I suppose it is true that where so large a number of men are employed many of whom, as you say, are probably not very wise, it is difficult at such times as this to control your own order ; that is, all the individuals of it in time of excitement ; the danger is that they will break over the rules and commit acts of violence? — A. Yes, «ir. Q. Now, then, is it a part of the theory of your order and is it countenanced by your order that where men are out on a strike like this they will prevent the employ- mentof any labor or the moving of any business by anybody else ? Is that a part of your creed?— A. The first thing we want to do is to uso brains instead of muscle. If i can persuade you to leave your engine or to leave any other vocation, if I talk to you, I have a perfect right to do so. That is what we claim, but I have no right to use physical force. Q. Have yon a right to use intimidation ? — A. What do you call intimidation? Q. Well, threats. — A. No, sir. Q. That is not countenanced by your order ?— A. \ No, sir ; not at all. We have had, as I stated to some of our friends in the beginning of this trouble, friends come and say we sympathize with you, are willing to stand by you in this fight, and we tried them. Finally they said you must do certain things; and we tried them. Yes, they said, but you have got to do something else; you have got to intimidate. The devil we must, I said, if we must take a club and knock you off. That is what they «alled sympathy. That don't amount to anything at all. Q. One word in regard to this black-list, which the committee so far as I know had not heard of before ; you say you never have seen it ? — ^A. No, sir ; I never did. Q. Would it not be true on a system of roads employing some fourteen thousand men, if that is the number, that there would be a great many bad men in the employ- ment of the road? — A. You can mighty soon find out whether they are bad, or not ; if ho is a competant or bad man. Q. But wouldn't it be likely to be true that there would be a good many worthless, faithless men ? — A. Yes. Q. Would it not, therefore, be the duty of the company to keep a pretty sharp watch for a man — I am not speaking now of oppression or taking advantage of any inad- vertence, but to keep a sharp watch so as to know exactly what sort of men they had, and if they find they have a bad man, to mark him down ; what do you say to that proposition ? — A. I think if a man is a drunken worthless man Q. But suppose he is unfaithful, negligent, lazy, suppose he has any of those qnali- * ties which render a man unfit for any responsible employment, would it not be the -duty of the company to keep a watch for him? — A. I don't know; I. rather think that Is like buying potatoes, you take big and little altogether. Ood Almighty never put a> man here to starve just because he is lazy. Q. Suppose ypU were a farmer employing a large number of men, you would proba- bly know whether the men were worth while retaining in your employment ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And you would not keep a man in your employment whom you were satisfied it was for your interest to discharge ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you deny that right to the railroad company?— A. No, sir; I think a man should have the right to discharge a man who is incompetent. Q. Well, we will find out all about that list before we will get through ? — A. I don't think it is right to compel a corporation or any man to keep a man who is incompe- tent. I don't indorse that doctrine at all. Q. I did not suppose you did. I know you would not do it yourself. — A. No, sir; I would not have it myself. I know a poor laborer worked for me one day and got drunk and went ou the rock pile down here, poor unfortunate fellow, and he finally got from there, I believe, in the calaboose and got locked up. He made |1.65, and there was that much coming to him. Mr. Compton made out the check, and 35 cents hospital dues was taken out. Q. Well, now let us say a word about that, because that has been brought up a good many times. You didn't put that into the list of grievances, though. Now, I suppose in regard to that the railroad corporation makes no money outoflt, do they; it is not fer their interests ; they do not undertake it on account of any advantage to them ?— A. I believe, honestly speaking, that the company has a good hospital, and I believe that they aim to do what is just and right by the patients sent there. The difficulty about that hospital is, it is away down at Sedalia, and a man with a familv living in Atchison don't want to go there. I wouldn't go there myself, and you wouldn't if you were here. . Q. My point is this, whether there was any intention in organizing that and exact- ing this fee to do any wrong to the employes of the road on the part of the company. It may be that the thing is wrong in its system. I should be inclined to think myself LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 173 that the objection you make to it is a valid one. But that is a mere matter of opin- ion. My point, however, is so far as the employes are concerned, they don't charge the corporation -with endeavoring to injure them f It is not to injure them, but for their benefit that lliey undertate it. Is not that so, although they may be mistaken as to the mode? — A. I presume that is their intention. I don't know. I have no right to think otherwise. By the Chaiemaic : Q. The system should be changed, that is, if a man contributes to that hospital fund and has a family the system should be formed so as to contribute to his aid where he is situated. That would relieve the trouble? — ^A. I have met with all the men that work here and I believe they would vote unanimously for the hospital if they would bring it to Atchison. Q. Well, you couldn't have hospitals every whore ; but that change would make the system very perfect and satisfactory, and it would be very beneficial, although I can readily undei-stand the hardship of a man paying out of his wages to keep up a hos- pital and not having the benefit of it if he happens to fall sick and the family are not able to go there. That change would seem to correct the system ? — A. If the hospital was located here a man's family could go and get his medicine, or your neighbor could go and get it for you, and we could derive a benefit from it. Q. They should reach that in some way in a change in the system, so that a man eonld get something from it here t — A. Yes, sir. The statement of grievances as set forth by this witness is as follows : To the public, greeting: As there seems to be much difference of opinion as to the causes of dispute and grievances under which the employes of the Missouri Pacific in the State of Kansas now labor, and in order that all may know our basis of complaint, in justice to mer- ehants, the public generally, and ourselves, we, the executive committee of the Knights of Labor, do make the following statement : First. We demand a recognition from the Missouri Pacific Railway Company of our right to organize as Knights of Labor, and to be treated with as such. Second. The reinstatement of workmen unjustly discharged on account of their con- nection with the Knights of Labor, while doing duty as such, and with the consent of their superior o£&cers. Third. That employes who were cut in pay one year ago, with promises of speedy restoration, have these promises now made good. Fourth. That eight hours bo considered a day's work. Fifth. That all time over eight hours, and all Sunday work, be counted as one and a half time, or one-half time to be added to the straight time. Sixth. That when work is taken from a certain point the necessary labor shall fol- low it wherever it may go. Seventh. That timely notice be given of all stoppages and lay-offs. Eighth. That we be paid not later than the tenth day of each month. Ninth. That unskilled labor receive not less than $1.50 per day, and that stowers or freight-loaders shall receive $45.25 per month. Tenth. That all yard foremen, switchmen, andhelpers receive wages equal to present Chicago rates. J. H. COOPER, JOHN MAYNE, C. W. WALKEM, Committee. Mr. JAMES COMPTON, recalled, testified as follows: - By Mr. Buknes : Question. There has been something said here about a black-list that has been kept on the line of the Missouri Pacific Railway ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. I would like for you to state what you know in regard to it.— A. In making up the rolls every month we made out a list of men that were discharged during the month, and the causes of their discharge, which is reported to Saint Louis every month and the list is printed, taking in the list from here and. Saint Louis and Sedalia and Parsons, and all the roads along the line, and it is printed and sent back here as a warning not to engage these men again. Q. That isi the list from other divisions is sent here ?— A. The list from the other stations is all combined and put into one list, and sent back here in printed form. Q. Is that a system ? — A. Yes, sir ; that has been done for the last five years. That was the object, that the men would not be employed on the line. Q. I will ask you if you see any kinship between that and boycotting? — A. I think they are synonymous terms ; just a boycott on alarge scale. That is the way I always looked at it. 174 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. By Mr. Stewakt : Q. Let us see about the boycott. You say that it is boyoottlDg. It is Bot what I understand by boycotting ? — A. Yes, Sir. Q. But did they send that list to other railroads to prevent other railroads from employing them ? — A. I can't say that. I don't know. Q. That is what I understand by boycotting?— A. It was sent to the other places on the system. I don't know about railroads outside of the system. W. W. FAGAN, recalled, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes : Question. There has been some testimony with regard to the keeping of a list and exchanging it between the different oflScers of the Missouri Pacific system of men who have been discharged, and it is said these are circulated for the purpose of notifying each division with regard to the character of men not fit for employment. It has been called a black-list. I would like for you to explain why it iskept, and the extent of it? — ^Answer. There was a list of that nature kept under the administration of Mr. Talmage while he was manager of the corporation, but nothing of the kind to my knowledge since Mr. Hoxie took charge of it. I require all of my foremen to accompany each time check with a statement showing the causes of the issuance of the check. That I keep as a record for my own information. It Is not reported to my other division. That black list was abolished over a year and a half ago, possibly three years ago. Prior to that there was a published list that was circulated from one division to another. Q. There is nothing of that sort in existeme now ? — A. No, sir. Q. If there is any explanation that you desire to make with regard to any testimony .you have heard to-day in regard to your management or the management of your as- sociates, you are at liberty to state it ? — A. There is one case in particular. I will be glad to explain the reason for the reduction in the time of working hoursat the shops, particularly closing the shops on legal holidays and so forth. As Mr. Cooper has al- ready stated, at onetime it was determined we had a surplus of machinists, or in other w;ords, we had more men in that department than were required to keep up their special ' part of the work. Before making any reduction I asked Mr. Cooper and other mem- bers of the executive committee to call at the o£6ce, at which time I took occasion to explain to them the necessity of making the farther reduction in the expenses of the road. I showed them a portion of our earnings sheet and also showed them the cost of operating'the locomotive and car department. I think I have our earnings sheet here for the month of December showing the expense of the car and locomotive de- partments for the year 1885 and for the twelve months of 1884. It cost us to operate our locomotive departinent $284,306.66 for the twelve months ending December 31, 1885. It had cost us to operate the same departments |338, 194.93 for the year 1884. It cost to operate the car department for the year 1884, $62,177.46. In the year 1885, $795,232.28, while onr receipts were about the same for the years 18S4 and 1885. Now, I mentioned that to illustrate the necessity of making a reduction in the expenses of these two departments in j)artioular. There was no reduction made in the number of hours nor in the force until after the grievance committee were consulted, or in other words, when it became necessary to make a reduction I gave them the option of making a reduction by a reduction offeree or by a reduction in the number of work- ing hours. They designated the latter. With the exception in this ease of relieving the six machinists there they designated the reduction in the force provided they were allowed to designated the parties who were to be discharged. That point I conceded. By the Chairman : Q. Who difl you consult on that subject ? — A. Mr. Cooper, Mr. Walkem, and Mr. Mayne, the grievance committee of the Knights of Labor. And I will say further, as to any of these grievances that have been presented here by the members of their or- ders to-day, that none of them were presented to me. By Mr. Stewakt : Q. You state in regard to this matter of the bridge men who have a complaint that you do not allow them for time in their travel jn the night ? — A. Well, as to that, I cannot answer, from the fact that I have not charge of that department. That is un- der Mr. Peck, at Pacific. Q. That does not come to you ? — A. It is not under my control. Q. Well, anything else? — A. Mr. Tutt, here, that has just been on the stand, he saw the man do it, and he accused him of it ; and I afterwards heard some conversa- sation between the man that he accused doing it, and a man by the name of Connors that had charge of the Knights of Labor there; he was a marshal of the day or something to that effect. He says to Connors, he sajs, " Well, they saw me do it." Connor says, " Nobody but that white hat fellow saw you.'' He had reference to Mr. Tutt ; he had a white hat on that day. We got another engine out of the house, and came out to the water-tank, three miles below there, and found the water all let oat of the tank. Q. Were any threats made to yon on any occasion or anything in the way of warn- ing ? — ^A. No, sir ; not personally. Q. At any time? — A. Not personally to me; no, sir. Q. Did yon ever receiveany circular or letter, anything of that sort, on that sub- ject? — A. No, sir; I never received any . I have seen some posted up, that was all, advising train men not to go out. Q. Well, in your service as conductor, did you meet with any other accident or ob- struction of any sort? — A. Well, on' the morning of the 22d they shot through our caboose. , Q. Where was that ? — A. Between Kansas City and Wyandot, about half way be- tween Cypress Yards and Wyandotte. Q. Was that before daylight ? — A. Yes, sir ; between half past one and two o'clock. Q. Did you see any person ? — A. I couldn't see any person ; it was too long a dis- I tance ; I could see the flash from the guns in the direction of the river. Q. Was it a bullet? — A. It was a Winches^er; I think it came through the ca- boose ; we have the ball. Q. How near your head did it come ? — A. Well, it was nearer my feet than it was my head ; I was in the cupola at the time, and it came in the lower part of the car about 5 feet from me. Q. Is that the ball (showing witness ball) ? — A. WeU, I should judge it was ; yes, sir. ^ Q. It was handed to me as the bullet ?— A. Well, the ball was given to Mr. Drake, or Mr. Tutt, some of them. Q. It didn't happen to hit anybody? — A. No, sir. Q. You are not acquainted with the gentleman that shot that ? — A. No, sir ; I am not personally, not that I know of. Q. Were there any other attempted Interferences with the performance of vobt duty?— A. Nothing. Mr. BuKNES. Have you that bullet ? Mr. Stewakt. There it is. Witness. There is the bullet ; Mr. Tutt had the bullet. Mr. Stewart. It was handed to me by Mr. Kerrigan. J. E. HOPF, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewakt). Your name is J. E. Hofif ?— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. You are foreman pf the* car department ? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. Where are your headquarters ? — A. At Cypress. Q. How many men are there under you ?— A. I have forty-nine men, or did have forty-nine men before the strike. Q. Did they aU go out ?— A. Yes, sir ; except one man that I had in my office. Q. What reason did they assign there ?— A. Well, I talked with one of the com- mittee on the morning that they went out, and he said they had no grievance against the Missouri Pacific road, they went out on account of some man in Texas being dis- charged. Q. What grievances had been laid before you as foreman of that department ?— A. Previous to this ? Q. Yes, sir ?— A. I had one grievance there in June, I think last Jnne, in regard to discharging a car-cleaner I had there. Q. Discharging what ?— A. A car-cleaner for not doing— I discharged him for not doing his work satisfactorily to me. Q. Well, what disposition did you make of that grievance f— A. The grievance com- mittee of the Knights of Labor, composed wholly of Knights of Labor, investigated .the matter to their satisfaction and sustained my action. Q. Any other grievance?— A. Some time after that there was a committee waited on me in regard to the manner I was doing some work ; that I was asking the men to do work that wasn't in their deparcment, and talked the matter over, and the thing was settled at that time satisfactorily to them and me— satisfactory to me anyhow, and I suppose to them ; I have never heard anything about it since; and at another time^ LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTU AXD WEST. 209 the committee waited on me in regard to liiring some men, the way I proposed to hire men; the supposition was we couldn't discharge a man if we had more men than we. needed in our services, we had no power to discharge them ; the Knights of Lahor would hold him in the shop. I wanted a couple ofextra men, and I made application to the man in my charge ; he asked mo what I would do with them when I got through with them. I said I proposed to hire them when I saw fit and discharge them.when I got done with them without any questions being asked. I made that answer. When the committee waited on me and asked me if I had made that proposition and I told them I had, and they objected to it. I made them the answer if they objected to the proposition I should not hire the men ; if I couldn't hire them that way I wouldn't Mre them at all. Q. Then they allowed yon to hire them?— A. Yes, sir. Q. That disposed of that question ? — A. Yes, sir; that is the only question that has ever come np between us and the Knights of Labor that I know of. Q. So up to time of this strike, so far as you know, the grievances had been dis- posed off — A. Yes, sir. Q. None existed at that time t — A. None existed that I know of. Q. Was there anything done that fell under your observation iu the way of vio- lence or injury to the property ; anything of that sortf — A. Well, nothing. Q. Any more than what has been stated here? — A. Nothing more than what has been stated, only intimidation of my men since we have started. Q. What do you know about that !— A. I know from my men ; I don't know per- sonally, only as my men have told me that they have been threatened to have their lives taken, and their property destroyed, and such things as that, provided they didn't quit the service of the Missouri Pacific road. Q. Any of them been driven out ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have had eight men, altogether, from time to time. Q. That have left?— A. Yes, sir; left. Q. For what reason ? — A. For tho reason they were afraid to work on account of the destruction of property and their lives ; and two weeks ago last Sunday I was picking np a, wreck up here at Wyandotte, and the men were attacked, and two of them beaten, not by men that were employed on the Missouri Pacific road, but strik- ers, and we had finally to take the men and jjut them in the car, and take the en- gines and go and ge*«, deputy sheriflf before I was able to finish my work. Q. Was this done in your presence ? — A. Yes, sir ; in my presence. Q. Was there any provocation for the assaults ? — A. None at all. Q. Well, what did they say? — A. The first thing I knew there were two men beat- ing two of my men, and after that we got them apart and got them separated out, and then they called me and my men all manner of names and kept pressing up closer and closer to our work — quite a large crowd — until I took the men away and went and got deputy sheriffs. Q. Were they old employ6sof the company, about there? — A. A portion of them; yes, sir. Q. Did they interfere to prevent it iu any way f — A. To prevent tho assault? Q. Yes, the fight — ^A. I didn't see no interference on the part of anybody to pre- vent fighting ; I had only ten men with me. J. M. SHEA, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). You are a switchman? — ^Answer. Yes, sir; I live at Nevada. Q. How far is that from here ? — A. About 100 miles, I should judge. Q. Is it west or east? — A. Wei], I don't know whether yon would call it west or south ; I should call it east. Q. Well, what is your experience, Mr. Shea? — A. I don't know. Q. What do you know about it, with reference to the strike ? — ^A. Well, in order to give you my experience I will have to go ba,ck to the 28th of October. Q. Well, go ahead. — A. At that time I received a letter that evening to come to Kansas City and report to Mr. Drake for duty, and I arrived on the morning of the 29th; I came out to Mr. Dralce's office ; in a short time he came in, and I presented my letter to him, as I had never seen him before, from Mr. Frey. He told me 1 was to receive the appointment of general yard-master of the Missouri Pacific ; that he con- templated a change, and asked me if I knew anything about the yards. I told him I didn't, as I had never seen it before, and he asked me ho w I would like to learn it. I told him that I would prefer, as I was a practical switchman, to just go in the yard as a switchman and learn the yard and learn the men. This, I think, was on Fri- day morning, and I worked with Mr. Cherry on tho Grand Avenue engine Friday and Saturday, and Sunday morning I was ordered to work with tho engine in the upper part of the yard by the yard-master then iu charge. On going np, or after we had arrived in the upper yard, the man in charge of that engine came to me and told me 3984 CONG 14 210 LABOR TEOUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. that they refused to work with me ; I asked them what the reason was ; he said he didn't know, but I would have to go and see. A man they called Pink— he was the yard-master; I don't know his name; he was a red-headed gentleman — and I went down and asked him what the trouble was. He said he didn't know, but would as- certain shortly, and I says, "All right; I will wait around a little while; I don't want to cause you or any of the men any trouble here." And I asked him then what the trouble was, and he said I was known as a " Company" man ; that I had done something while yard-master at Little Eock, Ark., against the interests of the men employed there. This I told him there was no truth in, but at the same time I would not insist on working at all, and went about my business. On Monday morning called at Mr. Drake's office and found he was absent, and waited until he returned; and I was then told by Mr. Drake that there was a special committee of the Knights of Labor that wished to wait on him in regard to the affair, and asked :ne to remain in theoffioe until he returned from the meeting with the committee. This I done, and he came back and told me that they could not ajjpoint mo now without trouble, and that I would have to come around the next day, I think it was, and see what settlement they would make. I came the next day and he told me he hadn't arrived at any conclusion yet ; be was going to Sedalia or Saint Louis, one of the two places, and that I should remain in Kansas City until I heard from him. I told him I couldn't afford to do that, as 1 had to work for my living, and he said he would pay me for the time. So I was in Kansas City then either ten or eleven days— ten days, I think- when Mr. Drake's clerk received a message to give me a time check at the rate of a yard foreman's pay for the time I was in Kansas City, and pass me back to Nevada. I v^ent there and accepted my former position as switchman in the night yard at Ne- vada, and was there about ten days, I should judge, which would make it along towards the latter part of November, when I received a notice one morning through th"! post-ofUce that I must leave the city of Nevada ; I must leave this city at once. Well, I can't give you the wording of it, but that was the substance of the notice. It bore the seal of local assembly Knights of Labor No. 3769, if my recollection is right. Well, I paid no attention to that further than' to hand it over to Mr. Frey, our division superintendent, whom I happened to meet that morning, and he asked me if I intended to remain, or if that was going to scare me. I told him certainly I intended to remain. About a week after t]iat — I know it was one Sunday night— we went to a little i)lace called Milo with a string of empty ballast cars. On my re- turn I was told there was an important letter in the mail-box of the passenger depot for me. I called for it and found it was anonymous communication desiring me to leave the city within twenty-four hours, otherwise I would receive sucht reatment as I would not appreciate. Well, that was signed by' the vigilance committee, but I am positive as to who wrote it, and who put it in the box. It was the man at that time day yard-master, named A. M. Saxe, put it in the box — wrote the communicatiou — and he was one of the members of the Knights of Labor. Then when I didn't see fit to leave at that time they called where I boarded, at the Sherman House, with Mr. Conkling, in a day or two, with a communication in a paper printed in Sedalia, I think, by one of the labor unions, stating I had been driven by square men out of the State of Kansas, and asked him to refuse to board me, and if he did board me the Knights of Labor .would do everything they could against him. Ttte gentleman Informed the com- mittee, who were A. M. Saxe and F. B. Kelly, that I had always paid my board, and as long as I continued to do so he intended to board me. Well, I heard nothing further of the matter until the night of 5th of March. There was a general order came there to handle no more Texas Pacific cars or M. O. P. cars without orders from the division superintendent or train-master's office, and I said I guessed there was something up, and a member of the order of the Knights of Labor said there was some trouble in Texas. Well, I worked all night pretty hard, and the next morning I went home and got my breakfast and went to bed, and about 11 o'clock, or perhaps half- past 11, a committee, consisting of A. M. Saxe, H. Bowmaster, F. B. Kelly, David Bloodsoe, and some ethers whose names I can't call at present, called upon me and notified me there was a strike in order, and I asked them in what regard, and they said it was not necessary to give the details ; they simply asked i t of me that I wouldn't leave Nevada to go anywhere else ; that the company's officers might desire me to take empl6yment. I told them that I liked Nevada very much, and I thought I would stay there. Then they asked me not to work in Nevada. I told them whenever my yard- master was ready to go to work I was, and that I didn't covet and ask any other posi- tion except such as I nad held before. Well, that answer seemed to satisfy them. So that evfening I went to the depot as usual, and I found the gentlemen, Mr. Treadway and Mr. Hollister, the night yard-master, there, and asked them if they were going to do anything, and they said they might as well put in the time by switching passenger trains. I forgot to mention that when the committee waited on me they notified me they had killed the switch-engine and put her in the hole ; that we couldn't do any- thing, I asked Mr. Penfleld, who was in charge there as agent and in charge of the yard men, if we remained there and attended to'the switching of the trains — that is, iiABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 211 change the sleeper going from Kansas City to Texas, and, vice versa, from Texas to Kansas City, if we would draw onr salary as heretofore, and he said he didn't know- any reason why we should not, and that he would he advised perhajis by Mr. Frey in the morning. So we changed the sleeper that night of the 6th on the' soiith-hound train, and about 1 o'clock Mr. Saxe, Mr. Kelly, and ]^loodshaw called on us and told ua that we must not meddle with that passenger train any more. They said, "We knew you sons of bitches would go back on us." " Well," I said, " that was not a very serious affair." "Well," they said, " the next man that would attempt to do any work in that yard should be killed ; " and as we knew eighteen or nineteen Knights of Labor in the yard at the time acting as deputies, we concluded we would go home that evening, and the next day, as we could do no work, there was a notice come some time in the after- noon to saspecd the yard crew. So I wasn't called upon any more to do any work of any kind until, I think, the 25th or 26th of March, we were asked if we were ready to go to work and take the places we had formerly occupied, to which all of us answered yes. Mr. Hollister went to work first. There was a traiti of Government freight coming through, and they Wanted to have the yard men see that it got through in good shape. So we got an engine fired up and watered and got the four cars of Government freight and they went through all right. Well, we were not interfered with at all that day, but the next night several gentlemen in the crowd, I don't know who they were, sug- gested that if I insisted on working longer that my life would pay the penalty. I made no answer to them, because I didn't know which one addressed me, further than that I hated to have anything like that occur ; and the next morning we fired up an engine and were abused a great deal by words, and one party came over with a knife in his hand toward me ; and I happened to be pretty familiar with him and I told him he had better put the knife up ; but he says, " I don't intend to hurt"you." " I knew you didn't intend to hurt me," I says. One of the crowd says, "Now you got it, give it to him ; " and they didn't do anything further. He put his knife up and went away. His name was Durfene. He was one of the prominent strikers and leaders all through. We didn't have any further trouble then until the next day. We started to send a train north, which was Saturday ; and we got the train made up and as it was pulling out at the north end of the yard a gentleman named John Mc- Dowell pulled a pin and thro wed it at myself. In the meantime there were at least ten or twelve others pulling pins and applying brakes to stop the train. The crew and the yard-master, after some little time, got them coupled up again ; and we started towards the depot, and the crowd had then swelled to nearly four hundred ; and several parties kicked me in the crowd ; I don't know who they were. Mr. Cum- mings, one of the citizens, a sheriff, arrested a couple of parties, which attracted their attention from the train to the crowd, they expecting they would release those par- ties, and the train got out safely. Well, after that there was nothing until, I think, Monday morning — either Sunday or Monday, I ain't sure which now — the engineer, John Shean, and Fireman John Shane were tjoth forcibly taken from the engine on the L., S. and A. track. Mr. Thurber took the engine and put it away, and no far- ther attempt was made to move trains that day. Q. Well, I guess we will have to stop here, Mr. Shea ; we can't spend any more time with you. — A. If you will allow me, I would like to refer to another matter I over- looked wherein the Knights of Labor, as I understand it, now ask to, have me dis- charged in Nevada. That matter was thoroughly investigated at the time by Mr. Frey, and I don't know what decision they arrived at further than I was never dis- -charged. Q. Were yon ever invited to join the Knights of Labor ? — A. I was asked, yes, sir ; asked in Kansas City the first day I came here, they stating that if I did I wouldn't have no trouble. Q. That is all from you. Q. (ByMr. BuKNES.) Who was it asked you to join the order? — A. William F. Rock- well, and a man whom I know under several aliases and I believe he travels here by the name of Harry Mullen. Now, I don't know whether they are members or who they are. F. G. ELLS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Cuktist). Give your age and residence. — ^Answer. My age is 36 years; residence, Kansas City, Mo. Q. And your business? — A. I am a barber by trade. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) We will examine you with reference to the visit of Mr.Pow- derly to this place and the conferences he held, so far as you have personal knowledge, and what took place between him and the gentlemen with reference to the Missouri Pacific Railroad troubles.— A. I was secretary of the conference and reduced the work of that joint session to writing. I will have to use manuscript perhaps in giving data. Q. Between whom was the conference ?— A. It was between the Executive Boards 101, 82, 17, 93, and 107. That covers the territory of Illinois and Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, Kansas, and Nebraska to Omaha. 212 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. That paper is a statement in writing ? — A. It is the testimony that was given at that conference. Brother Powderly was in attendance. Q. Well, did they examine witnesses ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that purports to be the testimony of others,, then? — A. Well, the witnesses- were members of the executive board and testified to such as came within their own personal knowledge. Q. Yon don't mean they were sworn as witnesses ? — A. They were not sworn ; no, sir. Q. It was just a conference in which they interchanged their views ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, does the paper show the parties to the conference ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, have you any objection to parting with the paper and letting us have it f— A. I would have just as it is now ; there are other matters contained here. Q. Well, will you copy out of those proceedings all that relates to the matter we are considering between' the Missouri Pacific Railway and its employes and give it to us for a consideration for incorporation in our report ?r~^- ^^s, sir ; I think I could, i presume I could give you the list of this in ten minutes, perhaps less. Q. Well, you may^ust read those portions that relate exclusively to the matter in hand here now. — A. Well, the first statement Brother Powderly stated the cause or the strike by the Texas and Pacific employes was understood by the public, but the Gould Southwest System strike is stUl misunderstood by himself and the public ; that a false impression pervaded the public mind, they thinking it caused by the discharge of Hall at Marshall, Texas. The reasons given by Brother Irons for the Missouri Pa- cific being called out was the failure of that company to live up to the terms of agree- ment made on March 15, 1885 ; that they had violated to a greater or less extent every article of said contract ; that grievances had been sent to Manager Hoxie, ask- ing the adjustment of these troubles, and that said grievances were entirely ignored;, an attempt to se6 Mr. Hoxie was futile, and^he would evade men so trying to see him, Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Stop right there, if you please. Is that what Mr. Powderly stated Mr. Irons had said ? — A. No. sir. This is what Mr. Irons stated ; that the com- mittee — he himself was on the committee to Saint Louis — ^he said the reason for call- ing the Missouri Pacific Company cmployds out was the failure of the company to- live up to the terms of their agreement. Q. You don't understand me. I understood you, when you commenced, to say that Mr. Powderly stated that the reasons were not understood ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And tliat ho said that Irons had so stated. Is that right ? - -A. That is not cor- rect. Brother Pow derly aslied for the reason of the Missouri Pacific Railway em- ployes being called ou t. Q. At this conference?— A. Yes, sir. Brother Irons said for the failure of the comr pany to live up to their agreement. Q. Now I understand it. — A. This is Mr. Irons's statement. Q. Yes, sir ; I wanted to understand that. — A. Yes, sir. On communicating with Mr. Hoxie the parties would be put off with promise of speedy adjustment ; but nothing would bo done, and the committee were forced to discontinue trying to get recogni- tion ; men had been discharged without notice, in violation of contracts requiring thirty days' notice being given in case of discharge ; also, in vidlation of the contract which states that in order to reduce the expenses of the road the reduction should be made in the number of hours worked, and not in the number of employ<5s. In viola- tion of the above section, a whole force of section-men were discharged without cause or notice. They fully believed the only cause was because they belonged to the order- of the Knights of Labor. When the grievance was submitted to the ofBoials they claimed the agreement of March, 1885, only covered strikers and shopmen ; that bridge- men on the line of the road had been moved from point. to point only by nights aijcl on Sundays, and no pay allowed them during transit; that on one occasion the bridge gang had gone 400 miles, had done repairs in nine hours and then returned ; the time in transit was twenty-six hours ; they were allowed nine hours' wages ; that the hours of section-men were so reduced that they made but 55 cents per day, and in stormy weather they had to lose every moment of the storm ; also, apprentices in the shop's were promoted to the position of journeymen and paid only an apprentice's salary, which was about one-half pay of the regular journeymen. I suppose you don't want to know anything about the discharge of Mr. Hall in Texas ? Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) No, that js being investigated by another branch of the committee. The Witness. While Mr. Irons was in Dallas he telegraphed Mr. Hoxie that there was trouble on the Missouri Pacific system, and that a strike was imminent, and re- quested that he send them passes to come to Saint Louis. He says at that time it was not our intention to call out the Missouri Pacific Railway. The 'employes demanded him to call them out, as that was the only way they would have of getting their frievances settled. He issued the order for them to walk out at 10 o'clock a. m., aturday, March 6. But the portion where he stated that he went to see Mr. Hoxie in Saint Louis, I don't see that I have it here. However, he stated, and 1 have the record of that, that the committee went from Dallas to Saint Louis, arriving there LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 213 «t 6:45 on Tuesday prior to the strike being called on Saturday. Mr. Hoxie was not to be found in the city. His chief clerk said he didn't know -where he was; lie be- lieved he had gone to Louisville, but he didn't knov- The committee were looking for him until Friday night and failed to see him. They had these grievances there also to present to him. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Have you anything more in that record to read ? — A. I be- 'UeVe there is nothing more here that would pertain to that. Q. Well, now, do you know any fact or circumstance connected with the difficulty between theMissouri Pacific Railway and its employes that will showthe cause orthe -extent of the trouble between them ? — A. Only as I have heard from employes. Q. While in the employment of the company? — A. No, sir; it was after the strike. Q. Now, if yon will state the names of the parties and what they told you as to the grievances that they had, we may be able to reach them and perhaps examine them. — ^A. Well, there was since the strike one member, or one employ^ of the Missouri Pacific, that was at Independence here, by the name of Gemmel. He had a written statement, I believe. Ho is not here. He said to me, regarding the contracts made to restore the rates on that line to the wages paid in September, 1884, according to the contract they raised his wages in March, 1885, but the first of May, 1885, thej^ cut his wages ®5 a month without notice, and the first day of June cut his wages again $5 without noticf . Q. In what department did yon say he was? — A. Well, he had charge of tlieswitcL- jards, I believe, at Independence. Q. Have yon any other instances that you remember? — A. None from the employes, excepting those at the conference. Q. Well, can you tell us what you regard as the causes of these troubles ? — A. Well, the men said that they were subject to petty annoyances and petty grievances, but didn't note the instances. There was general dissatisfaction. Q. That was nhat the men said. From what you know what do you regard as the cause of the trouble between this railroad company and its employes? — A. Well, I believe that the low rate of wages paid to track-men — section-men — caused dissatis-i faction in that branch ; I believe that the fact of discharging in the machine-shops and hiring the men at less wages, also promoting the apprentices to a journeyman's position and holding them at apprentice's salary would naturally tend to create dis- satisfaction among the other machinists and cause trouble in that line. ' Section-men and track-layers and shopmen were the ones that seemed to be most discontented on the line. Q. Were you aware of any discontent or any of these grievances prior to the strike ■of March (3th last ? — A. I had heard that there was considerable dissatisfaction on the line, even as early as in January. Q. Does your order teach obedience to the law or violation of law f — A. It teaches obedience to the law. Q. Does your order ever countenance disobedience to law — disregard of law 1 — A. No, sir ; the men that were called out in District 107 were ordered to observe all gen- eral laws, and commit no acts of violence, demean themselves like men and citizens, and observe all laws ; they would all be held individually responsible for any acts of violence or destruction of property. Q. Do you remember any other fact or circumstance that yon deem material to this investigation? — A. No, sir; I don't think thp,t I do. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) Do you know where Irons is ? — A. Where he is at present ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. No, I don't; the last I heard of him he was in Saint Louis. I am not in communication with him. Q. (By Mr. BuKXES.) Have you ever been in the employment of this railroad com- pany ? — A. No, sir; never at any time. Q. Have you seen this contract of March 15, 1885 ? — A. I have. Q. You have read it ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom was that contract made ? — A. Well, there is a contract — I would hardly call it a contract. The governors of the States of Missouri and Kansas recom- mended that these men be placed back to work without prejudice ; that the rate of wages be restored to the September rate of 1884, that being the point from which they started to make the reduction ; they also recommended Mr. Stewakt. If you will allow me to suggest if that contract -is in existence, it seems to me it is not worth while to take up the time now in going over it. Mr. Burses. No ; I merely am desirous of knowing that he has reference to the same contract. Q. Let me ask you if at that meeting when Mr. Powderly was here, it was deter- mined that there should be a strike in East Saint Louis? — A. No, sir; it was not. Q. Was that strike in East Saint Louis discussed here in that meeting with Mr. Powderly ?— A. No; the probability of there being a strike there was discussed. Q. What was said, as nearly as you can remember ?— A. Well, the strike there wason the part of the switchmen, asking for what was known as Chicago rates. Of course 214 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■we had no control over them. Tiieysvanted to go out on their own responsibility, and also said thpy were ready to go ont in sympathy ^¥itll the others, if it ■vcouirt bring the company to terms. Q. Well, do you remember this charges made? Take, for instance, the acts of vio- lence that have been reported in the newspapers and some of this testimony, or any of these acts of violence against the railroad property or the property of individ- uals — has there been any member expelled from tlie order? — A. For the destruction , of railroad property, I don't know that they have ; I don't know that it has ever been traced to a member of the order. Q. Has any one ever been legally convicted of ihe crime mentioned, destroying railroad property ? — A. No member of our order ; not as yet ; no, sir. Q. Have charges been preferred agaiiist any of these members who are niider in- dictment? — A. Any charges preferred against them in our order ? Q; Yes', sir. — A. Well, I couldn't say. Those membprs that are under indictment are members of District 101 ; I belong to District 107 ;' consequently it would not come un(ier my notice, not until after action had been taken, at least. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) Does your order regard it as a violation of law to take forcible possession of other peoples' property and prevent their using it as they have the right to under the laws of the State ? — A. I would call it a violation of law to take posses- sion of property. Q. Would it be, then, contrary to the principles of your order ?— A. I believe that it is. Q. How does it happen, then, that everywhere on the line of this road men in your order did exactly that thing?— A. Well, that is a question it would be very hard for me to answer ; our order doesn't teach that. Q. Wouldn't it rather seem that they didn't know what was the law, or else if they did, they disregarded it ?— A. If they did tliat they disregarded any of teachings of the law of our order ; certainly. Q. Well, where the violations of the law was so universal among men in yourorder, wouldn't it rather indicate they didn't have much respect for law ? — A. Well, in some instances it would look that way. Q. I suppose you would admit, Mr.EUs, that the Knights of Labor, nnr anybody else, had any right to take possession of the yard here, or the shops of this railroadi corporation, wouldn't yon ?— A. Well, I wouldn't say that they would have the right. Q. I speak now of the legal rights.— A. Yes, sir; they couldn't take forcible pos- session and do right. Q. Well, they couldn't do it, could they, without violating the law?— A. No, sir; I think you will find that they delivered all that property to the railroad company upon demand. Q. Well, did they deliver it up until the sheriflfs came there and put the railroads in. possession ?— A. They received orders on Friday night to vacate the company's prop- erty, as the company wanted to take possession on Saturday; Friday night, or Sat- urday morning rather, the men left. Q. How long was that after the strike ?— A. I think it was two weeks. Q. You think they took possession of it with the permission and consent of the rail- road company ?— A. No, I don't suppose they did ; they had possession of it from th» fact of their being employes ; they were in possession of the property ; they were not paid ; they couldn't do any work there if they wanted to. Q. I suppose you know, Mr. Ells, that the railroad company is authorized by it» charter, and it is its duty, to receive and transport freight. Now, is it lawful for any body of men to interfere, in your judgment or in the judgment of the order, and pre- vent the transportation of freight by uncoupling cars or any other steps?— A. No, sir ; my advice would be if they didn't want to work— would be to step oif the com- pany's premises and let the company have their property to do as they, saw fit, not t» interfere with it in that respect. Q. (By Mr.BuKNES.) I understood you to say you didn't know that any of this violence was committed by Knights of Labor ?— A. I don't know it, sir. Mr. Stewart. I didn't speak of violence, Mr. Burnes. Mr. Burnes. Well, actually taking possession of the property Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Have you any doubt about it as to who did it?— A. Well, I have not seen the evidence. Q. That is not an answer to the question.— A. Well, I have; yes sir Q. Yon have then some doubt as to whether any Knight of Labor participated in obstructing and preventing the moving of freight hero at this station; is that what you mean to say ?— A. They are not acts of violence resulting in destruotion to the property. " Q. I am not speaking of acts of violence; I am speaking of taking possession of freight trains and refusing to allow the railroad company to move their freight trains?— A. Well, I am not aware the company had ever gone there and requested tnem to vacate. ^ LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AXD WEST. 215 Q. WeU, I don't care to press the question. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) I will ask you whether or not the object of these men, as far as you know it is the object, was not to take possession of this property for the pur- pose of protection ?— A. That was the understanding that 1 had of it ; that they were protected from a hoodlum element or those that would rifle the freight-ears and every- thing of that kind ; that when competent men were brought to the round-house or other places to man the trains, that they would surrender possession of it. That was my idea or understanding of it. The WiTifESS. I desire to read from this report what are considered as the griev- ances and resolutions adopted by that conference. I will call your attention to the grievances presented to the executive board at Dennison, and which representatives of its board going to Saint Louis were instructed to place before Mr. Hoxie. Wo called at Mr. Hoxie's office and found that he had "skipped by the light of tlie moon," or, in other words, he heard of our coming and took a trip East, leaving no word, as his chief clerk claimed, where he was going Or when he would be back, con- sequently our only alternative was to leave grievances in charge of Hoxie's chief clerk and request him to present the same to Mr. Hoxie as soon as he got back, and to communicate with E. W. Drew, chairman of the board at Sedalia. It was agreed by the board shortly after leaving Hoxie's office that I should call to see Mr. Hoxie as soon as he returned and receive his answer on said grievances. Mr. Hoxie had got back to the city some time before I heard he was he was here; that being so, I did not know but what he had communicated with Brother Drew. However, I called at his office, but did not get to see him, although he was in at the time. He instructed Ms clerk to admit no one, as he did not desire to see any one, or to be disturbed, as he was in consultation. I called him once or twice again and found him out, as I was told by his clerk that he was out, consequently I do not believe any of the executive board has ever heard any more of those grievances or what become of them since they were left at Mr. Hoxie's office. "Whereas the agreement existing between the employes and management of the Southwest system of railroads is drawing to a close ; and " Whereas if said agreement is allowed to expire by us, wo may expect trouble : Therefore, , " Be itresolved, By this District Assembly 101, in session assembled, instruct its execu- tive board to use every possible means to renew said agreement. " Be it resolved, That the district executive board be instructed to secure as soon as possible for all unskilled labor a rate of wages of not less than $1.50 per day. " Wliereaa the employes of the Southwest system on receiving an injury are com- pelled to sign a release before the company wiU allow them to go to work : Therefore, " Be it resoIveS, That District Assembly 101 will give it due consideration and take steps to abolish the release system. " Adopted and referred to executive board ; also to local assemblies for joint actions with brotherhood. "EesoUed, That this District Assembly 101 do establish a uniform system for the government of apprentices working on the Gould Southwest system of railroads. " (1) Four years to constitute an apprenticeship, and that their scale of wages be fixed as follows, viz : For the first year, $1 per day ; for the second year, $1.25 per day ; for the third year, $1.75 per day ; and for the fourth and last year, $2.25 per day. And at their expiration of their term of apprenticeship they are to receive the average journeymen wages of their department. "Beit further resolved, That no children nnder the age of seventeen years be admit- ted as apprentices in any department on the above-mentioned railroads. "Sworn to by E. A. Carpenter, as submitted to meeting of District Assembly No. 101, at Parsons, Eans., July 25, 1885. Relative to the cut of September, 1884, the following named persons were never restored: J. Monroe Korris, day yard-master; A. M. Vedder, caller of conductors and mail carrier; A. M. King, pumper; T. J. Friar, number taker ; Matt. Pomeroy, number taker and day and night car-sealer ; J. P. Col- licott, bill clerk. " Respectfully submitted. "J. MONROE NORRIS, " Chairman L. Ex. Board. "EUFUS STUART, " Yard Engineer. "T. P. BERRY, ^'Foreman of Bound house." Mr. HENRY JOHNSON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Mr. BuKNEs). State your name and age, Mr. Johnson.— Answer. My age I don't exactly know ; I am about thirty-one years old. I live right down here by the Union Elevator, on Eighth street. 216 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUZ'H AND WEST. Q. How long have you been employed by the Missouri Paciflo Eailroad ?-j3^. I guess a little over two years. ' ' Q. When were you discharged from that employment? — A. It -was in February, I think ; I ain't certain, though ; I thinlt it was in February. Q. Are you certain it was before the strilie ? — A- Yes, sir, Q. Some days before ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How were yon discharged? — A. Well, from what I can learn, Mr. New dis- charged me. Q. Who is he ? — A'. He was the master-mechanic at the Missouri Pacific round- house. Q. Did he tell you what you were discharged for? — A. Well, what I took it to bef I went and asked him ; says I, " What did you discharge me for?" and he allowedhe thought I was getting too old there, and that was the only satisfaction he gave me. Q. Is that all the satisfaction he ever gave you ? — A. Yes, sir ; I asked him what he wanted to discharge me for ; I thought I was doing too much any way ; I was do- ing two men's workj and wasn't getting one man's pay for it. Q. Did you have any notice that you were going to be discharged ? — A. Kot unti he sent me in the office to get my time. Q. Did he discharge you at the end of the month ? — A. No, sir, it wasn't the end of the month. It was along about the middle of the mouth, I think. Q. So far as you know the only cause of your discharge was you were too old f — A. That was all the satisfaction I got. Q. You understand your age to be 31 ? — A. I am just about 31 ; I don't know my age exactly. Q. You are in good health and physical condition ?-^A. Yes, sir. Q. And were tlien ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (ByMr. Stewakt.) What was your business ? — A. I was coaling the engine; my business was at that time, but they set me to coaling the ponies in the yard ; we had four mornings and seven at noontime generally. They used to have two men to do that work and I did it all alone ; that was what he discharged me for, I guess ; I did too much work for him. DEETEE LOBNEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Bcknes). Where do you live ? — Answer. In Eiverview, Kans. Q. Where is that?^A. That is over across by the round-house up on the hill. Q. How old are you ?— A. How old I am ? I am 31. Q. Are you a married man ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have yon a family ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Of children?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you a native of this country— were you born in this country f — ^A. No, sir. Q. I want to ask you if you have been in the employment of the Missouri Pacifio Eailroad Company ?— A. Yes, sir; I have been working in the Missouri Pacifio three years. Q. What were you doing? — A. Section workman. Q. I want to ask you as to the fact, if it be a fact, that married men— men of fam- ilies in the employment of the company— were, to your knowledge, discharged from the service of the company because, having families, they declined to board with the boarding-housekeeper of the company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many such instances as that do you know of ?— A. Well, I know four of them, Q. Who kept the boarding-house?- A. The boss I was working for, Robert Kane. Q. He was the section foreman ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He wanted the men to board with him? — A. Certainly; yes, sir. Q. And those who had families wanted to board at home ? — A. Certainly. Q. And because he couldn't get to board them he discharged them and hired single men in their places? — A. Yes, sir.. Q. That is the fact, is it?— A. That is the fact. Q. Were these men nptiflcd of any intention to discharge them— did they have any notice they were going to be discharged ?— A. Had no notice before the morning he came around and hetold them hedidtft have anything more for them to do: hedidn't give them any notice at all. Q. How long after he discharged the married men was it until he employed the single men ?— A. He had the single men on at that time ; he had men working for him two weeks, and was boarding at his house, and then he got orders to lay off some of the hands, and then he laid ofl the oldest men, who had been working in the hot sun all summer, and ho discharged those men, and kept the men wholiad been there two weeks working. Q. Do yon know of any other complaint ? — A. No, sir. Q. Or grievance against the company ?— A. I don't know anything re about it. LABOK TROUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. 217 Q. (By Mr. Stewart). Wheu were you discharged ?— A. Well. I wasn't discharged ; the men who were working together with me were discharged. ' Q4 You were not discharged? — ^A. I was not discharged. Q. Ton have been testifying about other peoi)le t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who worked with you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you are out now? — A. I am out now. .JOHN MEAD, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknes). Is your name John Mead ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What is your age ? — A. Twenty-five. Q. Where do yon live ? — A. Argentine. Q, How long have yon been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Company t — A. I went to work the 14th of last October, and I got discharged the 21st of January. Q. Were you notified that you were going to be discharged ? — A. When I came out to work in the afternoon I was told to get my board bill ; I was the same as discharged. Q. What did that mean? — A. That I was going to get my time. Q. What did getting your time mean ? — A. It was the discharge. Q. That is the language that is used when yoa are to be discharged? — A. Yes, sir. The foreman told me I absented myself forty minutes from work ; I told him it wasn't BO. He said it didn't make a damned bit of diCference ; I would get my board bill anyhow. Q. Did you then quit work? — A. Yes, sir; I had to. Q. Were you paid up to the end of the month when you were discharged? — A. No, sir; I was paid up to that noon — that half day when I came out in the afternoon he told me. Q. Is that customary as a rule — did men get their discharges at other periods than the close of the month? — A. No, sir; they pay them up to* the time they discharge them. Q. Whether a man is discharged by the company or whether he leaves of his owa accord he is only paid up to the time of his leaving? — A. That is it, if he leaves of his own accord, and he has got to wait until the pay-car comes ; the time has gone in and he has got to wait for it. Q. Do you know of the discharge of anybody else by this company? — A. Yes, sir; a man by tide name of David Callahan was discharged. Q. How did he come to be discharged ? — A. Well, he had sickness in his family, and he had to stay home. He staid home two days, and he came out the next morning and the foreman told him to go home ; he didn't want him any more. Q. Did he notify him of the sickness of his family t — A. He didn't get time ; he just told him to go ; he didn't need him any longer. The man turned around and walked away. Another man, George Crow, got discharged, I think, on the 21st of December. He was told he wasn't wanted any more. Q. Paid him up to the time ? — A. I don't know how they paid him up, but I expect they paid him the same as they paid me, as long as he worked. Q. Do you know of any other cases ?— A. Yes, sir ; I know of another married man ; I don't know his name ; he was a Scandinavian ; he worked there all the summer, I believe, for the same foreman — the same man as Lobner worked for, the same man I worked for — and he got discharged. Q. Do you know the cause for which he got discharged ? — A. I don't know, sir. Q. Do you know of any other fact or circumstance calculated to show wrong or injustice done by the railroad company to any of its employes? — A. Yes, sir. A man boarding with the boarding-house boss got more favor showed to him than a man who didn't. In the month of December, before the time he laid me off— I don't know exactly; I didn't keep track of it — I know there is a man there thatt didn't work as many days as I did that got more pay than me. Them that boarded with the board- ing boss, they could do as they pleased. If the boss found out a man was a Knight of Labor he belly-ached around them and kicked all the time; he was all the time grumbling. Q. Was the foreman interested in the boarding house ? — A. His wife ran the board- ing-honse. The same foreman used to run a boarding-house and grocery store in Leavenworth, and saloon, when he was there four or five years ago. His wife would eay to the men there was plenty of good men in the market that were glad to get ninety cents a day. Q. Have any other causes occurred of this kind ? — A. Not that I am aware of. Q. Well, did this discharge and this manner of treating men have a tendency to excite them and to lead them into hostility of feeling against the railroad company? — A. Well, no ; not as I know of; I don't think the railroad company would keep a man any longer than they wonld need him. Q. The men were not offended then by being discharged ? — A. They were offended for the simple reason all the men who were discharged were Knights of Labor ; ha kept only two that I know of that belonged to the Knights of Labor. 218 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ' Q. These men were aggravated by these discharges in this manner? — A. I should say they were ; they -were fired for being Knights of Labor more than anything else. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) You worked on the track? — A. Yes, sir; an extra gang. They have ten cents a day more than the section men ; I got $1.25 and tlie section men got $1.15. I work on tho extra gang. , Q. You are not a section man ? — A. No, sir. Q. You were under the section foreman? — A. No, sir; a regular extra gang fore- man. Q. What was his name ?— A. Robert Kane. Q. Did you or either of these men you have talked about carry your grievances to any of the railroad atithorities ?— A. No, sir ; not as I know of. Q. Never said anything about it?— A. Not to the railroad authorities we didn't. Q. How did you suppose they could correct it unless they knew something about it ? — A. I fetched it to the grievance committee of the assembly I belonged to, and they put it there, I guess. Q. That is all you did about it?— A. That is all. FEEDEDICK FRITZ, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question Cby Mr. Burnes). Mr. Fritz, state your full name. — Answer. Frederick Fritz. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missonri Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. About a year and five months. Q. In what department ?-:-A. In tho round-house. Q. How many hours a day did you work? — ^A. I worked from twelve and a half to thirteen hours most every night ; from G to most 7 o'clock every morning. Q. Did you receive any pay or extra wages for services? —A. No, sir. Q. Did you ask the person in authority over you for such extra pay?— A. Thoy never offered me any ; I asked them for it twice. Q. You asked him for it twice ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he say ? — A. He said he couldn't give it to r^e. • Q. Have you never been paid for these extra hours ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of any other workmen in the same fix as you ? — A. YeS) sir. Q. How many other men were there who worked the same number of hours ? — ^A. There is about ten of them. Q. About ten of them that worked as many hours as you did ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know whether they were paid for their extra work ?-^A. I suppose not ; I never heard anything about it. Q. You never heard of it if they were ? — A. No, sir. Q Is there anything else you know with regard to the grievances of the employes ef that company? — ^A. No. Q. When were yon discharged ? — A. Went out with the men when they went oat on a strike. Q. Then yon are still out ? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Stewart. Who was the foreman there who had charge? — A. The foreman was Mr, New ; I worked for him, and afterwards worked for Mr. Rogers. , Q. Lately for Mr. Rogers ?— A. Yes, sir ; he has only been there about two montiis. CHARLES SCHMIDT, being duly sworn and examined, testifies as follows: By Mr. Burnes : Question. Is your name Charles Schmidt? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What is your ago? — A. Thirty-two. Q. Where dq you reside? — A. Wyandotte. Q. What is your occupation ?— A. Working at the round-house. Q. Are you in the service of the Missonri Pacific Company now f— A. No, sir. Q. When did you leave that service?— A. The 5th of March. Q. How long had you been in it? — A. Seven months. Q. How many hours did you work a day ?— A. We were there from six until seven o'clock every morning. We worked from six until se-yii .; o'clock every morning. Q. From six until seven ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That made thirteen hours ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How were you paid?— A. Paid for ten hours ; $1,35 a day. Q. Did you pre^sent your complaint to tho officer over you?— A. Yes, sir; no, I never made complaint ; no, sir. Q. Did you ask him for extra pay ?~A. Well, I told him about it. I says, " That is a fine way ; to work thirteen hours for $1.35. Q. What did he say ?— A. Well, our foreman told me— well, he says, " That is our way we work here ; we have got to do the work ; the work has got to bo done." Q. You were never paid for tl^se extra hours ?— A. No, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 219 Q. Do you kno-nr of any other grievance against this company by any other em- ployes? — A. Well, I know one morning we tried to go home and one fellow did go home, and he got discharged on account of that. He went home at 6 o'clock in the morning. Q. Then he went home before he commenced work ?— A. Well, in the morning was our time out, you know ; one day's, work then. Q. I understood you to say he went home at 6 o'clock in the morning? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had he worked all night? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And all the day before ? — A. No, sir ; he started at 6 o'clock in the evening. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) It was at night he began ; at 6 o'clock at night. Mr. BuKNES. Oh, yes, sir ; I see. Q. Was he ordered to stay later than 6 o'clock ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he tell the foreman what took him home ? — A. Yes, sir ; he saitl he wouldn't work until 7 o'clock ; he would go home; and I staid in the evening. He tried to come back to work again, and he discharged him. Q. Why did the man leave at 6 instead of working until 7 ? — A. Well he thought ten hours was long enough. Q. He had worked ten hours, then ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And because he wouldn't work more Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) That would be twelve hours? — A. Yes, sir; that would be twelve hours. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) Is it customary to take an hour at noon or at any interme- diate point of time? — A. Sometimes we took twenty minutes and sonietimes half an hour ; then we went to work again ; we never took a regular hour. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) What is the name of that foreman ? — A. Our night foreman was Ed. Dynack, and the master mechanic was Bill New at that time. Q. Whom did you make your complaint to; the foreman? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You don't know whether it was ever brought to these railroad authorities in any way, do you ; I mean the higher officers ? — A. Well, they told him — yes, they told him about it ; but he didn't pay no attention to it. Q. They told whom ? — A. They told Bill New, the master mechanic. Q. Who tpld him ? — A. Why the men did ; told him thirteen hours was too long. Q. Whatmen told him ? — A. Several of the night men that worked there. Q. You didn't tell him, you~made"no complaint? — A. Yes, sir; I told him once too ; he didn't give me no satisfaction. Q. Did this night foreman work with you? — A. Yes, sir; he worked with us. Q. Did he work as many hours as you did ? — A. Yes, sir ; he staid as long as we did. Q. You went out with the strikers? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) Did yon ever make any complaint to the present master me- chanic, Mr. Rogers ? — A. No, sir. Q. This occurred during the administration of a former master mechanic ? — A. Yes, nr. ROBERT GERZ, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknes). Where do you live ? — Answer. Kansas City, Kans. Q. What is your age ? — A. Thirty-six. Q. Your occupation ? — A. Working on the Missouri Pacific Railroad — was before the strike. Q. How long have you been in the employment of that company ? — A. Well, about three years, I guess. Q. You have been discharged ? — A. Yes, sir; I was discharged a little over a year ago, I believe. Q. How much over a year ago ? — A. Well, something about a year, I believe — about a year, I guess. Q. Were you discharged prior to the 15th of March, 1885 ? — A. No, sir ; it wasn't quite that long ; abont ten months. Q. Were you in the lockout or strike of 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. After that strike was over were you restored to duty on the road ? — A. No, sir. Q. You never went to work for the road after the strike in March, 1685? — A. 1885 yon are talking about ? Q. I am talking about 1885.— A. No, sir ; I wasn't in that strike at all. Q. Did you remain working for the company thronghout that strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Didn't you go out at all ? — A. No, sir. Q. How long after that strike, then, before you were discharged ?— A. Well, it was that summer after Q. That summer following ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you receive any notice that you were going to be discharged ?— A. No ; I didn't know it Q. Were you informed that there was any accusation against you ?— A. No, sir. 220 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Was there any complaint made that you didn't discharge your duties ?— A. No, Q. Wei e you discharged at the end of the month or between the beginning and the end ?— A. I think it was along towards the last of the month I was discharged. Q. Were you paid to the end of the month or to your discharge ?— A. I believe I was discharged on the last of the month. . Q. Have yon ever been informed of the cause ?— A. No, sir ; well, yes, sir. The man that got my place said that he worked, I believe, about two months after I was discharged, and he said he was owing the foreman some board, and he said that was the reason he discharged me, so that he conld get the board out of the man that got my place ; he would get his board money out of him. Q. That was told you by your successor, the man who took your place ? — ^A. Yes, sir. ' Q. Have you any other evidence to sustain that charge than simply what this man told you ? — A. No, sir, Q. Did you ever tell the master mechanic at that time, or anybody over you, what this man told you T— A. No, sir ; I never said anything about it to nobody at all. Q. Have you any knowledge of any grievances on the part of any of the men asso- ciated with yon in the work on this road ? — A. Sir? Q. Have you any knowledge of any grievance on the part of any other person t— A. No, sir. Q. During their service on this road? — A., No, sir. Q. Have you been in the service of this company since that discharge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When were you re-employed ?— A. I got work, I believe, in about three months after that. I got work from Mr. Hopp cleaning coaches. Q. You were not boarding then, with this same boarding-house keeper? — A. No, sir; ITiad a family at home, and I preferred boarding at home. I suppose I could have worked on if I had boarded over at bis house. Q. Did you ask any one to restore you to this service ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Was it tendered to you voluntarily afterwards ? — A. Sir ? Q. Was there a tender made to you by some officer of the company to re-employ you ? — A. -Yes, sir. Q. It was a voluntary tender ? — A. Yes, sir. , . Q. Have you been in their employment ever since ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are yon in the employment of it now ? — A. No, sir ; not now I am not. Q. When did you quit their employment ? — A. I quit work when the strike com- menced. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) I understand you never made complaint of having been dis- charged to anybody ? — A. No, sir; didn't say a word about it. Q. Who was that man that discharged you ? — A. A man by the name of Dillon. Q. Where were you employed— what was your work ? — A. I had charge of the switch-lights in the yards. Q. Here in Kansas City ? — A. In the Missouri Pacific yards ; yes, sir ; State line. PATRICK O'BRIEN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. Your name is Patrick O'Brien?— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Your age, Mr. O'Brien ? — A. About thirty-eight years old. Q. Your residence ? — A. I live on Cherry street, sir, Kansas City. Q. When did you enter the service of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. I went work February, 1863, sir. Q. How long did you remain in the employment of the company ? — A. I have been all the time since, sir. _Q. Are you in their employment now ? — A. Yes, sir, until the 6th day of March, the biggest part of the time. I lost my arm thirteen years ago in their employment. Q. Did you lose your arm while in the employment of that company ? — A. Yes, sir. ' Q. Well, I want to inquire of you with regard to your promised wages or salary and how the promise was fulfilled ?— A. Well, I went to flagging, sir, at the railroad crossing at $1 a day about twelve years ago. That is what I received up to the 23d of September last, and I was changed from one crossing to another ; and there were switches erected there, and that was extra work, and the general yard-master told me I would get flO a month extra wages ; and the first pay day that came there was rothing paid for the switches ; and my partner went to headquarters, and the man who returned the time said that the superintendent — he was absent when he returned the time and he didn't know how much he returned. When he came back the under- standing was it would be turned in the next pay day. We waited until the next pay day and there was nothing paid extra. We worked the switches from the 23d day of September up to the 3d day of March and never received a cent for it. Q. Who promised you this |10 extra ?— A. It was the general yard-master, Mr. No- LABOIi TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 221 Ian. He is in this city yet, sir, but not in the employment of the Missoliri Pacific Company. He said he was ordeied by the superintendent to give $10 or $15, and make it as low as he could, but he told me that he couldn't figure it lower than $10. Q. Did you ever mention the matter to the superintendent ?— A. I have, sir. Q. What superintendent ? — A. Mr, Drake. Q. What did he say? — A. Well, he told me that he would see Mr. Osborn about it, the man who returned the time. Q. Did you ever see him afterwards?— A. I have not, sir; I did not speak to him since until yesterday. Q. Did you ever get any part of this $10 ?— A. No, sir. Q. For how many months are you entitled to this |10 ? — A. About five months and a half, I should think. Q. Have youafamily ? — A. I have not, sir; I havea widowed sister living, with four orphan children — left with four orphan children four years ago— depending on me for aid to a certain extent. Her oldest boy is at the Western Union, only taken from school at the age of twelve years. By Mr. Cuktin : Q. You left the employment of the company on the 6th of March last ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you leave f — A. Well, it was time ; I was working for little or nothing. The work we were doing would cost about $70 or $80 a month. I was attending to two switches. Q. What were the wages paid in the yards, ordinary wages ? — A. Well, they told me they paid $35. Theswitchmen were getting, perhaps, $2 a day for attending to the switches ; no flagging at all. By Mr. Burnks : Q. Tell me how you came to lose your arm and when it was ? — A. No, sir ; I couldn't give the date. I worked under J.M.Lee about eighteen years. I have his letter here in my pocket. He is agent at the present time in Atchison, and I was attending un- loading stock at night at the same time. I watched at Grand avenue about five years, and this time he was intending to send me back as night watchman again, and I was coming to his ofBce to get my orders to move from West Kansas here to Grand avenue, and before I got to the office an engine came after me, ran into me, and crippled me. Q. So your arm had to be amputated f — A. Sir? Q. So your arm had to be amputated ? — A. Yes, sir ; it was broken in three differ- ent places ; it had to be amputated. That was thirteen years the 17th day of last January. Q. Did you bring a suit against the railroad company for the loss of the arm? — A. No, sir. Q. Why didn't you bring it? — A. Well, I thought I could get along then ; I bought property in Kansas City while night watchman at Grand avenue ; 1 was getting pretty good wages; I owed a little on the property at the time I lost my arm ; the company paid me $400 ; I hadn't enough to pay the dootor's-bill and pay all the bal- ance I was owing for this property, and the property was sold. Q. Did you have to pay the doctor's bills for amputation ? — A. I didn't have enough to pay it left out of the $400; the property was sold. Q. Did the company pay any part of the doctor's bills ? — A. No, sir ; thoy paid me $400, and I got a job; I thought if I got time to pay the doctor's bills I would pay it. Q. The company paid you $400 ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. To avoid being sued, probably, in settlement of the matter ?■ — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that to be in lien of any charges of the doctors ? — A. No, sir. I thought I would be treated well at the time I was sent there flagging — Mr. Dickson, afinefriend of mine. I thought I would always be used well, and 1 was about satisfied. Of course the man who ran over me was no engineer. Q. When did you notify Mr. Drake about this $10 ? — A. This was some time before the strike came up at all, sir. Q. Was that last fall or winter ? — A. I told Mr. Nolan that I didn't receive no pay ; he told me to go and see Mr. Drake and so I did. After I was sent to the crossing Mr. Nolan was laid ofi'for some reason. Q. You saw him about it before this strike, did you? — A. Yes, sir; I did. Q. Do you remember how long before the strike ?— A. I couldn't say, sir ; three or four weeks, something about that time. MORRIS RUSSELL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr.BuKNEs: Question. What is your given name ? — Answer. My name is Morris Russell. Q. Your age ? — A. Fifty-six years old. Q. Where do you live ?— A. Kansas City. 222 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ' Q. Wliat'is your occupation ? — A. I have been a flagman for the Ijtst two years. Q. In what company have you been employed ? — A. By the Missouri Pacific. Q. Were you employed in the yards here in Kansas City? — A. Yes, sir; -way down in tho bottom. Q. What -wages were you to receive ? — A. I worked at night ; I was getting $35 a month 'for flagging. Q. How many hours did you work ? — A. Well, I came there at 7, and I used to work until 6 and after 6. Q. Were you promised any additional pay for this increased labor? — A. Yes, sir; there -were two switches there they -wanted me to throw, and Mr. Nolan -was yard- master at the time, and he came to the flag-house and told me that I would be paid $10 a month extra. Well, in a short time afterwards he left and Mr. Osbom came up to the flag-house and he told me he had charge of the flagmen and switchmen in keep- ing their time ; but, says he, " You attend to thisswitch and you will be paid for it." I told him all right. Well, I waited until the pay car came for that money, and I got no pay ; I got nothing — only |35, the same as he always gave us. 1 -went down then to his oflice and saw him then. Says I, " Mr. Osborn, I got no pay for throwing them switches." Says he to me, ' ' Mr. Drake had been from home -when I made out the pay-roll," says he, "and I spoke to him when he came back; he told me," he says, " to have it all put on the nfext pay-roll." Well, I said then I was satisfied then with •what he told me, and he told me to be sure and tell my partner, O'Brien, as I was going home that morning, to tell him we -were going to get paid the next time the pay-car came in. Well, I went down the next time -when it came in, and we got no pay, only the $35, and he told me he had nothing to do with it ; to go to Mr. Drake myself. That is the answer he made to me. So I didn't go ; my partner went. Q. You never received any part of the $10 ? — A. No, sir ; didn't receive none. Q. Are you in the employ of the company now ? — A. Well, I was up to the strike. Q. You went out on the strike? — A. Yes, sir; I went out. Q. The 6th of March?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any other fact or circumstance that you can give us with regard to this strike? — A. No, sir; that is about all. CHARLES JOHNSON, being duly sworn aud examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. Mr. Johnson, state your place of residence, your age, aud occupation. — Answer. My name is Charles Johnson ; am thirty-one years old ; live in Armourdale. Q. When did you enter the service of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. The 9th of November, 1885. Q. How, long did you remain in that service?— A. Until the strike commenced; that is the 6th of March. Q. What wages were you promised?— A. I was promised $2.75 for ten hours' work. Q. How much were you paid ?— A, I was paid $2.60. Q. Why were you paid only $2.60 when you were promised $2.75 ?— A. They broke their promise. Q. Why did they pay you less than they promised to pay yon?— A. They broke, their promise. i Q. Did you tell them they had treated you badly in that respect ?— A. I asked for it twice and I did not get it. Q. You asked for it?— A. Yes, sir; and they promised me that twice afterwards, but didn't give it to me. Q. Who was in authority over you ? — A. Mr. New — W. T. New. Mr. Ste-wakt. What is that name ? The Witness. New. By Mr. Bhrnes : Q. What authority had Mr. Bell over you ?— A. He tried to shoot me down in the yard when I was going home to dinner. Q. What position did ho hold m the company ?— A. He held his pistol right against Q. Did ho hold any office in the railroad company : was he in the employ of the railroadcompany?— A. Yes, sir; he is yard-master. ' Q. Did he draw his pisfol on you ?— A. Yes, sir; he did. Q. What for ?— A. For nothing ; didn't say a word, I didn't. Q. Did he ever say -why he drew his pistol on you?— A. I never talked to that man ; I never said a word to him after, neither. Q. Did you ever hear from anybody else why he did this?— A. Well, I knew that his name was Bell, and that he was the yard-master ; that is all I knew about it. Q. Had you ever had any conversation with him— done him any harm in any wavT— A. No, sir. ■; V LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 223 Q. Never had insulted Wm f — A. No, sir. Q. He just drew his pistol on you ? — A. Yes, sir ; aud he said, " Get away from here quick," he said, " or else I will put a bullet right through yoti, yon son-of-a- t)itch," he said. Q. Where is Bell now ? — A. I believe he is here. Q. Stillin the employ of the company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Yon are not ? — A. I am not now. Mr. CnKTiK. I suppose you thought it was time to leave ? The Witness. Yes, sir. By Mr. Bdrnbs : Q. Mr. Johnson, had Mr. Bell or anybody else prior to this attempt to shoot you, or threaten to shoot you — did he or anybody else warn you to keep off the grounds f — A. They didn't say anything until I got up there ; one of the detectives he has got — he got hold of me, and Mr. Bell he pulled out his pistol and held it right for me, and he said that I had to get away from there quick or else he would put a bullet right through me. Q. What time of day was this ? — A. It was at noon. ■ Q. Had you been at work during the forenoon? — A. No, sir; I was here in town during the forenoon. I was going home for dinner. ^. Had you worked the day before ? — ^A. No, sir. This happened on Monday. Q. After the strike ? — A. Yes, sir ; on the 25th of April. Q. Well, didn't you think that Mr. Bell concluded, as you were engaged in this strike, that you were there with some evil design? — ^A. I never had any trouble with anybody. Q. Had anybody told you you must not come in the yards? — A. Yes, sir; we were told to keep off the ground ; but I was talking to one of the guards over there at the round-house, and he said I could go over the ground if I didn't do any harm — that is, destroy any property or talk to anybody I saw — I could pass over the ground. Q. Then the supposition is, Mr. Bell did this because he had ordered you not to come on the ground, as you had struck? — A. Well, I don't know if there is Q. Hadn't the sheriff served an order on you, a restraining order not to come on the grounds? — A. Yes, sir. Q. So that you were on the ground in violation of this order that had been served by the sheriff? — A. I was on the Union Pacific track then. I was not on the Missouri Pacific ground neither. Q. Do you know the exact extent of the grounds of the Missouri Pacific and of the Union Pacific ? — A. Yes, sir ; that track I was on was on the Union Pacific. Q. Yon were not then on the grounds of the Missouri Pacific? — ^A. No. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Had you any business there ? — A. I had no other business; just to go home for dinner. Q. I know, but had you any business on that ground at that time? — ^A. No; nothing only just to pass over. Q. Who was this man that agreed to give yon $2.75 a day ? — A. Mr. New ; he was the master mechanic then. Q. What was your business ? — A. Machinist. Q. Did you ever make any complaint because he didn't give you but $2.60 ? — ^A. How? Q. Did you ever make any complaint? — A. Yes, sir; I did to Mr. New; but I have not said anything since Mr. Rogers got charge of the shops. Q. You only complained to Mr. New ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you lay your case before the grievance committee of the Knights ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You don't know what they did with it, do you? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Buenes : Q. I will ask yon if this man New was not discharged by the company on the re- quest of the Knights of Labor ? — A. How ? Q. Do yon know whether or not this man New that you speak of was discharged and is now discharged from the employment of the company at the request of the Knights of Labor? — A. I don't know.. Q. Do you know whether he is still in the employment of the company or not ? — A. I know he is not. Well, he is not over in the round-house ; that is all I know. Q. Do you remember signing a petition requesting his discharge ? — ^A. Yes, sir; we had grievances against him. Q. Yon signed the paper ? — A. And I signed the paper. Q. Asking the railroad company to discharge him. I will ask you if, in going to yonr home, it wasn't the direct or nearest way to go through the Pacific grounds or yards ? — A. Yes, sir ; that was the shortest way. 224 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. That -was your reason for going through the Missouri Pacific ground or attempt- ing to go through ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. I want to ask you whether that petition or complaint or bill of grievances was addressed to the Knights of Lahor or a committee of the Knights of Labor or to the railroad company ?— A. Well, it was addressed to the railroad company from the Knights of Labor. Q. That was the paper that you signed ? — A. Yes, sir. MICHAEL MONEGHAN, being duly sworn and examined,- testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes : Question. State your given name, Mr. Moneghan. — Answer. Michael Moneghan. Q. Where do you live, Mr. Moneghan ? — A. In Kansas City, sir. Q. What is your age ? — ^A. Well, if I live until my next birthday, I will be 63 ; that will be next August, the 27th day. Q. Have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what department ? — A. Machinist. Q. How long have you been in that service ? — ^A. Well, if I was there until next • June, I would be there ten years ; I think I started there on the 22d day of June, 1876. Q. When did you quit that service ? — A. Well, I left there at the time of the strike. Q. Have you any grievance against the company, for mistreatment by it, or have you knowledge of any of your associate workmen who have such grievance? — ^A. Well, I couldn't say that I have any personal grievance against the company ; I worked under four master mechanics there, and I had agreed with every one perfectly well except Mr. New, and Mr. New made it his brags when he came there that he wouldn't leave a man that ever worked for Phelps there three months ; I told him politely — at least I sent him word to that effect — that there were men there he couldn't very well climb, men who had passed over more corduroy bridges than he had. He began tyrannizing and making it just so disconvenient to the men that he got several of them to quit from his blasphemous language, for he couldn't speak three words without swearing. Well, I didn't blame him exactly, for this man was two-thirds drunk most all the time; I would call him an inebriate in fact ; and I got along all the time with the company, and would to this day if it was not for New. Mr. Phelps was a gentleman, and so was Mr. Lawrence ; and Mr. Phelps, the second time came back there; he was a gentleman, and as for Mr. Rogers I couldn't say anything for him but what is gentlemanly and upright. My experience with the gentleman is not very long. Q. How long was Mr. New in service there over you ? — A. Well, I believe he re- placed Mr. Phillips in the latter end of April or the beginning of May, that is a year ago ; and he staid there until the company thought tit to shift him, I suppose for their own convenience more than anything else that I know of. Q. Well, you say then that you have no personal or individual grievance ? — A. Not one, sir. Q. You got your regular pay ? — A. Regular as clock work. Q. Satisfied with your employment? — ^A. I was perfectly satisfied so far. Q. Were the men generally associated with you — were they satisfied ? — A. With their treatment ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. gome were and some were not ; but the generality were very dis- satisfied under the reign of Mr. New. Q. You saw no dissatisfaction under the reign of anybody else ? — ^A. Not a bit, sir. Q. Did you sign a petition asking for his discharge f— A. Upon my word, sir, I did, and he wanted me to sign another for him to counteract that, but I told him I couldn't really do it ; it would be against my conscience to do so, and I wouldn't do it. Q. Well, the company discharged Mr. New, did the^ t— A. They did, I believe ; I know he didn't leave on his own account, but he was in a very polite manner asked to resign and he couldn't stop any longer ; I think the company stopped his pay and he wouldn't work any longer. • OTHO HAREOD, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buenes : Question. When did you enter the service of the Missouri Pacific Company ?— Answer. In July, 1882. Q. And did you remain constantly in that employment nntil the late strike?— A, Until the 6th day of March. Q. In what department ? — ^A. Switch yard. Q. How many hours did you work during the day ?— A. I worked about ten and ten hours and a half; some days I would work eloven'hours. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 225 Q. What were yonr wages! — ^A. My wages a part of the time was $70 a montli. When I first began to work I got |60 a month, then I got $70. Then afterwards I got promoted to assistant yardmaster at |90, and in a little while I got |135 for what time I was there. Q. You were paid by the month, then? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many days constituted a working month under the system ? — A. Well, it is different in different departments ; in the car department I believe twenty-six days. Q. In yonr department? — A. Well, every day in the month ; we had to work every day in the month ; we didn't know when Sunday came, except we saw people dressed up going to churoii. Q. So if a month had thirty-one days in it you worked thirty-one days? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. If it had twenty-eight or twenty-nine or thirty days you worked you worked whatever number of days it contained ? — A. Worked every day, Sunday included., Q. Were you paid anything extra for this Sunday work ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did yon ever demand pay for it? — A. No, sir. Q. Was it understood when you were employed that you were to work every day in the month ? — A. Yes, sir ; I so understood it. ' Q. Have you knowledge of any fact or circumstance tending to show any wrong done by the company to any of its employes ? — A. Well, we had had a good deal of trouble from the switch-yards — ^had considerable trouble ; we had trouble there last fall among the men. They discharged a ma.n by the name of Nolajid in the fall, and brought a man there by the name of Mike Shea to stay at the yards. It seems he didn't have a very good reputation among the switchmen, and the men got it into their heads they didn't want to work for no such man and they came to me and told , me that Mr. Shea told around that day that he intended to take the yard the next morning ; the men came to me that evening and they said if he did they intended to quit in a body the next morning, and I told them that wouldn't do, they better give Mr. Drake some kind of a show to get somebody else, to make some other arrange- ment; if they did it would leave me in a very bad light. Mr. Drake and the com- pany — ^they engineered this thing ; and they went to Mr. Drake the next morning and told him they didn't want this man Shea there, so Mr. Shea didn't take the yard ; but I was running the yard that time in the absence of the general yardmaster, who was east, and they let me stay there for about a week and said nothing ; Mr. Drake came home after that and asked me if I could run the yard ; I told him I thought I could if I was treated right and had the help that I ought to have, and he said "Then I will let you keep the yard;" so I did keep the yard ; but the general agent didn't like me very well, and he made it so unpleasant for me that I ootddn't keep it ; he made it impossible for me to keep it. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) Who is he?— A. E. A. Smith, the general agent. V By Mr. Bubnes : Q. Did you resign, or were yon discharged? — A. I resigned, sir. Q. When did you resign ? — A. I think it was about the 15th of December. Mr. Drake was in Sedalia at that time, and I telegraphed to him to have a man on the 17th to take my place ; I wouldn't stay any longer. • MICHAEL O'TOOLE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows ; By Mr. Bdknbs : Question. Give youi age, place of residence, and occupation. — Answer. My age Is 32 ; I live in Armourdale. Q. How long have you been in the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany ? — ^A. A year ago the 20th day of February. q! In what department did you serve ? — A. Firing up engines. Q. How many hours did yon work? — A. Thirteen. hours at night. Q. Was that a constant occurrence ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Day after day? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Or night after night ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you allowed anything extra for the hours oven ten hours? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ask for it ? — ^A. Well, I asked our foreman. Q. Sir ? — A. Yes, sir ; I asked our foreman at that time, Mr. Denniok. Q. What did he say ? — A. He said we had to stay there until the hours were iip. Q. That meant he wouldn't pay or wouldn't certify it up ? — A. Wouldn't certify that we could go home at any time uutil seven o'clock. Q. When did you auit this service ? — A. When the strike went out. ' Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) When they struck ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) You have never been paid anything for these extra hours of work ? — A. No, sir. 3984 CONG 15 226 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By Mr. CUKTIK.) What was the character of the work which you did ! -'A. That 1 done? Q. What did you do at night, and, these men whb worked at night?— A. Some of them wiped, some of them knocked fires, and some more pulled ash-pans. Q. Was. it constant work all night, or only at intervals? — ^A. At that time it was con- stant work. Q. (By Mr. Stkwakt.) At what time? — A. When this here foreman Denniok was there, and then for all; we couldn't do enough then. Q. When Dennick was there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, how was it afterwards when Mr. Rogers came ? — A. Since Mr. Rogers has come it is a little bit different. Q. It is not labor constantly for thirteen hours, is it ? — A. It is for a time. Q. You worked at intervals, didn't you ? — ^A. My labor is more constant all the time; turned forty and forty- two engines on that table at a night ; it keeps a man of my kind going pretty lively all night. JIPHRAM SANBURN, sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Btjrnes : Question. Please state your name, age,' residence- and occupation. — Answer. My name is Ephram Sanburn ; my occupation is a stationary engineer ; my residence is Kansas City. Q. How long have you been in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. I believe since the 12th of November, 1884. Q. What is a day's work for a stationary engineer; how many hours? — A. Well, I worked there most of the time since I was about fifteen years old ; I never done much over ten hours a day's work. Q. What did yon receive for your work there? — A. |1.50 a day. | Q. How many hours did you work ? — A. Well, I call it eleven hours and a half's work. I had to be there twenty minutes before seven in the morning, and the same thing at noon, and in the evening I had to be there and look the shop and carry the key in the office. That took me about twenty minutes after all the rest of the men left. Q. Did you get any extra pay ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you ever made a claim for extra pay ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the answer ? — A. Well, the answer was Mr. New had to see Mr. Bartlett. That is what he told me. Then he informed me I would get more pay and I would get a man to help me, because I was running a drill-press and a bolt-cutter a.lso, besides attending to the stationary. Q. Then you were doing the work of two men ? — A. Well, I think I was ; and be- sides that I had all the belts to attend to. If a belt broke down, or anything, I had to go on and fix it, or let it run till noon or evening, and then I had to fix it after ■everything was stopped. Q. You have never received anything for this extra work? — A. No, sir; I have been promised twice I would get a man to help, and more pay, but I never got it. Q; Are you now in the employment of the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. Whein did you quit the service ? — A. When we had this walk-out here the 6th of March. By Mr. CURTIN : Q. You are complaining now principally of Mr. New's treatment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How was your treatment before — by the foreman before and since Mr. New was discharged ? — A. Oh, I was treated all right after Mr. New was discharged ; I done the same work — that is, I wasn't rushed all the time as I was before when Mr. New was there ; I always had a good deal of work to do from the car depaxtment of the road and difierent departments. By Mr. Bubkbs : Q. Were your wages increased ? — A. No, sir. JOHN ARMSTRONG (colored), being duly sworn and examined, testified as fol- lows: By Mr. Bdknes : Question. State your name. — Answer. John Armstrong. Q. Andplaceof residence.— A. 1210 Liberty street ; I was working for the Missouri Pacific. Q. What information had you in regard to the discharge of men in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company before these discharges were made ?— A. The first information I had of it was during Mr. New's administration at the round- house there ; he was on an engine one morning, and it was in the winter time j it was LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 227 about two or three weeks before his removal from there, maybe longer ; and tbey ■wanted to take coal, and the coal was in the ehute over night and had ueen frozen in the qhute, snow and slush on it, and it didn't drop as it ought to as soon as the apron dropped down, and he turned around to me and he says, "Do you know where you can get three or four white men f " He says, " I want to fire them God damned niggers and put white men there that will do the work." They got the coal out the best they could. Q. (By Mr. CUETIN.) What did he mean by God damned niggers f — A. There were four or five men there ; I was pretty black ; I don't know whether he meant me or not ; there were four or five on the chute. Q. Well, go on. — A. Well, he asked me if I could find the men ; I told him I wasn't looking for men, I wasn't hiring them ; there were three or four or five boys from where he was boarding ; they came over there for work. He came to the conclusion the next morning — I don't know what conclusion he did come to — not to put the men to work. I and my partner were working together ; he came down and he said ne couldn't put them men to work ; the Knights of Labor would sooner keep the God damned niggers than put the white men to work ; he said if he had a black dog along with the Enights of Labor he would kill the son of a bitch. Q. Do you know of any specific wrongs done by this company to any of the em- plpyfe ? — A. I have not been in the employ long enough. Q. How long have you been in ? — A. Since the 20th day of November I have been in their employ. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have yon been mistreated in any way ? — A. Well, no ; only Q. They paid you all they agreed to pay ? — A. Teg, sir; Mr. New didn't do with me as he agreed to do when I went to work for him. G. BLACEMAN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. State your name, age, and place of residence. — Answer. G. Blackman is my name ; residence, Armordale, Eans. ; age, thirty-nine years. Q. When did you enter the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company 1 — A. 1884. Q. When did you quit it?— A. The 6xh of March. Q. During the time you were in that service, how many nights did you work be- yofld the hours your employment required you ? — A. When I went to work for the company I went to work nights as a new hand ; all new men that are hired go to work nights and work themselves up from night-work into day-work — that is, in our branch of the road ; and when we work ourselves up we get a day job ; we work thirteen hours in the nigtt, no matter how long it takes. If it takes two years to get a day job, we work two years at thirteen hours a day and ten hours' pay. Q. You work thirteen hours iorten hours pay, because you are seeking promotion? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is this promotion promised as a consideration for those extra hours ? — A. Well, I don't know as it is, for these extra hours. A man imderstands when he goes to ' work he has got to work the night-shift, that being thirteen hours, and work it until such time as he gets promotion to the day engine. I worked fourteen months before I got a day engine, Q. Well', did you get this promotion f — A. Yes, sir. Q. To a day job ?— A. Yes, sir ; I kept it about four months, until Mr. New came and took charge of it ; he took charge then, and he put me on nights again. Q. Put you back on the night service? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In all your service with this railroad company you found no cause of complaint, then, except during the time Mr. New was in the employment over you ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. The company otherwise treated yon well ? — A. As far as the company was con- cerned they treated me very well. Q. Well, I will ask you if you have been paid anything for these extra hours at any time? — A. No, sir. J have worked as late as ten o'clock after I got on the day- shift ; I have worked as late as ten o'clock, after working from seven in the morning until six at night ; I have worked until ten o'clock at night, and never got any over- time for it. Q. Have you made any claim for it ? — A. I have put in time but never got it. Q. Did tliis occur under New's administration? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have no such trouble with anybody else ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long were you kept on the night-shift? — A. About seven months after Mr. New got there — took possession. Q. You were kept in the night service seven months before you got thispromotioni? — A. The first I was on fourteen months and then I got a day-shift until Mr. New took charge ; after he took charge then he put me back nights again and I had to serve seven months again. 228 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. As I understaBd you, you didn't complain of the service of fourteen months for the promotion? But you complain that a wrong was done to you by puttitig yon hack in the night service?— A. After I had worked for promotion and got it and then hadto work nights again or had to go home and stay home. . ,, -.t Q. After the discharge of New were you restored to your position ?— A. Mr. New re- stored me to the day job before he was Q. Before he was dismissed?— A. Before he was dismissed. ^ Q. But in restoring you he didn't pay you or certify up your ti me for the extra work you did while in the night service or in the day service ?— A. No, sir. WDjLIAM F. ROCKWELL, beirig duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknbs : Question. State your full name.— Answer. William F. Rockwell. Q. Tour place of residence ?— A. Wyandotte, Kans. Q. Your age and occupation ?— A. I am thirty-two years old; occupation, switch- Q. How long have you been in the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway ?— A. About seventeen months. Q. When did you quit that service?— A. On the 6th of March. , Q. How many hours did you work?- A. All the way from ten to twelve and a half. Q. How much of the time did you work twelve and a half or over ten ?— A. Well, I didn't count ; there is a good many nights we worked over ten hours. Q. Were you paid anything for the hours over ten? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ask anyone to certify jjour time A. I did not. Q. For those extra hours ? — A. I did not. Q. Made no claim for it?— A. I did not ; I didn't think it was any use. Q. Did you work Sundays? — ^A. Yes, sir. By Mr. CuRTiN: Q. Wasthisnight work?- A. No, sir; day work. Q. How much time were you allowed at noon ? — A. Well, sometimes we got half an hour and sometimes an hour, and sometimes three-quarters of an hour ; there is no regularity about it, owing altogether how work was. By Mr. Bdrnbs : Q. Do you know the wages thafe are paid by other roads, or were paid when you were in the service ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were your wages as high as those paid by other railroads? — A. It was. Q. Did you get injured whUe in the service? — A. I did, sir. Q. What was that injury ? — A. Got that hand crippled. Q. You lost one of your fingers ? — A. Got my thumb mashed and bunged up. Q. Did any one make you apromise of compensation for that injury? — A. The next day after I got hurt I was sent for to come to Mr. Smith's office. I went to the office. Mr. Smith didn't happen to be in the office, and I asked the clerk, I asked him what was wanted. He said, ' ' I have a contract I want yon to sign." I says, ' ' What do I want to sign that for now, I ain't ready to go to work?'^ He says, "It is necessary to do it now." I says, "Let us wait until I go to work." He say, "It won't hurt tosignitilow." I says, ''Suppose I sign it now, when I get ready to go to work I'll have to whistle for a job." He says, "No, you wiU be all right for your job." So I told himbeforel would sign it I would like to know whether I would go to work when I got ready to go to work. During that time Mr. Smith came Into the office. He told him what I wanted. Mr. Smith said it would be all right about going back to work when I got able to go to work. So I looked over the contract and the wind up of the contract said, "For and in consideration of one dollar I release this company (the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company) from all damages or claims that I may have against it." I signed the contract. Well, this was about the 14th of June ; I was ready to go to work, and I didn't receive my doUar yet by the way ; and I went to Mr. Smith and told him I would like to go to Saint Louis and see about some insurance I had and see if I could effect some settlement with the company. So Mr. Smith gave me a letter to Mr. Drake, and also a pass to Saint Louis, and the letter — I don't remember whether Mr. Drake gave me the letter or Mr. Jones — to a claim agent in Saint Louis, stating I had received an inquiry while working in the employ or the company in their yard, and tried to get them to make some settlement. I didn't get any settlement ; they could do nothing for me. I told him I had a family and I would like to get some time. Well, they could do nothing for me. I told him I would like to have some assurance about going back to work, to make some arrangement about it, so Mr. Jones said for me to go back 'to Kansas City and he would guarantee me I should go to work as soon as I got back there. I got back on the 16th of June. I re- forted to the yardmaster for work. Well, he said business had kind of fell off since got hiirt and he didn't see much show to put me to work; he said he would LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 229 look around. I went home. This waa in the morning. In the afternoon I went around and asked him if he had found anything. He said he hadn't. Mr. Smith told me to come around again Monday morning. I went around Monday morning and I asked him if he had any encouragement for me, and he said he had none. During that time the yardmaster came in, and I asked him if he had anything, and he said he hadn't. 'Well, I says, " I suppose I'll have to wait until somebody dies or quits or gets fired." He says, "It looks that way." I said no more to him. I am a member of the Knights of Labor. We have a grievance committee, and I went to the grievance committee and laid the matter before them. They had taken no action on it, the grievance committee hadn't, and I came back intending not to say anythipg more to the yardmaster about it, because I could get no satisfaction. In the mean- time the yardmaster went up to the west end of the yard, and he met a member of the grievance committee and he says, " Say, you tell Rockwell if he will come around I will put him to work-^we don't want any trouble over this thing — rather than have any trouble." So they told me to drop it. I said "All right, I will." I reported for duty, and he put me in one of the hardest parts of the yard to work, and my finger hadn't healed up yet ; and the west ends of the yard catching cars — there is not another harder place in the west end of the Missouri Pacific yard. StiU, I stayed there like a little man and held my job until Mr. Layer left, and then I got changed to an easier position and remained until the 6th of March, and have not since received the dollar. Q. Why did you sign that release when you saw what was in it? — A. Well, I knew very well it would be mighty poor policy for a poor man to fight a railroad com- pany, aiud I didn't have no money to fight them with ; I thought it was better to take the job and go along about my business than to kick up any stink, so I asked the clerk where my dollar was, and he said I would get that after a whUe. Q. That dollar has never been paid you? — A. I have not seen it. Q. How did you get injured f — A. By coupling cars. They had akind of a patent ^awhead. It is something — if you understand anything about a drawhead of the cars — ^it is something similar to a Miller coupling. It was in a box car ; the pin in the hind end of our engine had got broke in making a coupling. These drawheads you have to put the link in the drawhead. I took the pin out of the front of the engine and put it in the hind end of the engine. The pin was a little crooked, and they drove the pin in there so I couldn't get the link out to put it in the drawhead in the car ; so I had to hold the link with the coupling-iron and the pin in the draw- head in the car, in order to make the coupling before the link would fly by to miss the coupling, and I catched my hand between the top of the pin and the top of the casting on the engine. Q. Do other men who get hurt on the road have to sign those releases f — A. They -do, or they don't go back to work ; either sign a release or not go back to work, as I understand it. Q. Do you know of other instances in which men have been discharged for refusing to sign a release T — A. Well, I don't know of any, any more than there was — ^it was told me I would have to sign it before I went back to work. M. L. PARKER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows:' By Mr. Burnbs : Question. What is your given name T — Answer. M. L. Parker. Q. How long have you been in the railroad business, Mr. Parker t — A. About thirty- five years. Q. Are you acquainted with practical track construction and repairs? — A. Per- fectly, sir. Q. Have yon examined the track where this wreck occurred? — A. Tes, sir. Q. When did you examine it with reference to the period of the accident? — ^A. 1 thiiik it happened about four o'clock in the morning, and I went to the wreck about twenty minutes past six or about half-past six. Q. Did you examine the track when you went there ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How did yon find it? — A. Well, the track was in rather a bad condition. Q. What was the condition of the rails?— A. Well, they were all twisted out of shape, that is, six of them ; all that were loose and away from the track were all twisted out of shape. I saw no straight rails that were loose at all. Q. Were any of them broken?— A. Tes, sir; one broken rail, and one that was parted by the fish-plates also. Q. Were any spikes withdrawn ?— A. I saw several spikes there that looked as though they had been pushed out and three or four holes or more, looked as though they had been lifted out. „ , . . ^ ,, • , t ~ Q. How many spikes appeared thus to have been lifted ?— A. I think I saw some eeven or eight altogether. ^ ^ i, v Q Well I will get you to state if from what you saw there appeared to have been any foul play with the track or whether the appearance indicated an accident in tha 230 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH. AND WEST. ordinary way ? — A. Well, sir, it looked purely accidental to me. I was told that a train had heen thrown off and a couple of men killed, and I hurried down to where the engine lay, and I thought I would examine it for myself. I had beep to a great many wrecks where they had been thrown off different ways, and as I came up to the wreck there.was a man there with a gun in his hand that didn't want me to stop. He wanted me to pass on. I told him that I'was working at the Union Pacific, and I was just passing that way and would like to stop and look at it. So I passed by him and went down to where the engine was thrown from the track. I looked at the two pien and then went back of the engine a ways and looked up under the cars to examine the rails, I saw two ties hanging to the end of the rails, where it looked as though they had been separated in the middle, as though the engine had come off the track first and had shoved against the rails next to the river, and had actually pulled them apart in the center, and the ends of the ties — two, I think, there were — still attached to the rail, or else the rail lay oh top of the tie, where it belonged. I couldn't get close enough to see. I went up again to see whereabouts the engine would begia to press the ties away from their proper place, and I found where the track first be- gan to give way the ties had moved about three or four inches — where the engine went off down the bank there about two feet or a little upwards, moved towards the river, and where the ears set on the track they appeared — the rails appeared to be in their proper place, and I don't remember of seeing any loose spikes there either, and I examined the rails, and I think I counted six, and they were all somewhat twisted out of shape. It looked as though the engine had been going rather at a slow speed and the cars were rather shoving her against the curve there, and she must have careened over by the weight of the cars as she turned that curve. That was the idea I had of it. Q. Is that your best judgment after thirty years' experience in the service? — A. Tes, sir. Q. Are you a practical track-man ? — A. Sir ? Q. Are you a practical track-man ? — A. No, sir; I am a machinist by trade. I have been railroading a good while, fired a good while, ran some, and know something about railroading. Q. Did you ever work on a railroad track in the construction or repairs? — ^A. No, sir ; not on a track. Q. Have you been in the service of railroad companies as a wrecker? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. To what extent? — A. About thirteen months I was with a wrecking train alto- gether, taking up wrecks on the New York Central. They generally always kept a certain quantity of men for that purpose. I was sent out for about eighteen months. Q. Did you generally examine the rails and ties and the condition of things with regard to the question whether it was an accident or done by some malicious person. — A. Most always so ; yes, sir. It was sometimes claimed that there had been foul play, and we examined them very closely ; others, again, we knew just exactly how the accident happened. Q. Did you examine the condition of the ties here when this accident occurred? — A. Yes, sir. , • . > Q, What was their condition?— A. Where the engine went off they were in a pretty bad condition ; they looked— some of them looked as though they were somewhat de- cayed, four or five of them ; and the ends of the ties, some of them, were a little de-' cayed; others again looked solid, as far as I could see. By Mr. CuKTllf: Q.' You say some spikes were pulled out?— A. Yes, sir. 9. How do you account for that?— A. Well, as far as I could examine it, sir, it looked as though the rail had shoved them out sideways. (J. The engine did it, and no man did it, you think ?— A. No, sir : it didn't look as though a man pulled them. Q.'What was that man doing there with a gun ?— A. I think he was guarding the track, or guarding the property in some way ; there were four or five of them there. Q. You say, from your examination at the time, some of the spikes looked as though they had been pulled out, and the others had been twisted out by the engine ?— A. X 68j Sir. Q. And you give it as your deliberate judgment, do you, that the track hadn't been tampered with ? — A. I am pretty positive it could not have been. Q. You are positive of that?— A. Yes, sir; from the appearance of the track it didn't look possible to me it could have been. Q. How long after the accident did you see itt— A. Well, it must have been— I jheard it went off about four o'clock. Q. No, it went off at three as the evidence is here.— A. I saw it about half past six in the morning. Q. About half past six in the morning?— A. Yes, sir; somewhere close about that time. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 231 Q. The evidence is it went off at three f — A. Sir? Q. The evidence is that at 3 o'clock It -went off f — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you saw it about half past six J — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Stewart : Q. You say you live here T — ^A. I live in Wyandotte, sir. Q. You are in the employment of what company f — A. The Union Pacific. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, suppose you had gone there with a lantern at the time of this accident and had found these spikes lying there pulled out, and the nut-heads of the fish-plates taken off and laid down there, would yon have said the engine did it ? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Buknbs : Q. How did you find those fish-plates? — ^A. The fish-plates were attached to the rails, two bolts in each end, and broke in two between the two rails; they were yet fast to the rails when I saw them. Q. Were there any of them taken off? — A. Not that I saw, sir. PATRICK COSGROVE, being duly sworn and examined, testified ae follows : By Mr. BmuirES : Question. State your residence. — Answer. I live in Kansas City, Kans.^ known as Wyandotte. Q. What service have you been in on this road ? — ^A. Machinist. Q. What contribution have you made to the support of the hospitals ? — ^A. I will state that I have contributed to the support of the hospital fund for the last five years ; even up to the 6th of last March there was a part of my time deducted for that fund; and further than that, I have applied for medicine here to our master mechanic on three occasions, and I couldn't get it. I got it once by going up to the Wabash Hos- pital ; several others had to pay to the same fond and could never get none. I will state for your information that this hospital fund was the cause of the second strike on this road. I believe this is the fourth that has taken place in eight or nine years. The second strike was on account of that fund being imposed on the people working for the company. Of course, we struck. We were beat, and after Q. How often have you had occasion to apply for relief, for medicine or entertain- ment from this hospital ? — A. On three occasions. Q. On two of them you got no relief or aid ? — A. No, sir. Q. On one occasion you got some relief from the hospital here belonging to the Wa- bash system ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of similar iustp.nces with regard to other employ^ ? — A. Yes, sir ; many. Q. Many of them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can yon estimate about how many ? — A. Yes, sir; I know all the shopmen that applied. They frequently told me they couldn't get any, and they brought it before the grievance committee, and we spoke to Mr. New about it, but he said he could do nothing with it — Mr. New, the master mechanic. He said there was no hospital here and no way of getting medicine. Q. Do you know of any other grievance on the part of any employ^ of that com- pany? — A. Well, yes, sir; I do. Q. Well, please state any individual grievance you know of. — A. I wiU state for myself. On the 10th of October last — it was a year — they cut me back from the 10th of October to the Ist of the month without any notice whatever ; and on that day there were two or three machinists quit and they got their pay in full, and those that kept on working simply were cut back to the 1st of the month. During that winter, 1884, and the spring of 1885 there was at least a cutting back to the end of the month of 10 per cent. Q. (By Mr. Stbwakt.) That was all settled by the March contract ; you are going back to the last strike now, are you not ? — A. Yes, sir. There has been many griev- ances by the men working for the company at Cypress under the administration of Mr. New that they had to adjust ; among them was some colored men who were work- ing on the coal-chute there ; three of them Mr. Stewakt. We have heard all about that. Mr. Bdknes. Yes, we have ; it was described by another witness. A. Also on Saturdays, for the last four or five months back, they took off the hour we were allowed on Saturday afternoon for many years past ; it was a custom ; we felt as though we were entitled to it. Q. Since the 15th day of March, 1885, has the company ever reduced your wages after the service was rendered ?— A. No, sir ; I got my regular pay right along since. Q. Then yon have no complaint against the company with regard to your wages since that time ? — A. No, sir. 232 LABOR TROUBLES IS THE SOUTH AND WEST. \ • Q. The grievances you allude to on the part of other men relate b?,ok to the period before the 15th of March, 1885 ?— A. Before and since that date ; yes, sir. There are other men who have brought grievances before them and tried to adjust them j I have been on this grievance committee here and I have tried to adjust those grievances 'with the foreman. Q. Did you adjust them ?— A. Some cases we did and some we did not, we could not. These grievances were handed over to the chairman of our general executive , board— the district board— and laid before the company in Saint Louis, which is the cause of these late troubles. Q. Was there any payment added for that extra hour on Saturday ? Were you paid anything for that extra hour?— A. No, sir; the hour was taken oiT. We used to get that hour up to last fall. Q. That is, you were allowed to work that hour, but you were cut ofi an hour sooner ? — ^A. No, sir ; we always were allowed to quit at five o'clock, but they made ,ns work the extra hour on Saturday without allowing us pay for it. Q. Didn't the company pay you for that extra hour ? — A. No, sir ; didn't get any paiy for it. Q. Didn't they pay you for ten hours' work ?-(-A. We got paid for nine hours' work- just for nine hours' work for Saturday, but we had been getting ten hours. Q. You got paid on Saturday for ten hours, although yon only worked nine ?— A. 'No, sir ; we only got paid for nine hours on Saturday. Q. Then'you were requited to work ten hours ? — A. No, sir ; we were working only nine hours right along for the last five or six months back. MICHAEL LEAUy, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Burnbs: Question. Mr. Leary, state your full name. — ^Answer. Michael Leary. • Q. What is your age ? — ^A. I am twenty-nine years old. Q. State your residence and occupation. — A. Kansas City, Mo.; I am a switchman in the yard. Q. When did you enter the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway ? — A. The 17th of last December. Q. When were you discharged ! — A. I went out on the strike. Q. Do you know of any order issued by any one in authority in that company di- recting the discharge of all Knights of Labor ? — A. Well, sir, the yard-master that ran the yard here before the strike — ^his name was Maher — ^Mr. Maher was running the yard ; he told me two weeks before he got fired out of here that Mr. Smith, the freight agent at Kansas City, asked him if he could not get rid of all the Knights of Labor working in the yard; and he told Mr. Smith that he didn't know any of them ; that they wouldn't tell him who they were or who belonged to it, and he saidh* wouldn't have anything to do with it. Mr. Smith told him mey had to be fired, every one of them. When Mr. Nolan took the yard the first break he made he commenced to fire them. He fired me and my crew, three helpers and the assistant yard-master. He claimed that we held a passenger train. Mr. Smith was in Saint Louis at th« time, and he had charge of the yard here ; and we investigated it and talked to Nolaa about it, and he admitted he had done wrong ; when he saw he had to put ns back he admitted he had done wrong, and he sent us back again without going any further with it, and I asked him if Mr. Smith did not say that — asked him to get rid of me — and he didn't come right ont and say yes, but he said, we had quite a talk when I took the yard here ; there w^as a' good many men here Mr. Smith didn't want, and h« said he told him he would have to get rid of them. H. A. HARBAUGH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes: Question. Have you stated your occupation? — Answer. Printer. Q. Will you state as briefly and fully as yOu think proper all you know with re- gard to a boycott put upon certain persons in Kansas City? — A. Well, the boycott as was placed upon the Journal, I think in September, by order of the typographical union primarily — first. The reasons for the boycott extended back a good many years, a portion of which time I was not here. The strike occurred while I was in the West ; 1 don't know exactly all the details except from hearsay. I was in Colorado then; I left here in 1878. A month before I left they were paying forty-five cent* per thousand— had been for some time. The month I left they had reduced to thirty. By 'Mi. Stewart : Q. Who did ? — A. Well, the Journal Company principally. At that time the paper was under the management of a gentleman named Abiel ; it previously had been under the maijagement of I. P. Moore, he didn't reduce ; but when Mr. Abiel took it LABOR TROUBLES TN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 233 he made a reduction of the wages. A great many of us, in order not to go out on a strike, left the city, I among the number, and stayed away until a year ago last Oc- tober I came back. I arrived in the city from Colorado in pretty poor circumstances, just iost a situation out there and hadn't saved much mouey — lost it — I applied for work at that time and couldn't get any in town except two or three days in. job rooms which were not paying very well, not enough to support my family ; I didn't get enough work so I went to Chicago. In the mean time I saw prospects of things straightening up here, and having learned my trade here I thought I would come back, probably I could do better here. I came back and done very well, and imme- diately after arriving here I went to the Journal on a committee appointed by the union, requesting them to allow union printers to work in the office, and I was told by the manager that he couldn't allow union printers to work in his place. I asked him as a special favor to let me work there as I had learned my trade there in the , office when he was bookkeeper — commenced my apprenticeship in it and finished it ; he said no, he couldn't mix the office, union men couldn't work there. So we went into the boycott on those terms. Considering he was boycotting us, not allowing us to work there, we must do the same in return. By Mr. Buenes : Q. Then this boycott was a boycott by the typographical union ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And the boycott was instituted because the Journal had refused to give yon em- ployment f — A. Yes, sir. Q. On the ground you were a union man ? — A. Not me alone ; others. Q. Well, otiiers t— A. Yes, sir. F. A. ALLEN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes : Question. State your name, age, residence and occupation. — Answer. My name is F. A. Allen ; I reside in Kansas City ; I am by occupation a printer. Q. I will get you to state if you are the editor of the paper called the Boycotter 1 — ^A. No, sir, I am considered the business manager. Q^Do you know whether the Journal newspaper was boycotted ? — A. It was. Q. You have heard the last witness' testimony ? — A. It was about as he says. Sev- eral other little trifling things occurred prior ; it is hardly worth while bringing them op though. Q. Who owns that paper, the Boycotter ? — A. The Typographical Union conducts it. Q. I will ask you to state whether while the Boycotter was boycotting the Journal the Journal was boycotting the Boycotter? — A. That is just it. I believe there is a circular somewhere in existence ; I printed it in last week's Boycotter, where they sent it out to several merchants that I know of requesting them to boycott the Boy- cotter and those persons who advertised in the Boycotter. I can produce the circular if you desire it. Q. Sir f — ^A. I had the circular ; I can hand it to you in a few moments if you want it. Q. All right; yon can file it with the secretary. — ^A. Yes, sir. The following is the circular referred to above : (Secret cixonlar. The Jonmal's cowardly attack upon business men. Driven to the wall. They send an anonymons circnJar to the business men of Kansas City and Ticinity.] An anonymous secret circular has been sent out in the interest of the rat Journal to the business men of the city. It is as follows : " To iusiness men, purehasers of merchandise, citizens of Kansas City and vicinity. " You are all presumed to be interested in the growth of the city, its representative institutions, and you know, or you ought to know, that you do well when others do well ; that you cannot flourish at the unjust expense of others ; nor do you believe that others should flourish at your expense by catering to your, enemies, submitting or appealing to submit, to a class demand, founded upon a principle of ' rule or ruin, avowedly for the extirpation of all who have manhood enough to resist the domin- ance. " Yon are aware that a boycott has for months been declared by utterly irrespon- sible elements, against the Journal and all who advertise in it or subscribe to it. The sanctity of your homes has been invaded by the apostles of secret leagues ; your busi- ness threatened ; your personal liberty has been sought to be curtailed by an irre- sponsible set of men, who only abstain from violence for fear of law, boasting that they could thus prosecute an infringement on your natural and normal rights, pro- vided they did not go so far as to place themselves amenable to the terrors of crim- inal law. None but those with criminal intent bound their acts by the limit of the 234 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. law. Honorable, moral men are governed by considerations of riglit,;«fairne88, and justice, not by fear of the law. Tie latter is for the restraint of the wonld-be crim- inals, and only those having criminal intent have occasion to square their, conduct by such restraining law. " Do you want to range yourselves with these and abet their schemes? "Do you know that by accepting and acting upon the demands of this class you become an active agent in their hands to abridge the rights of your neighbor in busi- ness? ■ 1 i "Do you wish to be linown as abetting an infamous crusade against any class of business in Kansas City and talse the consequences? " Do you know that he who lends his influence to such purposes, subversive of the rights and fair fame of his neighbor, destructive of rightful business freedom, thereby proclaims himself an enemy of all the business interests of this city ? " Do you know that when you have thus become an ally to the boycott you cease to have a partnership in the general interest of the city's business, cease to have any right to expect the trade of any but your allies, the boycotters ? " Do you know that every workman who from that very cause, declines to place his labor and' his manhood at the dictation of sundry organizations is black-listed by these organized usurpers ? Usurpers of others' rights in every sense, their manhood, their independence. "Do you know that these unorganized wage- workers outnumber the organized fourfold, and not one of them, to be true to himself, can or does stand in with the boycotters, hence with you ? " Do you know that many are desirous of having the names of all firms who so far forget thgmselves as to boycott their fellow business men, in order that they may give their trafte to men of principle — men who refuse to be made partners in an associa- tion for the destruction of their neighbors' business ? " Such is the fact. These names will be given, and the boycotters will thns be boycotted. Many responsible persons have asked that such a list be prepared, in or- der that they may shun, and by their influence they may induce others to shun, the enemies of our city's trade. Such retaliation is in perfect accord with every element of human nature, in accord with nature's flrst law — to which all statute laws are subordinate. . "First, ejsamine the Boy cotter's list of advertisers. All these are assistant boy- cotters — ^helping to the destruction of some part of your business men. You will find a long list of ready-made clothing dealers, as follows : Houghton & Herrick, Sixth and Main streets ; C. D. Axman, Golden Eagle Clothing House ; W. W. Morgan & Co., 1099 and 1011 Main street ; H. Ganz & Bro., 905 Main street ; Great Eastern Bankrupt Clothing Co., 17 West Fifth street ; Kahn & Schloss, cor. Missouri avenue and Main street. "■Remember all these deal in goods made by the cheapest of cheap labor. "All the above have advertised themselves, hence the public know where they stand. ' " Do you want to aid the boycott. Then trade with them. Watch the Boycotter each week, copy all names. Call on any of your friends who may be boycotted, and make up your list from their reports. Meet organized wrong by organized right. "See that the boycott is made to operate as the two-edged sword, that is it — use it effectively, but only in retaliation, to let panderers to a bad principle see how it reacts. " Act upon the motto 'An injury to one is the concern of all,' so far as it applied to this guerrilla warfare upon your fellow business men. " See that your barber, baker, and all whom you patronize are free from the rep- rehensible practices of discrimination against men pursuing honorably an honorable business, and if he, will not reform — ^give him his own medicine. " LEX TALIONIS." Mr. DAVID ECCLES, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: I know something of the present boycotting. I had occasion at the time the boycott was instituted against the Journal to try to effect a compromise, and called upon them. The typographical union had taken the matter up and it came before the Knights of Labor. I stated their grievances ; that they were prevented from working in the Journal ofSce, and suggested to them that it was incumbent upon them, owing to their motto of "An evil to one is the consideration of all," that we ought to take up their grievance. I went to Mr. Mann and told him I thought it was very imprudent on his part to pursue the course he was doing. If we had objectionable men in the typographical union he ought to relegate them back to the Knights of Labor, as that body would not support any demand upon him to bring into his ofiSoe men whom he denominated as drunkards and rowdies and who would keep his ofSoe in turmoil, and we would give him an opportunity to make any selection he might desire. He said he couldn't possibly admit any union men. We'll, I says, " If that is the case you LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 235 will aroDse the entire animosity of the Kuights of Labor as well as the typographical nnion, for the simple fact is, there are a great many Knights of Labor who are print- ers and who belong to the typographical union likewise." The restrictions of the order we held of a moral character and not calculated to support any of the vices that he was condemning continaally as the practice of the printers' fraternity. The long and short of it was he objected to taking any of the union men in from the simple fact if he permitted one or two to get in it would be an entering wedge he would have the oflSc& "unionized" in a short time; if it had to be "unionized" he might as well do it at once;. he didn't want to let them in there whatever. That being the case, I was somewhat theretofore a friend of the Journal office, and would have aided them to effect a com- promise at that time. Mr. Mann was here, I believe, before this body. He said they asked for the expulsion of the men connected — one or two especially — with the office. That is not the fact. I told Mr. Mann I thought a coni;^romise could be effected to let those men remain on at the inception of this boycott, letting the old men remain on^ but "don't" exclude a Knight of Labor who was a union man simply because he was a anion man. WTien a man went there for work he feould have all the privileges of the office, and we did not, or we would not ; I would not individually, and I thought I might have some influence with others' support in combining, looking to make it at first an exclusively nnipn office. Mr. Mann rejected these terms of compromise, and little by little the paper has been going on making attacks upon the Knights of Labor as a body which has caused considerable feeling, and for that reason, one by one, we never took it up as a Knight of Labor fight at first. One assembly would vote to sup- port the typographical union and another would vote to support it, until eventually the attitude of the Journal towards the Knights of L^or led them to take a stand against it. So this has been brought upon the Journal largely by its own a<£^on. I think there has been a strong tendency in the press to condemn workmen for Doycot- ting, condemning it indiscriminately, but for my part I don't see how a body of men can effect a fight within the pales of law — as it is a fight, there is no use dis- guising that fact — effect a fight against the oppression of capital without resorting to this as a means. Violence is tbrbidden, and we come here as a moral force. Now,. there are extremes in boycotting. It is well enough to have the views of the labor element upon this matter, because there has been in times past a liability to trans- gress the rights of the workingman, because they have abused their own rights. In regard to boycotting, I think when you carry it to the extreme of standing before a person's door and ^most resorting to violence, or forbid people to enter, that it be- comes amenable to the law ; but otherwise, as long as they only resort to moral sua- sion, it is a power they have, or ought to have. I don't see how unionism can be caxried out without it is moving unitedly, reprehending bad ends, turning the cur- rent of business in a direction beneficial to workingmen. It is simply turning in preference to those corporations who do the best by the laboring men. Now, there is a fact here connected By Mr. Stewart: Q. Let me ask you a question right there. — A. Yes, sir. Q. Your argument, so far as it has gone, would justify the boycotting of the Jour- nal because, as you say, the Journal makes war upon a particular combination ? — ^A. Certainly. Q. Now, what do you say to this other proposition — your right or the right of any organization to strike at the business of an innocent man who has no relation to either of your affairs except that as a bnsiness man he pursues his business in a quiet, peace- able way, and advertises it, as he has been accustomed to do, in the Journal, which has a wide circulation, which gives people notice of his business, do you claim the right to do thatf — A. Well, sir, I would say in regard -to that, that there are certain evils that are incident to all modes or species of warfare whereby innocent parties are made to suffer. It is something to be lamented. Now, in regard to boycotting our merchants. I don't think we, as workingmen, would boycott any merchant who came to us and said that "I" or " we appreciate the situation and believe that your meas- ures are justifiable, but our business would suffer considerably by refraining from ad- vertising in any paper," or any act that was forbidden ; but instead of that — and the objectionable characters are usually those of a pig-headed disposition— and their answer is, they will do what they please in the business, and this disgusts them and creates a disfavor and intensity of feeling for boycotting these men. I know of several instances in Kansas City where the merchants decided that they had to advertise in the Journal, and we have not been very severe on them because they have expressed their sympathy with us at the same time ; some requesting us that it was their best interest, not to be severe on them ; but others who, when the com- mittee waited upon them, said they had no desire to have any interview with a com- mittee, that they thought they could conduct their own business, and other term& of contempt to the laboring man or to the representatives of the laborer; that of course creates an ill will. 236 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. The terms a man employs in that way have nothing to do with the question of his right one way or the other. Of course he may be injudicious, but that don't touch the question of right. — ^A. Yes, sir; the whole question is a moral question, and the terms a man employs bear more on this than you will admit morally. Q. I don-'t want to argue the question with you ; I want to get your views as to whether you think it is right; I don't care to hear an argument on the subject. I asked you to say if it is right. — A. Then you put your question in an argumentative way, sir. Q. No ; I don't ask it in an argumentative way ; I put it categorically — I ask yon, if j^ou say it is right to strike at the business of an innocent man in order to carry out your own general views as to any particular thing, real or imaginary? — A. Excuse me ; I said it was only relatively so ; there were certain evils to all modes of warfare that we could not possibly eliminate. I don't say it is right for a man to treat an- other with a supercilious disregard, nor for another to boycott a man, but one is aa jnstiflable as the other. Q. (By Mr. CuETEsr. ) They are both evils ; they are neither justifiable. — A. Of course that is so. If you will eliminate one you will eliminate the other. If men are gentle- men there will be no need of boycotting. By Mr. Buknbs : Q. Mistreatment or incivility would not justify a violation of law. — A. It may not be a violation of law. I don't think we have any law in the State of Missouri— I don't think it is right — this whole argument before your board has been for the pur- pose of bringing about such a«law, inasmuch as there are certain obsolete laws or statutes in the Eastern States that have been carried from the older countries that have been invoked against trade unions ; the public press has worked with the money power to create a prejudice detrimental to the interests of labor in favor of their own, and for that reason they will talk about points of misbehavior on the part of the laborer, actual transgressions, and make them the legitimate outcome of the labor movement, which is very wrong, and create in the pubbc a sentiment against them to stop them from doing what is their province for doing, and that I think is their aim now. I do not think we should encourage the capitalist element to have strennons laws against the working man refraining from patronizing any institution or any article. Q. Are you a naturalized citizen of this country J — A. Yes, sir ; I was brought hers before I was twelve years of age; I became a citizen by my father being naturalized before I was of age. Q. Do you belong to any organization ? — A. I belong to the Knights of Labor and printers' unioh. Q. Any others? — ^A. No, sir; I have had occasion, in the Knights of Labor, to act where I have known the working man to be perfectly terrorized. JAMES MURRAY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. BuRNBS : Question. Mr. Murray, how long were you in the employment of the Pacific Rail- road Company ?— Answer. Since 1868, off and on ; not right along. Q. In what department were you employed ? — ^A. As fireman and engineer. Q. WeU, we will get you to state your knowledge of any grievance on the part of the employes of the company and on the part of yourself against this company since March a year ago, March, 1885 ? — A. I have no grievance to make ; I don't know any- thing about anybody else ; but what grievance I had with Mr. New here, that is all I know. Q. Your grievances were with Mr. New?— A. Yes, sir; I have been troubled with him personally and part — ^he wanted to borrow some money of me one time for fifty years. So he asked me two or three times ; I told him I would report him and I did do it. '^ Q. The compauy discharged Mr. New, didn't it ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And you have no grievance except under his administration ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Why did he borrow this money from you ?— A. Why did he borrow it ? " That was the telegram to Mr. Fitzsimmons, the chairman of that committee. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 249 " You VfjU therefore see that no reduction in force in the shops is made, and will consult with me before making any reduction in the hours of work, and I also ad- Tise that yon make no change in the men's wages or class men's wages without £rst getting permission from this office. "H. M. HOXIE." Mr. Fitzsimmous replied to Mr. Hoxie's message as follows : Sedalia, May 25, 1885. H. M. HoxiE, Saint Louis, Mo. : Yours of even date received. We thank you for favors shown and hope there will be no more use for us as a grievance committee. We believe that all are satisfied with your message, which we will cause to be printed and posted in each shop on the ^s- >tem. Very respectfully, the committee, J. W. riTZSIMMONS, Chavrman. Saint Louis, May 25, 1885, To Superintendents: I also enclose herewith for your information copy of the letter of grievances as presented to me by the grievance committee, by J. W. Fitzsimmous, chairman, to which the foregoing is an answer. H. M. HOXIE, Third rice-Preaident. (See Exhibits F, G, and H.) You will see that the demand made by Mr. Fitzsim- mous and his committee in relation 1o moving machinery and so forth from one di- vision to another was not consented to by Mr. Hoxie. Q. Could you furnish us with copies of those telegrams? — A. Yes, sir; we can furnish you copies. I have read these and it is not necessary for me to say anything further, except that the instructions from Mr. Hoxie, and from my superiors at all times, and the instructions which 1 gave to my subordinates, were to strictly carry ■out the provisions of those two circulars, and so far as I know they have never know- ingly been violated. There have been a great many cases which have been called to my attention, and I have never failed to rectify anything that was wrong. We were not required to give thirty days' notice, under the agreement, when we wanted to dis- •charge a man. We were supposed to have the right to discharge a man for failure to do his duty if we found it necessary, to transfer an engine from Sedalia to Saint Xonis to-have it repaired here, that we had the right to do it, under the agreement, and the agreement will show for Itself. And I will say that the principal shop of the Jlissonri Pacific road is at Saint Louis. There is a large shop here. There is a shop at Cypress, but it is a small shop. It is not intended lor heavy repairs. And on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas road the principal shop of the division north of Denison •is at Parsons. There are shops also at Denison which are used by the Missouri Pa- «ific and by the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and the roads in Texas jointly. And it was not always possible to do all the work in one shop — we might, for instance, have two or three wrecks and we would get more engines to repair on one division than we could repair as fast as we wanted them. I have read the agreement half a dozen times, and I never could see why we could not move machinery from one point to another when it became necessary, nnder those agreements. The Chairman. Colonel Bnrnes has said that we want copies of those agreements. The Witness. Yes, sir; you shall have them. The first trouble I had after I came here — I am not going to recite all the grievances, nor am I going to read all these papers by any means — was the " Wabash boycott " that was brought on by the Knights of Labor ; they had trouble with the Wabash Railroad, and we were more or less con- nected with the Wabash Railroad. For instance, in Saint Louis they had no round- house on the west side of the Mississippi River, and we were doing the repairs on the engines that ran into Saint Louis ; that is, they were taken to the round-house to our ehops ; they were wiped, and any light repairs that were needed were done by our men, and at the end of each month we rendered a bill against the Wabash road. At Hannibal we had a joint agent with the Wabash, and it is managed by the Missouri, Kansas and Texas road, or by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. We do all the switching in the yard, handle all the Wabash freight, and render a bill against that road each month for the service. It is done as a matter of economy. We also do the Wabash business for the East between Moberly and Hannibal. We haul their freight, •for which we receive a compensation; we haul their passenger trains, for which we •4:eceive a compensation. These agreements were in effect that I have referred to — 250 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. positive agreements with the men, aud, so far as I know, have never been violated on my division by the company. On the 20th day of August I received a telegram from Saint Louis from our master mechaDic which says : Saint Louis, August 20, 1885. E. K. Siblby: Have been notified by the committee that if we continue to do Wa- bash work we shall have trouble. I informed them that I did not get my orders from any persons except the superintendent, and that the work would be done as usual until instructions were received from proper authority. Have you any suggestions '°°^''' L. BAETLETT. I replied to Mr. Bartlett at once: " Your message received. In reply I can say that I desire you to continue doing^ your work as you have in the past. Make no changes whatever. Explain to thes^ parties that we are under contract to do the work, and that it cannot in any way be- considered as Wabash business. "E. K. SIBLEY." I received another message from Mr. Bartlett the same day. He says : "One man has refused to fire up a Wabash engine. Have ordered his suspensions until I hear from you. Please answer quick." I thought I took out the reply to that message. I have the message, but I will not look for it now. I can produce it, however. I wired Mi-. Bartlett in reply to put that" man to work at once, and that I would be in Saint Louis and see him. On the same day I received another message from him : "Committee have interviewed me again, and demand an answer whether I will re- instate man suspended. Anotlier man has just now refused to work on Wabash en- gines. What shall be done ? Could you come to Saint Louis ? Please answer quick."" I answered that I had previously answered his message, instructing him to put the man to work. I telegraphed again that I would come to Saint Louis, and to take no action until I came. And my object in doing that was to avoid any trouble. We did not want any trouble ; had been trying all the time to avoid it. I imme- diately put myself in communication with Mr. Hoxie, who was then the third vice- president, and was in New York, and with Mr. Kerrigan, who was on the Iron Moun- tain road, and I went to' Saint Louis on the 2Ist ; and after having a consultation with the parties that were there, and receiving telegraphic instrootiims from Mr. Hoxie, which were to the effect that he did not wish to bring about any disturbance; that he preferred to concede and comply with the demands made by the men ; the Wabasb road was notified that we could not take care of their engines at Saint Louis ; that they must take care of them themselves. The superintendent, Mr. Frey, who was then thedivision superintendent, was instructed by me by wire from Saint Louis to go to Hannibal and see that the Wabash road did their own switching at that point. Mr. Irvin, who was the master car-builder at Sedalia, and had charge of the repairs of cars and so on of the Wabash road, was notified not to do any more work on Wa- bash cars. In fact, we in every way carried out the demand made upon us to boy- cott the rolling-stock and business of the Wabash road. On my return to Sedalia,. which was on the 23d, I supposed I had everything fixed. I supposed I would not have any more trouble. I had agreed not to repair the engines or cars. I received a telegram from Mr. Golden, division superintendent at Parsons, which said: "Part of the yard men have refused to handle Wabash cars ; we have had to trans- fer eight or ten cars of stock from Wabash to system cars and are holding four cars of lumber iu Wabash cars. Engineer Anderson and his fireman on engine 41 also re- fused to put their cars in or out of trains, except to place them for transfer to other cars. They say they are working under orders, and if we should interfere in this- there will be trouble all over the system ; we can get the Wabash cars now here through the yards, if you think it best to do so." I wired Mr. Golden at once — "Will you please getyour committee to give you notice, in writing, in relation to- handling Wabash cars in Parsons' yards, and come to Sedalia by first train ; meet me at my office to-morrow morning. In the mean time continue to transfer Wabash cars or side-track them. Take no further action until you have consulted with me." Mr. Golden came to Sedalia. In the mean time I had consulted with my superiors. And Mr. Golden presented a circular issued by Mr. Frederick Turner; I don't know what his oflioial bushiess is, but I think he is secretary of the general executive com- mittee or something of the Knights of Labor, dated August 15, 1885. I thought I had it with me, but I have not got it. It can be produced, however. I think it is in Saint _ Louis. It was a notice to the employes of the Order of the Knights of Labor, as I ' LABOR TROUBLES IN THK SOUTH AND WEST, 251 _roinember, on the Missouri Paoiflo system and on thef Union Pacific, not to handle or Ao any work on Wabash rolling-stock. I then sent for the chairman of the committee, ■who was then filling the same position that is now filled by Mr. Martin Irons, and after having a consultation with him I asked him to please put in writing what he ex- pected the Missouri Pacific Railroad to do in relation to the Wabash business. After some time he sent me this letter. It is here now in his own handwriting: Sedalia, Mo., August 24, 1885. To tlie Manager MissouH Pacific Sailway Company, leased and operated lines, and Texas Pacific Railroad : Gents: The spirit of circular issued by the general executive board of the> Knights of Labor is, that we ask said companies to refuse to receive empty cars from the Wa- bash Railroad or Wabash cars, if empty, from any road, unless roads south or west. That said Wabash cars may be removed from the Southwest system and Union Pacific, and we ask that the employes of said road be not asked to repair any of said Wabash, cars or engines. Yours, respectfully, R. W. DREW, Chairman Executive Board, Southwest System. P. S. — The Wabash business between Moberly and Hannibal, on the Missouri, Kan- sas and Texas Railroad, shall not be interfered with until further orders. R. W. DREW, Chairman Executive Board, Southwest System. I have various communications which were handed in at Kansas City and Parsons, and other points, but I will not refer to them. I had a personal conversation with Mr. Drew and got Mr. Drew to consent to allow live-stock in transit coming north in "Wabash cars to come, and in case such car broke down that the car might be repaired at Parsons or Sedalia. I did that with the understanding, however, that when these cars passed off they should not return on to the the system, and that we would en- tirely suspend our relations with the Wabash railroad, except the moving of their trains between Moberly and Hannibal. I have a copy of the letter here which Mr. Drew sent out. This one is addressed to Mr. D. Ferrell, Armourdale, Kans. Another to the same effect was addressed to Mr. Brenan. SEDAilA, August 24, 1885. D. Feerbl, Armourdale, Kans. : Deak Sir AND Brother: I have had an understanding with Mr. Sibley, the su- perintendent at this place.. No more cars belonging to the Wabash will be allowed on this system. He has notified all points east and north to receive no more Wabash cars. Ail Wabash cars going east must be allowed to pass, and if loaded and need some light repairs to enable them to be moved, have it done. All empty cars in the yards belonging to the Wabash must not be repaired. Our object is to get all the cars belonging to the Wabash off this road. The company is doing nothing to inter- fere with our arrangement. Yours, fraternally, R. W. DREW. P. S. — Cars going west or south loaded at some point previous to this time must not be detained, as the law requires roads to transmit cars to points on their road> The matter will be settled as soon as we get all Wabash cars off our roads. R. W. DREW. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs). Did Mr. Drew hold any position in your company ? — A. Mr. Drew at that time was a carpenter in the car-shops at Sedalia, but he was doing this- as chairman of the committee of District Assembly 101. I think that was his title. I have the letter here [refers to letter]. Yes, sir ; he signs himself R. W. Drew, chair- man executive board. Southwest system. I read this to show you that I made every effort to avoid trouble. „ Q. And to show that you were not entirely superintendent of your own property? — A. I was not superintendent at that time, sir. Mr. Drew and 1 held very friendly re- lations. I sent for him occasionally, and he sat on one side of my desk and I on the other, and we talked the matter over like two brothers and did the best we could. I was trying to avoid a general strike on the Southwest system. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Was the interruption of your Wabash relations detrimental to the interests of this company t — A. Seriously detrimental. Q. Ip a pecuniary sense ? — A. In a pecuniary sense, seriously so. The live stock la Texas was moving then. I suppose we were moving out of Texas probably sixty or «eventy cars of stock a day, perhaps 150, and we were short of stock cars ourselves 252 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. and we had been obliged to borrow from the lines east, and we had a large number of » Wabash cars in Texas which had been sent there to bring the live stock out of Texas to Chicago and Saint Louis, and we couldn't get other cars there to load the stock in, and the result was that the business, some of it, I understand quite a large quantity, went to Chicago by way of New Orleans, and the business was lost to us. At Kansas City— the Wabash could reach Kansas City without their business going over our road ; at that point they had been delivering us business for Atchison, Saint Joe, Omaha; that business was transferred then to other lines and lost to us. Well, that is a fair example. We were losing the business and it was going to other roads. I sent out telegrams on August 24th to all points on the system to bring no more Wabash cars on the road. The telegrams are there. On the 28th of August, 1885, Mr. Drew called on me and gave notice that he would stop the Wabash business between Moberly and Hannibal. I talked to him and I plead with him ; I explained to him that we had done everything in reason, and finally got his consent to wait until the next day. I telegraphed Mr. Hoxie, who was ■in New York, and received his reply that the business of the Wabash road must not ■stop between Moberly and Hannibal. Fortunately for us the boycott was declared ■off on the 29th, the following day. I have the notice here from Mr. Drew, written on a telegraph blank, dated August 29, 1885, in which he says, " The boycott must at •once be raised on the Wabash freight till after Thursday." That is the way he put it. " Signed R. W. Drew." However, that ended the trouble. Well, now in taking away those engines from Saint Louis, I don't know how many Wabash engines he had, but in taking them away it left us with a surplus of men — £ve men that had been doing the Wabash work. The master mechanic called on me lio know what he should do with the men. Well, I couldn't tell him myself. That is, if he told them to take their time and go, that was a violation of the agreement; that is, it would be so construed by the men. They claimed under the agreement that if we reduced the force, in accordance with the' agreement, it must run through the •entire shop. That is, there were, I believe, about twenty -Ave wipers; we willsay there were thirty-iive, or perhaps thirty wipers employed at the Saint Louis machine- shops, and these five had been working on the Wabash engine which had been or- ■dered away by the men themselves. I suggested to the master mechanic that he re- •duce the time of the thirty wipers, or whatever number there were, and keep the whole force employed; reduce the hours of work of the full number of wipers equal to five men. I suggested to him that he do it through his committee so as to avoir! ^ny possibility of trouble. He did so, and reported to me that they would not stand it, that it must run through the whole shop, which they knew was perfectly and ut- terly impossible. That is, on account of five wipers, we could not reduce the time •of 500 men, machinists, painters, carpenters, boiler-makers, &c., because there was work for them. They had not been at work on engines. The result was, that after trying every way to adjust it, I notified the master mechanic to find places for them and keep them, notwithstanding they themselves had taken the work away from them. I believe that is all that is important in connection with the Wabash boycott. It was declared off on the 29th day of August, 1885, and we resumed business, and so far as that goes, we have had no more trouble with it. There is one thing that I omitted to say in connection with these agreements ; to chow that it was not understood that that agreepent covers all the employes on the system, I have here a copy of an agreement made with the engineers, dated Saint Louis, March 24, 1885, which shows that the engineers did not consider themselves as being covered by the other agreement. I also nave agreements made about the same ■date which were made with the firemen by their respective superintendents, and with the brakemen. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You claim in other words that that agreement, so far as it affects wages, relates only to a particular class of men ? — A. It relates only to men who were on a strike on the I5th of March, 1885, and is so expressed — explicitly ex- pressed. Q. (By Mr. BuRNES.) What class of men do you allude to ?— A. I allude to the men employed in the shops, the machinists, blacksmiths, boiler-makers and car-builders, and men employed in machine-shops and in the car repair shops. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) And to no others?— A. And to no others. Now, this is a matter which is of very little importance, except that we were not hunting trouble. ■On October 6,, 1885, I received a telegram from Mr. E. A. Smith, our commercial agent at Kansas City, which reads as follows : " The chairman of the committee of the Knights of Labor waits on me this morn- ing in regard to MoMahon and Sheehan, two of the parties indicted by the grand j ury at Independence, and acquitted on the 27th of September. They asked for these par- ties to be reinstated and put to work. I do not know what their course of action is going to be if we refuse to put them to work, as per your message of September 30. Kindly wire me your instructions in the morning. They give me until to-morrow to answer. "E. A. SMITH." LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 253 The facts in tliis case are that our cars had been broken open at Kansas City, we had lost a great deal of freight, and we sent some detectives there to report, who- complained to the authorities, and the matter was hunted up, and tbese men were arrested and were indicted by the grand jury on September 30. I ordered them discharged from our service. I thought it was good and sufficient cause, but I re- plied to Mr. Smith, on the 8th of October : "If MoMahon and Sheehan are Ijoth good, reliable, steady men, and you are satisfied that the charges against them were without foundation,, and that the grand jury erred iu indicting them for theft, you may return them to work. Lf you are not satisfied, and think that they are guilty, and that the grand j ury was right in indicting them, we da not want them returned to us, unless the committee of the Knights of Labor can pro- duce satisfactory evidence of their innocence. We do not wish to do the men any in- justice, and you may state to the committee that if any is being done them if they will put the matter in writing I will have it carefully investigated." [You will see how closely I was trying to avoid trouble. ] " Mr. Drake will be in Kansas City to-morrow morning and meet yourself and the committee and take up and examine any papers- which they desire to present. You may show the chairman of the committee this- telegram. "E. K. SIBLEY." The result was that it was about to bring on trouble, and he put the men back to- iWork notwithstanding there was some doubt about their innocence. However, w& thought best not to go too far into the matter, and gave them the benefit of th& doubt. Now, the next trouble we had of serious importance was on October 9. Just as I was- preparing to leave for Saint Louis on an order from the general superintendent, I re- ceived a telegram from Parsons, dated Pabsons, Kans., Octoler9, 1885. E. K. SlBLET : You are wanted here immediately to avoid trouble at shops. J. B. BRENNAN, A. BOYD, Committee, I replied,to that telegram as follows : Sedalia, Mo., Octoier 9, 1885. J. B. Breknact and A. Boyd, Committee, Parsons, Kans. : On account of previous important engagement it is hardly possible for me to come- to Parsons immediately. I should be greatly obliged if you will put any grievauc& you may have in writing and present it to yonr master mechanic. I will take the- matter up and come to Parsons, provided it cannot be arranged without my doing so. I assure yon that it is oar intention to deal justly and fairly with all our men, in view of which I trust you will present the matter as suggested in this telegram. E. K. SIBLEY. Now, I was pleading, with the men who were working there to give me the privi- lege of going to Saint Louis rather than have a strike, but they wouldn't do that, and! sent me the following message in reply : Pabsons, Kans., Octoier 9, 18b5. E. K. Sibley: Your telegram of October 9 received, and will say that we have submitted our grievance to Mr. Smith, the master mechanic, and got no satisfaction from him. Our grievance is this : The foundry at this point has been running but three or four days Jier week for the last six or seven months on account of lack of orders. Now, the orders have come in so fast and are so far ahead of the foundry diepartment that without any more coming in the foundry cannot fill orders on hand before the 1st of January, 1886, by working six days per week and ten hours a day. We also respectfully in- form you that the amount of help has been reduced in the foundry by men quitting and so forth [they do not claim there were any discharged] and that none have been hired iu their places, thereby causing one man to do two men's work, and we will state right here that we find it impossible to do anything with Mr. Smith, and will say in conclnsion that if you want things to run smoothly at this point that you will grant these demands in i)er80n or telegram immediately. The demands to be brief, are, as we demand, are as follows: That the foundry be ordered to work here- after six days a week of ten hours a day and that the help in the foundry be restored to its original number. J. B. BRENNAN, A. BOYD, WILLIAM B. LAUGHLIN, Committee,. 264 tA.BOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTU AND WEST. I communicated these messages to Mr. Kerrigan, wlio was the general snperintend- ent, and received instractious to go to Parsons, instead of coming to Saint Louis, which I did. I met the members of the committee and talked to them and explained to them that the work was not in the foundry to be done. I explained to them that we ha,d not discharged a man from the foundry ; that wherever a man left— went away— we had not filled his place simply for the reason that there was not work enough there to run the foundry on full time, and we desired to work the men full time, if possible. We did not wish to discharge any of them. I went over the whole ground with them. I reasoned with them, I talked with them, and I believe made some im- pression. They, however, demanded — now, I don't remember the number, but they ■said at the time the agreement was made in March, 1885— May, 18ci5, I think they •claimed there was forty or forty-one molders, and that by the men leaving the serv- ice they had been reduced to about twenty-eight. At least I think they demanded -that some thirteen more men be hired and put into service, and that the pay of some of the apprentices that they claimed had served longer than they should as -apprentices should be increased and that the foundry be allowed to run six days -of ten hours. We had in the early part of the year run the foundry three days of ten hours. Xt the time I went to Parsons we were running it four days a week of ten hours a day. I, after going over the whole ground, agreed to put on one or two helpers, I don't remember which, and to allow them to work five days of nine bours. The master mechanic stated to me that he thought he would have work •enough to last until January 1, 1886. That he had received a large number of ■orders just at that time, but that after January there would not be work for them. -But, I concluded, to avoid trouble, that perhaps it would be best to let them do all the work before the 1st of January if they chose to do so, and then, when there ■was no work, of course we were not expected to run. They left me and agreed to ■come back. They said they would go and hold a meeting, and I told them I would wait until 12 o'clock that night for an answer, which I did and sat np, but they did not come back to give me any answer. I came back to Sedalia, and on the following •day. Sunday night, I suppose about 9 o'clock, I received a telegram from the master mechanic that the employes refused to accept my propositions, and that the foundry men would not return to work on Monday. He asked for an answer. I waited until the next day, and he telegraphed me again for an answer, and I replied to him that I had said everything I could ; that I was carrying out the agreement, not only'in spirit, but in every way, and that I had conceded more than I ought to, more than I should have in the ihterests of the company that I represented, and more than the agreement ■called for. In fact, I was censured by my superiors for doing what I did. On Mon- day they did not return to work. The foundry remained closed about a week, per- haps a little more than a week, when I received a message saying they desired to re- turn to work on my terms. Of course I was under no obligations to take them back on my terms. They had violated the agreement, they had struck, they were out of our employ ; but to avoid trouble I telegraphed the master mechanic to let the men resume work. Mr, BUENES. Let me ask you in that connection, did this committee represent the Knights of Labor or the Union? A. Well, sir, in that conference Mr. Hollis was present, and he is known to be a mem- "ber of the Knights of Labor. There were other gentlemen there. Of course I could Tiot swear that the men who sent me that telegram were Knights of Labor. However, Mr. Hollis met with the committee, and he is known to be a member of the Knights jof Labor. Q. These shops were not leased, they were your own shops? — ^A. No, sir; they were not ; they were our own, shops. Q. I am desired to ask you if you have not been since running the shops with a full complement of men ? — A. No, sir; we run the shop under the arrangement which I made. I won't say what date it was, I think it was the 1st of February, although that may not be the correct date, when it was leased to Dilley & Son by the company, to George N. Dilley & Son, and I understand theyhave been able to do all the work we did in five days of nine hours in about two days of ten hours. I don't know that. 1 think, however, it is probably correct. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) In making that contract, giving them five days' work, was ■that a judicious or advantageous contract for the company ? — A. Well, four days of ten hours is forty hours, and five days of nine hours is forty-five hours ; there was a benefit to the amount of five hours each week. Q. (By the CH-iUKMAN.) To the men ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the company need that amount of service there at that time? — A. No, sir. Q. So far, then, it was a sacrifice on the part of the company for the benefit of the men ? — A. Nothing else in the world. Here is a matter which I present merely to show that we did not refuse to investi- gate any grievance that was presented. It was a matter presented by the switchmen ■at Hannibal, in which they demanded a reduction of hours. I immediately instructed LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 255 Mr. Frey, who was then superiuteudent of that division, to go to Hannibal, and see the men and adjust the matter. He came back to me, and made a report to me on November 15, 1S85. ■■" E. K. Sibley, Superintendent : " On receipt of the attached communication I proceeded to Hannibal, and had an interview with all of the men employed in the day yard, and convinced them that twelve hours constituted a day's work for yard men ; that the agreement between Mr. Hoxie and R. S. Hayes with the employfe in this system in no way applied to yard men. I found that they seldom worked later than 7 o'clock p. m., which I agreed to remedy as far as I could. It sometimes occurs that Wabash freight trains arrive at Hannibal pnly a short time before 7 p.m., and in such cases one of the day crews is -on duty till about 7:30 p. m., in order to facilitate the making up and moving of trains. After talking the matter over very fully they were all perfectly satisfied and well pleased with the result of the conference, and withdrew the complaint." Now, it takes too much time to read all of the grievances. I read these to show you that the continual claim which has been made that we did not pay any attention to a man when he had a grievance is all wrong. Here is another grievance, which came up at Parsons, and I believe that is about the only one that I ever had that did not «ome to me through the Knights of Labor. November 15, 1885. T. G. Golden, Division Superintendent : We, the Parsons yardmen, do most respectfully request that our wages and hours be changed to the same as those of the Sedalia and Denison yards, namely, hours of -day men from 7 a. m. to 6 p. m., and night men frem 6 p. m. to 7 a, m. ; the day switch- men to receive $2.15 per day and the night switchmen $2.25 per night; day foremen $75 per month and night foremen $80 per month. We would like to hear from you as ■soon as possible. Very respectfully, PARSONS YARDMEN. That was forwarded to me by Mr. Golden, and was by me returned to Mr. Golden ; a.nd I instructed him to take the matter up with his switchmen and adjust it, find. «ut what the wages were at other places, and adjust them with his men there ; if he was unable to fix it to their satisfaction to refer the papers back to me and I would go to Parsons. On November 28, 1885, he writes me : "I fixed matters up with the yardmen here by making their pay as follows, from November 1: Foremen day and night yards, $70 per month; day switchmen, $2 per. ■day, the same as it was ; the night switchmen, $2.20 per night. They are aU satisfied. "Respectfully, "T. G. GOLDEN, "Division Superintendent." Now, that was not only adjusting a grievance, but it was like most of the rest to ■which I have referred, making the concession, or nearly the concession, asked. Here is a matter in relation to the Hiawatha switchman who testified, I think, be- fore you at Kansas City. All I wish to refer to in this matter is that the grievance ■was brought up, and brought up through a Mr. A. N. Todd, and a Mr. B. C. Elliott, of Hiawatha, neither of whom vrere emploj^s of the company. The papers were pre- sented to my assistant, Mr. Drake, and by him referred to me. At that time I dis- liked very much to take up a matter as to the pay of our Hiawatha "switchmen with J)artie8 that were not connected with the road. I, however, instructed Mr. Drake to go to Hiawatha and make such adjustment as he found necessary. We were paying switchmen there, as testified to, $55 a month. He met the men and agreed to pay them $60 a month, which was too much, considering the rate of pay at other points. The reply made by Mr. Sherman in writing to Mr^ Drake in relation to his proposition is a letter dated — Hiawatha, November 30, 1885. Mr. F. B. Dkake, Assistant Superintendent, Kansas City, Mo. : Dear Sir : I promised to send you a letter on No. 2, this date, but was at work ■nntil late last evening ; hence the reason for not sending it. -I laid our conversation in full before the committee, and they will not accept of it in this manner. The grievance will have to be settled by them. * H. SHERMAN. The direct oflFer of $60 per month was made to the men. The_ matter was after- wards brought to my notice by Mr. Martin Irons, who, I believe, is chairman of the executive board of District Assembly No. 101. He came to my office to see me about 266 LABOE TEOQBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. it, and said there was some trouble at Hiawatha and he desired to have an adjust^ ment of it ; stating the facts to him, I stated that I had serious objections to adjust- ing the matter with these two men, and that I thought it could be adjusted with our own employ(58, and a short time after explaining the matter to him he called at the; office to say that the matter was all right, and I asked him to put it in writing, andi I have his notice, dated — i SeDalia, Mo., December 30, 1885. E. K. Sibley, Esq., Supenntendent : Dear Sir : The trouble existing with your employes at Hiawatha, Kans., has been, satisfactorily adjusted on the conditions agreed upon by yourself and me, namely, that said employes receive $60 per month, and that all time intervening between trains and the completion of work be at the disposal of said employes. Yours, respectfully, ' ^ ■" MARTIN IRONS, Chairman ExecuHre Board, Knights of Labor. Stamped with stamp of District Assembly No. 101. Mr. Sherman seems to think some injustice has been done him, and I wanted to- show that our action was approved by the highest authority that wo knew in connecK tiou with the Knights of Labor. In the matter of Mr. Shea, whom we attempted to put in as yard master at Kansas- City, I wish to say that we had a yard master there by the name of Noonan, I think, Mr. Frank Noonan, was considered a very good man. I was in Kansas City one morning and the master mechanic ac Cypress came to me and reported that a car load of links and pins had been shipped from Saint Louis to him at Cypress, to be used in Kansas City, Leavenworth, Hiawatha, and other points along the line north of Kan- sas City, and that they had all been unloaded by the yard master in the Kansas City yards, and that he had requested that a part of them to be loaded up and sent to him to be forwarded, and that they were entirely without links and pins at Leavenworth. I seut for Mr. Noonan, but was told that he had just received a telegram that some member of his family was ill ; that he had left matters in charge of Mr. Harrod. I sent then foi Mr. Harrod, who was the assistant, and asked him if it was a fact that Mr. Noonan had unloaded the links and pins. He said '"Yes." I asked him if he knew it to- be a fact that Mr. Noonan had refused to have a portion of them loaded apd forwarded. He said he did. I thought that was a sufficient cause for discharging the yardmas- ter, and I directed Mr. Drake, who was the superintendent in charge, to discharge him. There was, however, no fuss made about that. I sent Mr. Shea over there, and in- structed Mr. Drake to put him in as yardmaster. He attempted to do it. The com- > mittee called on him, and said that he was not a proper man ; they did not wanthim there. I had known Mr. Shea myself personally for a number of years. I knew him at Little Rock as yardmaster when I was employed there myself, and I knew he was a competent yardmaster. I knew nothing against him there, but I telegraphed Mr. Drake that if it was objected to not to insist upon it, bat to put him to work in the yard as a switchman. 1 then received notice from him that they objected even to that. I then instructed him to put in Mr. Harrod. The men- there in the yard had' requested that Mr. Harrod be made the yardmaster. He was also the chairman of the local grievance committee of the Knights of Labor. I put him in, and sent Mr. Shea back to Nevada, where he had been switching in the yards. Mr. Harrod held the position for some time, and finally resigned, and Mr. Bell, the present yardmaster, was appointed. I simply wanted to say this to show that I made the concession, that I did not want trouble. Now, here is a ease in which we did not make the concession. In December, 1885, the master mechanic at ParsoLS wrote me he had been called upon by a committee of the Knights o'f Labor with the verbal demand that Mr. John Crawford be placed: on the road as an engineer. Mr. Smith, who was then the master mechanic, had not been there vel-y long, and was not there when Mr. Crawford was employed. Bat the facts, as near as they could be got at, were that he had been on the road, and was dis- charged on the ground of incompetency some eighteen months previous ; that his case had been examined by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, and that the com- pany were sustained in their action. I think afterwards he went out in the country, perhaps, and worked on a farm. I think I learned that, in making inquiries, he con- cluded that he would lite to return, and could not get back any other way : that the company did not consider him competent ; the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers did not consider him competent ; the master mechanic did not consider him compe- tent; and he joined the Knightslof Labor, and undertooli to force himself on again through their influence. We didn't take him back. JJLBOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 257 Heie is a notice that Mr. Fred Page, chairman of committee at Sedalia, addressed to Mr. Brown, onr roadmaster &om Sedalia to Hannibal : Sedalia, Sfovemier 30, 1885. Mr. Bbowv. Dear Sir: As we have an agreement with Mr. Hoxie that no men shall he dis- charged until cause is shown for such action, I have been instructed by the Enightsof Labor of this place to ask if you will please inform ns as to the cause of Mr. J,ohn Seymour being discharged at Clifton, Mo., &om Section 23. By doing so, you wiU . oblige Tours, truly, FEED PAGE, Chairman of the Committee. Stamped with the stamp of District Assembly 101. There was nothing in the agreement which made it necessary to reply to Mr. Page's communication. My instructions to every one had been such that any one holding a position of foreman or master mechanic who had employed men felt that they were obliged to explain to any one who called upon them to do so. And, in response to Mr, Page's commnnication, Mr, Brown made the following reply : MoBEKLT Station, December 4, 1885, Mr, F, Page: Dear Sir : Tours, dated November 30, at hand. Id answer I would respectfully say that I was compelled to relieve John Seymour, section foreman at Clifton, to pro- tect the interests of the company. I am held responsible for every man under my charge, therefore I must necessarily employ the best men I can get, Mr, Seymour has proved to be a careless track foreman, and I cannot, in justice to the company and the public, keep such a man, as section foremen have large responsibilities, and a careless man may be the cause of serious accident and loss of life. Very truly, yours, EOBEET BEOWN, ' Division Boadmaster. I approved of his reply and thought it was a very good one. Now, in the matter of Mr. Shea, after he returned to Nevada he had a great deal of trouble — that is, he seemed to be objectionable in many ways. I have a communica- tion which was sent to him, dated : Nevada, Mo., November 21, 1885. J. W. Shea, Soai : Tou are hereby notified to leave this place at once, as your histoi^ is too well known, and if you don't we will see that the strength of the assembly will be brought to bear npon you to this end. By order of Assembly 3769, Knights of Labor, Stamped with the seal of the order. The matter of bis removal was afterwards brought to my attention through Mr. Martin Irons and an investigation demanded. I sent my assistant down there, and here is a copy of the testimony taken in the case written on the type- writer. Every employ^ in the yard there that knew him is examined, and there is not one thing in the whole testimony that would make it necessary for us to remove him &om our service. In Mr. Irons's communication to me he asked that the matter be investi- gated and the man removed. This was not done. We found no cause for doing it. I don't know but that I am tiring the committee. If I am going too far with this I will stop. I am pretty near through, however. Mr. Bdrnes. Take your own course. The Chairmajst. Why, yes, we had better hear this. Mr. Stewart. Tes, sir. The Witness. The next grievance of importance presented was a commnnication from Mr. Martin Irons to me informing me that Mr. Bell, the yardm aster, had removed the foreman at Grand Avenue and placed another man in charge, and that the men were not satisfied, and desired to have Mr, Martin Scow put on as foreman. I investi- gated the matter pretty carefully; went into it, talked with Mr. Bell, talked with Mr. Drake, sent Mr. Drake to Kansas City, and, after making all the inquiry possible, I addressed the following letter to Mr. Irons : Sedaua, Mo., January 21, 1886. Martin Irons, Esq., Chairman: I am in receipt of yours of January 15, with complaint made by the yardmen at Kansas City, After careful investigation I am unable to find any serious grounds 3984 CONG 17 268 LABOR TSOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. for complaint, or that tbe agreement has been violated in any respect. If yon will in- vestigate the matter you will find that we have been very nnfortnnate in the way of iaocidents and destruction of property in that yard, much of which has been caused by Careless and incompetent men. We hold Mr. Bell responsible for the management of the yatd) and do not interfere with his men unless we find that they are not doing thBif duty, and he must say what men he will put in the different positions. He will doubtless become better acquainted with the qualifications and abilities of his men after he has been in the yards a li ttle longer. I am satisfied that he will not do any of them injustice and that he will look after those who do their work well and see that they are taken care of when opportunity offers. In relation to the position of foreman at Grand Avenue, the place is important and had to be filled promptly, and it was important that he put a man there whom he knew was competent to fill the place. His attention has been called to Mr. Scow, and if in his judgment he should find him competent he will doubtless advance him when opportunity offers. E. K. SIBLEY. You got the history of Mr. Scow in Kansas City. He was caught in wrecking one of our trains just outside of Kansas City, and was arrested by the police. The next serious grievance which we had presented was a long list of complaints which came from Kansas City against Mr. W. T. New, who was assistant master me- chanic. He was charged by the men with overbearing conduct, with intemperance, with an attempt to extort money, &o. I took up the case ; I was not able to give the matter pereoual attention ; but I went through it and got the testimony of a number of men, and I inquired all I could and got all the information I could from my assist- ants and from other parties. I failed to find anything to corroborate the charge made against him of intemperance or disiionesty ; I did, however, find that he was some- what overbearing ; I believe at times that his conduct was overbearing and that he did not treat his men properly — that is, while I do not think he was a very bad man, I do not think the treatment of bis men— his conduct towards his men — was calcu- lated to inspire their respect. I, however, notified Mr. Irons, who presented the grievance to me, that I did not think there was suflSeient cause for his removal, and he notified me that unless he was removed he would call out the system. His exact words were, "With all due respect to you, sir, it he is not removed I will call out the system." I communicated with Mr. Kerrigan, and he came to Sedalia and bad a con- ference with Mr. Irons. Mr. Irons made a statement of some testimony which he had in his possession in addition to the testimony which he had presented, and again, rather than have trouble, we removed Mr. New, and appointed his successor on the 8th day of February, Mr. M. J. Eogers. In connection with Mr. New's removal we bad trouble at Saint Louis with bur fire- men. And I want to say here, gentlemen, that in all agreements with the Brother- hood of Locomotive Engineers, with the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, and with the Brotherhood of Brakemen, we have never had any trouble in adjusting griev- ances, and I believe that you can go to either one of the three and they will say that they never had any just cause for complaint that has not been met by the company , fairly and settled to their satisfaction—at least up to the time I left the road, which was on the 5th of April — the 8th of April. What I was going to say about the fireman Vas as near as I can ascertain a number of them joined the Knights of Labor and there was some division of feeling among the employes — that is, the engineers and a good many of the firemen at Cypress thought that Mr. New should remain and didn't want to see him removed, and that he was competent, and they so expressed themselves, and made some move to see if they could not retain him in his position. The firemen, however, on the east end, running out of Saint Louis, combined and refused to come out with their engineers. The first man who did it was a man named Brantner. He reported sick, and the remainder of them made the arrangement not to be found, and the result was that we were unable to get a fireman to go out with one of our engi- neers. It caused some little trouble and some little delay and was immediately fixed' up after the matter was adjusted in relation to Mr. New, and all the firemen returned to work. It was simply a Uttle matter on that end to force us into removing Mr. New. There has been much said, and I have seen it stated frequently that we pay no atten- tion to the demands for increase in salaries. I wish to say that on March 4, 1886, 1 received a letter from Mr. T. W. Newell, giving a list of his apprentices and the date that they commenced work, and the rate of pay was, for the first one, $2 a day ; the second one, $1.75 ; the third, fourth and fifth, |l.75 per day, and the last one $1.25 per day. These were apprentices. He asked permission to increase their salaries, and said they were apprentices who had worked for some time and were growing to be useful men, and after referring the matter to Mr. Kerrigan and obtaining his permis- sion, I returired the papers on the 8th of March, 1886, after the strike began. Q. (By Mr, Stewabt.) What is the date of the application?— A. March 4. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 259 Q. That is before the strike T — A. Tes, sir; that is two days before the strike. " T. W. Neweix, JfdMter Jfeoftojiio : ' ' I herewith return your letter of March 4, with correspondence attached. Please note that you are authorized to increase the pay of apprentices from the present pay ten, fifteen, and twenty-five per cent., as their names appear on the attached letter in order of their ability. Note and return correspondence to me for file." That is, the man who was receiving 12 was increased to |2.20; the man who was receiving $1.75 was increased 15 per cent., and the man who was receiving $1.25 was increased 25 per cent., a very fair increase in the salary of an apprentice, at least we thought so. And I will say that that has occurred through all the shops. The mas- ter mechanic and master car-builder at Sedalia and the master mechanic and the master car-builder at Saint Louis made the same application, and in each case they were authorized to increase the pay of their apprentices. Now, there are other numerous small matters presented, all of which were adjusted. I will.not refer to any more of them. Q. (By the Chaikmak.) It may save a good deal of time hereafter if you will say whether, in your intercourse with Mr. Irons, anything was said about the conduct of that man (Mx. New), his oppression and his language and abuse of the men, which has been so fully proved up at Kansas City ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; there was something said. He claimed that he was overbearing and Q. But did Mr. Irons know that? — A. Mr. Irons claimed to have some personal knowledge; yes, sir. The next serious trouble which we had were the instructions which we received to boycott the Texas and Pacific cars. I do not remember the exact date ; probably the 3d or 4th of March, 1886, just a day or two before the strike, I received telegrams from every point on the line. Saint Louis, Hannibal, Kansas City, and Parsons and all the junction points, that the men — switchmen working in the yards — had received instructions not to handle or switch any Texas and Pacific care. I had received no notice of it myself, and immediately commenced to inquire for the cause by tele- graph, although I presumed 1 knew why before I sent out the inquiries. But I wished, if possible, to get some statement from some of the different committees of the Knights of Labor which had ordered us not to move the oars or freight going from or coming to the Texas and Pacific or going to the Texas and Pacific road. How- ever, after telegraphing the general superintendent for instructions, I received an or- der not to handle any Texas and Pacific cars. I immediately sent out instruc- tions Q. (By Mr. Stbwakt.) You received an order from whom? — A. Mr. Kerrigan, the general superintendent ; that is, not to handle them —that is, to obey the demand made upon us by the Knights of Labor — ^that is, not to bring on any issue, but to stop doing the Texas and Pacific business. It was another concession made to avoid trouble. I sent instructions to every point necessary not to attempt to move any more Texas and Pacific cars. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) What date was that? — A. Those instructions were sent out probably the 4th or 5th of March. I have not those with me. 1 see they are not here. 1 thought they were here, but it is so recent that I can remember it aU. Q. It was before the strike ? — A.' It was a day or two days before the strike. I sent instructions out not to handle any more TexasandPaoific cars. Ifthere were any loaded with perishable freight to transfer them to other cars and tbose that were loaded with freight for the Texas and Pacific road, to^ut them on the side track and leave them there. That occurred on the morning of the 5th. Sometime during the afternoon I was waited upon by Mr. Fred Page, the chairman of the local committee here, and I think Mr. Eugene Perry came with him, who was also one of the local committee. They were both employes in the machine-shops. They came in and said they desired to notify me that after 10 o'clock on the morning of the 6th we would not be allowed to move any Texas and Pacific cars. They came in and gave me that notice in ad- vance, so that if we had anything that we could get off the road we might have an opportunity to do it. They expressed great regret at beingobliged to give that notice. They said they did not wish to injure the Missouri Pacific road in any way, that they had nothing to complain of ; the men were all satisfied and they were satisfied. But they had been ordered to boycott the cars and business of the Texas and Pacific Bail- road. I explained to that committee that it was going to work a very serious injury to our business. The Central Branch Line, of which Mr. Fagan is superintendent, had been blockaded with snow and business practically suspended for two months. What is known as the Nebraska Extension of the Missouri Pacific road, running from Atch- ison to Omaha, had also been blocked with snow ; and also the Topeka, Salina and Western Division, running out from Council Groves, had been blockaded with snow, and the Neosho Extension of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas. We had been unable to move the com crop. The road was then open and doing business ; the corn was 260 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. moving rapidly; we were unable to furnish cars to move it; we were borrowing cars from every road that would loan them to us; we had a number of Texas and Paoifio cars, &nd I said, "Let us use the Texas and Pacific cars to haul the com. We have done nothing through the month of February or tho month of January, and now, why refuse that ? It can't hurt anybody ; it don't do the Texas and Pacific road any good, and it will help us out. You say you have nothing agsiinst us— you are satisfied. Mr. Page left me, saying he thought we ought to be allowed to do so. and that he would telegraph Mr. Irons, who was then at Marshall. I have stated this to show you that we obeyed even that rather than have trouble. The next morning was the 6th. Ten o'cloct was the hour which they ha,d fixed for the boycott of the Texas and Pacific cars. My ofBce was in East Sedalia. I could look out of my window and look over at the shop, and I think about five minutes before the whistle blew a gentleman came in and says, " I believe the men are going to strike." I says, " Oh, no; I had an interview with the committee last evenmg, and they are just going to boycott the Texas and Paoifio cars, and we are going on ; we are hot going to have any trouble ; that is all right." And I was perfectly happy and contented that we were not going to have a general strike. However, I got up and walked to the window with this gentleman, and at 10 o'clock the whistle blew and the men came out; and I turned around, and I was handed a message from Parsons, and one from Cypress, and one from Sftint Louis, and one from Holden, and one from Pleasant Hill and from Hannibal. Saint Louis said, "Whistle blowing, men going ' out "; another one from the trainmaster said that " Switchmen are taking their en- gines to the round-house and pulling the fires and killing the engines." Those were the kind of messages I received, and that is the notice I got of the strike — on the 6th of March, at 10 o'clock. It came to,me in that way. The engines were parked by the 'strikers at the different places when they came in. Here at Sedalia they were run upon side tracks as fast as they arrived, fires pulled, water let out of the engines, and parts of them taken away. ■ Sometime dur- ing the night a great number of the parts were removed, the engines disabled as far as they could be. We commenced that evening making efforts to get trains out, and succeeded in getting one train west. I immediately telegraphed every superintend- ent and every master mechanic arid foremen whose men had struck, to kijow why the men went out ; to ascertain, if possible, and report to me. I wanted to know why ; and the universal reply, without exception, wsis, the men had no grievance, that they were simply ordered to strike by the Knights of Labor, and that the order came from Martin Irons ; they knew of no cause for it. Some of them, I think, asserted that they believed that it was on account of the discharge of Mr. Hall ; others as- serted that it was on account of the trouble with the Texas and Pacific road, on which Mr. Hall was employed. We went on. I am not going to enter into details about what we did, very much, tihrough the strike, as there will be other witnesses here who can explain it better than 1 can. I just simply wish to say that we commenced, from day to day, trying to get trains out of this city and other points aiter the strike took place. The strikers took possession of the shops, put on their guards, and put men on to handle coal for pas- senger trains ; notified the master mechanic that he would be allowed to retain men enough in his service to handle the engines hauling mail trains. They discriminated between mail and passenger trains, although at this point there was no objection luade to running any passenger trains. There was, however, at other points. The foreman of car repairs was also notified that he might retain enough men in his serv- ice to clean and oil and take care of the psjsseuger cars that ran in and out of here, but no others would be employed, and that they must be selected by the Knights of Labpr ; that is, the committee, of which Mr. Page was acting chairman. We made efforts from day to day to get out our trains. The master mechanic, with the assist- ance of a foreman and a division superintendent and one or. two others, was able to get an engine ready ; that is, by taking some of the parts of the engine and changing them about, he was able to get out an engine from day to day. We would attempt to get out a train, get it up into the east end of the yard, where it would be boarded by the strikers, the brakes set, the engineer and fireman requested to leave their engines. And that went on from day to day until the 23d of March. On the 23d of March we got a train ready to move east, and with the assistance of the city authorities and the sheriffs the strikers were all removed from our grounds, and the train went out under good headway, and after getting out about three miles it had to go up a grade, and they found that the track had been soaped or greased, and it was necessary to use a good deal of steam to get over it, and after he got over that grade and started down another he found that a rail had been cut; that is, the angle plates were taken off the joint and the rail shoved in about two or two and a half inches and spiked in. The train ran onto that and the engine was derailed. The fireman and engineer escaped without injury. Mr. Frey, the division, who was on the engine, had his back seriously hurt; Mr. Lyons, the trainmaster, was somewhat injured, one of the guards on the train, a Mr. Mason, had his arm broken and head cut, and Mr. Neal, a citizen LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 261 in town, who had volunteered to go out as a guard and assist us in moving trains — a very poor man, who needed worK very much and who was anxious to do anything that he could — ^had his leg broken, and so on ; and that was the result of that day's work. On the 25th we made another attempt to move the trains with the assistance ' of the sheriff and the citizens of Sedalia, whom I am very proud of; they responded and helped us out, or I don't believe we would be running here yet : we succeeded in running a train east. It went through to Chamois, the end of the division. The following day we moved trains out of here in all direction^, and from that day until the present time trains have been mnning through Sedalia without interruption. There was, however, some delay at Parsons and at some other points. On the 23th of March we had a passenger train ditched four miles south of Parsons ; I have not the report with me, but &om the reports made by the superintendent^ it was under about the same circumstances that the train was ditched here, that is, the rail had been moved in about the same way. However, it was a passenger instead ot a freight train. We also had trains ditched on the 28th and 29th, going out east and west from Kansas City. That is about a general history of it, and I have heard the testimony of others in relation to the manner of killing engines and stopping trains and so on, and it was about the same thing here as it was at other points, Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) There is one question which is suggested by testimony which the committee has heard at other points, and that is with reference to the em- ployment of these night men in the round house. Testimony has been introduced to show that at Kansas City, and I don't know but at Atchison, men employed at the lound house, wipers, or whatever they are called, have made some complaint that they are worked over hours without any extra pay. Have you anything to say with reference to those complaints f — A. Those men worked two shifts, day and night shifts, one relieve the other, they are twelve hour shifts and one ^ift relieves the other. Q. Is that nnderstood when they are employed f — ^A. That has always been under- stood and has always been done, except recently, I don't remember the date, but at some points I think there was some notice given that they wonld not do it j that has always been understood and was the case at the time of the agreement of March 15, 1885, and May 35, 1885 ; there has been no change made in that. Q. Well, some other testimony was introduced showing that switchmen at Kansas City, for example, worked over hours; there were switchmen that appeared who swore that they worked over hours there without any extra atli>wanee ? — A. The switchmen are employed in the same way. The night shift relieves the day and the day shift relieves the night. Q. Do they understand that when they are employed, that they divide the twenty- four hours between them ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; they understand that except in cases where there is a special agreement. There is a special agreement at Kansas City, which was made since the str^e. Q. Made since the strike t — A, Since March 6, yes, sir, but it was in no way con- nected with the strike. The yardmen and switchmen — switchmen come Under the same head that the switchmen on a construction train, or the switchmen on a work train, or the switchmen on a pusher or any of those men, and our agreement with them is that a day's work shall be twelve hours. Q. Perhaps we may as well ask you now whether while you were here lately, while you have been superintendent here at Sedalia, any grievance or grievances have been presented by the men employed here in this region that you have not investigated and disposed of f — ^A. Not one. Q. Had there been any statement or complaint made to you here on the part of men employed in this region, any request to redress grievances ? — ^A. Had there been any request to redress grievances t Q. Was any complaint made or any request to rediess grievances made here by the men here recently before the strike, prior to the strike T — A. None, except those that were adjusted and attended to. Those were the only ones that were presented. Mr. Stewart. That is all, unless Mr. Kerrigan may have any questions to suggest. We do not understand the ins and outs on either side of this question and the gentle- men must suggest questions if they want them asked. Q. (By Mr. BUENES.) Colonel, I will ask yon if, during your service as superin- tendent of this company, there was any grievance presented to you or that came to your knowledge that you neglected or failed to consider and failed to pass upon I — A. No, sir ; there never was. Q. Was any claim ever presented to you or the knowledge of the claim against the company for extra hours that you left unredressed or unattended to ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) You heard the testimony at Kansas City ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Very well, you heard it stated by a number of witnesses there that they had made complaints. They do not seem to have made complaints to the proper person. Who W3S the proper party to complain to ? — A. If the men were employed in the ma- chine shop, they should have made complaint to their master mechanic ; if their 262 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. master mechanic failed to hear what they had to say, thej should have made com- plaint to their division superintendent. If he failed to toar what they had to say and adjust it, they should have made complaint to me as superintendent of this divis- ion. If I failed to attend to their grievance, they should have made complaint to Mr. Kerrigan, their general superintendent. If he failed to attend to it, it should have gone to Mr. Hoxie, the first vice-president. And I wish to say that no such complamt ever reached me that I did not attend to. ^ j- Q. Well, if the complaint was made it would be the duty, then, of jom subordi- nate, to whom it was made, to communicate it to you I— A. He should do so, and if he failed the man who made the complaint could communicate it himsell. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs.) Is that rule pretty generally understood among your work- men ?— A. Yes, air, it is weU understood. Judging from the number of grievances that I have had to adjust during the eight or nine or ten months that I have been here, I should say it was well understood. , . » -nt x i Q. Then a great many of them did appeal to you directly ?— A. Not as a ruie, no, sir. The complaints usually reached me through the proper channel. That is, they wore forwarded from the departments. . ,, . 4.. ... Q. Colonel Sibley, were any special steps taken to acquaint them at any time with this mle of procedure by publishing notices or by sticking up notices at the shops!— A. This agreement which I read here of May 25, which provided for the menstatmg their grievances in writing was answered, if you will remember, by Mr. J. W. Pitz- simmons, chairman of the grievance committee. I will read his reply to Mr. Hoxie, in which he says: "We believe that all are satisfied with your message, which we will cause to be printed and posted in each shop on the system." Now, I cannot swear it was posted, but I am very certain that I have seen it posted. I think it is a matter that can be proved. Q. Will you please read the tbregoing paragraph ?— A. Read the whole of it T Q. From Mr. Hoxie? Mr. Stewart. That is a reply to Mr. Hoxie. Mr. BuRNDs. Read it aU then, please? A. "May 25, 1885. To all superintendents. This confirms my message to yon of even date." Now, he recites the message, " Mr. Fitzsimmons and a committee were here last week conferring on some questions of which I will more fuUy advise you by letter and I have this morning telegraphed Mr. Fitzsimmons as follows: " According to promise made you on Saturday, I advise that we will strictly enforce the provisions of the circular of First "Vice-President Hayes, dated March 15, 18tf5. "In the shops, and wherever it may be practicable, we will reduce the hours of work, instead of reducing the force, whenever the necessity arises ; that whenever any employe believes that he has been unjustly discharged he may make a statement of his case in writing to the superintendent of the road on which he has worked, who wiU promptly investigate and reinstate him if wrongfully discharged. " It is believed that the interests of the company and the employes are identical, and the management earnestly desire the hearty co-operation of all employes in the efScient and economical administration of the properties under its charge, to the end that the fullest development of its capabilities may be brought about and work may be given to all under conditions in every way satisfactory. ^ ' "H. M. HOXIE, " Third Vice-President." Mr. BuRNES. That is certainly a satisfactory answer to my question. Have you knowledge that that circular was posted up ?— A. WeU, I believe it was. I have seen printed copies of that, and I think it can be proved by a master mechanic who will be called on the stand that they were posted in the shop. Q. I will aek you this question, if any of the gentlemen who were negotiating with you from time to time had information to your knowledge that this was the rul« of procedure ?— A. Oh, yes, sir. Q. My object is that iif any one or more knew that they might appeal to you, or ap- peal in this manner, it could have been communicated, and ought to have been com- municated, perhaps through the lodges of the Knights of Labor, to all the men ? — A. I don't know that I got that question exactly [another member of the committee hav- ing made a remark]. Q. If any of the representative men of the Elnights of Labor knew that it was a rule of procedure to appeal in cases of grievances directly to his superior ofloer — to those directly in charge — they could communicate it to the men at laige, even if the company could not. Do you know that any such representative men of these assem- blies had that knowledge ?— A. Oh, yes, sir; they had the knowledge; Mr. Fitzsim- mons had the knowledge, and I know that Mr. Irons had the knowledge, because we read the agreement together. I know that Mr. HoUis, at Parsons, had the knowl- edge, for I read the agreement to him as I have read it to the committee, and in very much the same manner ; and I know that they certainly had knowledge of it, be- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 263 cause they commnnicated with me direct by telegraph— not only commnnicated -with me, hut gave me a peremptory order to come to Parsons. I think it was well under- stood. The Chairman. We have nothing more to ask just now. Mr. S. P. WELLEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buenes). Mr. Weller, will you state your full name, age, residence, and occupation? — Answer. My name is Weller; I am thirty-six years old; live in Se- dalia ; assistant master mechanic of the Missouri Pacific Railway. Q. Do you know anything relating to the cause or the extent of the troubles be- tween the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes?— A. Well, there was no cause here for that strike. The only cause they gave me when they blew the whis- tle was on account of that man Hall, in Texas. Q. Do you know anything with regard to the understanding of the men with ref- erence to the mode of presenting grievances through their immediate oflScers, or, if not to the immediate officers, to the superior officers above them ? — A. Well, they al- ways do here ; they come and present them. They had a committee in each shop, and they would present the grievances. Q. Do youknow of any men who were not.allowed pay for extra hours of work? — A. No, sir ; 1 do not. Q. Do you know of any grievances on the part of the employes that remained un- redressed? — A. There was never any grievance presented to me during my time here Q. Nor presented to any other officer to your knowledge ? — A. Not to my knowl- edge; no, sir. Q. Mr. Weller, will you state how the wipers and the hostlers are employed, and how long they work, and what the order is with regard to their employment ? — A. Well, we pay our wipers .51.25 a day — from $1.25 to $1.50. Our hostlers we pay them $tJ5 and |70 per month ; the day hostler $65 and the night hostler $70, making the difference in favor of the night hostler on account of the hours being longer and its being night work. Q. What hours are contracted for with regard to the wipers and the hostlers ? — A. We have been working them ten hours. We work our day wipers ten hours, and our night wipers worked sometimes a little more, usually a little more than ten hours. Q. At what hour do they begin work ? — A. Between dix and seven o'clock in the evening. Q. That is the night men? — ^A. The night men, yes, sir. Q. They begin at six ? — A. Six o'clock in the evening and seven. Q. Have you no fixed time for them to begin ? — A. Yes, sir ; some commence at six o'clock and some at seven. Q. And when is their service ended for a night or day ? — A. Six o'clock in the morn- ing. Q. Was there any complaint about extra work &om any of these men ? — ^A. No, sir ; there was never no complaints made to me. Q. Are the hours understood by the men when employed ? — A. Tes, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Is that work at night hard work? — A. No, sir; it is no harder than in the day time. Q. Do they have any time for rest in the middle of the night ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Well, they had always had an hour. Q. When? (Witness continuing.) Sometimes an hour and a half ortwo hours; it depends entirely on our business. Mr. SAMUEL IRVIN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnes). Let the secretary take your name, age, occupation, and residence. — Answer. Forty ; foreman of car repairs of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas ' Division and Missouri Pacific. Q. Will you tell us what you know as to the hours of work on the part of the men in your employment ? — A. Well, we work ten hours, from 7 to 12 and from 1 to 6. Q. Are your men ever required to work beyond 6? — A. Yes, sir ; in case of wrecks or anything of that kind, sir. Q. When they work extra hours do you give them the time and are they paid for those extra hours? — A. Yes, sir; time and a half for all overtime. Q. Do you know of any instance where such pay has been denied ? — A. No, sir ; not since.a year ago last March. Q. Have you any other facts or circumstances within your knowledge to tend to give us information with regard to the cause or the extent of the late trouble between the Missouri Pacific Railway and their employes ? — ^A. Nothing, only what was told me by prominent Knights of Labor. Q. If you have any information from the Knights of Labor relating to the cause or extent of the trouble, you may relate it. — A. They informed me that they had no 264 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. grievances as far as the Missouri Pacific was coBcerned ; it was a matter of forcing the receiver of the Texas and Pacific Railway to reinstate a man named Hall. Q. Is there anything else that they stated to you t— A. Well, that was the principal reason, and then some of them said it was a matter of principle, that what concerned one concerned them all, and that they had nothing — there was no grievances on the Missouri Pacific or anything in my department more particularly, I asked them ahout. There was not a man that presented any grievances to me in writing or any other way. . Q. I will get you to state if your men generally had knowledgfe of the agifeement that has been read here to-day and alluded to by Colonel Sibley ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have every reason to believe they had. Q. Have those men or any of them in your department ever made any complaint or intimated any complaint since the 15th day of last March a year ago? — A. I had the chairman of the grievance eommitteie, J. W. Fitzsimmons, come to me last July in re- gard to two men that I had hired at Parsons. I hired one of them in December, 1884, and one of them in January, 1885, and paid one $40 and the other |45, and after we had the strike in March, 1885, 1 raised their pay, paid them the increase the other men had, and raised them both to $50 a month, and he came to me in July first — no, he came to me in June first and wanted me to put them men back at day rates. I explained to him that if I done so that the men— and working them only twenty-six days a month— that the men would make less money than they made at |50 a month. And there was some other informal conversation, and he says, "All right, let it rest just as it is." He went oflf and left me and then come back again in July and stated that the local grievance committee of the Knights of Labor at Parsons wouldn't give them no rest until I put these men back at day rates. I told them that I would do so on the 1st of August. I done so, putting them men back at the rates one of them. We hired him in 1884 at |1.60, and the other one had worked in August, 1884, and September, lS84, at the same rate or 16 cents an hour. And I told them that I would put them back at that rate on the Ist day of August. So I notified my foreman there to do so, and then I went down there personally myself. The men seemed to be dissatisfied about it, and one of them says, he says, " I wonld have been better off at $50 a month," because, he claimed, that he was getting |1.75 at that time. I showed him by our time-books, and also by letters from the foreman which was there previous to the one they have now, that his services were engaged at 16 cents an hour, andhe didn't stay but a short time afjter that and quit the service of the company. The other iman worked up to March of this year at $1.60 or 16 cents an hour. The man has made less than $50 a month since. That was the only grievance I have had in regard to salary in any way, shape, or form. Q. Has any grievance of any 'kind been presented to you that you refused to con- sider? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you decided adversely to the claimant in any case, and then refused or failed to report it to your superior ? — ^A. No, sir ; I had in last May, when we was do- ing a great deal of work for the Missouri Pacific division at this shop, audit was then decided that each division should take care of its own work, and we had a great many men more than we had work for. I went to some of the committee that was then working for me and explained to them the situation, how we was situated, andif we had to retain the number of men in certain departments, that was in their depart- ment more particularly, that we would have to reduce the hours, and they said to me, they said, " We don't want it that way." Then I says, " What is left for me to do ? You can see b^ the looks of things in the yards that I haven 't got work for you people, and you will either have to take less hours or we will have to have less men." This was prior to receiving Mr. Hoxie's circular of March 25. I had let some of them go on the 15th, some of them had given notice to the rest in May that we would dispense with their services. I told the committee before, them that worked for me in the shop, and they called the committee before, and I went before them and stated the case to • them just exactly how it was. They said, " Well, you go ahead and let these men go and we will see that you have no trouble and won't cause the company any trouble," and they never have that I know of, sir. J. B. FLANDERS, being duly sworn and examained, testifies as follows ; Question (by Mr. Burnbs) . State your full name, age, and occupation, and what con- nection you have with the Missouri Pacific Railway.— -Answer. John B. Flanders; 37 years old ; division superintendent. Q. If you have any knowledge or information with regard to the cause or extent of the troubles between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes, 9r any of them, you wjU please state such information.— A. I was down the road, away from my office on the day the strike was inaugurated. I received the first intima- tion by telegraph from the agent. The next day 1 went to Pleasant HiU and was directed by Colonel Sibley to find out the cause of it. That was on Sunday morning the 7th. I found all the shopmen there, a great many of them, at least, and I asked LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 265 them what was the matter ; if they were on a strike. They said, no, not yet, hut are expecting to go on a strike at any moment. I says, " What do you men want t" They says, " "We have not received orders yet." And I asked him if he received an order, whether he expected to do it. He said certainly. I was talking to a man, I believe his title was the master workman of that lodge, Charlton. They did strike the nest day, and I asked them if they had any grievance of their own, and they said no, they had no grievances whatever, but expected to strike on orders. Q, Do you know of any individual grievances on the part of the em^loy^s of the . company presented to you that were left unredressed? — ^A. I never received but one and that was from the hrakemen of the Kansas and Arizona Division, who asked for more pay and so forth, and it was fixed up at once and it was advanced considerably ; in fact their pay was advanced from $1.75 a day to a matter of $3.23. Q. Do you know of any other fact or circumstance tending to show the cause of present trouble — of the late trouble f — A. l^o, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Did they say where the order was to come from for the strike? — A. I don't recollect that exactly, how they worded it. There was something said that they expected it from the executive committee. I didn't ask them from what point, W. B. L"? ONS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknbs). Mr. Lyons, state your full name. — Answer. W. B. Lyons. Q. And yont age, residence, and bcoupationt — A. Forty-three years old ; residence, Pleasant Hill ; division superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas. Q. Will yon state all the facts and circumstances within your knowledge tending to inform us as to the cause or extent of the trouble between the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Company and its employes? — A. In my department we had no grievances ; there were no striking men in my department, the transportation department, and when the whistle blew on the 6th of March I maiide inquiries of the number of men that quit work, and asked them what the'trouble was, and some of them said that they were ordered to quit work; didn't seem to know what the trouble was. Others said it was on account of some man in Texas — a man by the name of Hall — ^being discharged. Q. Did any of the employes in your division claim that they had been mistreated or neglected in any way? — A. No, sir; not to me. Q. During your term of service have you ever failed to give attention to any griev- ance presented to you? — A. I have not, sir. Q. In the consideration of these grievances, if your decision should be against the man, have you at his request reported the case to your superior ofBcers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. WUl you give us the extent of your information with regard to the wreck tfiat oc- curred here near Sedalia; Ibelieveyou wereonthetrainf — A. Yes, sir; wemadeannm- ber of failures to get trains out of here. We commenced on the 7th of March in attempt- ing to get trains out, and on the 7th we got oiie train out west and made a failure to get a train out east on account of intimidation of firemen and engineers and the plead- ings of the Knights of Labor to the engineer and fireman not to go out on their engines. And it went on till the 12th. We made an attempt on the 12th and got the engine out of the round-house onto the train and she was boarded by strikers, and it was impossible for us to get the train out. They took our engine away from us, uncoupled the engine from the train, and took it away from: us and killed it ; drew the fire and blowed the water out of the boilers. On the 33d of March we started out with the train, got three miles out of town — in the first place about a mile from town we have quite a heavy grade, and we knew that point had been tampered with. The rails had been soaped and greased and so forth, and we were going out of town at quite a speed to get over that grade. We just got aronnd the curve on top of the hill when we came across a rail misplaced. The splices were taken off and the spikes pulled on one end of the rail, and the raU shoved in and just held with a spike so an east-bound engine would have gone oS the track ; a west-bound engine I don't think would have gone off the track. They were looking for our passenger at the time ; didn't know which way it would come. It was done by somebody that understood the business. Myself and Mr. Prey and officer Mason and a citizen by the name of Neal were on board. I was hurt in the back a little, not much. Mr. Frey had his back injured ; Mr. Mason had his left arm broke in two places and the wrist mashed ; cut over the right eye. Mr. Neal had his leg broken between the thigh and the knee. The engineer and fire- man were not hurt. They all jumped off the engine but me. I didn't get off. I thought there was something wrong with the train. I hadn't time to get off, I went over with the engine. Q. What was the speed of the train when it reached the place where it went off the track ? — A. I think we were going all of 20 miles an hour. Q. Twenty miles an hour? — A. We were going faster than we should have been going had it not been for the track being greased. Q. What is the general condition of the track along here ; the ordinary condition? — A. It is good, sir. 266 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are the ties in good condition f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Any of the rails old or broken ?— A. No, sir; not tp my knowledge. Q. I will ask if anybody followed the train f— A. Yes, sir. Q. How many and whof — A. Well, I don't know who they were; there was a crowd followed just as we passed them, they started after the train jnst as hard aa they-could go. The engine hadn't been tnmed over fifteen miniites before there was twenty-five men there. Q. Did you recognize any of the men who followed the train t — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they men who had been in the employment of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you if any of those men that yon recognized there were members of the Knights of Labor ? — A. I have so understood. They have been with them right along ; all the time acting with them. Q. Acting with them as Enights of Labor? — A. I suppose, yes, sir; as strikers. Knights of Labor. Q. Well, perhaps not every striker was a Knight of Labor t— A. Well, I don't know anything about that. I don't know that these men were Knights of Labor that I recognized ; 1 have never been in their lodge and have no way of knowing it. Q. You recognized some of them as strikers, but have no means of knowing that they were Knights of Labor f^A. No, sir; I have not. DANIEL GROW, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuRims). State your full name, age, occupation, and residence t— Answer. Daniel Grow. Q. And the position yon hold in the Missonri Pacific Railroad Company T— A Forty-one years old : I am now train-master, and live in Sedalia. Q. Will you state whfit efforts you made during the month of March, during this trouble here, to get trains out of the yards in Sedalia ? — A. At the time of the strike I was general yard-master here ; I had charge of the yard. Wetried all we could to get trains out. We would get engines out of the house and make up trains and try to get them out, but we were stopped every time by strikers until on the 23d of March we succeeded in getting a train out ; about 3 miles out of town it was wrecked by splices being taken off at the joint, the spikes pulled, and the rail moved in. Q. Did you recognize the parties who restrained yon from getting engines out of the yard? — A. Well, some of them; I know some of them, but not their names. Q.' They were men who had been in the employment of the company ? — A Men that had been In the employment of the company — some of them ; I knew some of them. Q. Did you recognize any of them as Knights of Labor — members of that organi- zation ? — A. Well, not belonging to the organization ; I can't say that they were mem- bers, but they were on the executive committee. Q. Of the executive committee ofthe Knights of Labor? — ^A. Supposed to be on the executive committee of the Knights of Labor — at least they represented tJiemselves as such. Q. Did they represent themselves as such openly ? — A. Well, no, not at that time. They would come to see us and tell us Q. Please state their names. — A. 'One of them was Mr. Perry ; I know he came sev- eral times, and Mr. Page also came to us. Q. Did they take part in preventing yon from getting out your engines, and encour- age others in taking part ? — A. Yes, sir ; they would prevent us from gettng trains put. Mr. Perry took an engine we had from us that was onto a train and run it away. Took it down about a mile and a half from East Sedalia here, and pulled the fire out, blowed the engine out, blowing the water out, and brought the engine back, one time ; an ether time, Mr. Page — we were trying tp get a train out and Mr. Page was present — got up on the train and made a sign, and men boarded the train and stopped it. Q. Were any of your own men — those who had formerly been employed under you and who had struck— engaged in this effort ? — A. At that time — the men that were employed under me — there were none of them struck at all. My men were all right; my yardmen, switchmen, and so on. 0. Were any appeals made to the men to your knowledge— A. Not of my own men Q. No ; wait one moment. Were-any appeals made, to your knowledge, to any of the men in the former employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company to de- sist, on the ground that it was an interference with the commerce of the different States, and ihat the railroad company under its charter was bound to move such fieight ? — A. By the officers of the company ? Q. By anybody?— A. By the oflScers of the law there was. Q. Such appeals were made by the officers of the law ?— A. Yes, sir. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 267 J. J. FEEY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnes). Mr. Frey, please state your full name, ocbupation,aUd connection with tbe Missouri Pacific Kailroad Company, and your place of residence. — Answer. J. J. Frey; age, thirty-six; superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway north of Denison. Q. Ton have heard the inquiries made of these other witnesses. If you can give us any information bearing upon the subject under investigation, we would be much obliged to you for doing so. — A. Well, I have heard all the testimony that has been gi'sen here, and can confirm all that came under my observation. I was on the train that was wrecked on the 23d of March — was on the engine. We had succeeded in getting the train out of town, and while passing the stock-yards, which were about half a mile north of the yard, six or eight of the strikers boarded the train. We were then running at a very fair rate of speed, perhaps 15 or 18 miles an hour. They would jump on the side of the train and hold on with one band and motion for the balance to come on. They kept that up for a short time, and in the meantime our speed in- creased, and when these strikers found that the balance were not getting on, we were going at such a rate of speed that they could not get off, at least without possible in- jury to themselves. After we had gotten outside of the crowd entirely, that was be- yond the stock-yards, I stepped over onto the firemen's side in the gangway, and looked back and saw them still hanging on the side of the train. There was, perhaps, three or four or five of them. I stepped over and told the engineer, "Now," I said, " we may possibly find the track soaped down In the hollow, and don't get stuck." I did not tell him why, but my object was to keep up a rate of speed so the strikers couldn't get off, and when I got over to the next station I would put them under arrest. We got down throngh that hollow, and in the meantime, when one of the strikers found that we were not going to stop, he got off, but he rolled around in the dust considerable, and got up and walked away. Occasionally I would look back to see if they were hanging on, and then I would look ahead. Alter we had gotten about 3 miles east of Sedalia I had just looked back to see if they were still there, and on turning around I looked ahead, and a very short distance ahead I discovered that the track had been tampered with. The rails had been sep- arated. The fish-plateshad been taken off of the east rail. Say this is east [indicat- ing], this rail had been — the spikes drawn, and pulled in like that [indicating], about 6 inches. It was in plain view ; it was broad daylight and the sun was shining. I discovered that about, hallooed to the men on the engine, and I says, " Boys, jump for your lives." t immediately got down on the engine on the firemen's side and jumped, and from where I struck the ground to where the rails were parte'd was just about two or three car lengths, and by the time I struck the ground the engine had struck this place, turned over, and the cars were piling on top of her. Well, I was stunned pretty badly. I lit first on my feet, and then on my back right on a little knoU of grass earth. I lay there stunned, perfectly conscious, however, but couldn't move. At the same time this wreckage was going on and the men that were on top of the train, I saw them flying around in all directions, and expected to see them all killed. One of the breakmen on the train brought me a cup of water and I xook a drink of it and bathed my head and then got up and found my back was badly hurt. In the meantime I got reports of who was injured and how badly, and gave direc- tions for one of the brakemen to go back to town as quick as he could to have an engine come out there to couple on to the caboose and take the wonnded back to town and to notify Colonel Sibley, so that he might have physicians on hand. They commenced taking up the wounded and carrying them into the caboose, and the man in the mean time had started to town to get this assistance. In probably fifteen min- utes after the wreck occurred I looked back, and the track, just as far as I could see, was one black mass of men coming. Some were on the track and some were on the side of it. Some were walking and some were running. After all the wonnded were placed in the caboose, a Mr. Dugan, of Sedalia, came up to me and asked n!ie if I was hurt. I told him yes. Well, he said, he was there with the buggy ; that he had seen this crowd foUowing the' train, and he felt that something was going to happen, and that he and his wife had followed along just to see what the result was going to be, and he said his buggy was right near there, and invited me to get in, and that his wife would drive me home. As I stated, I had seen that the wounded were all placed in the caboose, and thought perhaps by my getting in there and hurrying back I might beat the breakman back and get assistance much quicker. I got in the buggy with her and started back. We had gone but a short distance when we met the mob, as I must term it, coming scattered along, and while they would not say anything to me while I was facing them; as a coward will not, after the buggy got by just a little bit they would use all sorts of indecent language, which I do not want to use here, in thepresence of that lady. They seemed to feel that they had done something, accomplished something very grand. That sort of a reception greeted me until I had gotten nearly to within a mile of town. I was helpless ; I couldp't do anything, and the lady was crying and excited. She 268 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. drove me to the office ; I got out, and met Colonel Sibley there, and lepoited the facts to him. In the mean time the brakemau had arrived, and we had gotten an engine ■with some men, and they had started after the caboose. I waited aronnd there awhile, and they finally came back, and we had the ambalance there and put them in it, and put Mr. Neal in the hospital, and Mr. Neal was taken to his home. Their in- juTies, I believe, have already been described, and you probably do not care to have it repeated. Now, I infer from questions I have heard asked, that were suggested (referring to sug- gestions by Mr. Maguire), that somebody was going to try to make it appear that this track was in bad condition, and that the wreck was caused by that and by the high rate of speed that we were running. They can't do that. The fish-plates that were taken off of this joint were lying up on top of the cut on the bank, and the bolts were lying on the slope of the bank, which shows conclusively that they were taken off. This rail was spikes in. It would hardly do that of its own accord. The, track from Sedalia to that point, I must say, was first-class, and the engine which was pnll- ing the train was a very heavy and large one, and she rode just as nice and smooth as any sleeping-car I was ever in. The ties were good, and the rails were good, and the track in good surface. Now, on one occasion during the strike, I attempted to run a freight train north on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and got the engine onto the train. A 14rge nnmher of strikers were there. Among others were Eugene Perry, Fred. Page, and our young friend sitting there; I never could learn his name (referring to a man afterwards identified to the committee as H. J. Merrill) to remember it, and they were on the en- gine and around it. I finally said to Mr. Page, " Mr. Page, what are you going to do here?" "Well," he says, "we are going to take this engine." I says, "No, yon can't, take this engine ; it is in my charge, and I don't know what right you have to take it." I said, " If you take this engine you must force me from it, and if you go to dg that you might as well commence now, because it is no Bse to waste any time." I says, "I just want you to force me from this engine, and then I, of course, cannot say what shall become of it." Well, he hesitated, and said he didn't want to have any personal difficulty, and, I think, consulted Mr. Perry, and he finally said that they wouldn't molest it. " Well," I said " then order these men off; they have no business on it, and are in my way." He says, " Get off, boys," so they got off. In the mean- time the engineer came. The engine, by the way, had just a short time previous arrived from the north and the fire had not been kindled. The engineer looked her over, and he said that she was not in condition to go until the fire was cleaned. I said, "All right", we will clean the fire." So we cut the engine loose from the train and ran it up to a switch and down onto > the track where we usually clean engines, where the ash piles are. A man came along with one of these iron hooks, wiLh which they usually clean engines, and he says to Mr. Weller, the master mechanic, " Do you want this engine cleaned V Mr. Weller says, " Yes," and the fellow got on and commenced to clean the engine. I says to Mr. Weller, " You watch that fellow, I don't know who he is, and he may mean mis- chief." So he commenced pulling the fire out, and pulling it out, and I finally discov- ered what his object was, and told Mr. Weller to stop him and not let him draw all the fire out, or we would have a dead engine. Mr. Weller tried to stop him once, and he persisted in cleaning the fire. Then 1 told Mr. Weller, said I, "Don't let him pnll out anymore fire." And he stopped him, and the fellow pulled out the iron rod and threw it up on the tank, put on his coat and winked at the boys and stepped off the engine — smart trick. 1 saw then that the fire was so far gone that we would have to rebuild it. We took the engine off that track and backed it on what we call the round-house track to put on some wood. Mr. Weller was on the engine, and when we got to the wood pile I myself threw the wood on, and after awhile we got a fire started and commenced making steam. After we had gotten about forty or fifty pounds of steam, I asked Mr. Weller if he wanted any more wood. He said, "Well." I said, "Now you watch this engine, I must step over to the office to answer some messages, and I will be back before you have steam enough to move." 1 stepped over and was gone perhaps fifteen minutes. When I came back, Mr. Weller informed me that some of the strikers had molested some parts of the machinery, and that he had, in order to save the engine from dying on his hands, to step off the engine to look at that part, and while he did so probably ten or fifteen of them ran away with her and killed her. Mr. Weller is here and can probably tell you the names of the parties who did it. Q. Mr. i'tey, in speaking of the men hanging onto the car, you said, as I understood it, that you looked back just before this accident occurred, but I did not understand you as saying whether you saw the men still hanging on the side of the cars the last time you looked. — A. Yes, sir; some three or four of them. Q. Were still hanging there t — A. Were still hanging there. Q. Were they hanging there at the time the derailment occurred t— A. Well, Isaw, after— just about the time I saw the break, I called to the engineer and then got out on LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 269 the gangway to jump off, and as 1 did so I saw probably two or three or four of them jumping off, and while I was lying on the ground and after the train had come nearly to a stop I saw the last one get off and stop on a run across the prairie. I laid there and watched him, and I wished that I might be able to get up and chase him. Q. He was running away from it after he knew that the wreck had occurred t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they attempt to succor the party in any way? — A. Sirt Q. Did they attempt to succor the party, did they attempt to assist, did they offer any assistance t — A. No, sir. Q. Your division extends from this place to Denison t — A. It does. At that time I was division superintendent and had charge of the line between Hannibal and Par- sons. Q. Have you any knowledge of your own as to who were or who were not Knights of Labor in Sedalia t — A. Well, I have knowledge to this extent, that I have seen sig- natures followed by titles, for instance, ''Executive Board District Assembly No. so so," or " Local Assembly, " and so on. Q. Will you please state the names of the parties that yon have recognized as mem- bers of the order? — A. Well, sir; I have given them. Martin Irons, Eugene Perry, Fred Page, Isaac Wright, Fisher, I believe it iq Fred Fisher, and a good many more, but I can't, recall them now. Q. I will get you to state if the persons yon have named, who were engaged in this strike either directly or indirectly, participated in it actively, or if they counseled and directed it. In short, state what part either or all of them took in the restraining of trains or the destruction of property and the circumstances generally to which you have alluded ? — A. Yes, sir. Mr. Page and Perry and Wright seemed' to be the im- mediate leaders upon the ground in the stoppage of trains and killing engines. While I do not say that all of thtm did anything of that sort personally excepting Peri'y run- ning off with an engine, in company with fifteen or twenty strikers they were always on the gronnd, and seemed to be directing the men and the actions of the strikers. Q. Who was it who directed the men to get off the engine after you made the re- quest? — A. Mr. Page. Q. How long had they been on that engine before he gave that order? — A. Proba- bly twenty minutes. Q. As soon as you asked him to order the men off he ordered them off and they obeyed? — A. After consultation ho ordered them off and they got off. Q. You don't know whether he ordered them on or not ? — A. I do not, sir, but he was light around the engines there with the crowd, and I have reason to believe that he did. Q. How often have you seen Mr. Wright on the ground during the excitement ? — A. Well, I couldn't; say as to the number of times; I have seen him several times. Q. When you saw the opening in the track did yon see any person near it? — A. Well, I have an indistinct recdllection that I did, but whether it was farmers plow- ing out in the field or individuals walking along or standing I could not say. Q. Doesn't it appear a little strange, perhaps, that you made this discovery, not be- ing a practical engineer or fireman, before it was discovered by them ? — A. It may to the gentleman who asked the question, but it is not anything strange at all whcu I was standing in the ga^jgway there looking right straight ahead on that rail. Mind you I was on that side of the engine where the rail was taken up right in a direct line with it, and there is nothing' strange about it. (Mr. Maguire having siiggested the question). Q. State if the track was straight there or if it was a curve ?— A. It was straight, sir. Q. So that a locomotive engineer, standingon the other side of the track, would not be as apt to see it as yon would be, being on the right side ? — A. Not unless ho was paying special attention to that side of the rail at the time when he came in view. Q. Is it or is it not more difficult to see a rail, standing on the opposite of the car ? — A. Most assuredly it is. Q. Did yon sign a release for the damages done you by the railroad company after the accident ? — A. I had the honor, ye?, sir ; I did not consider that the railroad com- pany was responsible for my damages, and that is why I signed my release. I hold others responsible. Q. What did your company pay you for signing that release ? Did yon sign the release before yon returned to your duties as superintendent? — A. Yes, sir; well.I don't know ; I didn't consider myself out of the service at any time. Q. Yon have not answered the question as to how much the company paid you for signing the release. — A. Well, I didn't expect anything ; I do not anticipate any re- muneration, no, sir. Q. Did the agreement call for any sum, or the release, did it specify any sum ? — A. I believe it said, "in consideration of one dollar." Now, while we have a good oij- portunity here, yon gentlemen no doubt would like to ascertain from a competent 270 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. -witness what " intimidation " is, what constitutes intimidation. Now, if you would like to ask me a question on that subject I would be pleased to answer it. Q. Well, we would like to know, of course, what constitutes intimidation on the railroad.— A. Well, I would state that on a certain day we attempted to get out a freight train ; I believe it was on the second or third day after the strike took place. I was on the engine, and Paul Smith was the engineer, and we started and got— no, I am a little ahead of my time ; when we started out of the round-house with the en- gine we had to go up to a certain switch and then back down to a train at a certain point. Before we got to this switch that young man there [referring to Mr. Merrill], I don't know his name, halloed at the engineer, " Paul Smith, for your sake, my sake, the sake of your family, I ask you not to go out on that engine." And Paul Smith immediately weakened and didn't take this train out. Now I asked him why he wouldn't go, and he said " I am afraid." Now, what they meant he probably under- stood better than I did ; it had been explained. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Which of these young men is it. You have pomted several times to some young man; which one is it f— A. This young man that is proinpting Mr. — [indicating Maguire.] Q. Is he in the employ of the company? Mr. BiTRNBS. His name is Harpley MerriU. The Witness. Since I know his name I would state that I have seen several noticsB by one Merrill to different men in our shops, notifying them to leave their work and so on; whether he is the same man or not I cannot say ; it was a Merrill. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs.) I will ask you to take your recollection carefully and say if you are certain that he is the person who spoke to the engineer as detailed by you just now ?— A. I believe he is the party to the best of my knowledge and belief. Q. You have no doubt about it at all f— A. There is no doubt in my mind about it at all. Q. Do you remember the contents of those papers that you saw in the hands of the men ?— A. I read them, but I read so many that I can't just exactly specify what the contents were, but I remember distinctly that they were signed by Merrill. Q. I will ask you if you can remember that they probably contained merely infor- mation to the effect that the assemblies of the Knights of Labor would deal with ' them if they remained at work ; if you remember any threat except that ? — A. Well, now, I would prefer that yuu ask — I don't remember exactly, and Mr. Irvin, whom you have heard knows exactly what the letters were, and he probably can give you the contents as to what they were. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Was that a voluntary surrender of damages that yon made ? — A. It was voluntary, sir. Q. Voluntary? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you still feel the effects of your injury? — A. I do. I felt it this morning. I came up from Denison last night, a very long trip, and when I got up this morning I had to be a little bit careful which foot I put out of bed first. Q. It is not likely that looking along the iron rail, with your attention turned to it, you would be mistaken as to the displacement of that rail ? — A. No, sir. Q. I can readily understand that. ' The Witness. Just let me make one explanation to show you that the i?ail was out, if there is any doubt about it at all ; and those that were on the engine will bear me out in the statement that I gave the alarm. Well, now, if the rail was not up, if there was something not radically wrong there, why should I have given the alarm and the engineer call for brakes ? — ^A. That is the solution of the whole thing in my mind. Q. (By Mr. Bcienes.) It is evident that you thought you saw it ? — A. No, sir. The Chairman. And he found by the condition of the track and what occurred afterwards that he did? The Witness. Certainly I did. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) What was the grade there where that engine went off, waa it down grade ? — A. It was slightly downgrade ; probably thirty feet to the mile. Q. What speed did you say you were going ? Somebody has testified to the speed, but I didn't hear it. — ^A. Mr. Lyons testified it was going twenty miles an booT. I should say that we were going between twenty-two and ttrenty-four miles an hour. Q. That is a rather high rate speed for a freight train ? — A. No, sir. Q. Isn't it?— A. No, sir. Q. What damage was done to the engine and freight car's ? — A. The engine waa badly damaged. As I stated, as soon as she got to the defective paxt of the track she ran along the ties for a short distance and turned over, and the oars commenced roll- ing up on top of her and against^her. I believe the master mechanic told me the damage would amount to in the neighborhood of $2,000 to |3,500. Q. And were the cars broken up ? — A. The damage to the cars and the freight would probably amount to about $2,000 or $2,500. LAlJOli TROUBLKS IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. 271 Q. Were those men permauontly disabled or injured that had their legs and arms broken ?— A. Mr. Neal is still laid up. That occurred on the 23d of March. And Mr. Mason, who had an arm broken, seems to get along poorly. He is out, but still wears his arm in a sling. I saw him to- day and asked him how ho was leeling, and he said his arm pained him very much constantly. He had it broken in two places. Q. Where is this Mr. Page that you have been telling about? — A. Well, I believe he is in jail. Now, you have not asked me yet as to the cause of the strike. I want to tell all I know. Q. (By Mr. Burnks.) You have said Mr. E. Page is in jail ; will you please state Why he is in jail ?— A. Well, I understand from the papers that he is in jail for vio- lating the orders of the court. He was enjoined from entering the grounds of the railroad company. And I believe that is why he is in jail. Q. He is not charged with any specific offense other than violating the order of the court? — A. No, sir. I wonlj, for your information, say that the grand jury here has found an indictment against three or four or five of the strikers for tearing up this track and ditching that train that we have been talking about. Q. Is he one of them? — A. No, sir. Q. Was he indicted? — ^A. No, sir; I believe not. Q. Then, there is no indictment against Mr. Page, that you know of? — ^A. Well, there are some other indictments, or he is under arrest under some other charges here ; but I don't know just exactly how his matters stand at this time, but I know that he was arrested frequently during the continuance of this strike. Q. Go on, now, and give us anything bearing upon the cause. — A. About the 7th or 8th or March I met Mr. Page. I was like all the balance, I wanted to find out the cause of the strike, and I thought that perhaps Mr. Page knew. He was a promi- nent and active member of the organization of the Knights of Labor, and I asked him, said I, " Mr. Page, why did the men strike ? I have been trying to get some in- formation on that point, and have not been able to get anything definite." "Well," he says, " the strike was inaugurated on account of the discharge of Mr. Hall, at Mar- shall, Tex., and the refusal of Governor Brown to reinstate him or to recognize the committee down there to try to adjust the matter." I said, " Have the men on the Missouri Pacific system any grievances that caused this strike?" He says, "No; that is the only cause of it, as far as I know." I talked with others, whose names I cannot now recall, and several of them told me that same thing, while one or two others told me that they did not know why they struck ; that they were sim- ply — that they were called out, and had simply struck in obedience to orders, and that they regretted very much, indeed, that they had been called out, and wished that they had been ordered back to work. [A man hands paper to witness. ] There is one of those letters signed by Merrill. Q. (By Mr. Stbwakt.1 I understand that that is a document . that may be required in some judicial proceeding. Mr. BuKNES. Then give it to me and I will read it. SESAI.IA, April 12, 1886. Deab Sib and Brotbeb : You are hereby requested as a Knight of Labor to with- draw from the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company until the present strike is settled. Non-compliance with this request wUl be followed in the court of your assembly according to the laws laid down in the constitution. And therefore I hope you will comply with this request and so save your name and reputation and the order a good member. By order of local executive board. H. J. MEEEILL, Secret Authorized by district boards of this 101, 17, and 93, by the seal of No. 4054. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) To whom is that addressed ; you did not read the address? Mr, BcRNES. There is no address given. It says "Dear sir and brother." The Witness. We have several of these, but they were forwarded to Mr. Kerrigan, and on the back of each of them is noted by whom received and when. Now, I have no doubt that the parties who received this notice will be willing to testify that the language contained therein implies more than it says right on the face of it. In fact they would say it is an intimidation, a threat. Q. If you could give us a list of the names of the men who received this or any sim- ilar letter we would be obliged. — A. As I have stated, all those communications of that nature that I have handled were forwarded to Saint Louis. Q. I understand that, but if yon have the names of the parties to whom such letters were delivered we might examine them with regard to the time of receiving such let- ter. — A. Well, I don't know whether I could do that or not. Q. If you ascertain the names I will be obliged to you to let ns have them. — A. Judge Sherck says this was received by William Binder. Q. Is be now a citizen of Sedalia ? — ^A. I don't know him. 272 LABOR TBOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, Judge Sherck. I don't know, sir. Q. (By the Chairman-.) You know that other men did receiTe the circulars t— A. Yes, sir. R. ROCKWELL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by the Chairman). State your age, occupation, -and place of residence. —Answer. My occupation is general road master of the Missouri Pacific ; I ijeside in Sedalia ; my age is 51. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) You are the general road master of the Missouri Pacific f— A. Yes, sir. Q. Does that embrace the entire line ?— A. The Missouri Pacific as far west as Atch- ison. Q. Mr. Rockwell, I want to ask you with regard to the issuance of an order signed by yourself, perhaps printed, said to have been issued excluding from employment under you any person who was a member of the organization known as Knights of Labor, how you came to issue any such order, if you did issue it ? — A. I never issued any order of that character. Q. You never did ?— A. No, sir ; I issued an order to division road masters, I think it was on the 23d of March, that " On and after this date" w6 would not employ as foremen of regular section gangs or extra gangs any Knight of Labor. No reference whatever is made to any laboring men or any man under them, never has been, and we make no distinction to-day in any shape or form with any man but my foreman. Q. Testimony was taken in Washington to the effect that you had issued an order ex- cluding from employment on the sections any men who were members of that Order. — A. No, sir. I have not got one of those orders with me, but I can produce it. Q. You have never issued any such order ? — A. No, sir. Q. No such order was ever issued, so far as you kQOW?-r-A. No, sir. Q. The order you did issue related exclusively to section foremen? — A. Section foremen only, sir ; to no One else. Q. I would like to ask you what wages you pay to section men ? — A. For labor f Q. For labor.— A. The price ranges from $1.10 to $1.25. Q. You discriminate, then, between men ?— A. Well, in this way : The regular sec- tion gangs through the agricultural part of the country we pay fl.lO; nearer the cities we are paying |1.15, and for extra force, $1.25 — that is, for any extra force that we may employ for ballast gangs or ditching gangs. Q. Will you please state the reason for discriminating in that way ? — A. Well, sir, it occurs in this way, that the regular section men, as a rule, are employed and are at home every night, and carry their dinners with them. Tne result is that they are not boarding away from home. A. large percentage of the extra force are floating gangs, and move from place to place, and the result is that they are boarding ; that their boarding is quite high, and it costs them a great deal more to live than for a man who can live at home. Q. Have you ever had any knowledge that any of the section men have been dis- charged for a refusal to board at th^ boarding-house of the section boss ? — A. Never have, sir ; no, sir. I would like to state right here that during the strike of Mai'cl^ 1885, in the road department, we had no trouble. There was not a single man that I know of that struck. We hadn't any trouble at all. I knew of none, up to the morn- ing that the whistle blowed. There was not a letter to me or to my superior officers in any shape or form showing that there were any demands made by our trackmen up to the morning of March G of the present year. / , Q. Are you acquainted with the prices paid ordinarily through the country along the line of this road for farm labor and other branches of industry ? — A. Well, I am to some extent ; relative to farm labor and to prices paid on other railroads, 1 might not be very well posted, Q. How will the prices that you pay compare with the prices paid by farmers for labor on farms and with the prices paid by railroad men on other lines or systems of railway? — A. Well, we are certainly paying the average price, or we would not be able to' hold the men. We are paying the same prices. I have communications from various roads that cpnnect with us a.nd we are paying the standard prices so far as my knowledge goes for that class of labor throughout; the country. In iiict out of Silint Louis we pay $1.15 a day there for section— -laboring men, winter and summer while the Frisco road has paid $1 right beside us, running for thirty or forty miles along on a level with us. Q. And how will they compare with the prices paid for farm labor? — A. Well, I should think that our prices are about a fair average of what farmers are paying. Of course farm labor is longer hours and is a harder labor than our labor. Our labor is regular hours, the men work the exact number of hours, and if they work any over- time they are paid for it, while farm labor, as a rule goes to work at sun-up and quits work at sun-down. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 273 Q. Does it not frequently happen in wiuter that the hours of your men are not reg- lilar, but that they areiialled out frequently to shovel off snow in the night ? — A. Yjes, sir; but the hours is always on the side of the laboring men in the winter time, because unless yoTi commence woxking before daylight and work till after dark you couldn't work ten hours in the winter time. Q. Doesn't it frequently happen that they are called out to shovel snow in the night time 1 — A. If they are the men get paid for it. Q. Do they get extra pay? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Complaint has been made by testimony above here that men who did go out to shovel snow off the track at night were not paid extra, and that they were called out at very unseasonable hours to do the work. — A. I have no knowledge of any thing of the kind, sir. I think it must be some mistake somewheres that anything of that kind ever occurs. Q. Did you instruct your section bosses to report to you the grievances of your men against that ? — ^A. Yes, sir. \ Q. That is a part of their duty ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you displace or discharge a section foreman who failed to report to you such grievances ? — A. Yes, sir ; after carefully considering the grievances and finding out what it was, if the man had stated the fact, of course I would. Q. What was the time made by the section men generally during the last winter? — A. Well, the time during tbe wiuter was pretty light, perhaps an average of eight- een or twenty days per month for a couple of months. Q. Were they paid for the eighteen or twenty days, or were they paid for the thirty-one days ? — A. No, sir ; they were paid for the time that they worked. There was many days here last winter that nobody would want to go out to work. There was a, great many days that men preferred to stay in the house to going out to work, and —hen they were going out just such as were required to go out and walk track went out. There was nothing else in the wide world to be done when there was no snow. Q. Are you personally acquainted with Edwary Conroy, of Sedalia? — A. No, sir; I think not. Possibly I might know him ; I don't think I do, sir. Q. Mr. Rockwell, did yon examine the track at the place where this wreck occurred that has been mentioned by Mr. Frey? — A. Yes, sir; I was at that wreck within probably fifteen minutes after it occurred, as we were getting the train out. I was in the yard every day an attempt was made to get out a train, with the balance of these gentlemen who were making these efforts to run trains out. I was with them in rendering all the assistance I could in various ways. I had no men in this yard, and it was necessary for some one to look out for the switches and frogs. Q. Were you acquainted with the condition of the track? — A. Yes, sir; but I. was going to start when the train went oat. Q. We will come to that in one moment. What was the condition of the track be- fore and up to the time of this wreck? — A. Well, sir; it was in very fair condition, and you may call it in afitst class condition. The ties were good there. Q. How did the condition compare with the condition of previous years, any time heretofore ? — A. It was in a better condition at that time, sir, for the time of year, than it has been for five years. Q. Was that general as well as special ? — A. Yes, sir; that was general. The track was in better shape during the months of March and April of this spring than it has been in this country for five years. Q. Can you rercite the condition in which yon found the track at the time of the wreck? — A. Well, sir; I reached this wreck in fifteen minutes after it oconrred, and I found the rails, representing them pieces to be the rails, to give you a clear idea of how the matter was done, this [indicating] representing the east rail, and the train came onto this rail. The west rail had been unchanged. The fish-plates had been taken off and laid at one side in the ditch ; this rail had been pushed in and the spikes had been pulled on eight or nine ties. The ties were nearly new and the rail had been pushed in about that distance so that there was just passage enough so that the wheels went right on outside of it ; that was the condition I found it in. There was no disturbance in the track. That was how the tracks were. And the engine passed out on that side, on the north side, and five cars piled np on top of one auother and smashed to pieces. Q. I will ask you if that displacement of the rail for the distance of two or three car lengths could not about that time on such a day as that have been readily dis- covered from the train in motion ? — A. Oh, yes, sir ; it could be very easily discovered if a man happened to be on that side of the line; it could be very readily discovered for 200 feet very easily, or perhaps 250, that -he could see that displacement in that rail, without any trouljle at all. Q. I will get yoii to state whether this displacement of the rail was on the engineer s side on that day or the fireman's?— A. No, sir; it was not; it was on the fireman's side, it was on the north rail, and the train moving east the engineer would be on the op- posite side, the engineer being on the opposite track. 3984 noKG 18 274 LABOR TEOUBIES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Is the fireman's side where visitors or guests are usually seated? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I wJU ask you if a man of good sight, even if nnsliilled in railroad travel, on ex-* amination would have been apt to discover this at the distance of two or three ear lengths? The Chaibman. If he were on the lookout for it? Mr. BuRNBS. If he were on the lookout for it?— A. Yes, sir; it couldhave been seen. Of course a man not acquainted with railroads might not think about a thing of that kind, but if he was looking for it, of course a person looking for it ■ Q. It was necessary for me to ask the question as to an unskilled person, because I suppose the superintendent is somewhat skilled as to looking out for the condition of the track. — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you if, throughout the length of your division or command, any of the men under you expressed any discontent to you in your hearing them or your associa- tion with them, any dissatisfaction in any way prior to the time of this strike? — A. No, sir ; not a single word from anybody, sir. Q. Did you ask any of the men under you as to the cause of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir; I have. Q. Did the section men go out to any extent ? — A. No, sir ; we only had 202 men, all told, of section men, of laborers, that went out, out of about 900. Q. That is about one-fourth of them ? — A. Yes ; that was all on the east end. Q. State, Mr. Eockwell, whether they went out on the 6th of March or at a later period. — A. No, sir; most all of the section men that went out between St. Louis and Pacific — that is the place they nearly all went out, and on the two branches down there — didu't go out till about the 9th or 10th, along there. They didn't go out on the Cth. We had no men go on the 6th that I know of. I have no record of any going out on the 6th, bnt they dropped out all along between the 8th and 10th; that was jibout Ihe time that they all went out. Q. Have you any special knowledge or information that you could communicate iu regard to the cause of the trouble between this railroad company and its employes?— A. I have none, sir ; I have never been able to oljtain any one who has been out in connection with the strike. I heard some grievances stated along fifteen or twenty or twenty-five days after the strike had been in progress, but at the time, 6r twenty ■days after it, I never came across anybody who could give me any information. .Q. I will ask you if you had any information or reason to apprehend that any of the men working on this line of railroads were dissatisfied prior to the 6th of March f— A. I had no apprehension of anything of the kind, and I was utterly astonished w.hen I was informed about five or ten minutes — I believe Superintendent Frey informed me dbwn in the hall about five or ten minutes — before the whistle blew that there was going to be a strike. I hadn't the least idea, from the fact that our people had com- plied with most every request they made. They had just issued an order. I had seen it on all the record boards, at the various points where the conductors had to register, about the boycott of .the Texas Pacific, from the fact that I had to take my own men off the track and transfer freight at Independence out of Texas Pacific cars. And I supposed that that compliance Ought to have been satisfactory to any reason- able man. J. W. MILLS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnes). State your name, residence, and position on the Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company. — Answer. J. W. Mills; Sedalia; age, 54; foreman of blacksmiths, Missouri Pacific. Q. Will you state what conversation you have had with Mr. Page in regard to these troubles ? — A. I met Mr. Page, I think, on the 27th, ou the street. I presume that is the conversation you want? Q. Yes, sir. — A. He said, " I understand that they are trying to get men to work." Itold him, said I, "No ; I am merely asking men, if they want to go to work, to go and register; that I preferred my own men instead of new men. I understand the company was getting new men to take their places." And Mr. Page said, '• No ; we will all be to work in a day or two, and the new men can't work there.'' He says, " If they do, there will be blood shed." That is about all that Mr. Page told mo. Q. To what Page do you allude ? — A. Fred Page. Q. What effort did you make to induce your men who went out to come back ?— A. I merely asked them if they wanted to go to work — that is, when the company got ready for them— to come and register at the master mechanic's office, that they might secure their places ; that I would rather, have the old men than new ones. Q. Have yon made any objection to the employment of men who went out on the strike ? — A. Oh, no, sir; not in the least. , W. H. MASON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknes). How long have you been in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railroad ? — Answer. I have been in the employ of the company off and on for nearly seven years. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 275 Q. Were you in the wreck that was caused near the city of Sedalia ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what department -were you employed ? — A. I am a police ofBcer here in the employ of the compauy ; have charge of a small police force here for the company, looking after the company's property in the yards, and misdemeanors of all kinds. , . Q. Will you just go on in your own way and give us an account of the start- ing of the train and its progress and its catastrophe ! — A. This was on the even- ing of the 23d of March. We had made several attempts to take out trains and failed, and on the 23d I got notice that they w^ere going to try to take out a train in the afternoon, and that they wanted me there with such of the officers as was on duty iu day time. I went around and reported right after dinner to Mr. Frey, and got my orders from him, and went aronnd with the engine to the train, and after some con- siderable bickering there, why, I asked Mr. Frey if I should remain on the engine, and he told me no, to get on to the train. I taken my jnen and went on to the train with him, and everything was iu readiness, and we started out east-hound train 28, and there was a considerable lot of people on both sides of the track ; there was hundreds of them. Q. That is on both sides of the track before the train started f— A. Yes, sir, ahead of the train, east of the city. The city oflScers remained on the ground, the police force and constables and deputy sheriffs, and just as we had started the head brake- man on the train came to me, and says to me, said he, "How far are you going?" Said I, "I am going till the superintendent tells mo togetoff." And,8ay6l, "Why?" "WeU,"he says, said he, "I am not." Said I, "Why not?" He says, "I have been told that there was danger ahead', and I am going to get off when we get out of the corporation," and says I to him, said I, " I am not going to get off; I am going on this train." Well, when we got outside of the corporation, my thoughts was that they would attempt to take the train away from ns on former occasions. Didn't ap- prehend any danger of any other kind, and we got up a rate of speed that I couldn't very well get off after we passed outside of the corporation, and I didn't notice what had become of the brakeman ; he had went back to the rear of the train from where I was, and the wind was in the east, blowing from the east west, and where I was it blowed the smoke and cinders right in my face so bad that I couldn't pay very much attention, and somebody got on to the ear that I was on, on the side ladder. After we had got out of the city some three-quarters of a mile, I reckon, our boys thought that he was going to get on top of the car, but he didn't; he just come up far enough for me to see his head, and after we had passed these crowds I didn't feel any alarmed; and I asked mycffleer to turn his face to the south, so that if any suck thing did happen as an effort to capture the train we conld see it, and this man was on this side ladder; and after we got down into what is known as the nine-hole, we had a pretty good rate of speed, and he jumped off, and the last I saw of him he was going towards the hedge ; and there was people scattered along on each side of the way all the way out until the whistle sounded for brakes. That was the first inti- mation I had that there was anything wrong. And I hollered at my man — the young man right ahead of me — to grab the running-hoard. I calculated to grab the brake right back of me, but in hollering to him to grab the running-board just as I turned facing the south of me, right straight on, they struck. I saw the engine go off first. Just as I told my man to grab the running-board I saw the engine go off on the east side of the track, and then the crash come, and that threw my feet from under me and throwed me from the first t-o the second car back of the engine, and after that I didn't know much for some time. I was so badly jammed up, so badly bruised, that I didn't know what did happen. There was a great many people around — I couldsee that ; it seemed to me like when the whistle sounded that there was as many as twenty- five or thirty people on that side of the track and on this, but how they got there I don't know; but they were out a good ways from the track — that is, scattered about over the field. Q. Did you recognize any of them ?— A. No, sir ; I did not ; I was very busy just at that time, because the whistle had sounded, and I knowed there was something wrong. Q. What were your injuries? — A. I got hurt across the eye here, and on top of my head, this arm broke, the wrist and arm smashed here, the shoulder here, across my hack, this knee, that thigh, and my right foot. Mr. Stewaht. I think you were pretty lucky to get out of it as well as you did? — A. I was pretty lucky ; yes, sir. Sedalia, Thursday Evening, May 6, 1886—8 p. m. H. J. MUEEEL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Buknes : Question. State your full name, age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. H. J. Murrell; age, 29; and occupation, laborer; residence, Sedalia. Q. This committee is charged with the duty of investigating as to the cause and ex- tent of the troubles heretofore existing between the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- 276 LACOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. pany and its employes. Please direct your attention to these two propositions and tell us what you linow in regard to them.— A. In the month of April— no, let us see ; in February — in the month of February, the month before the strike, the local assem- blies attached to District Assembly No. 101 received a letter from the executive board of district 101 asking, "Will you sustain your executive board in demanding from the railroad company $1.50 per day for laborers?" There was a ballot taken. I don't know the result of the ballot. I know how I voted. I voted, yes. In March, I believe somewhere about the 1st of March, as near as I can recollect, we received another message asking would we assist our district executive board in de- manding the reinstatement of one Hall, discharged on the Texas and Pacific Eajlroad ; and inclosed with his letter was a statement of other grievances stating in any case it was necessary for the Knights of Labor on the Gould Southwest system to strike in order to reinstate Brother Hall ; the other grievances would be at the same time pre- sented. The best of my recollection the first grievance wa4 a demand for a better system of apprenticeship. I will state here that there are several apprentices who have worked probably — I know one especially who has worked three years and all he is receiving is a dollar a day; under the present system they don't learn much trade; they only learn V3,rious branches, and in fact they can't turn out first-class mechanics. The young man I have reference to is not in Sedalia to-day ; he is running a drill- press; for nearly the whole time he was at work he only learned that one branch. . The demand, I believe, that was to be made was for a system whereby apprentices would get their wages raised in proportion to their ability as mechanics. The first year they went in they were to receive $1 per day; the second year, if they were worth it, they were to receive $1.25, and so on; they were to be raised in proportion as they learned the trade. The section men on this system have received from $1.10 to $1.25 a day. In the winter time on various sections they have been only allowed to make about half time, even in tine weather; and I have known some to be actually in want — have a steady job, and yet be- actually in want. I received a letter from one, unfortunately the letter is destroyed, stating that during last winter be had gone to work without a mouthful to eat, and had nothing in the house but corn-bread for his children to eat ; went to bed and went to work hungry. The grievances around Sedalia I don't think are many, for I will say this of Mr. Sibley, he has always acted a gentlemen. I have been ititimately connected with our local grievance committee, and whenever a grievance has been presented to Mr. Sibley it has received prompt attention ; still there are several grievances which have not received his attention. In my official capacity as recording secretary of the local assembly of the Knights of Labor, various ones have come to me and stated their grievances and asked me the best way to get them placed before the proper author- ities and get them redressed. I had invariably referred them to the local grievance committee, of which Fred Page is chairman. I don't know whether they have all been redressed or not I know there is one grievance which has not been redressed, that is a fact, that night- wipers and their night laborers worked from twelve and thirteen hours a night for one day's pay — for ten hours' pay. The contract says or the report clearly specific^ ten hours shall constitute a day's pay. I myself have worked noons sometimes until fifteen minutes to 1, and I asked my foreman it he couldn't give me one hour's pay for my noon work ; . I told him I would rather have the 16 cents — I got $1.60 a day — I would rather have the 16 cents than have the time in the evening ; he told nie no, I couldn't do it. I could leave earlier in the even- ing; so instead of getting hours overtime as I wanted I have got away an hour earl- ier in the evening. Another agreement that I had with my foreman, I don't know that it can be called a part of the contract, it was that on Sundays or any other hol- iday I should have the privilege of going home as soon as my work was done ; that is, if I got done at 2 o'clock in the afternoon I should have the rest of the afternoon to myself to rest up. I had to wOrk every day. When the contract was first signed and entered into, the first time I heard it read I demanded a time and a half for Sunday, but I didn't get it. They said they really couldn't give it to me. As I had to work ev.ery day, I went to see the local grievance committee about it, and they said the contract didn't say I should not have it, but rather than cause any trouble they thought the best thing we could do, as we were just over one strike, was to work on Sunday for the same as any other day's pay, and and see if we couldn't arrange it with our foreman to have a little easier time, and that i^ the way we worked. We didn't demand that part of the contract to be enforced at all, time and a half for Sunday, in our department. I don't know of any other grievances, that is in the immediate department that I was working in ; but my idea of the cause of the strike was $1.50 a day for laborers, a better apprenticeship system, and pay for bridgemen, carpenters, and other men who had to go out on the road ; for time during the time they were traveling out ; this is what I struck for myself; I don't know whether any one else struck for the same or not. Q. Did you mention this to any of the officers of the railway company prior to the strike T— A. No, sir. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 277 Q, Why didn't yon do that 1 — A. Because I wasn't authorized ; I had no authority to do anything of the kind. Q. Well, from what you had seen of these gentlemen, and from your confidence in Mr. Sibley, don't you think it would have been better for you individually and for your individual welfare if yoa had gone to Mr. Sibley and suggested what yon yourself desired t — A. Well, sir, we had a, proper committee to do that work j and another thing, I was under the impression, and am yet, that the district executive board had some time before handed these grievances in to Mr. Hoxie, for his consideration, and I believe you will find that is so, too. Q. You never mentioned this matter to Colonel Sibley? — A. No, sir; I never spoke to Colonel Sibley in my life. Q. Nor to Mr. Freyf — A. No, sir; nor to Mr. Frey. Q. Did yon mention your desire for the $1.50 a day and for an improved system of employing apprentices, &o., to any officer to whom you had to report ? — A. No, sir. As I stated before, I was only as a private member, that is in general business, but I held an office in one of the assemblies — that of recording secretary. I think you mis- understand me; I was getting more than $1.50 a day ; I was getting $1.60 a day, but I was doing the worst work done on the railroad, washing boilers in the wet alt the while I was at work, work that is paid for on other divisions — towns in other divisions on this same road— at the rate of $1.80 and $2.25 a day. Q. Well, you remarked that so far as you were concerned, that you struck for the purpose of getting, as I understand you, $1.50 a day? — A. Yes, sir; $1.50 a day for all laborers receiving less. Q. Well, what did you want ; how much did you want ; yon were getting $1.60 ; how much increase did you expect ? You certainly didn't expect to be reduced down to $1.50? — A. No, sir; I expected that when the arrangement was made the other laborers would have their wages advanced in proportion. Q. WeM, I will ask you this question : As one that is anxious to know your feelings, and your wishes, and your expectations, would it not have been better, and would i t not have been common fairness for your grievance committee, and for your organiza- tion all to have mentioned your demands to the general officers of the road before going out under such circumstances, and imposing upon the company such great loss and injury? — A. Of course, and X supposed that it had been done; I am under that impression to-night. Q. Were you under the impression that the general officers had passed upon the demands, and had rejected them f — A. Well, of course I was; yes, sir. Q. Were any other members of the organization to which you belonged under that impression ? — A. I don't know. Q. Have you ever talked with any of them ? — A. No, sir. Q. You never made any inquiry as to whether the general officers had redressed your grievances — acceded to your requests or rejected them — but just proposed, with- out inquiring, to strike ? — A. As I stated before, when the question came whether we would support our district executive board in this matter we voted, and I supposed a unanimous vote, " yes." I expected those things had been brought before the proper authority, and when the time came we struck. Q. Was it not the real cause, while all these may have added to it — was not the real cause the order of District Assembly 101 ? — A. The real cause of the strike ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. No, sir ; I think the order came out of the cause. Q. Well, you would not have struck but for the order, would you ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then, so far as you were concerned, j'ou struck because of , the order? — A. Of course; yes, sir. Q. Then, may we not conclude that the order of District Assembly 101 was the cause of your strike? — A. No, sir; the cause of my strike was the deplorable condi- tion of what is called the laborers on the southwest system of railroads, in the first place. Q. Well, I will ask you this question: If you had known that your demands and your wishes in regard to the subjects yon hav^ mentioned had never been presented to the general officers of the company, and therefore had never been considered by them, would you have joined in the strike ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; I would have obeyed the order coming from onr district executive board. Q. Even if yon had known that the general officers of the company had not been informedof your wishes? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of your own knowledge of any individual cases of hardship — griev- ances on the part of men employed by the Missouri Pacific Eailway ? — A. Yes, sir ; I know that men have been there at night when I have left in the evening at 6 o'clock, and I have found some of them there in the morning when I came there a little before seven, on several different occasions. Q. You mean by that that you know of workmen who worked extra hours f — A. Yes, sir. ' 278 LABOR TEOUBL-ES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you know whether those men who worked extra hours were paid for this extra service ? — A. I know that they were not. Q. Do yon know that they ever made a demand for payment? — A. Well, no; I am .not sure that they have, although they have told me they had ; I can't swear that they have. Q. Then of your own knowledge you don't know ? — A. No. Q. Except what they told you in regard to it? — ^A. No, sir. Q. How many of them told you that they had not been paid for these extra hours f — A. Probably eight or ten. Q. If you can remember their names we would be glad to have you mention some who worked extra hours and made a demand for extra payment. — A. John Tilbury is one, and Philip Wagoner is another ; Dennis is another. Q. That will be sufficient ; probably I am going further than is necessary in your case. I understand you made no complaint because of extra hours that were not paid for? — ^A. I made complaint upon one occasion ; on Thanksgiving day I got my work done at about half-past two or three o'clock ; I washed myself and went home, and after I had gone home the foreman discovered that the man that does my work at night, that is, the man that does the same work I did at night, had left the engine without ■watering her, and had left her hand-plates out so she couldn't be filled up without their being put in, and there was not another man in the round-house who could put them in. He blamed me for the other man's negligence, and took four hours' time from me. I requested him to give me that time, but he never did it. He partly prom- ised me he would, or he promised me he would do the same with that as he had witli the time of Mr. News ; he would allow it to me somo day that I had nothing else (o do. Q. Did you mention that as a local grievence to the local committee ?— A. Yes, sir; I did. Q. Did they apply to have your claim considered ? — A. No, sir ; they did not. Q. Why didn't they apply ? — A. Because a gang- boss in the round-house was partly to blame^for it and he got into a little trouble a little while before that, so I was given to ilnderstand, and the master mechanic had threatened to discharge him, and there- fore I requested the local grievance committee not to take any action on it for fear the master mechanic would discharge the man. Qv So far as your own employment and payment were concerned, yon have no other complaint but that you have stated? — Ai Well, sir; I asked for the same wages as other boiler washers were getting at Saint Louis and Kansas City iu all cases aud was refused. Q. You asked it from the proper officer ?^A. I did; I went to the master mechanic. Q. What did he say ? — A. He told me that he had received orders from headquarters not to advance anybody's wages, therefore he couldn't do it. Q. Was that within the last year ?— A. Yes, sir ; that was when Mr. Newell was mas- ter mechanics, in Sedalia. Q. Do you understand the feeling of the workmen with regard to the maintenance of the hospital here in Sedalia and the one in Saint Louis? — ^A. I do, sir. Q. Tell US how that thing is organized and maintained. — A. It is organized to be maintained from the salaries of the employes; employes pay twenty -five cents per month hospital dues. A man gets hurt and goes' in a hospital; before he can go to work, and in some oases before he can even get treatment, he has to sign a release; the release promi ses payment of one dollar. The men never see the dollar ; they never receive that at all ; I have failed to find one case where a man received one dollar for signing a release. Q. You say if men get hurt, before they arc allowed to go to the hospital thoy are required to sign a release?— A. In some cases. Q. Some such cases have fallen nuder your observation ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. In the cases that you allude to were the injured parties taxed prior to their iu- iury for the support of this hospital ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. As a general thing here in Sedalia do sick and disabled members go to the hos- pital or are they sent to the hospital ?— A. Well, single men as a rule go to the hospital, trom the fact, living in boarding houses, they don't receive very gobd attention; but the married men prefer being treated at home. Q.Well, when they are treated at home are they allowed anything for boarding themselves instead of beingboarded in the hospital ?— A. No, sir ; not toniy knowledge. Q.Do you know whether they are supplied with medical attendance there?— A. They are supplied with medicine ; I suppose they are supplied with medical attend- ance ; I think to the best of my knowledge and belief they have to go aronud to the hospital to be treated. Q. Do you knowined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buenes: Question. In what capacity were you employed by the Missouri Pacific Railway ' Company ?— Answer. In the tin-shop. Q. How old are you ? — A. Going on 18. Q. What wages were you paid ?— A. Seventy-five cents a day for ten hours' work. Q. Have you worked ten hours each day ?— A. No, sir ; I worked nine hours since the time I commenced Q. Did you get pay for nine or ten hours ? — A. For nine hours. Q. Well, what wages did you expect ? — A. I expected a dollar a day— like the other I l)pys was getting for the first year. Q. Do they get a dollar a day? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they no older than you? — A. No, sir. Q. Had they any more experience ? — A. I guess they might have been there a couple cf months before I was. Q. Do you do as much work as they do ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you toll any one that you ought to have a dollar?— A. No, sir ; I went to Mr. Weller and asked him for a raise, and he told me he would see about it. Q. When wag that? — A. Why, it has been some time last winter. and Texas road, not on the Iron Mountain, Consequently, the men on the Iron Mountain made no complaint in regard to that ; and that is a year ago, and when the men at De Soto were nearly eiIi "of them at work ; at that time they were not actually on a strike, nor were the men, I believej in the Missouri Pacific shops in this city. I wish I had brought an extra copy of a special report I made after that strike; that would decide the whole matter in detail; but I didn't think about it until yesterday. Q. (By Mr. Stewabt.) I don't know but that it would be well, Mr. Chairman, to have him furnish the committee with a copy as a part of the history of this. The Chaismaih. Yes, sir ; you can do that. You can furnish a copy? The Witness. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Major, you have stated what you remember of the terms of that agreement? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, now, do you not think that it was a misapprehension of that agreement that existed which produced the strike ; that the persons employed on the railroad believed in their construction of the agreement that which you say was an error ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think that had a great deal to do with it. In the first place, when this agreement was accepted by those striking employes, or by their committee, as I stated before, the committee was largely made up of conservative men ; but the sub- sequent trouble, especially in the troubles wherein they tried to inaugurate a strike on the Southwest system in order to compel the Wabash system to do certain things, there was some ill Jfeeling created against certain of the old executive committee that was still in power. Q. (By Mr. Stewart). Was it thought they were too conservative ? — A. Yes, sir; on account of their being too conservative. It was on account of those Knights of Labor in Sedalia, especially those who have their families and homes there, that the strike was not inaugurated on the Missouri Pacific system at that time. Q. (By the Chairman.) Major, are you i^ware of the contract made on the 25th of May? — A. No, I was not in that conference. 304 LABOE. TEOUBLES IN TPIE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You don't iiiow anytbinp; about ,f bat ?— A. No, tliat was made Ijy Mr. Hoxie. I was shown a copy of that by Mr. Hoxie since, but I was not awaie that any such agreement existed. The Chaikman. Well, I have no doubt that Mr. Hoxie will produce that. Mr. Stewart. We got a copy from Mr. Sibley. It was made by a grievance commit- tee that came to Saint Louis. , . , ., . (The chairman then made inquiry for some representative of the striking employes, none having appeared at this session.) , . •, , The Chairman. This is the only meeting we have had at which the employes were not represented by some one. . Mr. Stewart. Well, they have had notice. The Chairman. There could be no misapprehension as to the fact that Mr. Maguire was told that we would meet at 10 o'clock ? The Secretary. No, sir ; I spoke to him about it ; at 9 o'clock, I put it. The Chairman. Well, we desire that to be be marked on the minutes, Mr. Eeher, that that notice was given. J. D. CLAEK (chief clerk iu State auditor's office), being duly sworn and exam- ined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuRNEs). Mr. Clark, you have heard the nature of this investi- gation, and the point upon which we desire informatior. Will you please give us the benefit of such information as you may have in your possession with regard to the cause and extent of the troubles. — Answer. Of my own personal knowledge I know very little. My experience has been, substantially, the same as narrated by General Jamison. There has been trouble at Sedalia, and there had been violence there, to prevent the movement of freight trains. And some time about the middle of March, as a precautionary measure, there was some 300 stand of arms sent up to arm the militia regiment at Kansas City, and, at General Jamison's request, 1 accompanied him on that trip with the arms. I also accompanied him to Pacific, subsequently, where there had been difficulties' There had been some shooting, some firing on the freight train the evening before, and the governor thought that it was necessary to place The Chairman (to the secretary). Will you please go and see the marshal and tell him to send word down to the geutleman [meaning Mr. Maguire] that we are in ses- sion ? They have a right to be represented, and notwithstanding th^t we have sent them notice, we will send it again. We do not desire anything more than to make this examination very tliorough on both sides. Presuming that we represent the country, we propose to do that, and it will be so reported to the Congress of the United States, that we desire all parties to be fully heard, and to be present, and we will prefer that both parties on both sides of this controversy shall sit near some mem- ber of this committee and suggest questions, all of which shall be put to the wit- nesses, as has been our custom since we left Saint Louis. We have, therefore, sent to give these men notice that they can come hero, and it may as well be understood that we will put any question to any witness put upon the stand, of a proper character, suggested by the parties, as we have done heretofore. I am sorry to detain yon, major, but Mr. Maguire inay have misunderstood that, although I think I told him that we would meet at 10 o'clock, and our secretary so told him. (Mr. Bailey, a representative of the Knights of Labor, shortly appeared, and the witness proceeded.) - The Witness. As I stated before, my testimony is substantially given by General Jamison, so far as we were together. I accompanied him, together with some eighteen or twenty citizens of Jefferson City, to the town of Pacific, in Franklin County, where there has been some trouble with some freight train that was passing through the town. There had been some shots fired, as I understood, and when we got there we found a feeling of unrest, uneasiness, on the part of the railroad officials, while some of the citizens seemed to entertain a prejudice against the deputies of the sheriff, to whom we had carried some sixty stand of arms to arm them with. Some of the Knights of Labor, or rather some of the citizens there, represented to me that they could preserve the peace, and that the deputies were unnecessary there. There seemed to be a feeling of prejudice against them ; but while we were there a passenger train, dashed, an engine to' a passenger train going west was killed some three or four miles from the place. , I understood that there were some ten or fifteen men who attacked the engine and took possession of it. The sheriff of the county, Mr. Knolty, happened to be aboard and commanded the peace, but he was ordered into the coach. He came back to the city, and there was some excitement, of course, there. We delivered the arms to the deputies and returned to Jefferson City. Afterwards, under an act of the feneral assembly of Uhis State, approved in 1874, Major Park and myself were sent y the governor of the State to De Soto. This act authorized the governor to em- ploy any number of men, not exceeding twenty-five, and to send them into any county LABOR TBOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 305 in the State for the purpose of preserving the peace, or for the suppression of any out- lawrythat may exist in that county. And it was under that actor the generalassem- bly that the goTemor sent Major Part and myself to Do Soto. We -went under hi» instructions as peace-makers simply to preserve order, to preserve peace, and to assist the officers in the preservation of peace. There had been some suspicion — I don't know that the word suspicion is proper — but there had been some misgivings as to whether the sheriff of Jefferson (evidently meaning Franklin) County would dis- charge his full duty, and that was a jjart of our business, to understand that he would do his duty in the matter of prbserving the peace. On arriving at De Soto we had a conference V7ith Mr. Laughlin, who, I believe, is the master workman of that assem- bly, and with the mayor of the town, the sheriff, and representative citizens, and rep- resentatives of the order. I explained to them our mission at De Soto. Mr. Laugh- lin replied, assuring us that he would use his influence to keep the peace, and the mayor likewise made a statement to that effect, and the sheriff also made a statement, and Father O'Leary made a statement, who is the parish priest at De Soto, assuring us that he would use his influence to keep the peace at Do Soto. There had been . some trouble there, as we uuderstood, a few days before. There had been an assault made upon Mr. Nelson, who was an employ^, or former employ^, of the company, act- ing as deputy sheriff, and also upon Mr. Todd, the yard-master, a few days before. We found substantially the same state of affairs existing there that existed else- where — that there had been engines killed, engines disabled, &c., obstructions placed . upon the track, &c. Q. (By Mr. Bukkes.) State, Mr. Clark-, if at these places you visited, you endeav- ored to obtain the cause, or causes of grievances of the enaployfe or any of them, of the MisBonri Pacific Eailway Company, against the company ; and if you ascertained any such grievances please state them. — A. I understood from some of the gentle- Wen, whose names I do not remember, with whom I talked, that there were griev- ances, thiit most all of them, in the course of conversation, referred to the discharge of this man Hall in Texas as precipitating the strike. And there seemed to be some complaint about the amount of wages paid the trackmen. That is about all the griev- ance that I heard of from those with whom I talked — ^probably there was one other one ; that was, that some of the bridgemen who were required to move to their work in the night time got no pay for it except for the hours that they were employed in the bridge building. With that exception, those were all the complaints that I heard. Q. Were those matters of complaint urged as a cause of the strike f — A. They were. In answer to questions, they were set up as causes of grievance. Q. Was anything said with regard to the order to strike on the part of District As- sembly 101 ? — A. I don't think that I had any conversation with any one about that. There seemed to be some prejudice there at De Soto against engineers. Some of them had received threatening letters. One I saw, and got a copy of, a threatening letter that an engineer by the name of Joyce, had received. I heard, from other sources, that an engineer by the name of Kelley, had also received threateniog letters. Q. From whom ? — ^A. The letter that I have, I have a copy of it, was not signed by any person at all. [Witness produces letter.] The letter reads : " De Soto, Mo., 3, 28, 1886. " John Joyce, Esq. : " Deab Sik : Under the existing circumstances, I feel the duty to warn you of impending peril to life and limb, when attempting to comply with your duty as an engineer. I know whereof I speak, and I trust you will receive this information in the spirit ia which it is given." Then there was a system of petty boycotting going on. Q. Who received that letter that you have just read? — ^A. That was received by Mr. Joyce. Q. What was he 1 — A. He was an engineer. Q. A locomotive engineer ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you hear any complaints with regard to the tax levied upon the men for the support of hospitals at Saint Lohis and Sedalia ? — ^A. No, sir ; I heard no complaints about the hospital tax. Q. The complaint of the bridgemen to which you alluded; state that more spe- cifically. — A. The only complaint is as I have stated, and this complaint did not come from bridgemen. It came from shop men in reply to the questions as to the cause of grievance, and it seemed to be about the fact that they did not get pay for the hours spent in traveling to and irom work. Q. Was anything said with regard to grievances or complaints made and sent to Mr. Hoxie at any time ? — A. No, sir ; not in conversation with me. Q. You spoke of this conversation with the shop men ; how did you learn that that was their employment? — ^A. The principal part of the men at De Soto that were in the strike are shop men. There are very few outside of the mechanical department that were on a strike there. 3984 CONG 20 306 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE- SOUTH AND WEST. ' Q. Which U rather an inference that Ihey'were shopt men than any actual knowl- edge on your part T — A. Yes, sir; as a matter of fact, all that I say is simply what I picked up ; it is not, as I stated in the beginning, on information personally known to me. I JAMES L. BLAIR, being duly sVorn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes: Que8ti9h. Will you please state your official position and residence ? — Answer. I reside in this city, sir; I am vice and acting president of the police board in this city, and as such the executive officer of the board. Q. You were present, I believe, Mr. Blair, at a conference between the governors of the States of Missouri and Kansas, and if so, wiU you please state the results of that conference, and all the facts so far as they bear upon the cause, or the question of the labor troubles, between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and their employes, or any of, them? — A.. Shall I state what occurred at this conference or Q. I think so, sir? — A. Or what conclusions I reached? Q. You may just state in your own way, the whole matter. — ^A. Well, perhaps it would be better for me to begin at my first connection with these matters, and that conference with the governors occurred later. Q. Yes, sir. — A. And will more appropriately come in at that time. Q. Well, just adopt that course, Mr. Blair. — A. The strike in this city occurred on the 6th of March, Saturday if I recollect correctly, and on the Monday following, I received notice or request from the officials of the railroad company, that their for- mer employes who had joined in the strike, and several lawless characters who were associated with them, were interferiog with their property, the running of their, trains, and that trouble might be anticipated at any time. I gave orders to the chief of police to send to the , scene of action whatever number of policemen might be necessary to preserve order, and a large number of the men were detailed to go to diffiirent parts of the city where trouble might be anticipated, the shops of the com- pany, along the line of the company's right of way through the city and at the next depot. The following day there was a meeting of the board. I reported the facts to them, and a resoltition was passed in the nature of a general order to the chief of police, to see that all requests for police assistance irom any part of the city where trouble was anticipated should b? at once met with by all the men at his disposal, if necessary. A few weeks after that, I don't remember the exact date. Governor Mar- maduke and Governor Martin eame to the city, as I understood it, at the request of members of some of the executive committees of the assemblies in this city to meet Mr. Hoxie and, if possible, arrange some terms upon which the difficulties might be broiight to an eud. I understood from both Governor Marmaduke and Governor Martin, that they had met at Kansas City for the purpose of conferring together in regard to those matters as the stoppage of railroad business in both their States had made it a matter of great public concern; that while there they were visited by pro- minent officials of the Knights of Labor informally, and the result of the rather pro- tracted informal conference was, that those officials requested them to come to the city and meet Mr. Hoxie for the jjurpose I have already stated. Governor Marmaduke Requested me to go with him to the meeting which occurred, I think, on Saturday, the first meeting. I did so. The conference was quite a pro- tracted one, the principal railroad officials were there. Governor Martin, Governor Marmaduke, and Major Kochtitsky, the State Labor Commissioner. The governors stated substantially, as I have already said, the purpose of their coming to Saint Louis, and I believe asked Mr. Hoxie what could be done in the matter. Of course there was a gteat deal of conversation which led up to these points, and I don't pre- tend to give aU that occurred, but the principal matters only. I understood from Mr. Hoxie, what Mr. Hoxie said that he was perfectly willing to make any arrange- ment which could be done to put an end to these troubles, consistent with the im- portant trust which he held as the manager of that property, and he then asked the governors what proposition, if any, they were authorized in submitting.. I think Governor Martin stated that the result of their conference in Kansas City with the officials of the Knights of Labor, was that they would be willing to advise the mem- bers of the organization to return to work, provided the railroad company would restore the agreement called the Hays agreement of March, 1885. ~ The governors also stated that there were other matters suggested to them by the officials of the Knights of Labor, but that they had expressly stated that they would be the bearers of conditions of no other proposition, than that of returning to work on the basis of the agreement — of the statement of March, 1885, those officials having stated that thalTwas all they would insist upon. Mr. Hoxie stated that the company m his opinion had alwa,ys lived up to that agreement, had never, in any instance, violated it know- iiiglyi an d he was perfectly willing to make any statement at that time which would signify the willingness of the company to abide by that agreement as they had always LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 307 done ; and he further stated, thongh I don't know that it is pertinent to the matter at present, that he had always been willing to treat with his employes on any griev- ance they might have ; that they had always had a good many of them, he thought ; he had sQways met them fairly and redressed whatever grtevance could be rfedressed. The result of the conference was the writing of a letter by Mr. Hoxie to the two gov- ernors, stating that they were willing to receive back in their employment any of the men who had gone out in the strike on March 6, on the scale of wages and on the terms of the statement of March, 1885, except those who had either injured the com- pany's property or advised others to do so. There was more in the letter, but I be- lieve that is the substance of it. The two governors addressed an answer to Mr. Hoxie, which in substance stated that they thought that was a fair basis of settle- ment of the existing difficulties. This matter was not finally arranged until the fol- lowing day, however, Sunday — Sunday afternoon. Those letters were both pub- lished, I believe, at the time. The following day the officials of the company noti- fied me that they intended to run out freight trains on the following day, that is on Monday, following the writing of these letters, the railroad officials notified me that they would run out trains on Tuesday, and asked for the proper police protection, an- ticipating from the large crowds which were congregated upon their property, and &om their actions, that there might be interference of some sort in running their trains. I think I asked what number of men would be required for the purpose, and as it was almost impossible for anybody to tell, that matter was not settled definitely, as to the number of men. I ordered the chief, however, to see that a sufficient num- ber of men were sent to the point where they expected to run out trains. A number of men were sent on that day, but I forget exactly how many. They, however, were not sufficient. I was not present at the time that the first train was attempted to be run in this way, but from a report made by the chief and the two sergeants who were in charge of the men at the place, I found that there was a crowd of several hundred men about the train, and that there were from twenty to thirty policemen. That they were unable to be at a sufficient number of points around the train to pre- vent members of the crowd from uncoupling the cars and otherwise preventing the train from running out. On the following day, or that afternoon, the chief was in- structed by the board of police commissioners, which met that day, to take a sufficient number of men to the point where the company intended to start a train next day to make sure that it should run. I went myself to the freight yards, on the day fol- lowing, in company with the chief; with about one hundred to one hundred and fifty policemen ; I can't give the exact number. I found in the freight yards of the com- pany a very large crowd of men ; I should judge, at a rough estimate, between three and five thousand somewhere ; I couldn't form any definite idea. They were congre- gated upon the tracks of the company, round the cars, and all through the yards,- over the bridges which crossed the company's right of way. The chief of police, in mak- ing his arrangements to assist the company in starting the train, first ordered the yard to be cleared of all persons except those who had business there as employes of the company, all policemen, and officials. This was done by forming a line of police- men and marching them across the yard, pushing the crowd back before them. When we first went on the ground the crowd was orderly ; there was no noise or disturbance of any kind. From my own observation and from what I heard at the time, most of the men immediately on the company's property were ex-employ4s of the company. That, of course, 1 couldn't say of my own knowledge ; howevet, there were a large number of people there, of course, attracted from curiosity or other motives. The patrolmen, as I have stated, advanced in a line, a sort of a convex sort of a semicir- cular line, pushing the crowd before them. There were several instances where some resistance was offered, men objected to being put off, within my own hearing, saying they had as much right to be there as anybody else : that it was not railroad property, but public property. They were, however, pnshed off, and made no serious resistance except at one point, which was at the south end of what they called the Tayton Ave- nue Bridge part of the yard. At that point there was a somewhat larger crowd gath- ered than elsewhere, and the force of policemen who went to push them hack off the ground met with some resistance. One sergeant was struck, and he, I think, knocked the man down who struck him ; and shortly after some stones were thrown from the bridge, which was immediately above this point. The officers, the patrolmen, then made a motion, some of them, as if to draw their pistols, and the crowd immediately scattered. There was nobody seriously hurt at that point except one patrolman, who was knocked down and suffered some slight injury. After the crowd was cleared from the freight yard, a number of policemen, about 50 I think, were placed on board of the train which had been made up to be taken out. They were put on top of the cars and on the engine and tender, and the train was about to move out. It was discovered, I think, that the caboose was off the track J it took some little time to put it on again. The engine backed down and . coupled on to the train and started again, when it appeared that there had been some obstruction placed on the switch, so that the first ear which went over it jolted off the 308 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. track. It was impossible to tell who had placed the obstruction there. Yery few people had passed over the switch, and I have never been able to ascertain by whom It was put there, but at any rate it threw the car off the track, and some further de- lq,y was necessary in patting it on. Ithen got on the last car of the train with the police, intending to go out with the train to the ontskirts of the city, but as wp were about to start up, some men from the crowd ran from between the caboose and the next car in front, and uncoupled it, so that when the rest of the train started out the caboose was left standing. I saw the man ruu off to the west side of the track, and directed an ofiftcer's attention to him, and he pursued him, but did not overtake him. The caboose was then coupled oft to the train and then proceeded west through a very large crowd, who shouted and made a great deal of noise and made various attempts to uncouple the cars as they passed along at a slow rate, but were unable to do so by reason of the fact that the tension of the coupling-pins was too tight. The train stopped for a moment at the E wing Avenue crossing, and then went westward. fivery day after that for, I think, a week or jmore, the same or a larger number of policemen were furnished, and trains were taken out, about the same experience being had in each case. From that time to this we have kept a large number of men posted upon the company's property, and in the neighborhood, for ibhe reason that large num- bers of men were congregated there, most of them ex-employ€s of the company, and the fear was entertained that they would — that some attempt would be made to destroy the company's property. Such an attempt was made immediately after the passage of the first train of which I spoke by the crowd's rushing toward the shops of the company situated just west of Ewing avenue. There was a large number of men who were engaged in. this rush, and they got about half way from the crossing to the shops, but were headed off and stopped by a squad of policemen who were sta- tioned there. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs. ) State, Mr. Blair, if you appointed special policemen to protect the shops. — A. Yes, sir. Q. State the number and result. — A. At the request of the company, I swore in, I think, between twenty and thirty^I am not positive about the number — of spepi^l of- ficers to be stationed on and around their premises. Those officers were sworn in under a provision of our State law which authorized that to be done, and gives them the powers of metropolitan police on the premises described in their licenses. Those men were sworn in, and I believe have been performing duty there ever since. This was done, I think, the second or third day of the strike, perhaps the 7th and 8th of March, some where along there. Q. These troubles, then, have been a considerable public expense ? — A. Very great, sir. Q. Did you see this obstruction yourself on the track, to which you allude, or was it information from others which enabled you to know it f — A. When the car went off the track I was standing, I suppose, 20 or 30 feet from the switch. I went up to the switch as soon as the car went off, and was shown where something had been, some piece of iron, the form of which I conld not give, which was crushed a good deal, which had been taken out of the switch. As you are aware, of course, at the ppint where the two tracks come together there is a narrow slot or crevice, where the flange of the wheel struck this piece of iron, as I was stating, and threw the car off the track. Q. The piece of iron had been taken out before you got there t — A. Yes, sir. Q. You saw the piece of iron, however ?— A. Yes, sir; it was shown me. Q. Did any of the constituted authorities of the city authorize the employes of the company on duty to carry arms ? — A. As to that I cannot speak. The board of which I am the executive officer has no authority to grant any such permit, except by the appointment and swearing in of an officer. Q. Were all the employls officers ? — A. All the employes of the railway company f Q. Sworn in as officers ? — A. All the employes of the company ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. I can hardly suppose that is possible ; the number of men sworn in by me as special officers could not exceed for this company — could not exceed 40. I have sworn in a large number of other men for other compames, the Bridge and Tunnel Company, the Union Depot Company, the Wabash Company, and others, to perform duty on the property of the respective companies, of course. Q. These twenty or thirty employes that you swore in, I will ask you if they were employes of the company ? — A. I was told, and they were— let me see. No, I must correct my testimony on that point. Since that time I have sworn in a large number of persons for other companies who were employes, l3nt I recollect now that the men sworn in for the Missouri Pacific were persons a great many of whom I had selected from a number of applicants to be policemen on our own force, and had sworn them in in that capacity. I was mistaken in saying Ijhat they were employes' of the com- pany. Q. Yes, sir. — ^A. ,That is true of all these other companies I have mentioned. Q. The police board, then, gave no authority to any one to carry arms, except such as were sworn in for service f — ^A. No, sir; it has no power to do so. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 309 Dr.W.B. OUTTEN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Qaestion (by Mr. BuRNBS). Doctor, you are chief surgeon of the hospital depart- ment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company f —Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Have you in charge the hospitals of that company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many hospitals of the company have you in charge ? — A. We have four at present, three in operation and one soon to be in operation — completing it. Besides, in addition to that, we Lave arrangements made witli the Wabash hospital, at Kan- sas City. Q. Where are these hospitals? — ^A. One in Saint Louis, one in Sedalia, another in Fort Worth, and one now built at Palestine, Tex. Q. Fort Worth is on the Texas and Facino Road, is it not? — A. Well, it is oil the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, you tnow — division of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas down to Taylor — and also on the Texas and Pacific Road. Q. Doctor, will you tell us how these hospitals are supported and maintained ? — A. The hospitals aresnpported and maintained by assessments, arranged on the basis oiail employfe receiving $100 a month 25 cents a month ; over that sum, 50 cents a month. This goes to constitute a hospital fund, which is to run the hospitals. All classes and character of sickness are taken there, with the exception of such as syph- ilis and diseases of that kind. Q. What is the extent of the hospital here ? — A. The extent of the hospital here, witii strained capacity, is 95 beds ; generally 85. Yon want, of course, the number of patients treated in these hospitals, do you ? Q. Yes, sir; if you— ^ — A. Last year 6,178 treated in this hospital here. The greater bulk of these were out-patients ; Ji,019 were in-patients. The department is divided off in such that we have an assistant chief surgeon situated at each hospital, who presides over a given territory ; that is mainly tor the purpose of attending the in- jured cases, and the cases are brought to these hospitals according to the territory in which the individual is, or if we can in any way, shape, or form lessen the cost to bring them to another hospital irrespective of that, We do it. The total number of cases treated in the hospital, that is, exclusive of the Texas and Pacific, was over 16,000. Taking the Iron Mountain Road as an example, 1 don't know the number of employes on that, but, as it is well known, it is a road that runs through a great deal of a malarial region of country, and almost every employ^ throughout the length and breadth of the line comes up to the hospital one portion of the year at least onc6 a. year. And it is for this reason that they live directly in the malarial regions of country, and we have tried to indicate to them that a change of climate would do them good. When they are sick, we bring them up here for that purpose. It places it in the power of almost any individual, seeing as he is an employ^ and paying his assessment, to come direct to the hospital, and we have fixed it in such a way that no one need remain at any given point any length of time. He can wire up to head- quarters &om any station on the line of the road, and a pass is telegraphed down to Mm at once, so he can come to the hospital, instead of waiting for the! usual manner of procedure of seeing his foreman prior to coming. In this way I conceive that I have accomplished a great deal of good, and probably saved a great many lives, by changing their locality, and at least giving them a chance to go &om a malarial to a non-m atrial climate. Q. How many persons did you say yon have treated at these hospitals? — A. Over 16,000 in the various hospitals. Q. Do you mean in a single year ? — A. In a single year. Q. How were they treated — that is to say, were they actually domiciled or placed within the hospital ? — A. Well, to give you an idea, the hospitals are being situated at places where the shops are ; the greater bulk of these employes are shopmen living in town, and out of that number I think there are some 4,500, or inore than that, that are actually domiciled and treated, and the average number of days in the hospital is a little over 11}§ days—that is, for every employ^ brought there. Now, an employfi «an do this — ^in the event that he does not desire to go to the hospital^ and in ord^r to save time, and at the same time put himself under treatment: he makes application for medicine, and medicine is sent direct to him, on the first train ; but it would de- pend, from necessity, upon the presentation of his certificate, which, of course, is ob- tained. If he has the proper certificate, of course we admit him if he desires to stay in the hospital ; we admit him, and the whole thing is carried upon that basis, in which we have tried to be neither captious, or I think unjust, because we conceive that the thing is humane in its tendency, and we just desire to carry it out in that direction. Q. Can yon state the proportion of the 16,000 that were aeconmiodated in the hos-, pital, and the proportion of those who were not ? — A. Well, I think it is a Uttla over, it is between 4,500 and 5,000 that we accommodated in the hospital direct, and the balance are outside patients and patients treated on the road. Q. Yon think 4,500 were accommodated inside of the hospital ? — A. Direct in the hospital. * 310 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. They were given board and lodging t— A. Tliey were given board and lodging. Q. Free?— A. And passes were supplied to them, you know, in going to and from the hospital. Q. Yon think the 46,000, the average time of their continuation m the hospital was 11 days or more ? — A. Yes, sir ; llfj days. n a j « ■ Q.' Do you know the amount of funds raised from the assessments alluded to?— A. No, sir; I do not; I am simply assaming this position. I was instructed to supply my- self with everything that I required, and upon the supposition that if the assessment was too low the company had to make it up, and in conversation with Mr. Hoxie I so understood, and it was explained that when the company paid its share, why it was all the better. I would state this in order to make it what I conceive to be the chief point. That the company has not considered these hospitals iu any sense allied to any charitable institutions, and that we have never been skimped in any given direc- tions as regards supplies, and we are not placed in the relative positiou where red tape comes in and things depend upon a quarterly requisition system, but we go in the open market and buy that which we conceive to be the beat, and I think that any one who has been in these hospitals will maintain the idea that the food there is the best we can possibly get. Q. I have here a statement with regard to the disbursements and contributions for twelve months prior to February, 1886, which I will submit to you and ask yon if yon suppose it is about a correct statement of the facts ? — ^A. I should suppose so, sir ; I am not supposed to keep account of the cost of these buildings that they put up, or anything of that kind. My own statement, of course, is different from that. Mr. BUKNES. Mr. Chairman, that is a» statement presented by the company as to the disbursements and receipts of the hospitals. The CH4IRMAK. No doubt some member of the company will be here to prove it. Mr. Btjrnbs. Mr. Kerrigan, when he is examined, can be referred to as to whether it is a correct statement or not. Q. How many attendants have you tit these different hospitals ? — ^A. We average about nineteen attendants ; we have generally at each hospital either one — well, her© in the Saint Louis Hospital we have more than that. We have a full consulting staff, representing all the specialists, where we desire to get the best physician we possibly can — that is, for instance, we have an oculist, a throat and chest man, and have all the specialists representing as far as the physical elements of the matter enters ; you know those we get without compensation simply from the fact of advertising them as being consulting surgeons for the system. But at any rate we get for the employes the same treatment as though they paid direct to the individual, but in the general run of hospitals we have an assistant surgeon in charge, and two outside consulting sur- geons, and then in addition to that two house surgeons, and generally from two to three orderlies and about from eight to ten Sisters of Charity, whom we employ as Burses entirely. Q. The surgeons you have mentioned, are they on salaries ? — A. The assistant sur- geon is on a salary, and the consulting surgeons are not, and the house surgeons are on salaries. Q. Are those expenses paid out of this fund? — A. Yes, sir; I have so understood it. Q. Is your salary paid out of this fund? — A. That I don't know, sir; but I think not ; I am not sure of that, however. I get the money and I have been perfectly sat- isfied. I have not made any inquiry about it. ' Q. Doctor, will yon state if all patients are received into- the hospital when pre- sented with proper credentials? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge of any being turned away and refused? — ^A. Not where he had the credentials, sir ; but he certainly would be if he did not have them. Q. Of course you would have no means of knowing that he was an employ^ of the company? — A. No, sir. Q. Doctor, I will ask you if the location of these hospitals does not work a hard- ship upon patients not living near to them ; for instance, what is the effect upon pa- tients living in Atchison, Kans., having no hospital nearer than Kansas City or Seda- Ua ? — A. Well, there is no doubt about that to my conception. It is this : the amount of funds that you get, and certainly with the manner and method of your carrying on these institutions. Now I don't say it because I am at the head of the institution, but the relative rate of cost for treating patients is much higher than any other class of institutions, even those of the United States, and for that reason the assess- ments have been made, and so by instructions of the general officers of the company; under no condition could any possible cause for complaint be made. Now, admitting that it is somewhat of a hardship upon an individual to carry him even from Tex- arkana to Saint Louis, yet if you would go to work and attempt, with the limited funds at your command, to settle all the doctors' bills in any section with every oa.se of sickness on the line of the road, 1 doubt if you could pay assessments to carry that out as it should be, and taking the'road as it now stands. For instance, we have at every fifty miles of road a local surgeon, and he is sent for direct in case LABOR , TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 311 an individual gets hurt on the system. Exclusively of the T. & P. road there must lie about 160 local surgeons ; these are subject directly to the call of our employes in the event of injury, not in the event of sickness ; they are paid for the services they render, not by tide hospital fund, but by the company itself. All vouchers that are made out for the i^ttention of a local surgeon are charged direotly to the company itself; also, every individual who gets killed while he is in the employ of the com- pany the cost of burial is always charged against the company. There has- been a time that these things used to be somewhat skimped, but not now. For instance, the last six or eight months we have had committees who came here, and in that event we generally let them select the cofBus themselves, showing that we desired to please them. This was left under my own direction, and the company accepted it, and of course I have carried it out in that way. Now I would tell you this one thing which I conceive to be one of the benefits of the institution, and that is this: we are in the habit, and can show records during the past year, where we have shipped certain em- ployes who have contracted certain diseases that were desirous of changing climate ; for instance, if a consumptive came here, in the event a change of climate would pos- sibly suit him, we would ship him to that climate ; in the event he stayed on our road we would supply him with treatment ; in the event he hadn't means enough to send him to that point we would send him to a hospital nearest where we have the climate that would suit him, and in cases of enlarged spleen in Texas, such as are common in Texas, and this climate would cure him, and he could work up here till he got well, the arrange- ment has been made. Now, in case we have not a good enough climate here, we have an arrangement with another hospital department so that we can send them there. Q. What is your arrangement with the hospital of the Wabash Bead at Kansas City t — ^A. On the same basis we treat their eases. We charge them at the rate of |5 a week, for treating cases. Q. I will ask you if this system is not also unequal if not unjust as between mar- ried men and single men ? — A. Certainly it is ; but then we try to obviate that as near as best we can. In the event a man comes to the hospital we always have an entry on our books, in the list of questions, the residence of the friends or relatives; and in the event that his wife lives at one point and he gets sick or desires her to come there we generally send for the wife and she stays there until we think he is out of danger; and she is not charged, of course, for her board as long as humanity will dic- tate it, and when it becomes an element of injustice, why of course we tell the lady it is about time *o go. Now, there is one point been brought up, and that is this, that we won't treat single men in the town here ; our force is limited ; if a married man gets sick and we have a sufficiently large force and he wants to stay at home we try to treat him outside ; we are doing injustice in doing this because there are so many we can't do it, but if a single man gets sick we maintain he is entitled to come to the hospital. Of course in some instances he may have somebody to wait on him, but we conceive we have got institutions where we can give him better treatment. Q. Ton comply with all orders for medicines or prescriptions T — A. Anything that they ask, sir, in that direction. Q. Do you know what the effect of a refusal by an employ^ to pay this assessment is 1 — A. In the event that he is on the road ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. Well, I don't know it positively, but I suppose it would be dis- charge, sir. I had understood, when the first assessment was made, it was put to men in that way, that in the event of employment, so far as that is concerned, that I served the company and received so and so much for my services in consideration of 80 and so much being donated to the hospital fund. Q. Prior to the 6th of March, did you hear any complaint with regard to this tax upon the men ? — A. No, sir ; never had. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) At the time of the strike ? — A. No, sir. Just irrespective of any idea of labor trouble or anything of that kind I want to put myself on record. I conceived that my calling was humane, and my chipf idea was to make the depart- ment popular where I could, and I am perfectly sure, and absolutely sure to this point, that there was not an element of itthat has not been studied. Now, in order to make the hospital department available to even extent, and to be as far-reaching as it could, Ml. Hoxie got up a sanitary in.spection. The ultimate idea of that was this : that if we conld carry out the thing in detail, that we might save men from getting sick, and thereby save time and money to them. So this sanitary inspection was carried out for the purpose of testing all classes of water, and everything that would prevent the people that lived in the various places from getting sick. Now, I can say this, that' on the then 6,0f miles of road there was scarcely a station but what had been inves- tigated as to the water, and even as to the climatology of that region of country. All of which we have got a tabulated statement of, and expect to put forward some time, so the employes would be benefited, and be able to avoid certain circumstances in the future which might be deleterious to him. Q. In the event of the death of a patient, is he buried out of this fund ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is, if he dies from sickness. The funeral comes directly from the hospital fund. Those that die of injury, the company pay for. 312 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you remember the case of a. Mr. McGlnness, who died in Arkansas ? he wm killed, sir, I understand, on the Camden branch. You have stated that where they are killed by any accident that they are not buried out of this fund, I believe. Mr. BuRNES. Where they are killed by accident they are not buried out of this fund. Mr. SxBWAJtT. He asks yon if you remember that case of a man who was killed, named McGinness. — A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you know about that case, or what has come to you officially in regard to it ? — A. Well, now I am not perfectly sure ; I think Mr. McGinness was killed in con- sequence of an engine falling over on him, if I am not mistaken. I think our vouchers will show that the funeral bills were paid by the company, because we have never made any exception in that direction, and quite the contrary, and the managers have left that to me — and 1 have been careful on that one point — because, I suppose, I am more perfectly neutral in the company's employ in that direction, and to me it has beea an especial point of pleasure that I can say that they have not complained about what I have done, particularly in this direction. Q. Doctor, are you aware of the truth of the claim made that the employes defrayed the expenses of burying that man ? — A. If the employes did it, they certainly did it without orders ; did it of their ovfn free will and accord, and without asking me, be- cause orders were issued, I know, and I am perfectly convinced of that fact,.that the funeral of McGinness, we have never attacked that issue. Our books are open for inspection on that point all the way through. ' Q. Doctor, will you look over the vouchers with regard to the funeral of this man McGinness and file them with us? — A. I will, sir ; yes, sir. Q. (By the Chaiemait.) When this system was established were the employ €scon- Bulted, or was it an arbitrary tax on them ; was their consent asked I — A. No ; I think not, sir. Q. You think not ? — A. No, sir ; I do not know about the Missouri Pacific, I only at that time-^you know the system has been established since 1879, and I only had charge since February of 1885. Q. And do I understand you to say that if a man refuses to pay the tax he is turned off? — A. That I don't know, sir, exactly about that ; but I suppose it is a compulsory element. Q. It is therefore a system established by the railroad company without consulting the' persons who are taxed ? — A. I suppose so. Q. Doctor, we had evidence somewhere in the country, I think at Atchison, in the jifst place I asked the question, when a man is married and chooses to be treated at home you don't pay anything out of the fund ? — A. How do yon mean, sir ? Q. Well, a man with a family, for instance, living at one of the points on the road, and who grows sick, or is hurt, and prefers living at home to be treated by his fam- ily, yon don't pay anything to him ?— A. No, sir ; no, sir; I cannot. Q. We had evidence before us that the doctor charged a man for advice when he was sick ; he took a dollar. — A. Well, the doctor is only employed in those circum- stances. In the event that he is called in a case of injury, why the company pays for that, but not in the case of sickness, but we went as far as we could on that point. We have, according to agreement that the doctor signs, a fee-bill which is reduced to •writing, and which he is supposed to act under. Q. Let me understand if that is the settled policy ; in one instance a man swore he- fore this committee that he applied to the doctor, that he was assessed and his assess- ment was paid, and the doctor charged him a dollar?-^ A. Yes, sir; for sickness, jn all probability. Take the number of miles of road and the number of people em- ployed, if you would attempt to pay every doctor along the line of the road Q. But could not that have been paid out of the general fund instead of taking it from the individual? — A. No, sir; we only pay the doctor in the event of injuries. Now, in the event that a man gets hurt Q. Well^ when a man goes to the hospital, then you defray all the expenses?— A. All the expenses ; in the event he writes for medicine we send it ; if this doctor writes a prescription and sends it to us we send him medicine on the first train ; we do the best we can, but we cannot have, say, on a system of 5,000 or 6,000 miles doctors sending bills in for each and every case. Q. That is a system entirely arbitrary? — A. Yes, sir ; it is a system the same as is on the Central Pacific, same that is on the continuation of the Central Pacific; also other roads in the country, the Denver and Eio Grande. Q. I have no doubt at all of your conscientious administration of your duty, and all others ; but it seems to me that the system might be corrected a little. Mr. BuRNBS. In further support of the suggestions of the chairman. Doctor, let me ask you if you don't think it would be an improvement upon your present system if you would allow the patient who boards at home a commutation for rations to the amount equal to the cost of boarding if he were in the hospital ? — ^A. Well, if you increase your assessments certainly it would be very agreeable. Under the present assessment I don't think it could be done. I know the rate of assessments all over LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 313 the United States, and I don't think for the sum of 25 cents a month , or $3 a year, that there is any system on the face of the earth that does any more. (^ I think you are right -with regard to that. — A. But as far as that is concerned, I would like to see this system so fixed that it was possible for each and every em- ploy^, likewise his family, including his wife and children, heneflted. It would cer- tainly be a protection to him to have that thing extended in that direction. Q. In order to make the blessings of these institutions equal to all, I would sug- gest that a commutation equal to the cost of maintaining the patient in the hospital might very weU be made for such as are by reasonable distance or other circum- stances furnished their own board at their own homes ; but I will ask you with re- gard to the employment of these men, if when they are employed by the railroad company they are employed with the understanding that out of their wages this as- sessment or these assessments will be deducted ? — A. I think there is no doubt of that ; I know this, that on the Iron Mountain Road at the time the assessment was first got up there, it was voted on by the employes ; now the Missouri Pacific I know nothing about. Q. Without going back to the origin of the institution, men now hired, and who hav^ been hired for the last year, have they not been hired with reference to an un- deista^ding that this hospital tax was an incubus or burden upon their salary?^ — ^A. I think they have been, sir; I don't know this absolutely, but only from the hearsay of .employes in the hospital. They certainly understand that. Q. It is collected monthly, is it not t — A. Yes, sir; monthly. Q. So that they know at the end of each month that this tax is deducted from their pay t — ^A. Yes, sir. The Chaibman. Yes, sir; but, colonel, you know at the same time that they, if they do not pay that, they will be discharged ; I think that system might be very much corrected ; I have great doubts whether it is in the power of any party to make an assessment on the wages of men they employ and compel the payment in a man- ner which would make a man pay rather thkn lose his employment ; however that is a question which the company can consider. I only suggest that. Mr. Stewakt. On the other hand, governor, if they understand that when thby are employed it is part of the contract, and they certainly should pay it, because they are not obliged to take employment ; they can go somewhereelse if they do not like it. The Chairman. It is verjr beneficial, I have no doubt of -that. A. You can start in one given line for 1,480 miles and not strike a hospital outside of the railroad hospitals ; now there are certain classes of employes that are brought direct from the climates which it is impossible for them to survive in, and these men are not forced to go back to where they started from at all, but whatever climate they desire to select they are given passes to that point. Q. (By the Chairman.) Do not understand me as casting any doubt upon the efl- ciency of the institution, but if it could be so enlarged as to extend to the individual who does not like to leave home, and who may be sick, particularly as he contributes, there should be some relief extended to him; it would cost less than taking him into the hospital. — A. That has been under consideration, These things have got to be proved in sequence. Now, as far as your railroad is concerned, your internal marine is a new idea, and these things have got to be proved in sequence ; these are objec- tions and all hospitals at present in vogue have them — that they are too narrow and do not include enough outside. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) In other words, I presume you mean to say that the em- barrassments that result are really the want of a sufficient fund? — A. That is it. Q. And provided the employes will furnish funds enough yon can furnish these ad- ditional facilities? — A. I can do it in every direction, if there is a sufficient quantity of funds supplied. , Q. If the assessments are doubled, would it be sufficient ? — A. That I don't know, sir ; I could not tell you exactly on that thing at all. Q. As I understa.nd, you, the contribution of the company to this system is found in the fact that they treat the wounded without charge? — ^A. They treated the wounded and buried the dead without charge. Q. But they do not contribute directly to the fund? — ^A. Not just in that way, with the exception that they make up whatever deficiency we lack. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Has this assessment been increased or diminished in the last year?— A. It has been diminished ; it used to be 35 cents for those under $50, and all over that 50 cents per month; now it is decreased, from under |100 a month 25 cents, and all above that 50 cents a month. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) I suppose this is a plan undertaken by the corporation not for its own benefit, but for the benefit of the employes; isn't that so ? — A. Yes, sir; that was the endeavor. ' ■ j j. Q. And the best system has been devised with the means that can be raised to secure this result ? — A. Yes, sir. 314 ■ LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By the Chaibmau.) And you contemplate cbanges in it to make_ it better, of Bonrse t-^A. That is our conception ; we cfertainly don't -vrant to rest qnietly, and we know the difSculties we have had to contend with in forming it ; and you know these things only come up by a slow process of experience, but to my mind I think it is an essentiajl thing in a country like this. Q. Do you think it would be better for the employes of this system of railway to abandon this system and make no assessments at aU, and have the employes to employ physicians as they were able to do it?i — ^A. No, sirj I do not. -I don't believe if yon left it to the vote of a candid and unbiased crowd, if you would leave it to the vote of the Knights of Labor that have gone out, that they would not do away with it. Mr. Stewakt. I don't think this inquiry is important, inasmuch as the Knights of Labor have not made any complaint in this particular. — ^A. The thing is with me a matter of humanity, and when you say all that you can say against it, the good more than counterbalances it twenty times over. Now, there are hardships, of course, in attempting to move these men. I don't seek to deny this ; but we try to prevent every one ofthem wo can, and I believe that I have had assistance right from the word^o, not only from the management jjer «e, but that of every man connected with the rail- road in that connection. Q. (By Mr.BtTRNBS.) Why was this assessment reduced; what was the reason of that? — A. The idea was this, in order to reduce the assessment to fix it so that the company should have to pay a portion of its share ; that was plain, and there had been an accumulation by a previous administration ; that sum I never knew or oared to know. Q. There had been an accumulation t — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. You don't know how mnch 1 — A. No, sir. Q. Then you have said that prior to your administration there was a surplus in the treasury? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And yet the rules remained the same with regard to the patients who were con- fined at home? — A. Up to the time that I went into the department. Q. It seems that there is a fund raised here annually of $75,000 from these men. The Chairman. How much* Mr. BUENBS. Seventy-five thousand dollars ; possibly $100,000, 1 don't know. Mr. Stewart. Seventy-eight thousand seven hundred and four dollars and seventy- one cents in the last year, up to the end of February, 1886, and a deficit of $20,476.28. So much more expended than was received from the fund. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.)- I will ask you, doctor, under the system of organization, if for that sum a good physician could not be retained in every prominent station alon^ the line of this system of road, under a contract that would require them to attend to all the employes in oases of sickness ? — ^A. That is in the event that you should in- crease your assessment, or just from the sum you have got now ? Q. With the $78,000? — A. No, sir ; I think not. I can give you this idea as near as I can get at it. In the event you are dealing with a certain class of physicians, say you put it at the relative rate as we have got it on the fee bill now, $1 for a visit to a patient's house ; now we receive on the Iron Mountain road alone in One year close onto the absolute number of employes on that road, and out of the number that we have got from the Iron Mountain road they stay ll|j days for each one of these, which runs up in the neighborhood of nine or ten hundred of in patients that we have. Take the sum of llfj per patient and you can compute it upon that basis in addition to that the absolute cost of the medicine prescribed must be taken into account, and , your prescription rarely costs less than 25 cents, so there would be a $1.25 cents at least for the patient ; in addition to that you would have to deal with a class of men who, I guess you all know, ^hose fee bills at best are extremely elastic, and you have no way of binding these gentlemen within certain limits at all. If you try to make a contract, you have got /to have more than one man at a given point, as the man may go away, and you cannot find him, and as we have at various points in the road— ' wherever we have men in service we have two. I would like to see these improve- ments made, and would be thoroughly delighted if it could be done, Q. (By Mr. Stewart. ) But you say this is the only way on this great system whereby men living in one section can be moved to another ? — A. That is the point. If I was livingin Arkansas I would certainly insist upon being moved, and not only that I would save time, but I would save the usual nauseating effects of the greater amount of drugs that are given, because you can get along with one-half the quantity up here. ■Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) But then you only have ninety-five beds ? — A. Well, to give you an idea of that we have got room to increase more ; they fixed the capacity of the hospital at eighty-five, the strained capacity could be as high as one hundred and twenty. Now, you say you get one hundred and twenty patients on Monday and continue them that number of days, you would have so many in the hospital at the commenceiient and they would be discharged, and then we would fill those up after we had discharged those that wore there ; we aim to give in case of necessity one LABdR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 315 hundred and twenty, and you could treat three hundred cases there in a month. Tou could even do better than that. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Do you think that the railroad employes or a body of law- yers, however well they may understand the matter, or even members of Congress, who 'are supposed to be the "wisest men in this country, can devise a better system than physicians can for the treatment of patients and for the hospital arr^^nge- mentsi — A. Well, I think that is a very good question and I would like to hit back at it. I don't think they can. Mr. Stkwakt. I don't believe they can, either. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Don't you think it is possible for human intelligence at least to devise a system that will be more equal in its operation f — A. I do, sir ; I do, judge. I know the weaknesses and defects of the department as well as any one, I suppose, and I believe if I could correct it in any given direction that I would be only too happy to do it, because ic is in that sphere in which you cannot do too much. Q. (By the Chairman.) Tou know that these people who are employed on the rail- road are not as enlightened as lawyers, or, as my Brother Stewart says, as members of Congress, although that remark of his presumed too much. Mr. Stewart. Not on medical subjects. The Chairman. You have studied human nature as part of your profession, and don't you know that men of that kind, however beneficent it may be and however correct — and I don't complain of that — grow restless under what they regard as an exaction t — A. Well, I think in the beginning they did, but I doubt whether they do now. To give you an idea, there has been this element about it : I suppose 80 per cent, of the employes of the entire hospital are Catholics, irrespective of the virtue of the sisters, whom I believe to be the best nurses in the world, irrespective of any- body. I thought it was a good idea to get the sisters there in order to minister to their spiritual wants. Now there has never been a time in my life but what I have not looked as closely at that as anything. In the event a Catholic dies to have his religious counselor there, and I conceive that by having the assistance of the sisters that they have done a great deal of good in that direction, as far as that is concerned, although I do not know whether it is my duty to do it, yet I was looking at the utility of the sisters, and also at their moral influence, which I have got. Mia. JOHN DUFFET, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burns). Where do you reside ? — Answer. DeSoto. Q. WiU you state what yon know with regard to the cause of these troubles, and the extent of them in and about De Soto f — A. Well, you mean for me to state about what I know of it t Q. Tes ; what you know and what you saw. — A. Well, I am the wife of an engi- neer, and I keep a few boarders, and one of the gentlemen that boarded with me vras working as yard-master, and when the train went through De Soto, why he went to the assistance of Mr. Nelson, .whom oue of the £nights of Labor knocked down, and they molested hiai, and he could not defend himself, so he ran to my house. He was an inmate of my house, and I should judge from 150 to 200 men followed him with clubs and rocks, and so on, but he was a little in advance of them, and got into the house, and they intended to kill him, I think ; and I took the pistol out of his hand and went to Uie front door just in time to prevent .them getting into the house, and they told me I was to give up that "scab," meaning Mr. Todd. I told them I wouldn't do it, and they used a good deal of profanity and disagreeable language to me, and they told me they would bum the house if X didn't give him up, and I wouldn'.t do it. Then they said they would hang me, but they conid not get a hold of me, and they stayed; I think they intended to get in if they could have gotten in. I didn't have any help there only myself and tht little children. The Chairman. You had a pistol there f — ^A. Sir ? Q. You had a pistol there, though t — A. I had a pistol; yes, sir. And they said they would tear the house down and burn it up, and used a great deal of language, of course, that I can not here repeat ; and I asked them what he had done ; I tried to talk to them to calm them, but they wouldn't listen to me ; and I asked them what he had done ; they said that he had pulled a pistol on one of their men, the Knights of Labor ; so I asked them if he killed any one; they Said, "No, but they wanted to Irill him." •' Well," I says, "you shall not have him," and they said they would not hurt me if I would give him up, and I told them I was not afraid of them, and I told them that I would give him up to the officers of the law, but to nobody else. There was a gentleman came up onto the porch, and they all cried out then, " There is an oflScer of the law ;• give him to him !" Of course, if I had given him up to him they would have very quickly taken him from him. They were very anxious that I should give this gentleman up to that one deputy sheriff. So I had no proof that he was a deputy sheriff, so I put him off the porch too, and he was very willing to go ; so directly the mayor came up ; I didn't recognize him ; I know him, but in my excitement I didn't 316 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. recognize him then, and I put him off too, which I was very sorry for, for of course I didn't intend to be rude to any one, but I didn't recognize him;^ and he also was a Knight of Labor, the mayor, and ■tfrhen he talked to them they dispersed. And they have made themselves, very disagreeable to me and my family, simply because my hns- barid, I suppose, is an engineer, and the engineers did not go on a strike with the rest. Q. (By Mr. Buesdes.) Doyonknowofalny other facts or circumstance bearing upon the question now under consideration f — A. I know nothing but what has been pub- lished ; only that connected with my own household and myself. Q. Yon spoke of a man having been struck by a Knight of Labor; how did you know that he was a Knight of Labor ?— A. Well, I supposed he was ; they said Ihey wete the men that threw the links at the engine as it went by. Q. You didn't see him when he delivered the blow ?— A. I didn't see it, no ; I was at hoine when that occurred. Q. That was mere hearsay from other parties? — A. That was mere hearsay from others that seen him. , Q'. (By Mr. Stewart.) You spoke about making it disagreeable for you and your family ; do you refer otily to this occasion that you desorilied, or do you refer to something that took place afterwards,?— A. Well, yes, sir; they belonged to the or- der ; they called scab at me and my children, as we wonld go by them on the street, and so on ; of course it was disagreeable. Q. Well, for how long did that form of insult continue after this ? — A. Well, I never went On the Street any more than I could possibly help, till it had quieted down a little. Q. But whenever you appeared they A. Not always; but whenever it was con- veiilent for them to do so without Q. And they called your children A. Oh, yes; it was not men that did that, but the families of men that belonged to the Knights of Labor. Q. Not the men themselves, but their families ?— A. Well, the men themselves have malde ugly remarks as we would pass them on the street. Q. (By Mr. BmiNBS.) How were you possessed of the information that those who called you and your children scabs were the Knights of Labor ? — A. Well, they have been pointed out to me by parties that knowed. Q. You have just been told so ; you don't know the fact ? — A. I don't know ; only I know they are Knights of Labor; they are called Knights of Labor. I know, they go in and out of their hall, and so on. Q. Do you remember the names of any tha,t made use of such langnage? — A. I do BOt ; 1 am not acquainted with the men, only when I see them. Major PARKS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BUKNKS). Major, you understand the two propositions that we are investigating ; I will call your attention to them, and ask yon to give us the result Of your information and your investigations, so far as that result bears upon the two propositions involved.— Answer. Well, I have not heard any of the examinations, or the two special points that you made. Q. The first relates to the cause, and the second to the extent of the troubles exist- ing in the State of Missouri, or Illinois, or Texas, or Arkansas, between the Missouri Pa,ciflc Railway Gompany and its employes ?-^A. So far as the cause is concerned, the cause of the strike, and the difScnlties which yon allude to, the itformation is alto- gether hearsay, derived from all sorts of sources. Q. That hearsay was from parties under circumstances and at a time when you were Bftaking a sort of official or semi-official investigation ? — A. Yes, sir ; from parties that •rtfere immediately concerned. Q. Just go on and discriminate, so far as you can, betweeh what yon know and what you have on the information of the character mentioned. — A. The nature of my business necessarily required me to investigate this matter, at least those under whose authority I was acting. In the process of this examination I visited several places, Kansas City particularly, and Pacific, Saint Louis, and De Soto, more partic- ularly Pacific and De Soto, where my investigation extended. The other was more general investigation. Now, would you prefer examining in regard to Pacific ? I can tell yon all I know about that. Q. Well, just state what you know about Pacific and then all about De Soto.— A. I accompanied General Jamison, the adjutant-general of the State, with several other gentlemen, perhaps eighteen or twenty, to take arms to Pacific, for the purpose of arming, or placing them in the hands of the sheriff there for the purpose of arming, deputy sheriffs. We started at night, the date I don't remember ; I think it was about the 20th of March, perhaps, but it was immediately after a freight train had been fired into there and the authorities had telegrephed to Governor Marmaduke, and I read the telegrams, that they were powerless to enforce the law, and preserve peace and order. It was then that General Jamison took those arms there. We LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 317 started late at night ; we did not reach there until next morning ; we laid over at Washington, I believe, most of the night, because it was hazardous traveling. In fact, we encountered a large stone at either place. I don't know, it might have been accident, but it looked a little suspicious ; but we happened to be running slowly ; however, we concluded to lay up at Washington over night ; so we got into Pacific the next morning. The deputy sheriffs were soon afterwards sworn in that morning, and guns were placed in their hands. At the request of General Jamison I accom- panied him to a meeting of the mayor and city council, as I understand it. They pro- tested that they were perfectly able, without the assistance of the State or anybody else, to maintain law and order. This, in view of the fact that the same parties had ^ telegraphed to General Marmaduke that they were not able to mai nt ain law and order; was something a little curious to us at that time, or at least to myself. And General Jamison and I talked over the matter afterwards ; but while we were there actually in session with those gentlemen, listening to them and hearing them say they could maintain law and order, a passenger train passed through and the sheriff went up on it for the purpose of summoning additional deputy sheriffs out in the country. That train (the engine) was tilled and the sheriff was driven back while we were actually in session with this mayor and city council. Well, the result of that was that the deputy sheriffs were sworn in and armed. That night we returned to Jef- ferson City ; that is, those gentlemen who had accompanied the guns and ammuni- tion down there. General Jamison remained there. A few days afterward, at Gov- ernor Maimadnke's request, I accompanied hima to Saint Louis. Mr. Clark was with •me. The situation at De Soto was not of the most favorable character for peace, still he did not want to send us there. He finally left us with the instruction for us to remain in Saint Louis for further developments before proceeding to Do Soto; that is, the idea was that he did not want to menace those people there with any sort of authority, especially with military. We remained here, and we were in conference with the citizens, with the railroad officials and others, and Mr. Hoxie was under the impression that we had better go to De Soto ; that he had information that the shops were to be destroyed,, violence was to be committed ; and I telegraphed immediately to Governor Marmaduke that, unless we received peremptory orders from him to the contrary, we would go to Pacific that night. He answered in Saint Louis as follows : "If you think best, go ; but remember I don't want to use the military." We went to De Soto ; reached there late at night — Mr. Clark and myself— and we immedia.tely had a meeting called of the sheriff and mayor and prominent citizens of the town, in- cluding the master workman of the organization of Knights of Labor there, a Mr. Laughlin. That meeting was held in the mayor's office, and was quite largely at- tended. Mr. Clark made a statement to them ; that we were there, and told them with what authority we were commissioned ; that we were there, not as enemies, or spies, or detectives, but as friends, on orders issued by the governor of the State to ob- serve law and order at all hazards, so far as it was in our power, and we wanted to have a penfect understanding with them. At the conclusion of his talk, the mayor and the parish priest there. Father O'Leary, and various other gentlemen, including the sheriff, whom we afterwards ascertained nearly all belonged to the Knights of Labor — of course excepting the priest — and they all made their statements ; and Mr. Laughlin, a man who impressed me as a man with a good deal of courage and firmness and backbone, especially, stated that he would back us up in maintaining law and order ; but he was fiercely denunciatory of Jay Gould. That seemed to be the hobby of all of them. Well, I interrupted the talk, because it was getting late at night, and told him I wanted to get at something definite ; that we had to make a report to Grovemor Marmaduke ; that he was undoubtedly up at his residence waiting to hear ftom us, and I had formulated a dispatch to them, and I stated to them, said I : " Gentlemen, if you are in earnest ; if you are a law-abiding order, and mean what you say, 1 want you to say that you will join with me in this dispatch, or let me say in this dispatch that you sanction its spirit, and that you will carry it out in good faith." I read the dispatch to them. It was in substance stating that peace and order was prevailing there, and that we had the pledges of this parish priest. Father O'Leary, of the mayor, and sheriff, and master workman of the Knights of Labor that they would assist us in maintaining peace,. and something to that effect. I don't re- member the language of the dispatches, but they were published in the papers at the time. When Mr. Clark and myself went to our hotel that night after sending that dispatch — ^in fact we intrusted the sending of the dispatch to Mr. Laughlin himself, the master workman — when we went to our room we discussed one matter among ourselves, and that seemed ta be a curious phase of the thing, that every one of those gentlemen who had spoken and protested so vigorously in favor of the maintenance of law and order, and that that was the cardinal principle of the order, had said that "they would stay with us and sustain us so far as the corporate limits of the town were concerned. Of course we made no objection to that. It simply struck us as a curios- ity, and we talked about it after we got to the hotel. No acts of violence were com- mitted while we were there, except, I think, the night when we were there there was somebody — some employ^ of the road — shot at. 318 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Who was he ? — A. Somebody ; I can't remember the name now, but he was fired at. Well, the next day passed quietly, and the next ; Mr. Clark in the mean time had gone to Mineral Point, a station further down the road ; that morning before he started some rails were placed across the track, evidently for the purpose of wrecking a J)a88engertrain'; as soon as we learned, it Mr. Clark started off about the same time, his distination being Mineral Point, and Mr. Laughlin, the master workman of that order, had gone to Saint Louis. I went to the lodge room and called a man, named Park — I remember the name very|distinotly because it happened to be the same as my own, and he seemed to be second in command— I don't know what rank they hold— and I told them that they had violated their compact to us in its letter and in its spirit, and if not in its letter, that this attempt to wreck a train had occurred just about 200 yards outside of the corporate limits, and that I hoped in the future they would act in good faith; that it was evidence to me that if they could control' their own meij inside of the corporate limits they could certainly control them 200 or 300 yards outside. He said it was a lot of irresponsible hoodlums did that. Of course I could not gainsay it ; but there were no further acts of violence committed while 1 was there. Q. (By Mr. BuRNES.) Did you hear any expression of opinion with regard to the causes of the strike f — A. Oh, yes ; I made it my business to go among the men; I was friendly to them, and my object was peace, and I was with them and talked with them. The general thing was that they were loyal to their order, and had been directed to strike, and they were going to strike. They were faithful to their obliga- tions, and a man by the name of Hall in Texas had been discharged, and what was the cause of one brother was the cause of aU ; afterwards, though, I think it was' the day perhaps that I left De Soto, I was in the office of the general superintendent — the division superintendent. They were making out the pay-rolls or giving them their time-checks, and I heard one man laughingly protesting against paying a 25 cent as- sessment for the hospital fund. Q. Do you remember what he said in the way of protesting ? — A. I have forgotten now whether it was Mr. Todd, or somebody else, said there, he-said, " This month we have not been at work much ; you ought not to charge us 25 cents," I think ; it was , pleasant, it struck me ; that was the iirsi time I bad heard anything about the assess- ment ieature, and the only time. Q. 'V^^ere you informed by any of the employes of any special or general grievances against the management of the Missouri Pacific Railroad ? — A. Nothing further than I have stated'; I was shown their shops, where they had been broken into, and Mr. Kenan, the division superintendent, explained to me about how engines could he killed, as they call it ; what parts were taken, and he made a discovery while he was taking me through the shops that nearly ^ all the machinery there had been also killed ; that was a new discovery to him ; he supposed that only a certain few of the lathes had been crippled, but when we came to investigate it a majority of them had necessary parts taken away. I am not sufficiently acquainted with machinery to ex- plain that. Q. Is there any other fact or circumstance within your knowledge which would tend to enlighten us with regard to the cause or the extent of the troubles between this company and its employes ? — A. None to,my knowledge, sir ; well, I would make one further remark Q. You say you went to the next officer in command, and told him that they had broken the agreement. How do you know that the Knights of Labor had anything to do with putting this rail across the track ? — A. He said they had nothing to do with it ; he said it was a lot of irresponsible hoodlums. Q. I understood you to say that you accused the Knights of breaking their agree- ment. — A. Well, I presumed, as a matter of course, as they had entered into the agree- ment, and had kept it so far as the city was concerned, why, that they were respon- sible for keeping it immediately outside of the city limits ; it looked to me like bad faith, and I went to him to inquire about it. Q. Their agreement was to protect the property within the city limits? — A. Within the city limits. Q. Now, if they did not injure the property within the city limits they did not vio- late their agreement, did they ?— A. They did in spirit, not in letter ; that is what I was protesting against. Q. Well, they thought they had discharged their duty and complied with your re- quest, I understand, when they agreed to protect the prpperty inside of the city lim- its, but that it was not any part of their duty to go outside of the city limits to afford such protection, but that such protection ought to be afforded by people living out- side of the city limits. — A. That would not be my construction ; lihat constrnotion yon would have to put on it yourself. Q. You think that because they went with you a mile they ought to have gone two miles ; that is Scripture, at all events. — ^A. If you understood the situation, when yon . get outside of a little town like De Soto your are in the woods, practically speaking. ^ ', l.ABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AKD WEST. 319 Q. Were you in the town of Pacific -when the firing on the freight train took place t — A. No, sir. Q. That was on information ? — A. YeSf sir. H. M. SYKES, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BURNBS). Mr. Sykes, state what connection, if any, you have had with the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. — Answer. I am telegraph operator at Bis- marck. Q. Have you any knowledge or inforipation with regard to the cause or the extent of the trouble between the Missouri Pacific and its employes ? — A. Well, no ; only hear^ say, on our division. Q. Have you any information from the employes themselves, or any of them V — A. Well, I have heard them talking about it. Q. That is, the employes of the Missouri Pacific? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Just tell us what was said, and when it was said. — A. Well, it was directly after the strike I heard them talking — I presume it was about the 10th of March — in regard to it. My understanding of it, from what I heard, was that they were striking on ac- count of a man being discharged in Texas. Q. Did they mention any other circumstances as to the cause of grievance ? — A. No, sir : they did not. None of them seemed to know what was the cause, excepting that. At least, they talked that way. Q. Had you heard from any employ^ of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company of any other grievance prior to that time t — A. No, sir ; I had not. Q. Had you mingled freely with the employes up to the 6th of March last t — A. Well, to some extent. Of Course I seen a good many of them every day. Q. Have any of them at any time communicated to you any cause of complaint against the Missouri Pacific Railway? — A, No, sir; I never heard any complaint until the strike was ordered — until they were striking. Q, What class and proportion of the employes did you mingle with t— A. Well, mostly engineers and conductors and brakemen, and some of the car repairers I saw and talked with. A. D. BOSS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Btjknes). State your employment in the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. — Answer. I have not any employment in the Missouri Pacific Railway. Q. Where do you reside t — A. Bismarck, Mo. Q. We desire to know the extent of your information with regard to the cause and extent of the troubles between the Missouri Pacific and its employes ? — A. I don't know any cause except just the common report of the strike, such as I gathered from the papers and perharps with conversation with a few of the employes on the road and branches down there, and sometimes of some conversation with them in regard ■to the strike. Q. You say that you have had conversation with those employes of the company t — A. Yes, sir. Q. From the time prior to the 6th of March ? — A. Well, not prior, on that subject, only after. Q. State what you have heard from employes there, prior or subsequent to the 6th of March, or on the 6th of March, with regard to the cause of the trouble ? — A. On the 6th of March I heard that they were all on a strikei, and inquired into the cause, and it was simply an obedience to an order for a strike down in Texaa on account of a discharge of a man named Hall ; and I also heard some say that they expected an increase of wages for the trackmen and bridgemen. Q. How long after the 6th of March did you hear that? — A. Possibly a week or so after. Q. Did you hear any of them complaining prior to the 6th of March of any trouble or grievance? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you hear any of them after the 6th of March attribute the strike to any other cause than the discharge of Hall? — A. No, sir; not a direct cause. Q. To what class of employes did you allude as having these conversations with? — A. Well, most all classes. I have had some conversation with section men, track- men, bridgemen, engineers, and conductors. Q. Do you know any other acts or circumstance bearing on these questions that you regard as material ? — A. No, sir. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. Merchandising — merchant. Q. I suppose these men may have had grievances that they did not communicate to you ? — A. Certainly ; I had no interest in the matter at all. Q. And it was not your business to inquire particularly with regard to it ? — No, 320 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH -ANC WEST. Q. Why did you make inquiry after the 6th of March t— A. Well, because it was the common talk at the time ; it was the most prominent subject before the people, i Q. A matter, I suppose, in which you would have an interest 1 (No answer). S. C. BOSSINGEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Mr. BxJRNBs). What is your occupation, Mr. Bossinger? — ^Answer. I am agent at Poplar Bluff. Q. Agent of the Missouri Pacific Railway f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge or information bearing upon the cause or extent of the troubles between the company you represent and its employ 6s? — A. Prior to this strike I had none; while the trouble was brewing in Texas, was reported by the pa- pers ; there was at the time a pile-driving outfit at Poplar Bluff, and on it, I believe were a number of Knights of Labor. They were circulating among tho people, citi- zens, employes of the company, &o., trying to institute a lodge of the Knights of Labor. I understood from some parties that were anticipating going into it that they had from fifty to sixty names, and among them was a man by the name of Kavanaugh ; he took quite an active part in it, and got several of the men that were employed un- der me in the notion of going into the Knights of Labor, but about that time the strike was ordered on the system, and they were taken away. They were ordered to Barring Cross ; the men who were intending to go into it when the strike was ordered saw the position that the officials were thinking of taking, that it was apparent that they would take, and were slow about going into it, and said that they would hold out until it was settled. There was at the time, I believe, two Knights of Labor in the town, both switchmen ; one of them quit the first day and the other one worked oneday, • On the 7th, I laelieve, of March, business was so out down by the strike, that I was or- dered to reduce my force as much as possible ; in fact, my department, where there were some seventy-five men employed, and with further instructions to keep enough to pro- tect our property. I notified the superintendent of the condition of affairs, that the men were all willing to work, anxious to work, indeed, and he telegraphed that eveu- ing to keep the men on for the present ; but the next day, on the 8th, I beUeve, I re- ceived instructions again to cut the force, coming from higher authority, that while they would like to keep their men, that they could not in justice to themselves add the company retain men when they were not earning anything to pay them ; so I re- duced my force to the" lowest possible, and ■ everything was quiet, no distu^ance, there being uo one to cause it ; very few sympathizers. InfeiOt, there were one or two that were still circulating their paper, but were getting no satisfaction from the people, and some time along about between the 15th and the 20th there was a trestle on the Cairo Branch, about 8 or 10 miles from Poplar Bluff, that waa reported in bad condition. A gang of bridgemen came up, all of them known to be Knights of La- bor, and they went out and examined the trestle, circulated through the people there, and I believe about either that night or on the following night or on the previous one, I am not certain as to that, there was an attempt made upon the engine. There was only a small guard on the engine, some four or five men, and their duties were to look after the coal there, &c., so that they could not watch them properly, and an attempt was made to disable the engine. One of the patrols found a man upon the en- fiue, and he asked him what he was doing. "Well," he says, " can't you see." Then e told him he could see, and wanted him to get down, too, and he came down and an- other man came up and told him to stand there until he would see what they had done. He told them they need not go to look ; they had taken the left pop-valve from the engine, which was all the damage they had done. He looked anyhow, and they intended to hold the men, but there being only two of them, and some five or six of the outsiders, it was impossible for them to do so, so that they got away. A man who was watching the engine knows the parties who took the valves, but does not know their names; knows where they were working before, and can identify them when he sees them. We then immediately put a strong guard on our engine, and shortly after- wards had instructions to have deputies sworn in. I saw the sheriff, and had a suf- ficient number, as 1 supposed, to protect the property we had there. We had scarcely allowed any one in the yard without stating their business, and we had to arrest sev- eral. The city authorities fined them for vagrancy, &c. There was also some par- ties claiming to be Knights of Labor whose names were unknown to us ; they said they were Knights of Labor. They came there and requested the machinists and foremen to quit work and the wipers, and they refused to do so. They even went so far as to go to one man's house and ask him to quit work in the presence of his wife. Some time during the last of the strike Kavanaugh came back to Poplar Bluff, and in circulating among the people found that they were not much in favor of the Knights of Labor. He could not get up his organization at that time, and he left. It was told me by the yardmaster that he said that he was. That they were in ^to win, and meant to win, and would win ; if they could not by fair they would by foul. That is about all that I know in connection with it. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 321 Q. You stated in yonr examination that before the strike there was trouble brewing in Texas; what do you mean by that statement ? — A. The papers were saying all the time that there was boycottiug of a certain steam line, and also a likelihood of a strike on the Texas and Pacific. Q. Did you learn for what cause there threatened to be a strike on the Texas and Pacific? — ^A. Nothing only what the papers said; there was no other evidence in the case. Q. Did you preserve the notice, or abstract of the papers, that showed this feeling im regard to the probable strike in Texas ? — A. No, sir ; but it was in all the daily papers, I would further state in retjard to the two Knights of Labor that were under my em- ploy that one of them came back to me two days after he quit work and said he was ready to work. I asked him how it was ; he said he had been a Knight of Labor, but that he had resigned, and he has been working for me ever since ; for he did not think there was any cause for a strike. Q. If he had not resigned you would not have taken him back would you ? — A. Yes, I would have taken him back. Q. Begardless of that ? — A. Regardless of that if he was man enough to work for me. I knew he was a good man and reliable in every way, and if he went to work for me he would be true to my own interests. Q. You are not a Knight of Labor yourself? — A. No, sir ; I am not. Q. Of course, then, when you speak of men being Knights of Labor you speak merely from hearsay or general understanding ? — A. Except the two cases engaged at Poplar Blnff ; they were Knights of Labor and bad to quit when the strike was ordered. Q. All that is also hearsay ? — A. And the other man that I said was a Knight of Labor, Mr. Kavanangh, said so. In every case that I claim a man was a Knight of Labor he said so. There was no way of getting around it. He acknowledged it. Q. Well, yon must remember that a man might say he was a Knight of Labor when he was not f — A. Not likely to ; not nowadays he won't. Q. I will ask you if a great many of the persons who went out on the 6th of March, or subsequent, were not private citizens — that is to say, were not members of the or- der ? — A. To my certain knowledge there wasn't one ; because I only had two men in my employ or about the place but what were anxious to work, and they were the two mentioned. One of them has since returned to work, resigning his membership in the order. Q. There were but two, then, that went out ? — A. But two of my men. Q. And they returned admitting that they had been Knights of Labor? — A. One of them ; the other was no good ; even if he had returned I wouldn't have had him any how. Q. You spoke of some parties who were arrested and fined by the city authorities? — ' A. Yes. Q. Were they Knights of Labor ? — A. No, sir ; they were not. Q. Had they been iii the employment of the company ? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Then there are some bad men outside of the Knights of Labor, too ? — A . Yes, sir ; undoubtedly; they could not get them all. Q. Don't you think there are some good men in the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, I do ; I know of some of them. Q. Don't you think there are some good and some bad men in all churches and all organizations, all bodies of men ? — ^A. Yes, sir; that must be admitted ; good men will get in. Q. Did yon hear^avanaugh make the remark that they were going to win by fair or foul means? — ^A. No, sir ; I did not say so. Q. That was reported to you by some one else? — A. By reliable authority, yes, sir. Q. Who reported that to yon? — A. C. M. Laws, the yardmaster. Q. (By the Chairman.) I suppose in speaking of good and bad men there are good men and bad men in control of the railroads are there not, as well as they who are ployed? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Does it not sometimes occur that subordinates, in charge of special duties on the railroads are a little tyrannical? — A. It does occur; yes, sir. Q. It does occur. That is to say that sometimes men are employed by the railroad companies who do acts of oppression ?^A. Yes, sir ; without permission of their su- periors. H. H. MILES, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknes). You reside at Poplar Bluff?— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are yon in the employment of the Missouri Pacific? — A. No, sir; I am working for the city of Poplar Bluff. Q. Have you any knowledge or information with regard to the cause of these troubles' to which allusion has been made?— A. Well, to my own knowledge I have none, only hearsay. 3984 CONG 21 322 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Have you talked with any of the employes of the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany who were engaged in this strilie ?— A. I talked to one man about somewhere on the 20th of March, he had been an employ^ ; I don't know whether he was at that time or not. Q. You don't know whether he was in the employment of the company since the 6th of March?— A. No, sir; I think not at that time ; he had just come into Poplar Bluff there, a few days before ; he had only been there a few days ; he had been at DeSoto before that, so he told me. . t. .-. t. Q. He told you that he had been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Company ?— A. Yes, sir ; well he used to work at the Bluffs. I had known him two or three years before. Q. From what time did you understand that he had been in the employment of that company; since the 15th of March, 1885?— A. He didn't say what time; he had quit work or been discharged some time. He told me he had been discharged ; I don't know anything about that. Q. Unless he was identified with the service of the company March 15, 1885, we do not care to have his statement.- A. I don't know that he was, sir. Q. Is there any other fact or circumstance that you wish to state ? — A. No ; I was city marshal there, and I made some arrests there in guarding and looking after their property there in the yards; made some arrests of strange persons prowling around through the yards at night. Q. Do you know that they were employes of the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know that any of the men arrested were members of the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir; I do not. H. J. DEHLE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuilNES). Mr. Dehle, you reside at Charleston? — Answer. Ye8,8ii!. Q. Can you' give us any information with regard to the cause or extent of the troubles bet ween the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes?— A. Noth- ing, only fi'om what I read in the papers and heard a few of the employes say or told me. I had conversations with some of the employes. Q. Men who were in the employment of the company since March, 1885? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Just state what that conversation was' — A. Well, sir, we generally shell and get off the bulk of mir corn in the month of March ; our merchants had their warehouses full and some Hi'ty or sixty car loads on the track when this strike closed down on us. Our corn goi-s across the river at Bellmont. After the strike had been on for about eight days we sent a committee of ten to know if those few strikers at Bellmont y> ouldn't allow us to move our corn into the Mobile road ; that is, we went down with the deputy sheriff, we went as citizens though, and they laughed at us and told us— to get onto those— topk our engine from ns and side tracked it, took it from us and told us to get onto the polished cars and go home, which we very respectfully did. On that evening the sheriff swore in twenty-six deputies, of which I was the largest one, I think. We went down next morning and arrested three of the leading and in- sulting men of the day before, and told the balance to stand back, and got the incline started and put across the river sixty-five oar loads of corn that day. Sending tlie engine that they took from kb the day before out to Charleston, to liring in more corn. Those three men that we had under arrest, we told them to get into a box car and' come home with ns to Charleston, which they did, and not wanting to put them into jail, they were very respectable and genteel and nice men, I k'pt them at my house, and the question came up that night about the cause of the strike, &o., and it was dis- cussed there. They said they didn't know any cause of the strike, other than Mr. Hall, of Texas, should have been put back to work, but that they were ordered to strike and did strike, and they seemed to be ^orry for it. They were bonded out next day on bail to appear for trial, and our corn moved on. We were threatened by a band of Knights of Labor, it was said by telegram that they were coming from Cairo and to Charleston to kill some engines that we had -there belonging to the company, but we considered them in our care as we were in the city, and we stood guard over them, the citizens did, and got an extra squad of men, about twenty, to guard those engines if the party came down from Bird's Point and Cairo, but after standing in the rain and wet for about until 11 o'clock, we got a dispatch that they had run the en- gine out into the woods and killed it. Next morning we took about ten or fifteen deputies with Sheriff , and went down and found the engine as reported. We shoved her into the Point and fired her up and got her in good shape and went back to Charleston. We had threats of that kind, but we had men on guard there for about two weeks. The strike was the cause of considerable delay to us in the way of get- ting off our corn ; we got that all off by having from twenty-six to thirty men stand- ing guard all the time, and we didn't keep itup. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 323 Q. Yon spoke of threats haviag been telegraphed \>y the Knights of Labor?— A. No, sir ; not by Knights of Labor. We were informed by telegram that the Knights of Labor were coming up with an engine ; that they had got an engine away ixom the company, and it was that that we were guarding against. Q. Of course yon don't know of yonr own per.sonal knowledge that they were Knights of Labor t — A. No, sir ; I don't know ; I don't know that they were flights of Labor or who they were ; I only know that that telegram put it that they were coming up to take out four or six engines away from us. These three men that I said were arrested told me that they were Knights of Labor and that they were ord- ered to strike and had struck, because they were ordered to. There were only about sixteen or twenty Knights of Labor, at Bird's Point. One gentlemen went down from De Soto by the name of Sohultz to organize and give the boys back bone down there, and we told him to get into the polished cars and go to De Soto, and be did so. That is about all I know about the affair. Q. Did these 3 men whom you entertained, Mr. Dehle, say anything indicative of personal grievance on their part against the Company ? — A. No, sir ; they were, they behaved themselves so well after we arrested them that we would not put them in jail ; and the sheriff said if I would take care of them that he would put me in care of them, and they were very gentlemanly, nice men, and had no grievances themselves, but they were ordered to strike, and they were very sorry to have had to do it. Q. An order to strike is not ordinarily an order to capture trains or kill engines; what did they say about that ? — A. Well, I talked to them about that, and they said they had to do that to make the thing vigorous and determined. That is the reason they took the engines away from us and wanted us to walk home, but as good luck would have it, there was a passenger train due from Mobile, or rather on that road, and when they came along why they let us get into the polished cars and go home. Q. That seemed to be, I suppose, their conclusion merely, that as they were or- dered to strike they conceived that it was a part of their duty to make it vigorous. They did not claim that the order had ordered them to capture trains ? — A. Well, I don't think they did, sir. I don't think they said that they were ordered to captlire trains, but they did take that engine from us. Q. That seemed to be a result of their own mental operations. They didn't say that anybody had ordered it? — A. No, sir; they didn't say that anybody had ordered it; they took the engine away from us and kept it there, and I understood crippled it, only a little bit, put the fires out, and let the water out ; I think was all. A. H. DANFORTH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Bubnds). You reside at Charleston? — Answer. I do, sir. Q. Are you in the employment of the Missouri Pacific ? — A. No, sir. Q. What is your occupation? — A. I am a grain merchant. Q. Will you be kind enough to give us any information in relation to the cause and extent of the trouble? — ^A. Well, sir, about the 6th or 7th of March I had from twenty-five to thirty or forty cars of corn loaded there, and I went out to the agent of our place to have that corn shipped, and he informed me that the road was on a strike, and no trains were running, and they could not receipt for it ; and the corn staid there for several days, ten or twelve days, and we could not get it off. I made a trip to Saint Louis to see if I could not make some arrangements about getting our corn off. My com, most of it was, at the time. I came up here and saw the snperinr tendant in regard to it, and he said he could furnish an engine and conductor, &c., and took the grain to Belmont, if we could get it across the river there. I told him I thought we could do so, that our sheriff there would assist us ; and I went back home, and in a day or two they ordered an engine, &c., and hitched onto a train of thirty-five cars, I believe, and took it to Belmont ; six of us went down, citizens, with a deputy sheriff with us. When we got down there they side-tracked them — that is, we run the train on the side track, and the incline was out of fix and we could not put any corn across at that time ; and we started, the engine was going back to Charleston, and we ran on a side track, and some one threw the track so the engine could not get out, and it staid there ; and two or three men, who said they were strikers, acted so every time we tried it) so that we saw that we had better get away from there ; that they did not think we had any business down there, and we sort of came to that conclusion ourselves about that time. There was more of them than there was of us, and we got on the train and went back home. The next day or the day after we called on the sheriff, and got about twenty seven or eight men sworn in as deputy sheriffs, and we went back down to Belmont and put our com across the river. The second day we went down there we arrested three men and brought them up to Charleston and kept them there a day or two, and they were released on bond. Q. Were those the men referred to by Mr. Dehle? — A. The same men that Colonel Dehle referred to; yes, sir. There was a great injury to us down there, it stopping the railroad. It was the only chance we had to get supplies. We don't receive much from the river ; we could ship within 12 or 15 miles to thef river, which would cost 50 324 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, per cent, more to get out supplies them by railroad. There was quite a lot of stock there ready for shipment to Saint Louis, which parties had to drive to the river, and sent up by steamboat, which cost at least 25 per cent, more than shipping by rail. Q. The'result, then, to the business of Charleston was disastrous? — A. Yes; it was very damaging. Q. Is there any other fact or circumstance within your knowledge bearing upon the points of consideration ? — A. No, sir ; nothing that I know of. Q. Have you ever talked with any of the men engaged in bridge work or pile^driv- ing work for the railroad company with regard to grievances ? — A. No, sir ; I have not. E. GRIGGS, being duly sworn and exaipined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuKNBS). State the nature of your employment by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. — Answer. Yes, sir; I am agent at Belmont, Mo., and Columbus, Ky. , Q. Will you give us the benefit of your knowledge and information with regard to the cause and extent of the labor troubles between this railroad company and its em- ployes ?— A. Previous to March 8, when the employes struck at Belmont and Colum- bus, there was no grievances that I was aware of. The men all seemed to be in pros- perous circumstances, doing well and- perfectly satisfied with regard to their work and the compensation . On the morning of March the 8th I was in the telegraph office at Columbus, and thefe was a committee of Knights of Labor, or strikers — I don't know that they were Knights of Labor, I know nothing about that, only from hear- say ; but they were individual employes, and I knew every one of them individually by name — supposed to be or claimed to be Knights of Labor. They were in the tele- graph office and received a dispatch from De Soto, but I don't know what the dis- patch was ; but immediately upon their receiving the dispatch they went out of the office, went over to Belmont, went into the round-house, and notified the men to stop ; gave the men instructions to blow the whistle as a signal that they were on a strike, at the time my yardmen were in the act of placing a trip of cars on the transfer-boat at Belmont. They ran up to the yardmen and notified them to stop, to desist from putting the train upon the boat. The yardmen upon which information, not know- ing what the result would be, stopped then and there, aud moved the train back np on the hill and side-tracked it. A portion of the men then, from the round-hoaee, went out upon the section and notified' the sectionmen to .stop work ; therefore he and his gang stopped and came in. From that time, I think about to the 17th of March, the strikers, or Knights of Labor, as you may call them, were then iu pos- session, or took possession of the company's property. I, as agent, had no control; they told me that they would put guards upon the property and look after it, hut I was instructed to put our own guards, not recognizing them ; that they owned the property, or was responsible iu any way for the property. On the 16th of March I telegraphed to our division superintendent. I mean to say previous to that time that our incline on the Columbus side was in a crippled condition, caused by the bad effects of the ice that had run out of the river some time previous in Feb- ruary, and as the water receded it found tho incline crippled, so much so that it was dangerous to run the trains over it. Previous to the Itith of March we had to stop. I telegraphed to the superintendent that the foreman of the carpenter outfit or gang could procure men to go on with the work and repair the incline if he h*ad instruc- tions to do so. On that day; on the 16th of March, he came down with a gang of men to start to work to put the incline in condition so that we could run the passenger trains over it, not trying to move any freight because the Knights of Labor had in- structed us that we could not move any freight, and put the men to work, the Knights of Labor or strikers acquiescing in it that the work go ahead, that we put the inSine in condition to run the passenger trains over it. After they had gone to work they made a raid upon them, and said that they could not work any more ; would have to stop the work, and after a little parley, a little consultation on the part of the foreman, he agreeing to let the men, their men, as well as the Knights of Labor, that is, that had struck, go to work if they choose to. All we wanted was to have the incline repaired so that we could mpve the trains. So they went to work on the next day, the 17th of March ; they all started to work on the incline. About 11 o'clock the Knights of Lar bormade a rush. I am speaking now, saying Knights of Labor — I am speaking now with regard to the strikers and Knights of Labor. I mingle them together; that is, they were all one. I know them. They claim to be Knights of Labor, although they were the strikers, and you may call them Knights of Labor or strikers, whatever you please ; they are Knights of Labor and strikers also. Some of them I knowed to be Knights of Labor, because they had told me that they belonged to the lodge or to the assembly. Whatever you may call them, 1 would call them Knights of Labor. Mr. BuRNKS. It don't make any difference ; we understand what your information is. A. They came over the river on the Belmont side and recruited a force from there, saying that they had instructions from De Soto to stop the men from working on the LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 325 incline, and they gathered a posse aad went over ; and at ahout noon-time — a portion of the men had gone to dinner — they were then in the act of pulling a section of a hundred feet of decking off the incline. They had built a section of decking above and were to pull it down with a transfer boat in sections, and put it into position. While in the act of doing that — they had thejr lines and chains and had fast to a sec- tion — ^the strikers, or Knights of Labor, went onto the work, untied the lines, unfastened the chains whilst they were in the act of pulling it in position, and stopped them. One of the men — one of the carpenters who was at work — who was not a Knight or a striker, they made a demonstration to hit him, or, rather, to strike him, and he raised a bar to protect himself; and some one else told the striker for him to desist, or he would use means to prevent him from committing any act upon the employ^. The matter be- came so serious that with the yardmen that were at work that they were — there were not more than four or five of them, the balance of them had gone to dinner — but the matter became so aerious that the bridge carpenter then desisted from doing any more unless they had protection. They were ready and willing to go on with the work if the city authorities of Columbus or the company would give them protection. So we tried to compromise the matter. The foreman talked with the strikers or Knights of Labor, and so did I, and tried to effect a compromise with them, that the work was essential. They were stopping the United States mail by stopping the work, as we had to put our mail trains over this incline to make our connections below with the other roads, but we could not get the men to take the courage to go ahead with their work unless they were protected. That night I went before the mayor of the city of Columbus and swore out an affidavit, in connection with the foreman, that we were interfered with in the work that we were trying to prosecute, by a lot of employes, or strikers, or Knights of Labor, whatever you might call them, and that we wished jirotection in prosecuting the work, so we could get the work repaired and the trains moving. After swearing out this affidavit that we were interfered with he agreed to give us the necessary protection in the morning, so the men were perfectly satisfied to begin work again in the morning. The morning came ; that was the morning of the 18th of March, the men started to work under the protection of the city of Columbus and the marshal and some policemen, and they were not molested any further on the work, and the work then was continued on that day. f revious to that time the citizens of Charleston, Mo., had a large amount of corn that they wished to bring over here to ship to points south of Columbus, on the Mobile and Ohio Koad, and they were very anxious to get this corn off their hands. It had been accumulating there, a great deal of it had begun to spoil on their haqds. So that morning they started a train from Charleston, a train of thirty-four 01 fhirty-five carloads of corn, and brought it into Belmont about 7 o'clock without any molestation. It was run onto the side track, and the engine that brought ' the train in the inten tion was to turn it around and take a train out north. The strikers then were in full force, some of them coming from Columbus and the balance in Bellmont; I think the whole number were not more than ten or fifteen men. I could call them all by name if it is necessary. I know them all; know their occu- pations, and no one but employes or Knights of Labor were there. There was no outsiders connected with our trouble or connected with it in any way. The train, or the engine and caboose, rather, they tried to back it out of the side-track. One man, a striker, by the name of Hunger, threw a switch, so that if the engine would then have backed out it would have then been thrown off the track, and it was thrown back again. Well, the matter stood there in statu quo for. probably half an hour. I had instructions to make up the train and start it out. I notified the foreman of the round-house to put the engine on the turn-table and we would try and move it, and turn the engine around and get her ready to go north if possible. We would make the effort. When the hostler moved the engine to the turn-table in order to turn it so that she would go out head-to on the train, a body of Knights of Labor started with the engine, and as she got onto the turn-table they took hold of the lever and moved her around to certain tracks to run her into the round-house. I said to them, 'Gentlemen, I ask you now in behalf of the company to let the property alone. We want this engine to go out on the road with a train," said I. " Tou are laying your- selves liable to the State law ; you are trespassing on here, and I ask you not to per- sist in further trouble, putting yourselves in a position where you will get yourselves in trouble " ; and I told them that they knew what they were doing. After putting the engine on the turn-table they moved it themselves, and some of them threw the latch down. There is a latch that is worked on a hinge, that will throw the engine to a certain track. This latch holds the turn-table so you can bring the engine into the round-house or out onto the track. And after we got to it, the foreman of the round- house threw thfe latch down and they threw it up, and he threw it down and they moved it back, and he threw it down to move it back onto the track to go out in the yard, and I came around and I threw it down, and they threw it up. I suppose that ceremony was gone through three or four times. Whilst in the act one time of throw- ing it over, one of the Knights of Labor made an effort to strike me, and he used very 326 LABOE TKOUBLES IN THE SOUT]£ AND WEST, abusive language also, in the presence of the county attorney, who was there, and he went and told them to desist, as they were laying themselves liable to the law. After we found that we were overpowered in numbers we gave up the business; and let them take charge of the engine/and put it in the — or in the mean-time they had taken the hostler off of the engine. The hostler was there and they took hold of him and asked him to get off. They took him off, or rather topk hold of him and helped him off of the engine ; then they took the engine in the round-house, or rather the foreman took the engine in; he saw that there was no use of trying to get it cut, and one of the men drawed the steam off the engine, and, I think, undertook to put the fires out, but he said that he would put it out for them. So that we were com- pletely powerless to move any freight. After this I was talking with one of the promi- nent strikers, one of th'e chairnlen of the assembly, one Halters, that he had gothimself into trouble, and the balance of them. Said, "Now, you have put yourselves in a po- sition where you have overstepped the bounds of the law, and in all probability we will have to have you arrested." Well, he said, said he, "I don't think that we "— "we don't propbae to let any freight move out or in here, under any consideration whatever ; if it is, why it will be over my dead body." Well, I didn't say much to that declaration, although I had a pretty strong inclination that the freight would move. On that day we had warrants sworn out for five or six of them, and the next m6rning some deputy sheriffs came from Charleston, and there were three placed un- der arrest. After that the trouble ceased ; the corn was moved across the river and everything went along smoothly and satisfactorily. Previous to this time, though, I would state that for several days after the strike had been inaugurated there, they had locked our switches in Columbus with their own individual locks, and kept us from using certain tracks. That the strikers, the Knights of Labor, had done. A party that I knew was a Knight of Labor put private locks upon our switches and wouldn't allow us to use certain tracks that we could get the freight trains moved upon. After this — the morning that we tried to move the corn and did move it — one Schultz, from J)e Soto, made the assertion that it was not their intention to stop local business, that they would let the corn go, but they did want to stop through businesss. I assured him that as far as I was ooncernad, as the representative of the railroad, there would be no compromise ; we did not propose to have any compromise at all. We proposed to raise the blockade, and all freight of all descriptions, of all kin^s, should pass to and fro. That we didn't propose to make any discrimination what- ever; that wasn't my understanding, and there wouldn't be any agreement made by me.- So from that time forward, when they saw that we were masters of the situation, they became very peaceful and have been since. Q. These three men that you speak of as having been arrested, were they the three men referred to by Colonel Dehle ? — A. Yes, sir; they were the three. Q. When yoa speak of these men as being Knights of Labor you base the remark, I suppose, upon the facts, first, that they told you they were Knights of Labor ; sec- ondly, that they live and move in the community, and are known in the community as Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Of course the legal knowledge could only be derived from seeing them in the lodge?— A. No. iQ'. And it is in that sense, I suppose, you speak of them as Knights of Labor!— A. Yes, sir ; that is it. I might say this : I was talking with one Knight of Labor, that said he was a Knight ot Labor, and with regard to the strike he got up in the assembly and asked, after they had received instructions to quit work, where the orders came from for them to strike ; the chairman said that that was none of his business; they had orders to quit, and quit they must, and therefore he had nothing more to say. Q. He told you that ? — A. Yes, sir ; he told me that personally. Q. What was his name ? — A. The man ? Q. That communicated that to you ? — A. His name was — I object to giving his name, as that was a personal and private matter. Q. It was not, then, one of the eight men the names of whom you proposed giving?— A. No, sir. Q. Do you know any other fact or circumstance bearing upon the proposition in- volved in this investigation ? — A. Nothing further. Q. Were all the strikers Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That was your information ?— A. That was my information from them them- selves — from the Knights of Labor themselves. Q. In what manner were you notified by the Knights of Labor of any of the facts or circumstances that you have testified to ?— A. I don't say that I was notified by the Knights of Labor. Q; You may state if you were notified by any Knight of Labor; if so, in what man- ner?— -A. As to what? Q. As to any of the circumstances you have testified to.— A. No, I wasn't ; I wasn't advised as by Knights of Labor. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 327 Q. You had no written communication from the Knights of Labor in regard to any of these facts or circumstances? — A. No, sir. Q. Is there an assembly, or was there then an assembly, in Bellmontt — A. The as- sembly is in Columbus, Ky. Q. Not in Bellmout ? — A. Not in Bellmont. The members from Bellmont belong to the assembly in Colambus. Q. Yon stated that the Knights turned out in full force, and that there was some 10 or 15 of them ; is that the extent of their force ? — A. That is about the extent of the force of employes that were connected with the strike ; there were other Knights that belonged to them, but there was no one interfering with our business or work ex- cepting our own employes, or those that had been employes. Q. You spoke of Knights of Labor looking swi tches ; is that based upon your own observation and knowledge? — A. Yes, sir; that is based upon my own observation ; I saw the gentleman lock them and unlock them. Q. Yon know the men, then, who did it t — A, Yes, sir. Q. Have you any objections to giving the names of those parties who locked the switches ? — A. One Fred Hunger is the mftn that I saw lock and unlock switches. Q. Any others ?— A. He is the only one that I saw locking and unlocking switches. Q. Do you know where he resides ? — A. In Columbus, Ky . Q. Was he in the employment of the company? — A. He was previous to the 8th of March. Q. (By the Chairman.) There were only eight or ten of them ? — A. About ten or fifteen I said. Q. How many men had you? — A. How many men had I ? Q. Yes, sir? — A. In my immediate service? Q. How many men had the sheriff in his posse? — A. Oh, the sheriflf's posse was about twenty-five probably, or thirty. Q. Why didn't the sheriff stop it ? — A. Did stop it the next day after he came down in force; this occurred the day previous, when they came down only with one dep- uty. ' Q. (By Mr. Stbwart.) The question is, howmany men yon had at that time when they interfered ? — A. Well, I had on that side of the river— I have two stations there, part of my men is in Columbus and part in Bellmont — I had a few yardmen, two yardmen on the Bellmont side, and I had one office man. Q. That is all yon had? — A. And the foreman of the round-house was a loyal man. Probably four or five would have constituted our force on the Bellmont side at that time. Q. Was this interference with your business conducted with noise and confusion and demonstration, or was it quietly done ? — ^A. Well, there was a great deal of bois- terous talking when they undertook to run the engine into the round-house. Q. (By Mr. BuRNES. ) How many people were engaged in the round-house who were loyal to the company ? — A. One. Q. How many of them were disloyal or deserted? — A. Well, there were about seven ; six or seven, probably, I could not name them over now exactly. Q. You spoke of a contest between yourself and your people, when they would turn the switch handle one way and you would turn it back, and they would turn it again, and then of a man who attempted to stril^e yon or made a demonstration of personal violence to yourself; did you recognize him as a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. We would like his name. — A. That was Warner Grenning, was the one that threw the switch back and stood on it, and so did this Fred Hunger, and also a man by the name of Paret, and a man by the name of Halter had hold of the lever. He is chairman of the assembly in Columbus. Q. This man who proposed striking you, whom yon claim was a Knight of Labor, " now tell US how you have that information, from him himself, or hearsay, or how ? — ^A. I have that from hearsay. Q. From hearsay ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How did you learn that the particular individual was the chairman or master workman of the order ? — A. That was through the members of the order themselves. E„ P. BUELIN6AME, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. Do you reside in Belmont ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What is your occupation or business? — ^A. I have charge of the grain elevator at Belmont. Q. Have you any knowledge or information with regard to the extent or cause of the labor troubles between the Missouri Pacific Kailway and its employes ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have some knowledge and some information, and, like the other gentlemen who testified here, I would have to state some matters of hearsay in order to make a con- neeted statement. 328 LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Were you a party to the scenes deijioted here by Mr. Griggs ?— A. Some of tliem, sir. ^ Q. Just go on in your own way and give us what information yon have. — A. Before the striie hegun I heard that the railroad men, a number of them at Belmont,- had gone over to Columbus and joined the Knights of Labor, and following that pietty closely was the report that there was going to be shortly a big strike, and the day before the strike occurred— I heard that it was to take place the next day, I think, at 10 o'clock —and upon that day at about that time, whatever the hour was, I heard the round-house whistle blow, which I took to be the signal of the strike. My residence is where I can see about everything that transpires in the place along the tracks, and I saw coming up the track two men— one of them Warner Grenning, whom Mr. Griggs has mentioned, who was supposed to be a Knight of Labor. An engine was backing down towards the shops ; they motioned for that engine to stop. The engineer stopped the engind, and when they came up they said something which I didn't hear, but the engineer said, "All right, then ; that settles it," and they proceeded on past him towards the switch engine, which was then about to put a trip of freight across on the transfer boat. The engine had bio wed for the boat at the head of the incline; when they are ready to go on the boat they blow the whistle and the boat answers, if they are ready. The switch engine had blowed for the boat, ready to go down to the in- cline for the trip ; them men went up there, and the trip was not placed on the boat, but set back on the side-track; then, I believe, there was a complete sus- pension of business, so far as the railroad was concerned, except as to passenger trains. I was acquainted with most of these men, the railroad men there. We are all ac- quainted with each other down ^here, and I mingled with them, and talked with them, and heard the talk, and they seemed to be determined that no freight business should be done. Matters went along that way until about the 17th or 18th of March, when a train came in from Charleston, a train load of corn, upon which was a posse from Charleston, spoken of by Mr. Danforth and Mr. Deal, and I was at the switch that the men were holding down, three of them having, each one a foot upon the switch holding it down, when these gentlemen took the passenger train which was just starting out, in order that they might get home ; as soon as the passenger train had gone, the engine that brought the freight in was taken up to the turn-table to be switched back — turned and switched back to take out a train from Belmont. These men, strikers, surrounded and followed it, and when it was placed on the turn- table, some one took hold of the lever by which the table is moved, and Mr. Griggs, the agent of the company, told them to let the engine alone, that he wished to have , it go out on the road. He went to the forward end of the engine, at which end was the latch which holds the turn-table in position for any particular track. The en- gine was thrown around; these three or four men, Grenning, Halter, Munger, and Paret, were at the latch and held it iu a slot, which would run the engine into the round-house. Mr. Griggs threw the latch so that the table might be turned to run the engine out on the track. They threw it back. Several times he threw it over and they threw it back, and Grenning asked him in substance how long he thought he could do that, and said that they could do that as long as he could. Mr. Griggs said he wanted the engine to go onto the track to go out with a train ; Grenning says, "We don't want it to go out. We want it to go into the roundhouse." Mr. Griggs insisted that they should let the company alone ; that the company had use for the engine and wanted to control it; one of them, said, I think Grenning, "We will put the engine into the company's own house, where it belongs." Mr. Griggs insisted that they didn't want to do it; that they wanted it to go out. This man Munger turned towards Mr. Griggs, who was standing on the ground three or four feet from him, and said: And he doubled up his fist and looted at him, as if he would like to knock him down. Grenning and Halter took hold of him and pushed him away. Then my information is that he went around and made the engineer get ofif the engine. Mr. Griggs told those men, " Here is the circuit attorney ; you are violating the law, and here is the circuit attorney, and he is witnessing these proceedings, and you certainly will get yourselves into trouble if you persist." Mr. Grenning said he didn't care for the circuit attorney. They made an effort there for quite a little while to get the engine out, and the effort was given up, as the task was hopeless. There was no officer there ex- cept the circuit attorney, and he could not do anything, and they talked of killing the engine right where it was on the turn-table, when the foreman of the round-house got up on the engine^the engineer having been ordered down, and run it into the round- house, and I understand it was then killed. The next day the sheriff came from Charles- ton with an injunction writ from the court, and I think served writs on these three or four, or perhaps more, persons ; Grenning and Halter and Paret were then arrested and taken to Charleston. Munger escaped across the river with one or two others, who were wanted, and more corn was brought in. This man Schultz, I don't kuow what his name is, known there as an organizer of Knights of Labor, was there talking with the men, and from all that I learned, the opinion I formed was, that he wastry- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 329 ing to incito them to hold out .ind be determined, and that he said there would be 75 men there from Do Soto to help them, and he, with 6ome of these other men, I think with Hunger, went to the yard-master, Dan Sullivan, and tried to influence him to quit, so that the switch engine would not run ; and it seemed to be that there was an effort on the part of these men to stop freight, prevent by intimidation, by threats, if mast be by force. When this strong posse came down ancl it was determined by the officers that that corn should be moved across the river to the other side, and they consented that the corn might be moved, and agreed that we should be permitted to go across the river and he would see that it went all right without molestation. -He made an effort to get a promise, a pledge, something of that sort, that if that corn, which belonged to residents of the county, was allowed to pass without hindrance, no effort would be made to move anything else. I, as a citizen of Belmont, of that county, believing in law and order, insisted that all freight should be allowed to move, that the law should be respected, and said all that I could to prevent any such pledge being entered into, and it was not made at all events, and the train went out, and tnis man Shupe, if that is his name, said it might get out of Belmont, but it would not get through De Soto. I was sworn in that day as a deputy sheriff, and the posse all returned to Charleston except one. He and I remained there. There was no further trouble or difficulty, Mr. Griggs came to me one night and said they had information that an attack was meditated upon the round-house' and the machinery there, and asked me if I would come up. I went up; the other deputies were there ; four or five of the railroad company's men, the watchman and another man or two, and the foreman of the round-house, and we barracaded the best we could andiopt on the alert. The information seemed to come pretty direct, and we expected an attack. Word was telegraphed to Charleston a little after midnight, and an engine came from there with a large force and I went home ; but no attack was made that night. There was a good deal of talk ; one man said something about they were going to run the deputy sheriffs into the river, and it was reported to me by the person who heard it ; said he heard it ; that one of them said he wished he had a Winchester rifle, he would like to put a ball through the backs of some of those dep- uties ; but no one was hurt. There was no further interference with the running of the trains, I believe, since that time. I was called upon by the section boss, one evening, who stated that a committee of Knights of Labor had come into the boarding car and told him that he must quit or take the consequences, giving me the name of William Williams as a witness to the conversation, and the names of the committee, Richard Burnes, Samuel Summers, and another Summers — Reuben Summers, I think it was. I believe that statement covers all the facts that I am conversant with, at least all that come to my mind at present. Q. (By Mr. Boknbs.) I would like to ask you more specifically than has been stated the course of these cars loaded with corn. Where were they when the effort was made to get them on this track? What side of the river were iheyon? — A. They were in Missouri. Q. And the object was to remove them just across the river ? — A. To take them across the ri ver. Q. To what State ?— A. To Kentucky. = Q. (By the Chairman.) And thence where? — A. Then I think they were distrib- uted to points South, some going as far as Atlanta ; quite a large shipment. Q. They were then upon one bank ot the river, ready to. be crossed over to the other bank, one bank being in Missouri and the other in Kentucky ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. The two places were in sight of each other, I believe, were they not?— A. Yes, sir, in sight, directly opposite each other. Q. You spoke of two men going up the track, meeting an engine and stopping it. How could two men stop an engine without violence? — A. There was no violence used, The man did it with this motion, as he walked on the track. Q. (By Mr. Stbwakt.) You stated the circumstances, saying they signaled the en- gineer, and he stopped. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) You say no violence was used? — A. Sir? Q. You say no violence was used? — A. No violence was used in stopping that en- gine that I saw. Q. Why were you there at the time? — A. I wasn't at the engine; I was at the ele- vator ; but these tracks went close to my house, and pass the elevator ; every track that crosses the river runs within 30 or 4U feet of my door. Q. You saw that, then, from your place of business ?— A. Yes, sir ; the main track comes right near my house. Q. You spoke of the organization of Knights of Labor. What reason have you to think that they belong to that organization — the organizer, who came down there ? — A. That was what he was called. Other parties that spoke of him there said that was what he was. And from conversation with Mr. Behle, and from his conversation, it was evident he had Some connection with them. 330 LABOB TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WE^T. Q. Did you come to the conclusion that ha -was an organizer from -what was said in your presence? — A. From what was said, that was what I have been informed, and others said that he was known there as an organizer. Dr. AUEESWALD, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burkes). Doctor, you reside at De Soto, Missouri ?— Answer. Yes, BIT. Q. Can you give us any information with regard to the matters which we have been considering here ?— A. Yes, sir ; some— what came to my knowledge by obser- vation and bearing. About the 4th or 5th of March I had a conversation with a man who was in my employ, and he went regularly, or did attend regularly, the Knights of Labor meetings, and he told me that there was a strike being discussed at the lodge. By the way, I had visited the lodge myself. And the cause of the strike was that a man by the name of Hall was or was going to be discharged, and I disremem- ber what he said about that, but that at least it was the discharge of Hall, and that the strike was to take place on Saturday morning at 10 o'clock unless Hall was re- instated. And at 10 o'clock the whistle did blow, and from that time forth the Knights of Labor, or the strikers, took possession of the property here in town, and controlled the yards and tracks as far down as what is known as the " brick-yard," about one-half a mile out of town ; had entire possession. I believe some of them were sworn in as deputy marshals by our mayor. They stopped all trains coming and going into the yard, and I have forgotten the date of a train that I saw stopped. It was in the morning, right below the depot, about probably 50 or 100 yards. I came along just as they were stopping that and killing the engine. I was going around town, attending to my business, and saw that, and saw that the men who did it were strikers and Knights of Labor. From that time until about the 28th, I think it was on Saturday, about three weeks after the strike, the first train went through. From that time, after that, the guards, I think, were dispensed with on the road. That same day there was a mob, or a riot, in the streets, and I was standing in my office door, and saw a man by the name of Todd runniug across the track, with proba- bly 150 to 200 men after him, whom I recognized as strikers and Knights of Labor. And when they got across the track, there was cars on the track there obstrnct- ing the view, but when I got up on the steps I saw that they had stopped in front of a residence occupied by M^-s. Duffy, the wife of Engineer Duffy, but what they were doing I couldn't see. At any rate,"in about five or ten minutes, probably fifteen, the strikers crossed the track again, and at their head was a gentleman in the employ of the company by the name of Nelson. I don't know whether anybody had him in charge or not ; at any rate, when they came to the corner where my office is he was taken up to a wagon, in which was mounted the mayor of the city, a Knight of Labor, by the name of Dr. Keavy, and one or two others, which harangued the crowd, and addressed them and cautioned them to be considerate and use no violence, &c. Bat they were crying for Nelson ; to take him out and do him hurt. But the mayor got up in the wagon and said, "We must not use violence." I don't know whether he meant that he was one of the agitators, or Knights of Labor, or not. He was, how- ever, one of the Knights of Labor. And, finally, the crowd dispersed. From that time there has been comparative quiet, except that occasionally there would be ob- structions on the track ; a man by the name of Miller beaten for having gone to work, and other acts of like character. That is the result of what I have seen there— I know that the things that were done there were by the Knights of Labor— what I witnessed myself; because I know them to be Knights of Labor, having seen them in the hall, and they could not have been there unless they were. The same mob that was in front of Mrs. Duffy's was in front or partially in front of the block in which my business is, and I know it was the same mob, because they came directly over from there. And I saw them come, and recognized the men when they came to liiy place of business. Some of them at that time were armed with sticks and clubs and rocks. Q. (By the Chairman.) You said you were in the hall ? — A. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — ^A. I was. I was there once, when I was initiated, and once when I paid my dues and withdrew ; that made twice. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) Is there another organization now in De Soto called the "Law and Order League"? — ^A. Yes, sir; there is. Q. Are you a member of that order ?-^A. I am. Q. When did you leave De Soto ? — A. I left Tuesday — this morning. Q. Did you know that the Knights of Labor hall was burned down last night?— A. Yes I I saw it in ashes this morning ; as much of it as there c'ould be in ashes. It is a brick building. Q. So that there is a little violence on both sides down there ? — A. It is supposed to be occupied by the Knights of Labor; was last night as late as anybody was np around town ; supposed to be. At any rate they were supposed to be in and out there. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST 331 Q. It -was believed to be accidental, then ?— A. I don't know, sir. The fire was said to have taken place in the thiid story. That- is the story occupied by the If nights of Labor. Of course that is only hearsay ; I don't know that. Mr. Stewaet. Well, I don't believe we had better investigate that fire. Q. (By Mr. Buenbs.) Do you know -whether the Knights of Labor had a meeting in that hall last night f Mr. Stewart. Well, that is of no consequence. A. That they had a meeting there t No ; I couldn't say. I kuow they were going up there last night, because I passed there after candle-light, and there was a light in the stairway that they go np at that time. At this point an adjournment was taken until 9 o'clock Monday morning. Saint Louis, Mo., May 10, 1886. The committee, consisting of Messrs. Cnrtin, Stewart, and Bumes, met at 9 a.m., and the hearing was resumed as follows : WILLIAM KERRIGAN, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Mr. Stewart. We are directed to inquire into the cause and extent of the strike on your system of roads, which stopped your business, and which stopped the business more or less of five States. That is the substance of the resolation under which we are ^ acting. In the first place, will yon state what is your occupation Y The Witness. I am general superintendent of the Missouii Pacific Railway. Question. And your headquarters are at Saint Lonisf — Answer. At Saint Louis; yes, sir. Q. Will you state .what you know in your own way of any causes which led to this strike, if there are any causes f And in that connection state the matter of grievances on the part of the employes of the road and the action of the corporation with refer- ence to all such grievances as came to your knowledge, or the knowledge of the ex- ecutive officers of the road. I make this general statement in order that you may go on and state in your own way without particular questions being asked. When you get through perhaps some questions may be asked. State first as to the cause of the strike. — A. After the readjustment of the "New" matter atSedalia, about which Mr. Sibley testified, or rather just before that adjustment, he wrote me a personal letter, which I will read.: Dear Sir : Mr. Irons was in to see me to-day in relation to the New matter. I said to him that I had not completed the Investigation, but so far as I had gone I could not find any good cause for removing him. I sent Drake to Kansas City yesterday to get all the facts he could, and I have promised Mr. Irons to give him an answer as soon as possible. Mr. Irons informs me that the men. demand immediate answer, and that unless Mr. New is removed he will call out the system. E. K. SIBLEY, Superintendent. I went out there and assisted in the adjustment of that matter, and I had some little talk with Mr. Irons there. Shortly after that Mr. Irons brought me a letter from Mr. Sibley, requesting transportation for himself and delegates from points on the line of the road to Marshall. Mr. Irons called on me with that letter. I asked him what the trouble was at Marshall. He said there was not any ; that he went there himself and delegates toattendoneoftheirregularmeetings. laskedhimhow everythingwas working on our roads. He said there was no cause of trouble ; that the men were all satisfied ; ^hat the adjustment of the New matter had settled all disturbance on the road, and everything was working smoothly. I said to him in case we should have any trouble In the future that I would like to offer him any assistance in the matter ; that the desire of the company was to treat every man fairly that was employed by the company, and that we desired no trouble nor no strike or anything. He went off to Marshall, and a couple of weeks after that I received a letter from him, which I will read: Mr. Stewart. Give the date. The Witness. Marshau., Texas, 2, 18, '86. William Kerrigan, Vice-President Missowri Pacific Bailroad Company : Dear Sir : There is trouble brewing at this point, which I wish, if possible, to avoid, and I, believing by your late course that you wish to harmonize matters, re- spectfully ask your advice in this difficulty. The difficulty is this : that one of the foremen in the shops here, being a delegate to the convention of the Knights of La- bor, caused his absence from the shop for two days, and last night he was notified by 332 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the general foremaD, Mr. Crosby, that nis services were no longer needetl. This ac- tion on the part of Mr. Crosby, right at the meeting of the convention, has caused great excitement. Can we avert the trouble f Can you conveniently come here im- mediately, of course keeping your mission secret, and see if you cannot consistently adjust this matter ? Please advise me immediately by telegraph. Yours, respectfully, ' ^ ^' MARTIN IRONS. This is stamped with the seal of the Assembly, 101. That (referring to paper) is the original letter. My answer to that letter was this— I sent it by telegraph: 3, 22, '86. Maetin Irons, Marshal : Mv arrangements are such that I will be unable to come down. ' ^ ' WILLIAM KERRIGAN. I was just on the point of going out ou the road at the time and all my arrange- ments were made, and that is the answer I made to him. The strike at Marshall oc- curred on March 2. On March 3 I received a Western Union message from Mr. Irons, as follows : Marshall, Tex., March 3, 1886. William Kerrigan, Third Vice-President Missouri Pacific Eailroad : Please use influence in settling trouble at this place and prevent calling out the system. Please answer. MARTIN IRONS, Chairman Executive Board Knights of Labor. I have not the answer to that here ; I thought I had. I will furnish the answer to that. My answer substantially was that I was as desirous as he was of settling the matter ; that the Texas and Pacific Railroad was in the hands of a receiver and I could not consistently go down there without being asked to. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Without what, did you say ? — A. Without beicg asked to go there. Q. You mean asked by the officers of tlie Texas Pacific, or the receiver? — A. Well, the receiver of the United States court. Now, I will state here that the papers I will i>6ad here are the statements that were prepared in my office for Mr. Hoxie, to be read by him as part of his testimony, but his illness has prevented his doing so and has rendered him too feeble to do so now. In order to lessen the strain of his examina- tion he has requested me to read these statements and have them put in the record as paTt of the testimony. I was present during all the time these were being prepared, and I know personally that they are true and correct. I will state these papers were all gotten up in my office. Mr. Stewart. We will receivfe the papers now, Mr. Kerrigan, and the verification can come afterwards. This is probably the shortest and simplest way to get the sub- stance ill. The Witness. I think it is; yes, sir. The Missouri Pacific system consists of the following roads, which are operated under this management : The Missouri Pacific Railway, 995 miles; the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, 923. miles; the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, 1,386 miles ; the Central Bratuch, Union Pacific Railway, 388 miles ; the International and Great Northern road, including the Gal- veston, Houston and Henderson road, 825 miles; total, 4,517 miles. On the 6th of March there was engaged in operating these roads 13,393 men, not including the general office force. The general office force is not accounted for in any statement made before this commission ; they are not taken into consideration. When the strike was ordered on the 6th of March there were about 3,717 men who left bur employ, and we were obliged to suspend 6,095 men ou this' account. The total of the pay-rolls for January were $731,028.35;r The total of the pay-rolls for February were |687,987.60. Our average monthly paj[-roll from April, 1 885, to February, 1886, eleven months, was $769,219. From the best information that I have this strike commenced on the Texas and Pacific road on March 1. That letter that I read from Mr. Irons is the starting point in the strike, and shows the cause of it. On the 2d of March we were notified through Superintendent Herrin , of the International and Great Northern and Missouri, Kansas and Texas road South, that Master Workman Loving advised his officers that the strike would be general over our lines, but that they did not pro- Eose to use any violent measures on the Texas and Pacific, as that road was in the ands of a receiver, but would make the fight on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 333 property, leaving us to suppose that tlie strike would \>e confined to the State of Texas. On March 4th the executive committee of the Knights of Labor at Parsons gave us notice that the yardmen would not handle freight coming from or going to the Texas and Pacific Railway until tie strike was over, and the same day they advised us that no Texes and Pacific cars would he allowed to pass that point. On the same date we received the following notice, which was received and forwarded to us by Mr. Herrin, superintendent of the International road : " Boycott the Texas and Pacific Railroad. "Enights of Labor and all persons Mendly to this organization are requested not to handle any freight coming 6ver the Texas and Pacific road, or do any work or re- pairing on Texas and Pacific cars or engines, or give any aid whatever to said road. "By orderof District Assembly No. 101, Southwestern Gould System. "Approved. "A FOX, "Master Workman and Chairman Mxecutive Board Victory Assemhly, Knights of Labor, Palestine.'' Here is the original circular that was sent out I read a copy of it. I will read the following : [Bed Biver Assembly, ISo. 3690, Enights of Labor— Circular.] Destison, Tex., March 4, 1886. As a boycott has been ordered on all Texas and Pacific rolling stock, including New Orleans Pacific cars, you will refuse to repair or handle cars of those roads from this date until fiirther orders. M. J. MURRAY. J. P. MACKEY. D. A. ARNOLD. Local executive board, L. A. 3690. [SEAL.] JACOB B. PIFER, M. W. [Eed Eiver Assembly, No. 3690, Knights of Labor.] Denison, Tex., March 4, 1886. ' Mr. C. W. Clarke, Master Mechanic : As a boycott has been ordered by the district executive board of Knights of Labor, you are hereby notified that on and after this day all Knights of Labor will refuse to handle or repair Texas Pacific Railroad or New Orleans and Pacific rolling stock until further orders from said board. Hoping you will not antagonize this order, M. J. MURRAY. J. P. MACKEY. D. A. ARNOLD. Local executive board, L. A. 3690. [SEAL.] JACOB B. PIFER, M. W. I would state right here that during this part of the trouble Mr. Hoxie was in New Orleans, and I was advised by telegraph of these notices from all parts of the system, and I issued orders that we would not handle Texas and Pacific cars. Q. You yielded that point? — ^A. I yielded that point, yes, sir. My desire was to avoid trouble, and I thought the matter would be adjusted there at Marshall, and as we had established a precedent by yielding the same point on a former occasion in the trouble with the Wabash Railroad, I thoughtVe could afford to do it in this case sooner than have any trouble. Q. Now, will you state right there, inasmuch as you are on that point, what the effect Of that order was or would be, if carried out upon your system of roads a^nd upon the business of the country that furnished business to the Texas and Pacific road or the Missouri, Kansas and Texas ? — ^A. I presume that we deliver 75 per cent, of the freight coming from the northeast into Texas over our line. The rule among all roads is to interchange cars. We had a great many Texas and Pacific cars scat- tered all over the system, and a great many cars of other lines, lines east of the river, scattered all over the system. The rule is that if a oar is in bad order, or is damaged on our road, it does not matter what road it belongs to, we repair it the same as we would our own cars. I should say that about that time probably 30 per cent, of our total business was with Texas. That was all shut off by the order for the boycott of 384 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST of these cars. Naturally the boycott of these cars stopped our business on the Texas and Pacific altogether. Q. What was the effect of that order upon the inhabitants of Texas so far as bnsi- nefes was concerned ?— A. Well, it practically stopped them from receiving any busi- ness by the railway. Q. So that the effect of such an order as that of the Knights of Labor was not only to paralyze you but to paralyze the business of the country in that 'region ?— A. Yes, Q. That is all; go on.— A. On March 5th the shopmen at Saint Louis refused to work on the Texas and Pacific passenger and freight cars, alleging that this was done to boycott the Texas and Pacific. At Sedalia the committee called on Mr. Sibley, the superintendent, and advised him that after 10 o'clock on March 6 no Texas and Pacific cars or Texas and Pacific trains would be allowed to pass Sedalia, and that the same order would go into effect at Kansas City and Saint Louis. Mr. Siblejr then gave orders to the master mechanics and master car-builders to stop doing repairs on the Texas and Pacific cars. The committee expressed, at that time, much regret that there should bo any trouble and said there was no dissatisfaction. The general superintendent, Mr. Kerrigan,' thereupon gave orders over the system to not handle Texas and Pacific cars, hoping by that means to prevent the strike extending over the properties under our control. We had been in the habit of running through pas- senger coaches between Saint Louis and El Paso, but we were obliged to at once transfer the passengers at Texarkana and return the Texas and Pacific cars to that road and thus break up our through line. Texas and Pacific coaches were run to Saint Louis, and the coaches of the system, the Missouri Pacific, the Missouri, Kansas and Texas and the Iron Mountain coaches were run into Texas- That was done to stop the delay and inconvenience to passengers at terminal points, especially at Tex- arkana and at Denisou. The travel at that time was very heavy. There was a great deal of emigration going into Texas, and wherever they got on the cars of the system they were carried through to their destination, irrespective of whether it was the Texas and Pacific, the Iron Mountain, the Missouri Pacific, or the Missouri, Kansas and Texas. This boycott necessitated our making a transfer at these terminals ; that is, we had to transfer all the passengers, mail, baggage, and everything at these places, necessitating a large delay there and great inconvenience to emigrants going to these points in Texas, and others besides emigrants. We yielded to these demands of the strikers, hoping that the result would be that the strike would not extend to our road. On the 6th of March, at 10 o'clock and 10.30 a.m., the men went out on the entire system, except on the Central Branch of the Union Pacific. I will read an abstract of all notices received in regard to the men from the time' the strike began, and if you desirff I can give you the originals : [Abstract of notice to !R. M. Peck by the Pacific AsBembly, Knights of Labor, banded to Mr. Peek.] March 6, 1886. We hereby notify you that all workmen employed by the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Company at this point, and who are members of the Knights of Labor, will lay down their tools at 10.30 this morning and quit work. This order comes directly from the executive board of the Knights of Labor, and will continue in force until counter- manded by that body. We presume, sir, that you are fully aware of the cause that has brought about this crisis, namely, the discharge of one of our members, .an em- ploy6 of the Texas and Pacific Railroad, by the officials of that road, avowedly be- cause he was a Knight of Labor. This, sir, we hold to he a tyrannical persecution on decency, freedom, justice, and principle. Outside of that, sir, we have no special grievance to state. That was at Pacific. At De Soto, March 6, 1886, here is an abstract from Mr. Fleming's letter of March 6, 18d6 : "Mr. McLaughlin, representative of the Knights of Labor at this point, waited on Mr. Harris and tojd him that the men had struck and intended to stay out until the trouble on the Texas and Pacific road was adjusted ; that they believed that the re- ceivership there was all a blind, and that they would not go back until it was set- tled. A committee of the Knights of Labor waited upon a man by the name of James Carly, Carly having refused to join the Knights of Lalior, and told him that if he did not stop work he might as well be in the middle of the river." 'Palestine, March 6, 1886." [Abstract from Herrin's telegvam of March 6, 1886.] " Strikers say strike is ordered from headquarters." [Abstract from Sibley's message of March 6.] ' " Strikers say strike is ordered from headquarters on account of Texas and Pacific trouble." LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 335 [Abstract of telegram of M. J. Bogers, dated March 6.] This is from Cypress. " Men say strike is on account of Texas and Pacific trouble.'' [Abstract from Mr. Sibley's letter of March 6, 1886.] ' ' Mr. Golden [Mr. Golden -vras the division superintendent at Parsons] tells me that the men went out at Parsons without any warning or reason, and say they have no grievance here. Their reason for going out was to sustain the Knights of Labor on the Texas and Pacific Railway. " Mr. Bartlett, the master mechanic at Saint Louis, says that his shopmen have no grievance with the company, but have been ordered out by the executive committee and give no reason for their action ; that they have done nothing towards a settle-, ment, as they claim the matter is out of their hands. " Mr. Irvin," foreman of car repairs at Sedalia, " informs me that his men say they have no grievance with the company of any kind in any department, but they have been ordered out by the executive committee of the Knights of Labor to force the re- ceivers of the Texas and Pacific Railway to comply with or sign the agreement made between the employes of said road and Messrs. Hayes and Hoxie in March, 1885, and to reinstate some employes on the Texas and Pacific Railway, who they claim have been wrongfully discharged." " Mr. Newell, master mechanic at Parson, wires me that some of his men say that since they are out they will not again go to worli except on eight hours for ten hours' pay, and that all laboring men, including sectionmen, must be paid $1.50 per day." [Abstract of telegram from Johu Hodge and L. Bartlett.] " Men say they have no grievance ; simply acting under orders." [Abstract from letter of W-TV. Fagan, saDerintendent of the Central Branuh of the TTnion Pacific Railway, March 7, 188G.] •'Atchison. " That the men at Atchison shops say they have no grievance, but have decided to hold themselves in readiness to obey any instructions they might receive from Mar- shall, Tex., or Sedalia, ordering them to strike.'' [Letter from Mr. E. K. Sibley.] " March 7, 1886. "He says he has just received a telegram from Drake, who is assistant superintend- ent of the Missouri Pacific Railway, and has his headquarters at 'Kansas City, sayiing he had seen a committee of Knights of Labor and that they say they went out on ac- count of the Texas and Pacific trouble." [Abstract of letter from M. J. Eodgors, assistant master mechanic at Cypress, the shops across the ' river from Kansas City.] "March 6. "Men at shops all went out. At 11 a. m. I called committee into ofBce and asked them what waa the trouble ; I told them that the company was prepared to adjust any reasonable grievances. They said they were satisfied with the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and with its officers, but they were ordered out by the Knights of Labor on account of their friends being iu trouble in Texas. The Knights of Labor immediately took possession of the shops and yards, allowing no engine to move and no men to work, and intimidated the men from day to day who appUed for work." [Abstract of letter from F. X>. Drake, assistant superintendent at Kansas City.] "On March 6, 1886, at 10 a. m., all of the men at Kansas City, Mo., Kansas City, Kans., and Cypress, in the yards and shops, voluntarily quit work. On Sunday, March 7, I went to the hall occupied by the Knights of Labor, at 1919 West Sixth street, Kansas City, Kans., and asked the co'iimittee what the men had struck for — if they had any grievances which I could adjust and set them back to woi'k, to which the committee replied that they had no grievances at that point ; that they quit on the order of the general executive committee. District Assembly 101, Knights of Labor, and could not go back to work until ordered by the same authority ; they said they understood the grievance was the discharge of Hall on the Texas and Pacific Railway." [Abstract of a letter from John Hodge, master car-builder at Saint Loais.] "On the morning of March 6, one of my men, J. B. Williams, one of the committee at Saint Ijpuis, told me at 9.30 the executive committee would wait on Master Me- 336 LABOR TKO DELES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. chanio Bartlett and myself and notify us that at 10 o'clock the men ip Saint Louis shops would go out on a strike, and that such strike -would be general throughout the system . I asked him -what was the reason of this unexpected action on the part of our men. He leplied that the men had been ordered out, that they had no grievances against the company, and that nothing that I could say would in any way change the condition of affairs. I then asked him if the men had fully considered the step they had taken and the responsibility resting upon them. He said they had, and had been ordered out and were determined to obey orders. At 9.30 the committee waited on Mr. Bartlett and myself and announced that ^t 10 o'clock the bell would be rung and the strike inaugurated. We then asked them what their reasons were for this strike, and they gave the same answer practically that Williams gave me first; that it was not on account of any grievances they had, but simply to obey orders from higher officials in their order." ^ • [Abstract of letter from J. E. Hoff. foreman of the car department, Cypress.] "On the morning of the 6th of March I was waited on by a committee of employ^ in the various departments at Cypress, who informed me that the men proposed to go out on a strike at 10 o'clock that morning. I asked their chairman, Hamilton, what was their reason for this sudden action, and was told they had no grievances against the Missouri Pacific Eailway, but had been ordered out and had to obey the orders. On the 7th instant I went to see the committee again and was again assured that tlie strikers had no grievance against this road, but the additional information was given that they were striking in sympathy with the strike that was in progress on the Texas and Pacific Eailway." [Abstract of letter from W. H. Harris, master mechanic at De Soto, Mo.] " On March 6 at 10 a. m. our men struck and left the shops in a body and went im- mediately to their hall. In a short time the master workman, Charles McLaughlin, came in to see me and said they were out on a strike, and he thought the fact of the Texas and Pacific Eailway being placed in the hands of receivers was done to heat the men and small stockholders, and was only a blind to accomplish this end." [Abstract of letter from T. H. I?itzpatrick, general roadmaster at Parsons, Kans., March 6.] "I understand the cause of the strike was the discharge of one Hall, who was em- ployed by the Texas and Pacific railway in Texas." [Abstract of letter from J. J. Frey, superintendent of the Missouri, Ka naas and Texas at Sedalia, line north of Benison.] " On March 7 I met Fred Page, member of the local executive board, Knights of Labor, at Sedalia.' I inquired of hini why the men had struck. He replied that they had struck because Governor Brown, receiver of the Texas and Pacific Eailway Com- pany, had refused to reinstate a man named Hall, who had been discharged from the Texas and Pacific shops at Marshall, Tex. I asked him if that was the only reason, , and he replied yes, that the men had no grievances, but were called on to sustain the strike^ on the Texas and Pacific Eailway. I also talked with several other strikers as to the cause of the strike ; some said they had struck because of the discharge of Hall and of Governor Brown's refusal to reinstate him, while others said they had struck simply because they had been ordered out ; that they had no grievance whatever; that they were receiving good wages and good treatment, and that they were paid promptly. Many regretted that they had been called out and thought it was all wrong and hoped that they would be ordered back to work." [Abstract of letter of Samuel Irvin, foreman of car repairs, Sedalia, March 6.] "I interviewed several prominent Knights of Labor, Heueke, Legg, and others, as to the cause of the strike. They all said that they could not tell, unless it was to compel the receivers of the Texas and Pacific Eailway to reinstate one Hall who had been discharged ; that they were ordered out by the executive board District Assem- bly No. 101, Knights of Labor, and that the men in my department had no grievance." [Abstract of letter from "W. B. Lyons, division superintendent, Sedalia.] "On March 6 the men all went out on a strike. I talked with a number of them and asked them what the trouble was, and they said they did not know, and others said it was caused by the discharge of one Hall, who had been employed by the Texas and Pacific Eailway, and Governor Brown's refusal to reinstate him." LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 337 [Abstract of letter from T. G-. Golden, dlvlaion Baperintendent at Parsons, IKans.J " On the evening of March 6 I requested E. B. Hollis and William Quarles, two of the leading Knights of Labor there, to come to my office, and, upon their doing so, asked them to tell me what the cause of the strike was. Hollis, who was the spokes- man, answered that they had no grieyances against this company, hut that they struck to sustain the brothers of their order on the Texas and Pacific road. I in- quired if they referred to the case of C. A. Hall, the man who was discharged from the Marshall shops on the Texas and Pacific ; he answered yes. I explained to him about the Texas and Pacific road being in the hands of the United States court and not under the control of this company, but they said they were called out there and that they would not resume work until they had orders to do so." Those are the causes of the strike. I have some corroborative testimony here. Q. State what communications on that subject you had made to you personally from the strikers. — A. Most of these communications are the abstracts of letters — * here are the letters — which were sent to me by various officers of the road along the line. Q. I understand ; but what communication did you have with any of the strikers personally? — A. I read the communications I had from them in the commencement. Q. You read a communication from Martin Irons just previous to the strike. Did Martin Irons at any time just before the strike make any statement of grievances on the part of the men employed ? — A. The only statement he ever gave me was a peti- tion signed by the employes of Cypress relating to the New matter. Q. That was adjusted ? — A. Yes, sir; that is what I went to Sedalia for, to adjust that. Q. My point is this: whether any statement of grievances, and if so, what, prior to this demand for your assistance in settling the Texas and Pacific matter, was fur- nished to you by Mr. Irons or anybody else representiii}; the employ^ of this com- pany or the Kuights of Labor, that, you did not adjust, if any? — A. There had been no statement furnished me by any of the employes of grievances that I did not ad- just except in one case, and that was in the case of the engineers. The committee waited on me and I did not adjust the matter, and they notmed me that they would call on me some time in the fntnre. Q. That had nothing to do with the strike? — A. That had nothing to do with the strike, either directly or indirectly. Q. Because the engineers did not strike ? — ^A. The engineer did not strike. Further than that, no statement of grievances has been made to me directly or indirectly. On the contrary, when Mi'. Irons called at my office for transportation to Texas, be stated there were no grievances nor any cause of complaint among the men on the Missouri Pacific, and he was the representative man of the grievance committee of the South- western system he was chairman of that committee. Q. Will you give me the date of that interview with Mr. Irons when he made that statement ? — A. It was some time before the 18th of February, probably not exceed- ing a week. Q. Before the 18th of February ? — ^A. Before the 18th of February. Some time be- tween 1 he 8th and the 18th of February. He came down and I gave him the trans- portation he wanted. Q. Where was that statement made, in your office here at Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir; in my office at Saint Louis. He was then on route to Marshall, Tex. He was one of our employes at Sedalia, and came from Sedalia with a letter from Mr. Sibley asking for transportation, and Mr. Sibley recommended that, if consistent, I would grant his request and furnish him transportation, which I did on the recommendation of Mr. Sibley. We talked probably half or three quarters of an hour in my office. I didn't know what his object was in going to Marshall, and I thought I would ask him. I askeiS if there was any trouble down there and he said there was not; that they were going to meet in convention the officers of the Knights of Labor of the whole system, at iJarshall. Q. Have you any means of estimating — probably you have, and if you have not already made an estimate, I do not know whether you have or not — the loss in wages to these men that struck on your system up to the present time ; I mean not only the loss in wages to the men that struck, but the wage loss to your employes, because I un- derstand you to say you were obliged to suspend a good many men because you could not work your road with the shopmen out ? — ^A. I could only give it in round numbers. I estimate the loss to the wage-workers in this strike on our system to be about $1,000,000. I base that on the amount of the rolls, which were running between f700,000 and $800,000 a month at the time that they went out — men suspended and BO on. Q. Will you state, Mr. Kerrigan, how the average price of the employes on your sys- tem of railways in all the various departments compares with that of other systems in the western country, if you know? I do not want It if you do not know anything 3964 CONG 22 338 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. about it. Take, for instance, the trackmen, in whoso behalf some demand has been made it seems by the Knights of Labor since the strike ; how does the average price that you pay your trackmen compare with that of other roads ?— A. The average pnce we pay compared with other roads west of the river is about the same. We all pay the same and are compelled to pav it. If we paid less it would be impossible for any of us to employ men. We have never had at any time, either during the strike or be- fore the strike or since the strike, any trouble in getting all the track force we wanted except in some few places. tt v i ^ •* Q. I do DOt know whether you know what the fact is, Mr. Kerrigan, but it you do, vou can state how the average cost of living to the day laborers of your system com- pares wirh the average cost to the day laborers of the necessaries of life, provisions and so on, of the Pennsylvania system, for example, the Pennsylvania Central or the Pennsylvania Railroad — A. I do not know, sir. I should say it was a great deal less. The cost of living out here I should say would be greater than the cost of living "to the day laboreis East. ... Q. More or less, do yon say ?— A. The cost of living out here woold be more than it is in Pennsylvania. . . , . „ Q. Do you mean to say it would cost a man more to live in Missouri than in Penn- sylvania?— A. 1 think it would, sir. , Q. Provisions are not as high, are they? Is beef and corn and wheat worth more in Missouri than they arc in Pennsylvania ?— A. No, sir; I think they are worth more in Pennsylvania. • . ,. -n Q. Then, how is the cost of living greater in your system than it is in the EastT— A. Ijudge the cost of living therefrom the pay of the men; they pay less east of the river than west of the river. Q. Is that the only reason ? — A. That is the only reason ; yes, sir. Q. Are not the staples and necessaries of life cheaper west of the Mississippi River than east — corn, beef, wheat, and pork ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then, I would suppose it would cost less. However, no matter about that, let it go. I do not know whether it is worth while to inquire of you, unless you desire to make some general statement, of the effect of this strike upon the business of yonr system of roads. That is, you have shown it in detail, as to localities, hut nothing, as I recollect, has been saisl particularly about the business of the road itself. Your receipts, how have they been affected by the strike ? Have you made any estimate, in other words, of the loss to the railroad, this system of roads, by the strike? You have stated the loss to the employes in wages ; now, if you can, state as to that— of course it would be a matter of estimate. — A. I would estimate in an indirect way, that the loss to the railroad company, the Missouri Pacific road, its leased and oper- ated lines, to be about $3,000,000. Q. I do not suppose you can make an estimate of the loss to the communities of business by this system of roads. — A. There has been a great deal of loss to the Mis- souri Pacific which it never will recover. Business has been diverted, gone to other roads which will never come back to us. Q. So that the efieot of this strike is a million-dollar-loss to the wage-worker, two- million-dollar loss to the railroad company, and a loss, whatever it may be, to the business interests in all these States that do business by this system of roads, is that it?— A. Yes, sir. Q. That makes a strike rather profitable, doesn't it, speaking ironically? — A. Yes, sir ; I should say the loss to the country at large was two or three times as great as the loss to the railroad company and to the employes. Q. Is there anything else now? — A. I have a statement here of the extent of the strike which I would like to read : " From March 8 traffic was entirely suspended until March 29, with the exception of a few trains moved on the Central Branch and on the Grulf and San Antonio divis- ions of the International and Great Northern, and two trains on March 26 out of Saint Lonis. On March 27 two trains were run out of Saint Louis west ; twelve trains were moved on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and eleven trains on the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern division. On March 29 traffic was practically resumed at all points with the aid of police and sheriff's forces and other guards at joints along the line, except at Parsons and Fort Worth, when, with the aid of militia, trains were moved at Parsons on April 3, and at Fort Worth on April 4. Between these dates daily efforts were made at aU points where possible to resume freight traffic, bntsnoh resumption was prevented by the Knights of Labor strikers by killing and disabling engines, pulling pins from trains, ditching trains by misplacing rails, and intimidat- ing employes at work, itemized statements of which are shown in the papers attached. Between these dates freight traffic was entirely suspended except on divisions as above stated. Engines were disabled, round-houses and machine-shops broken into, water-tanks opened and broken and made unserviceable, property damaged and de- stroyed, bridges burned, tracks torn up by strikers, and our employee assaulted and beaten." LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 339 I will state here that it is estimated that about one hundred of our employes at the shops here ia Saint Louis were beaten in going to and coming from the shops at vari- ous times, either in the shops or in the yard. March 6, at Sedalia, fifty strikers disabled all freight engines in the yards and ronnd-housea. At 10 p. m. strikers took possession of switch-engine No. 202, blocked yard by distributing cars, blocked " Y" in same manner, thus preventing the turning of brauch passenger trains, ami then killed engine No. !i02. March 10, committee of strikers, consisting of I'^ed Page, E. Perry, and Ely Whet- tingtou, ordered our secret-service man, J. De Long, to stay out of yards and round- house, threatening him in case he refused ; names of Knigifits of Labor in possession of shops and property, George Fisher, .1. Burns, D. Wetsel, William Dnnnigan, Myers, H. Pilcher, William Haicroft, Henson, Pat Shay, Marroimm, Henry Crags, Wilson, A. Herkins, William Hill, Lyons, Lee Jones, WiUfam Duffer, T. Sullivan, John TiUery, H. Benkey, Roper, E. Perry, A. Dugan, Thomas Quinlau, and Isaac Wright; com- mittee in charge of above gang, J. Kowp, Charles Carrol, Greene, and E. Perry. Knights of Labor guarding Missouri, Kansas and Texas shops: James Thompson, Joseph Starr, J. Wighton, H. Pregg, jr., Tom Hughey, andT. C. Chaney. Witnesses, S. Irvin and W. H. Mason. The following-named Knights of Labor were leaders of about 100 men who killed engine No. '22 and took parts of her away. Some parties have killed all freight en- fines at Sedalia and disabled them by taking parts of same away: John Perry, Fred age, T. Sullivan, T. C. Holcroft, A. H. Ward, G. Fisher, W. Wetsel, andTheo. Kerr. Witnesses, J. J.Frey, S. Welliver, and W. B. Lyons. On March 12 tried to get train out, but mob pulled pins and cut engine loose from train. E.Perry, Ed. Howe, and Pat. Golden stole engine, ran her out of town on Kan- sas and Texas main lino, then brought her back and killed her. E. Perry was ar- rested. Mr. Perry and Mr. Page were representative men of the organization of the Knights of Labor at Sedalia. Q. I think that was proven at Sedalia. — A. Yes, sir ; that was proven at Sedalia, and these men were arrested there, and I think either one or both of them are serv- ing a sentence in jail now. March 14 attempted to get train out ; strikers boarded her just west of city limits and set all brakes; iirenian and braliemen deserted train. March 14 Knights of Labor gave Assistant Master Mechanic Weller twelve hours to leave town. That was at Sedalia. March 23 got Ireight train three miles out of town ; strikers moved rail in and spiked it; ditched train, injuring J. J.Frey, assistant superintendent, W.B.Lyons, train-master, Special Policeman Mason, and a Mr. Neil, a citizen who had volun- teered to go along as guard. Three cars and contents total wreck. March 2.5 strikers stole freight engine, ran her out on Kansas and Texas m!ain track two miles, killed her and left her there. March 26 mob of about 40 Knights of Labor attempted to raid ronnd-honse, but were prevented by a strong guard. March 28 strikers disabled pumps at Dry Wood, Marmaton, Hooper, and Chanute. April 1, strikers assaulted two men and seriously injured them. No names. Strik- ers went to house of a shopman about midnight, broke in the doors and windows, and tried to get hold of him, but citizens passing, together with help of family, finally drove them away. Lexington, March 26, "miners killed all freight engines here last night." I would state that Lexington is a mining town and handles a great deal of coal. The miners there went in with the strikers and assisted in killing engines. March 14, strikers at Kansas City killed and disabled eight freight engines and one stationary engine. March 23, strikers killed and disabled all yard engines at Cypress. March 29, train ditched near C. and A. crossing. Police arrested two strikers — Scow and Noonan. The latter was shot through the leg. Cypress, March 12, strikers killed all freight engines. Called on sheriff, but no aid given. Wyandotte, April 1, strikers threw switch and run train No. 2 into coal-j'eply of Mr. Hoxie to the governors, we beg to state : "(1) That while in conference in Kansas City we were sent for by the governors, and out of respect for them a committee was appointed, consisting of employes of the Gould roads only, which met with them, and by request stated the cause of the present withdrawal of active labor from the roads of the Gould Southwest system. On their suggestions, these gentlemen agreed to see Mr. Hoxie, and' attempt a settlement, if possible. It was agreed, in deference to their wishes, that we should submit to them all our grievances, with the understanding that they would arrange a meeting between Mr. Hoxie and ourselves. They desired permission to settle as best they could, on an nnderstauding that we would abide by their decision. To this we demurred, unless we were lirst permitted to pass upon the terms of settlement. With this understand- ing we consented to the interposition between Mr. Hoxie and ourselves. Mr. Hoxie refused to receive a delegation from the employes of the Knights of Labor, and the governors received from Mr. Hoxie the document published yesterday, which was given to the press even before we were permitted to see it. Now, in justice to ourselves and the truth of history, we desire to make the following statement of fact : "(1) The interposition of the governors was voluntary on theirpart, coming to Kan- sas City and seeking an interview with our board. " (2) We refused them the privilege of adjusting our differences or accepting terms of settlement without first submitting them to this committee for approval, notwith- standing which they received Mr. Hoxie's "proposition," qualifications .and all, and turned them over to the press and the public before we were even permitted to see them. " (3) They say to Mr. Hoxie : 'After careful investigation, we are unable to find wherein the Missouri Pacific Railway Company has violated the terms and conditions of the agreement made on the 15th of March, 1885, touching its employes in our re- spective States.' "To say the least of such a statement it is not creditable to the minds and heaits of men to whom has been committed the welfare of a great people to say that they will take advantage of our want of skill in legislative technicalities and wink at'gross violations of a sacred agreement in its plainly manifest spirit, because its technical letter gives an apparent advantage to a great corporation. " The governors state further : 'We recognize the fact that the Missouri Pacific Railway Company may justly claim that the strike of March 6, 1886, relieves it of the LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 351 iibligations it assumed in the circular of March li/, 1885.' In rendering this verdict the governors had blindly ignored the fact that the obligations assumed in said cir- cular at that time took effect on all the roads operated and and leased by said Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company, and was fully understood so to applyj although, by oversight, but two roads and States were mentioned therein. Evidence is at hand that striking employes of that date were up to the day of this strike still work- ipg for less pay than before the strike of last year, showing not a restoration of the old pay, but really a reduction, in violation of said circular agreement. Evidence is at hand that bridge men have been compelled to work many hours over-time without receiving the agreed overtime pay. Evidence is at hand to prove that in order to make it necessary to reduce the force of workingmen, work has been sent to contract shops, and in one instance a whole foundry sublet in order to bring the men under a new supervision, thus depriving the men of the provisions of the circu- lar agreement. All this done to create dissatisfaction and to induce the men to leave the company's employ, after which other men were employed, and always at reduced rates. Evidence is at hand that whole gangs of men have been discharged, notwith- standing that Mr. Hoxie agreed on May 18, 1H85, that rather than reduce the working force he would reduce the hours of work. " Every effort to have tliese men reinstated was refused by the company on the ground that they were not covered by the agreement, which agreement says: 'We will reduce the hours of work instead of reducing the force whenever tBe necessity arises.' The outrages on the Texas Pacific Railroad are sought to be made a matter entirely out of the range of the agreement. Men were, out of sheer prejudice, dis- charged without any effort to reduce the hours of work. The receivers fail to com- ply with the agreement of the company with the employes, after the institution of the receivership, notwithstanding they do not repudiate the agreements of said offi- cials, showing a clear intent to use the United States court and its officials for dis- honorable purposes. It is chiirged by Mr. Hoxie in previous statements that the agreement of March 5, 18IS5, has been violated by the employes. Said agreement is published in the morniog papers of March '22, and we ask any intelligent person to read with care and note if it be possible for the employe to violate any jirovisions of said agreement, be tbey never so desirous, and that for the sole reason that it is an agreement on the part of the company to tlo certain things, lint requiring nothing whatever of the employes. But why should we say more ? If Mr. Hoxie did not know that he was guilty of gross wrong and injustice, why should he retuse to listen to our evidence and hear our appeal for redress ? Why should he shelter himself behind subterfuges and technicalities? Why should he refuse to treat with the men he has wronged, and with evasive letters to governors, who cannot possibly enter into the merits of the controversy? The truth is simply this: Mr. Hoxie wanted trouble. He has provoked it. He is still inciting it, and making an innocent pub- lic pay the price of his perfidy. How long will the public consent for Gould and Hoxie thus to rule or ruin ? We wait to see. " By order of the executive board of District Assembly 101." Here is ah address published by the District Assemblies Nos. 101,93, and 17, which have their headquarters here, I think, or in this vicinity. It was published to the Knights of Labor and trade assemblies throughout North America. I would like to read it. It is as follows : " To the Evights of Labor and Trades Asaemblies throughout 2\orth America: "Brothers: The irrepressible conflict, the long-threatened war of labor against capital is upon us. The arch- monopolist of the world, Jay Gonld, has thrown the challenge in our teeth, and bidden us come on to the conflict. ' There c^n be no compromise in this case,' he says. ' There is no room for a compromise. I am bound to fight this question to the bitter end, for the very reason that the strikers have con- fessed that they have no grievances against our company,' so says Mr. Gould. " We have wearied the press and worn the types of the world in stating grievances, and demanding an opportunity to present them to Mr. Gould and his lieutenants ; we have offered through thehighest channels that represent us in the nation to meet him upon any field ; we have sought, we have plead, we have demanded that we be heard. To all this Mr. Gould has turned a deaf ear. There can be no question that were his cause just and he the injured Innocence in which he poses, he would see our represent- atives and hear our complaints. The very cowardice that skulks behind austerity and self-consftituted superiority condemns him. That cowardice which appeals to a court born and reared in luxury, and which cannot, in the nature of things, enter into sympathy with a poor man, and to which,wereheapoorman, he would not appeal, con- demns him. That cowardice which shuns a field on which " thrice armed is he who has his battle just," and on which field he dare not meet us, condemns him. And now, before the world, we challenge him to hear our complaints, for he says we have none. Before the world we impeach his veracity, when he says we have not presented them. Befoie t 352 LABOR TROUBLES IN TEE SOUTH AND WEST. the world l^t the trial go on. Distorted teohnioallties may obtain in the courts whioh he controls, and through the golden spectacles he places upon them they may see but the rights of wealth. But to that grander, higher court, that court whose verdict is final, as it is righteous, to that we appeal, and this is our case : After spurning our pleas for mauy months ; after imperiously ignoring every petition presented ; after violating sacred compaota,aud then interviewing Federal authorities to shieldhisper- fldy ; after crushing life and hope out of the poor men by holding them to hard labor at 55 cents a day until every vestige of manhood rose in revolt, then he turns to the golden-spectacledlegal mindsand tellshis story. He tells it, no doubt, withtonesof pathos and flowing tears. He poses as a suffering victim, bleeding at every pore&om the assaults of the hideous monster, labor. He poses, he pleads, he weeps, and lo ! the legal mind bows its sympathetic head and renders its verdict on ex parte testimony. " Fortified by such wonderful legal lore the valiant Gould arises behind his im- promptu moot court and threatens to sue every Knight of Labor in the land. shame, where is thy blush ! The arch fiend of oppression, the bloated vampire of the body politic, threatens openly to invade the sacred circle of onr homes to satiate his greed. He seeks to overawe and terrorize the weak and beget treason in our ranks. "Knights of Labor, hear us ! Mr. Gould is allowed to make such threats as these to intimidate us and our friends, when, were one of us to threaten thus, some sapient court would order our arrest and condemn us for 90ntempt. " Mr. Gould and his wise counsel well know that both the decision and the threat are sheer buncombe, aird such silly emanations are an insult to the intelligence of oar Bohool-boys and a challenge to the courage of our grandmothers. "Fellow-workmen, we have against us in this conflict : (1) the great corporations ; (SJ) the terrorized merchants, who dare not claim their souls as against said corpora- tions ; (3) the scabs. "If to any of these three you belong, now is your time ! Cowards to the rear, scabs ;o the enemy, andmen to the front! The great enemy is before ns. Cowardly though le be, yet he is fortified within barricades of gold and courts. But we are clad in armor of eternal right. ■ Let us only fall when we must. Let us die only when victory is assured for the generations behind us. The ages are looking down upon the object- lessons of to-day : Truth, crushed to earth, "will lise again; The eternal years of God are hers ; While Error, wounded, writhes in pain, > And dies amid her worshipers. "By order of Executive Boards Nos. 101. 93, 17." From this time the demonstrations of the parties engaged in the strike became more violent than before. A freight train was wrecked which had been started from Se- dalia, near that city ; parties of masked men, armed with guns, invaded the shops of the company at De Soto and Atchison, driving away the guards and injuring and destroy- ing th« company's machinery ; and trains and engines were forcibly taken possession of. At Saint Louis, through the efficient aid of the police department, the traffic of the company was gradually resumed, and at other points the blockade was partially, and in some cases wholly raised ; both citizens and police, as a general rule, affording pro- tection to trains and property. The governors of Missouri, Arkansa's, Texas, and Kansas issued proclamations calling for the movement of traffic, the protection of property, and the observance of the law, and pledging the power of the State to its en- forcement. On March 27, 28, and 29, the following correspondence passed between the general executive board of the Knights of Labor and the president of the Missouri Facifio KaUvray Company : " [Koble Order of the Knights of Labor of America. Oifioe of the general secretary.] " Phiiadelphia, JforoA 27. " Mr. Jat Gould : " Sir : The general executive board would be pleased to have an interview with yoa at your convenience to-day, for the purpose of submitting the Southwest diffloulties to a committee of seven for arbitration, three of the committee to be appointed by yourself, and three by the general executive board, the six to select the seventh mem- ber of the committee ; their decision in the matter to be final. Should this propo- ■itlon be acceptable we will at once issue an order for the men to return to work. " By order of the general executive board. "FEEDEEICK TUENBE, "Seoretary of the Board.' LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 353 " [The Missouri Pacific Hailroad Company.] " New Yoek, Maroh 27. « Frederick Tubnek, Esq., "Secretary, Fhiladelphia: " Dear Sir : I have your note of this date proposing an interview between your executive committee and the officers of this company for the purpose of submitting, to arbitration by a committee of seven what you term the ' Southwest difficulties.' You are doubtless aware that in the negotiations vrhich took place here last August between Mr. T. V. Powderly, general master workman, and associates, and the officer* of this company, it was agreed that in future no strikes would be ordered on the Mis- souri Pacific road until after a conference with the officers of the company and an op- portunity had to adjust any alleged grievances. In view of this fact, attention is- drawn to the following correspondence between Mr. A. L. Hopkins, vice-president of this company, in my absence, and Mr. Powderly : " 'New York, March 6. " ' T. V. Powderly, '"Scranton, Pa. : " ' Mr. Hoxie telegraphs that the Knights of Labor on onr road have struck, and refuse to allow any freight trains to run on our road, saying that they have no iev-gr ance, but are on^y striking because ordered to do so. If there is any grievance we- would like to talk it over with you. We understood you to promise that no strik* should be ordered without consultation. \ •' 'A. L. HOPKINS.' " ' Philadelphia, March 8. '"A. L. Hopkins, " 'Secretary Missouri Pacific Eailway, 195 Broadway, New York : "'Have telegraphed West for particulars. Papers say strike caused by the dis- charge of a man named Hall. Can he be reinstated, pending investigation ? " ' T. V. POWDERLY.' " 'New York, March 8.. " 'T. V. Powderly: '"Thanks for your message and suggestion. Hall was employed by the Texas and Pacific and not by us. That property is in the hands of the United States courts, and we have no control whatever over the receivers or over the employes. We have car- ried out the agreement made last spring in every respect, and the present strike ia unjust to us and unwise for you. It is reported here that this movement is the re- sult of Wall street influence on the part of those short of the securities likely to ba.- affected '"A. L. HOPKINS.' " No reply to this message was received, but this company's request for a confer- ence was ignored and its premises at once invaded and the property destroyed by the men of yoar order in great numbers, who also seized and disabled the trains, as they have since continued to do. The board of directors of this company thereupon had a copy of the correspondence above given, made and transmitted to Mr. H. M. Hoxie, the first vice-president and general manager at Saint Louis, with instructions to use every endeavor to continue the operation of the road, and committed the whole matter to his hands. Mr. Hoxie's overtures, made through the governors of Missouri and Kansas, who stated that they found no cause for the strike, were rejected by your order. These and the subsequent correspondence between him and Mr. Powderly are well known to you, and Mr. Hoxie's course has been confirmed by the board, and the matter is still in his hands. "I am therefore instructed by the board to refer you to him as its continuing rep- resentative in the premises. I am directed to add in behalf of the board that in its judgment, so lon^ as this company U forcibly kept from the control of its property and from performing its charter duties, its business is done, if at all, not under the conditions of law which are common to all citizens, but only at the will of the law- breaking force. Any negotiations with sn oh a force would be unwise and useless. Terms made with it would not be settlement of difficulties, but a triumph of force overthelawof theland. It would mean nothing, intheir judgment, but new troubles and worse. This is the result of their experience. " The governor's proclamation enjoins upon your men to return to duty, and thia company^s continued advertisement offers them employment on the same terms as heretofore. The board further suggests that inasmuch as your order assumes in yoni 3984 CONG 23 3^4 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. •communication responsibility for these men, and power and control over tliera, the fol- lowing from the proclamation of the governor of Missouri is expressive of their duty and of your own : '"I warn all persons, whether they he employes or not, against interposing any ob- stacle whatever in the way of said resumption ; and with a firm reliance upon the cour- age, good sense, and law-abiding spirit, of the public, I herebv call upon all good citizens to assist in carrying Out the purposes of this proclamation ; and I also hereby pledge the whole power of the State, so far as it. may be lawfully wielded by its chief executive officer, to sustain the company and its servants in said resumption, and to restrain and punish all that may oppose it.' "When this proclamation shall be obeyed, and when the company's late employes ishall desist from violence and interference with its trains, the board hereby assures them that they will find themselves met by Mr. Hoxie in the spirit in which he has tieretofore avoided rupture, and cause for just complaint, and in that just and liberal apirit which should always exist between the employer and the employed. "By order of the board. " Very respectfully, yours, "JAY GOULD, "President Missouri Facifio Eailway Company." " New York, March 27. "'Jay Gould, Esq., President, ^o. ; " Dear Sir: We have received your reply to our communication of this morning. "The statements made in your reply are worthy of more consideration than can be ^iven them at this moment. We are not in possession here of the letters or commu- nications or copies of the same referred to in your letter herein. We came here un- prepared, with no thought of using them, and even though we had them here, the tield that would be opened up for discussion would be so broad that it would take'a ^eat deal of time and space to cover it as contained in your reply. This would necessitate a review of the transactions of last year, bieginning with the strike of March, 1885, continuing through the Wabash trouble, which brought about our meeting with you in August, down to the strike on the Texas and Pacific and its extension to the Missouri Pacific. We consider that all this is unnecessary at *his time. Public interest, the interest of both parties to the controversy, will not be served by a longer continuance of the strike if there is a shadow of a chance -to bring it to a speedy termination. With that idea in view we prefer to let this dis- •cussion rest and allow this matter to be decided upon its merits by an impartial com- mittee of seven, selected as indicated iu our communication of this morning. Let "them proceed to adjust the differences, and having settled that matter, setting in mo- tion at once the idle wheels and hands, we have no objections to the same committee xeviewing our actions in the matter, and are willing to be judged to receive censure at their hands if necessary for any shortcomings they may deem ns guilty of. The needs of the hour require that this strike terminate speedily. If that is done, the other mat- •ters can be very readily attended to. " Very truly yours, " T. V. POWDERLY, " General Master Workman, Knights of Labor," "President's Officii, Missouri Pacific Railway, March W. *'T. V. POWDBKLY, Esq., "General Master WorTcman : "Dear Sir: Replying to your letter of the 27th inst., I will write to say that I will. i*o-morrow morning send the following instructions : -" ' H. M. Hoxie, " ' General Manager, Saint Louis : '• ' In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ment of labor in the several departments of the company, you will give preference to our late employes, whether they are members of the Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late strike, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the com- pany during the said strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences be- tween the employes and the company, past or future.' " Hoping the above will be satisfactory, I remain, ' ' ' Yours, very truly, "JAY GOULD, President." LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 355 The general master workman and district assemblies of tlie Kuiglits of Labor there- upon issued the following orders : "Martin Irons, " Chairman Executive Board, Biatrici Assembly Jfo. 101, Saint Louis : "President Jay Gould has consented to our proposition for arbitration, and so tele- graphs Vice-President Hoxie. Order men to resume work at once. " By order of the executive board. "T. V. POWDEELY, " General Master TTorkman, Knights of Labor." "New York, March 2^. " To the Knights of Labor now on strike in the Southwest : " Fnrsnant to telegraphic instructions sent to the chairman of the executive board, District Assembly No. 101, you are directed to resume work at once. " By order of the execntive board. "T. V. POWDEELY, "General Master Workman." "Saint Louis, March 29, 1886. " To the Knights of Labor of the Great Southwest: " Fellow Workmen :" We congratulate you, one and all, on your manhood and for- titude dnring our great fight for recognition and right. "Now that the battle is fought and the victory won, let us wear ocTr laurels as men of dignity and moderation. "Every man to his post and to his duty with qniet and sobriety. Let us exhibit the same zeal for the apbuilding of the business of the West that we have just done in proving that labor is king. " By order of joint executive board of District Assemblies Nos. 101, 93, and 17." This was followed by the following correspondence : "Missouri Pacific Eailway Company, "Mew York, March 29. "T. V. POWDERLY, Esq. : " Dear Sir : The papers this morning publish the following: " 'Jay Gould has consented to our proposition for arbitration, and so telegraphed Vice-President Hoxie. Order the men to resume work at once. "'T. V. POWDERLY, "'General Master Workman.' " They published an interview with you which leads one to think that the officers of your order in Saint Louis may misconstrue your message into a consent on the part of this company to the requirements contained in the letter from the secretary of your order, dated Philadelphia, March 27, which, in my letter to you of the same date, I declined to consider. " Yon will remember that at our conference of Sunday, I said to you that the po- sition of this company was unchanged in this respect, and that the whole matter was left in the hands of the first vice-president and general- manager, with the in- structions contained in my telegram to him, which was written before my interview with yon and read to you at the time. This telegram stated : ' " ' We see no objection to arbitrate any differences between the employ^ and the com- pany, past or future.' " While I feel confident that your understanding of this matter is the same as my own, I write you this in order that there may be no grounds for misunderstanding hereafter. "Very respectfully yours, "JAY GOULD, " President Missouri^ Pacific Railway Company." "AsTOR House, "New York, March29. "Mr. Jat Gould, " President Missouri Pacific Railroad Company : " Dear Sir : I regret exceedingly that my sickness to-day has prevented me ftom keeping the engagement made by my associates with you for three o'clock this after^ 356 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. " Our proposition that the men should return at once to wort on the agreement that any complaint that they might have should be suhmitted to arbitration, was made-" in perfect good faith, and wnen, after the receipt by you of our letter of Saturday night and our conference on Sunday, you made the telegraphic order to General Manager Etoxie, contained in your letter to me of the same, in which was used the following language: 'We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employes and the company, past or future,' we accepted your approval to the, general principles of arbitration in equal good faith, and at once issued our order for the men to return to work. We are not particular iu the adjustment of the pres- ent difficnlties whether the arbitrators appointed by your company shall be named by General Manager Hoxie or yourself, or whether their number shall consist of three, five, or seven. In case they consist of three my associates have named me (if sick- ness prevents, one of the other members of the board will take my place). In case they consist of five, Mr. W. O. McDowell will be associated with me. In case of seven, we woitld add a third name. ' ' We can imagine no greater misfortune for your company than that the impressiott should go forth, not only to the members of our organization, but the community at large, whose interests are suffering as the result of the present condition of affairs, that a break has occurred between the interests which you represent and which I represent, by reason of a technicality. "Thegentleman who waited upon yon informs me that in case I was unable to meet with you this afternoon at three o'clock that I was to meet you to-morrow morning at ten o'clock. I hope to be able to keep the engagement at that time. After the /receipt of your personal letter to me and reading the interview with yoa, published- in the papers this evening, the following telegram was sent to each of the followiug gentlemen : Messrs. Daly, Irons, and Houx, at Sedalia, Saint Louis, and Fort Worth:' " 'New Yohk, March 29. '"Complications have arisen since morning as to the method of arbitration. An- other conference will be held to-morrow.' '"T. V. POWDERLY, G.M. W.'" On March 30th a conference was held between the General Executive Board of the Knights of Labor and the president and directors of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, in New York, and a basis of agreement whereby such of the striking em- ployis were to return to their work as the company could provide places for, under the terms of the following correspondence : "New York, March 30, 1886. " H. M. HoxiB, "General Manager, Saint Louis : " Will you meet the General Executive Board of the Knights of Labor or the com- mittee of your employes from the Knights of Labor for the purpose of hearing what their cause of complaint was and for the purpose of making a settlement of present difficulties alike honorable to both parties, either on the basis of arbitration or by mutual agreement, the same to be binding on all parties? « "A. L. HOPKINS." " Saint Louis, March 30. "A. L.Hopkins: "Replying to your inquiry of this date, I have to say that yesterday I received from Mr. Gould the following message : " 'In resuming the movement of trains on the Missouri Pacific, and in the employ- ing of laborers in thq several departments of this company, give preference to our late employds, whether they are Knights of Labor or not, except that you will not employ any person who has injured the company's property during the late striite, nor will we discharge any person who has taken service with the company during said 'Strike. We see no objection to arbitrating any differences between the employ^ and the company, past or future. " ' Hoping the above will be satisfactory, I remain, yours, very truly, '"JAY GOULD, President,' " To which I sent the following reply : " ' Jay Gould : I have your message in relation to your interview widh Mr. Pow- derly, and also the letter of instruction, and will carry out the same to the best of my ability. I am, therefore, willing tp meet a committee of our employes, without dis- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 357 'Orimination, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such committee is appointed, to adjudicate with them any grievances that they may have. '"H. M. HOXIE.' " In pursuance of the above correspondence the following orders were published in the newspapers as having been authoritatively issued : "' Martin Irons, Saint Louia : " ' Have been in conference all day with the result that Vice-President Hoxie, Agreed to the following : " 'Willing to meet a committee of our employes, without discrimination, who are actually at work in the service of the company at the time such committee is ap- pointed, to adjust with them any grievances that they may have. •"H. M. HOXIE.' "Have your executive committee order the men to return to work, and also select a special committee from the employes of the Missouri Pacific to wait on Mr. Hoxie, to adjust any difference. Do this as quickly as possible. Board will leave for Saint 'Louis to-morrow. "FREDEEICK TURNER." " Saint Louis, March 31, 1886. " Master workmen local assemblies, District 101 : "You are ordered by the General Executive Board to go to work. Honor demands that you see that those who came out to support vou go to work first. " MARTIN IRONS, " C'/iairaiare.'' ** [Ifoble orderof Knights of Labor. Peace and prosperity to the faithful. Sanctuary of Local Assem- bly Xo. 4242.'] "East Saint Louis, III., March 31, 1S66— 4 o'clock p.m. * To members of local executive board, greeting : "Yon are hereby ordered to return to work in your former positions, if received. If not, report back to this joint board of District Assemblies 17, 101, and 93. "M. IRONS, "Chairman 101. "A. C. CAUGHLIN, "Chairman 93. "E. F. McKEON, '•Secretary 93." The only applications made for employment to the company in pursuance of the ■foregoing orders were through committees of Knights of Labor, who demanded that all who had struck on Mar ch 5, 1886, should be received back in their former positions, excepting only those who had been guilty of actual destiuction of property. To this the company replied that many workmen having been engaged in the place of those who had voluntarily abandoned the service, and the business of the company having been reduced and its capacity to employ men lessened, it could only furnish employ- ment to about 50 per cent, of those who had abandoned their positiCns, and would 4iccordingly receive back individually such of those who might apply as were needed and were not objectionable. The following statement appeared in the newspapers ou April 1, 1886: -"To the public: "As showing the sincerity of the railroad managers in their treatment of the Knights of Labor, we respectfully state that, pursuant to the order of our general executive board, we this day sent committees to the managers of the several railroads, offering to return the men to work. In no instance would they be received or treated with, each ofBcial in turn either refusing them a hearing or evading them with specious ■subterfuges for direct answers, or refusing them employment. Mr. Hoxie has agreed to receive a committee of employes to adjust any grievances which may exist. He refuses personally and through his subordinates to recognize any of us as employ^, and refuses to receive any but such as he calls employ^. In short, after himself and .Mr. Gould have conveyed the impression to the world that they are willing to settle. 358 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. they refuse to settle. ' Now ■we appeal to a suffering and candid public, on -whom is. falling all the weight of this great conflict, if we have not heen deceived enough. How much is long-suffering labor to bear ? This great strike never would have been had Mr. Hoxie condescended months ago to hear our complaints. We do not claim to be more than human. It should not be expected of us to be more than human. In this country position makes no man king or slave, knd imperious refusal on the part of one citizen to confer with other citizens with whom he may have business connec- tions when such refusal begets great business and spcial revolution is not only a mis- take but a crime against the public. Mr. Gould is invoking the law against little criminals who are made; desperate by his policy of duplicity and oppression. Yet a terrorized public does not invoke the law against the arch criminal of the land. If we cannot be allowed to return to work the strike must go on. "By order of executive boards District Assemblies 101, 93, and 17." Now, we were willing all this time to take back any of our men who applied for work, and I myself had a talk with Hodge and Mr. Bartlett, and requested them to see a portion of the men and induce them to return. Mr. Hodge is the master car- builder of the shops here at Saint LoTiis and Mr. Bartlett is the master mechanic here. On April 2 two members of the general executive committee of the Knights of Labor mad« an informal visit at the office of the first vice-president in Saint Louis, to whom, as individuals, the situation of affairs and the position of the company was fully ex- plained, and the purpose of the company to adhere to the policy announced by the first vice-president in his letter to the governors, and also in his subsequent corre- spondence with the president in New York, which was accepted by Mr. Powderly as the basis for the resumption of work, was distinctly stated, and the members of the executive board were urged to carry out the agreement of the chief of their order^ The two members were Mr. Turner and Mr. Bailey. 1 think you have a copy of the conversation that passed between Mr. Hoxie and Mr. Bailey and Mr. Turner. I do- not know whether that is a part of the record or not. Do you know ? [Addressing Judge Portis.] , Judge Portis. I do not think it is ; but you have it there in the bundle. Oolonel BuRNBS. It might be read, anyhow. The WiTNKSS. This is the conversation that took place between Mr. Bailey, Mr.. Turner, Mr. Hoxie, and Judge Hough. Mr. Bailey and Mr. Turner, as I understand it, are members of the general executive board, and they called on Mr. Hoxie in Saint Louis. I was present at that conversation, with the exception of a small part of it at the first. Mr. Stewart. Was that the conversation taken by the stenographer? Mr. Kerrigan. That was the conversation taken by the stenographer; yes, sir. I; would state that this conversation was had in a room with a table in it like this. There was only one chair in the room. Some of the gentlemen representing the execu- tive board stated that they were treated discourteously, because they were not, as I infer, invited to take seats. There was only one chair in the room. I came into the room with a message that I wanted to show to Mr. Hoxie in relation to some business- matter. He sat down probably two minutes to read that mcssago. He got up and came around the table and continued the conversation with Mr. Bailey and Mr. Turner as related there. The Hoxie-Turner covferenee, April 3, 1886. Mr. HoxiK. I am glad to meet you, gentlemen, as individuals and citizens. I sup- pose I have a right to infer from what has been stated in the papers, as well as from your note, the object of your visit. I think it is due to you to say at the outset that I cannot receive you in an official or representative capacity. My position, as stated in my telegram to Mr. Hopkins, which was communicated to Mr. Powderly, and ac- ceded to by him, cannot be departed from. I am willing, of course, to hear what you liave to say, but, as I have said before, I cannot treat with you as representatives of ^ tlie Knights of Labor. I said in my message that I would receive committees of meu actually in our employ. Mr. Turner. "In your employ"? Do you mean those people who went back upon, the order ? Mr. Hoxie. I mean committees of men actually in our employment at the time the committees wait upon me for the adjudication of any grievance they may have. Mr. Tbrner. We consented to all that, and expected the men to go to work, but we understand that you refuse to take them back. Now, in the dispatch from Mr. Gould to yourself, and to which you readily assented, it was stated that you would employ those wilhont discrimination, Init not those that had destroyed anypropetty. We agree with you on that point. We don't uphold any one that lias destroyed any property whatever or comniitted any act of violence. In a-sking for the reinstate- Jueut of those meu we do not ask you to set aside those you have taken in the pl«ce» LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH ATS'D WEST. 359 of those that struck, but Tve expected that you -would want men and give those the preference without discrimination, whether they are Knights of Labor or not. Wfr are not going to stand on technical ground, and do not desire you to recognize us as- Enights of Labor or an organization or anything else. We want to bring peace, and peace we want if we can get it by any possible means. Mr. HoxiE. What I have said in my letter to Mr. Irons, to Mr. Powderly, and to- Mr. Hopkins, for Mr. Powderly and your committee, and to the governors of the States. of Missouri and Kansas, is certainly known to you and to the men. What I have said! we are willing to stand by. We only want probably 50 per cent, of the men we have- had heretofore in the shops. We will take back,'as we have- stated, regardless of any order or religion they belong to, such men as we want, and when they are in our employ, and have grievances, as they think, I am ready and willing to meet them. We are going a little outside of the record in what we are talking about. The only- fact that concerns us now is this : Tour executive board ordered off the strike, and it didn't go off. Mr. TUKNER. No, we didn't order the strike off in those words, although we did the^ same thing ; we ordered the men to go to work and you refused to receive them. Mr. HoxiE. Therein you are mistaken. Mr. Turner. That is what we want to find out. Mr. HoxiE. We refused to receive the men as a body. We propose to take themi exactly as we have said in the correspondence with your people, both Mr. Powderly and yourself, to take such as we desire to re-employ, such as we need, not taking,, however, anybody who has advised or injured our property. Mr. BAH.EY. Advised what ? Mr. HoxiE. Advised the injury of our property. It seems to me that the present- trouble is only between you and Mr. Irons, and not between you and myself. That- is the way it appears to a man who reads the newspapers. Mr. Bailey. May I ask a question t Mr. HoxiE. Certainly. Mr. Bailey. Have you 50 per cent, of your former employes at work new t Mr. HoxiE. No, sir ; but I will state that we have had in our employ for the past^ year about 50 per cent, more men in the shops than we have needed. Mr. Bailey. Very foolish to keep them. Mr. HoxiB. We could not avoid it under the demands of your order. It is one of the things it has insisted upon and to which we have objected. They have demanded that, instead of reducing the number of men employed, we should reduce the houra- of labor, and we have been obliged to do that for a year under threats of a strike. Now, you know, and everybody knows who has worked in the shops or been around: them, that the fixed expenses of the shops and the road are a very large part of its. total expenditures. I mean this : All foremen wbo are operating the road receiv&- pay for the whole twenty-four hours, and it would be very much better for us to work. ten hours a day, and more if we could, but ten houfs we must work. It would be bet- ter to have a diminution of the force than to work eight hours per day with the in- creased force. Mr. Bailey. So it was a blessing that this occurred to you and gave you an oppor- tunity to reduce your force ? Mr. HoxiE. That is, according to your own statement. Mr. Bailey. I mean to be plain. I think that is just what is meant. And thea- there is another fact. You have discharged men who have remained at their post through all this trouble and been faithful to the company. Mr. HoxiB. When the 3,770 men struck and went out of the service, wc were oblige* to suspend for them, not only one but 6,0u0 men, because we were not earning money enough to pay those men that were in the service. Mr. Bailey. In this one case the man was employed until the strike was declared! off. Mr. HoxiE. I do not know anything about this case. Mr. Bailey. Do you still propose to take back your former employes without dis- crimination? Mr. HoxiB. It is still the intention of the company to take back many of its former employes. Mr. Turner. Do I understand that the men have not offered themselves individ- ually for- service ? Mr. HoxiE. No, sir; they have only offered themselves by committees, and we d» not propose to take them in that way. Mr. Turner. A man I refer to by the name of Berry, who offered his servicea^ im that way Mr. Bailey. He is a man who has remained at his post through the entire tronblie.. Mr. HoxiE. If he is in the employ of the company he has the right to come to. me at once and ask the whys and wherefores, and he is the man that I desire to see. Mr. TUKNBK. He went to Mr. Bartlett, who, I understand, is superintendent of mo- tive power. S60 LABOR TROUBLES IN" THE SOUTH AND WEST. Mr. HoxiE. He is master mechanic of this division. Mr. TCRNBK. He received a note from Mr. Bartlett stating that his services -were ■ao longer required. Mr. HoxiE. I think I recall the man you refer to, now. Mr. TuKiTEK. He is at Chamois, isn't he ? Mr. HoxiB. We know him, and we don't want Mr. Berry in our employ. Mr. TcKNBR. Didn't he stick to the company ? Mr. HoxiE. No, sir ; he headed the strikers at Chamois, and if you will investigate "the case you will find out that that is the fact. He hds been in the employ of this -company for twenty years, and has been for a good many years between JefferSon •City and Chamois, and is the man who took charge of the outbreak at that point. Mr. Bailey. A man has a right to better his condition if he can, you don't object 4othat? Mr. HoxiE. No, sir ; I agree with you on that point. Mr. Bailey. He has a right to complain if the best prices are not paid to him, and te should not be made a victim simply for getting a good price for what he has got to sell. Mr. HoxiE. You should remember one thing about the strike : It did not commence -on this road ; but was inaugurated to boycott the Texas and Paoiic. Don't let that get out of your mind. Don't let anything that your men may tell you get your minds away from the point that this strike did not come about except by the action -of the Texas and Pacific in discharging Mr. Hall, and that we had no control what- ■ever over the Texas and Pacific. Now, what has resulted since the commencement -of the strike as to the men arises from the fact that Mr. Irons declared this strike oa this road because we would not and could not make the receivers of the Texas and 'Pacific Railway take back Hall ; but that fact does not appear to have been kept be- .fore\the people, and it has not, perhaps, been kept before the executive committee of .•your order. You should bear that in mind and remember also that there has been no ^grievance presented to me of any kind. Mr. TuRNE'i, They claim there has. Mr.HoxiE. I tell yon what I know to be true. There was no grievance presented 4o me on which this strike was inaugurated, and whatever has been stated in regard !to grievances has been through the papers, and no notice of it has been presented to sme. Now, as to anything that has come up since the 6th of March in relation to the istrikeorto agreements, fsubmit to yon, as a fair-miutled man, that you would not •entertain anything of the kind. The strike was made by the order of Mr. Irons be- ■cause of the discharge of Mr. Hall, and I think you will agree with me that that mat- ter could not have been entertained by anybody in charge of a foreign road. Mr. Turner. That is all right. I have nothing to say against that; but last Sep- tember Mr.HoxiE. Don't let us go back of the history of this strike. The present is what we are discussing. * Mr. Turner. I want to show that these grievances were placed before you — at least they were placed in the hands of your secretary. I was in your office at the time. Mr. HoxiE. Do you mean the grievance of Mr. Palmer ? i will tell you that it was aiever presented. The present is what we are discussing. Mr. Turner. They claim these grievances ,were presented last September. Mr. HoxiE. Did they strike for that reason ? Mr. Turner. No, sir ; this strike was precipitated by the discharge of Mr. Hall. JMr, Bailey. Well, the trouble is on ; now we want to have it settled. Mr. HoxiE. It would seem that you have been trying to, but you have failed to get your orders carried out. It is a question between you and Mr. Irons whether it is set- tled or not. Mr. Bailey. It is a question whether you take these men back. When this agree- ment was entered into in New York City, it was said by a gentleman there that the men were to go to work, and a grievai;ice committee was to be appointed. I donbted then whether it meant that or not, and now I see I was correct. That was said by Mt. Somerville. Mr. HoxiE. I don't know him, he is not a director of our road. I never met the rgentleman in my life. Mr. Bailey. I don't say he is. Well, I suppose it is no use to fool any more time about this. Mr. HoxiE. A notice was incorporated in the letters written by me to the Gover- nors of Kansas and Missouri, stating that we wanted men, and that we would take er authority to appoint, a com- 364 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. mittee of three resident directors of the Southwestern Railroad System, and cause the names of the same to be immediately reported to Dr. Thos. O'Reilly, president of said meetuig. Very respectfully, , Dk. THOMAS O'REILLY, President. Thomas Makvin, Secretary. The Witness. This is Mr. Hoxie's reply to the committee of citizens : [The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Executive Department.] I Saint Louis, April 16. iDr. Thomas O'Reilly, Chairman, ^c, Saint Louis : ..Dear Sir: I am in receipt of your letter of the 15th instant, inclosing copy of pre- ximble and resolution adopted at a citizens' meeting, held at the court-house in this -city on the 13th instant, and requesting me "to appoint, or cause the proper author- ity to appoint, a committee of three of the resident directors of the Southwestern rail- road system, in conformity with said resolution, and cause the names of the same to be immediately reported to Dr. Thomas O'Reilly, president of said meeting." The substance of this resolution seems to be the appointment of " a committee of nine citizens of Saint Louis — three from the resident directors of the railways in in- sterest, three from the resident labor interests, present or recent employes of the rail- ways, to be selected by the unemployed, and three discreet and recognized repre- sentatives of the mercantile, manufacturing, and professional elements of the city, . in no wise connected or interested with the railway or labor organizations, who shall be authorized by their respective interests to meet, confer, and arrange with binding effect the existing troubles." The premise upon which the proposition for the appointment of such a committee rests is the statement in the preamble to the resolution that "the trade and com- merce of the city of Saint Louis, and the inter-State commerce through Saint Louis to and from all of the trade points of the Missouri Pacific and of the Saint Louis, I^on Mountain and Southern railways, has been for over a month and still is ob- structed, with no immediate sign of said roads complying with or being able to com- ply with their duty to the public as common carriers." I must respectfully c^ll your attention, and through you the attention of the citi- -zens participating in the meeting of the 13tb instant of which you were chairman, ■iio the fact that the railways constituting the Southwestern system are now in full operation, and were in fact at the time the resolution was presented by the managers ■of that meeting for the approval of the citizens there present. This fact can be at- tested by any one desiring to travel or forward freight, express matter, or mail over these railways. So far, then, as either the public or this company is concerned tlie need of a resumption of traffic- canuot be urged as a reason for appointment of the ■committee suggested. The action of such a committee would necessarily relate en- tirely to the methods by which the ex-employ& might be restored to the places they have voluntarily abandoned. \ After the serious interruption which the business of Saint Louis has already suf- . fered, and at a time when, through the protection of the civil authorities and through -extraordinary exertions in procuring suitable labor, this company has reopened its ■lines and fully established its traflftc, it is to me a matter of sincere regret that any portion of its citizens should send broadcast over the land, to the detriment of the ■city, a statement in regard to the obstruction of traflSc over two of its principal roads which I am satisfied the great body of the business men of this city would decline to indorse. Whatever may have been the difficulties for solution last month in relation to the resumption of traffic, they do not exist to-day. The railway companies, as one party, are expending their time, energies, and money to keep open the avenues of ■commerce for the public benefit, and are succeeding in so doing, and are solvent citi- zens, amenable as such through the courts to the State and to individuals. Another party to be affected by the proposed conference is avowedly expending its time, en- ergy, and money for the purpose of blockading the avenues of commerce, and is not a legally constituted solvent citizen, and cannot be so reached. In conclusion, I desire to call your attention to the reply of the president of this company to the communication of Mr. Powdcrly, published since the date of your meeting, which fully sets forth the position of this company, and which no words of ■mine could render more explicit. Very respectfally, H. M. HOXIE, Fice- President. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 365 Then foUo-ws other correspondence in relation to the adjustment of tronbles be- tween the citizens' committee and the railroad company and the Knights of Labor^ and that is all I know of that. - Colonel BuRNES. Copies of that correspondence ooght to be placed on the record. The Witness. A good deal of It we could furnish. We would just have to mak» copies ourselves and furnish it to-the stenographer. Now, I have here copies or the originals of notices that have been served by the Knights of Labor ou our employes. I do not suppose it is necessary to read those. Colonel BuRNES. We have been in the habit of putting those notices on the record. The Witness. These are intimidation notices served on our employes on all parts of the system. These are original, and if you desire we will furnish copies of them. (The notices referred to were here handed to Colonel Burries at his request.) Now, here is a memorandum of grievances that are charged against the railroad company : Charges made that section foremen on road were reduced $b per month without notice. Superintendent Drake, of the Missouri Pacific Railway, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that this charge is without toundation, as there has been no reduction in the pay of section foremen on the Missouri Pacific Railway within the last two or three years. Superintendent Fagan, of the Central Branch Union Pacific Railway, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that this statement is unquaUfiedly false in every particular, as far as the Central Branch Division is concerned. There has been no reduction in th& wages of men whatever since the Ist of March, 1885. Superintendent Prey, of the Missouri, Kansasand TexasNorthern in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that the pay of all regular section foremen on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division, north of Denison, up to March, 1885, was $45 per month ; and on 16th of March, 1885, the pay of all section foremen was increased to f 50 per month. The- charge is without foundation. Superintendent Fleming, of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, in a letter dated April 28, 1886, stated that no foremen in road department have beeu reduced $5 per month, either with or without notice, except in oneinstance, where the foreman of a quarry gang, who had been paid $60 per month, was reduced to $55, still leaving him a salary of $5 per month more than the regular foremen in this department. Mr. J. Herrin, of the International and Great Northern, states there has been no reduction in the wages of section foremen since March, 1885. Mr. J. Herrin, of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, Texas Division, states that in regard to section foiemen on road being reduced $5 per month, without notice, that this has hot been done. Orders were sent to D. F. Rnndle, general readmaster, to reduce wages of section fore- men between Taylor and Fort Worth from $55 to $50 per monthi same as paid on bal- ance of Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division in Texas, also ou the Texas and Great Northern Division. This notice was sent to general roadmaster in ample time to give 30 days' notice before reduction was made, as per circular of the third vice-president, under date of May 25. Roadmaster being absent on road week or ten days working on washoifts- did not receive letter in time to give required notice. Grievance committed met me in my car at Fort Worth, and explained their grievance that the 30 days' notice had not been given. I told them as that was the case the wages would not be reduced, and so notified the general roadmaster, and wages have not been reduced to this dat& (April 28, 1886). The committee seemed well pleased with the result of our meeting, and said they were very sorry they could not have met me sooner, as this grievance could have been prevented, and the following message was sent by them: J. N. FiTZSIMMONS, (Care H. Riley, Sedalia, Mo.) Superintendent Herrin 1b here and has rescinded order reducing section-foremen- and track- walkers' wages. " He represents that the matter could have been settled. here if he conld have seen yon, and we are satisfied that this is the case. WILLIAM KEENAN, Q, A. SCHUELL, G. N. MILLIGAN, SAMUEL E. CLARK, Loeal Grievance Committee. Mr. Powderly's second complaint was that boiler makers were sent out on the road fiom Denison, and were allowed one-half time while travelling. Superintendent J. Herrin, DenisoUrSays in regard to boiler makers sent out on road from Denison, and allowed one-half time while traveling : " Rossbottom, car ret)airer, was sent out on road to do some work ; was allowed 34 hours, which he accepted and expressed himself satisfied. If he had not gone out on 366 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. road he would have made but 14 hours in shop, as the men were working but eight iours per As^." The third complaint was that engine wipers were reduced from |1.26 to $1.15. J. Herrin, superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas International and Great Northern, says engine wipers paid |1.25 per day, and have been paid that amount since March, 1885 ; no reduction or advance ; no increase of wages asked for by them. At terminal stations where we have no round-house, wipers are paid $1.45 j)er day. The superintendent of the Iron Mountain and Southern, in a letter of the 28th of April, says no reduction has been made in the pay of engine wipers since March, 1885. J.J. Frey, superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Northern, in a letter dated the 28th of April, 1886, says the pay of engine wipers on Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division, north of Denison, in" March, 188o, was $1.25 per day ; this rate has not been changed up to the present time. Number of wipers in locomotive depart- ment in March, 1885, was 19 ; number in March, 1886, was 23 ; an increased force of 4 wipers. Superintendent Drake, of the Missouri Pacific, in a letter dated the 29th of April, 1886, says there is no groand for this complaint. No engifie wipers on Missouri Pa- cific Division is paid less than $1.25 per day. No reduction whatever has been made in the pay of these men since March, 1885, not even when they refused to work twelve hours. I will 8ta.te right there that sometime before the strike, probably a month, the master mechanics in all these shops had the wipers work in two shifts, twelve hours ■on and twelve hours off. The master mechanic of each shop had a notiee left on his table by' the Knights of Labor that the wipers would not work more than ten hours. I have not that notice with me, but I can get a copy of it. The men refused to work twelve hours on and twelve hours off, and would only work ten hours. I saw it was ^oing to cause us trouble, and I issued instructions for them to work ten hours a day. What he refers to is they refused to work twelve hours. Engine wipers at Saint Louis are now paid $1.40 and $1.45 per day and upwards; at Sedalia, -$1.25 and up- wards; and at Cypress, $1.35 and upwards. Superintendent Pagan, of the Central Branch Union Pacific, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that there is no foundation whatever for this report ; it is unqualifiedly false in every particular. Mr. Powderly's fourth complaint is that car foremen were reduced $10 per month, and had to do two men's work. Mr. J. Herrin, superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and International and Great Northern, states that theye has been no reduction in the wages of car re- pairers or foremen since March, 1885. Wages have been increased in some instances ■on truck and car repairers, in many cases to $1.80, $i, and $^"2? per day, voluntarily oo the part of the company. Mr. Drake, supt-riutendeut of the Missouri Pacific Eailway, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that on one occasion, on June 1, 1885, car repairer at Independence, Mo., was receiving $85 per month, aud was reduced to |75, but not before giving him thirty •days' notice'of such reduction. He continued at work, seemingly satisfied that the reduction had been made. There is no foundation whatever in the report that any car foremen on the Missouri Pacific Division are required to do two men's work. Superintendent Prey, of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, North, in a letter of April 28, states that the only reduction in the car department on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division, north of IJenison, was $5 in the pay of upholsterer. Instead of reduc- ing the pay of foremen on this division, the pay of R. Walker, general foreman, was increased $10 per month, and the pay of J. Kohlbohn was increased $5 per month. The pay of N. H. Baeuuraeistor, inspector, was increased $10 per month, and the pay of T.. E. Banks, inspector, was increased $10 per month. No foremen in the car de- partment are required to do two men's work. Mr. Pagan, superintendent of the Central Branch Union Pacific, in a letter of April 28, 1886, says that the statement is unqualifiedly false. No reduction in wages of car foremen has been made on this division since the 1st of March, 1885. Mr. Superintendent Fleming, of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that the wages of car foremen have not been reduced. As to the charge that foremen are required to do two men's work, it is utterly without foundation in fact. Mr. Powderly's fifth charge is that foreman in mill at De Soto has been reduced $10 per month without notice. Mr. Fleming, superintendent of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, in a letter of April 28, 1886, says that the foreman of the mill, on September 1, 1885, was promoted to a more lucrative position ; man put in his place paid $75 per mouth, $10 per month less than his predecessor. January 4, 1886, it was deemed to the interest of the company that a more competent man be put in charge of the mill, and he was paid the old wages, viz, $85 per month. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 367 Mr. PoTvderly's sixth charge is that foreman of car department at Parsons was re- ■duced |10 iier month without notice. Foreman at Parsons ■was paid $90 per month np to November 1, 1884, when he was relieved and a new foreman appointed at a salary of fbS per month, which pay was continued nntil February 1, 1885, when it was reduced to $80, and remained at that ra/te until March 16, 1885, when all the wages were restored to September (1884) rates and his salary was placed at $90 per month, which was the September (1884) rate. This foreman was fnlly advised of the salary at the time of his appointment, and en- gaged nnder those terms. Mr. Powderly's seventh charge is that check clerks in freight houses had been re- duced $5 per month without notice. Mr. J . Herrin, superintendent of the International and Great Northern, and Jlissouri, Kansas and Texas, south, states there has been no reduction on either the Interna- tional and Great Northern or the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, south, in the pay of check clerks in freight houses since March, 1885. ' Mr. Superintendent Frey, of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, north, in a letter of April 28, 1886, says on February 7, 1886, salary of J. H. Schnell, check clerk at Em- poria, was reduced from $45 to $40 per month. Pay of all other check clerks on this division have remained unchanged. Mr. Drake, superintendent of the Missouri Pacific, in a letter of April 28, 1885, states : " I have inquired into this matter thoroughly, and cannot iind a single instance where a check clerk's salary has been reduced as alleged." Mr. Fagan, superintendent of the Central Branch Union Pacific, in a letter of April S8, 1880, states: "As far as this statement refers to matters on the Central Branch J)ivislon, I can say that it is unqualifiedly false in every particular. There has been no reduction in the wages of men specified above since the 1st day of March, 1885." Mr. Fleming, superintendent of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states: "I have not reduced the pay of any check clerk in freight houses since March, 1885." Mr. Podwerly's eighth charge is that the auditor's statement will show reduction of ■wages. In reference to this it says here : " Mr. Kerrigan is preparing a statement showing the wages paid by other railroads in Missouri and Kansas and on connecting lines. I have answered that by showing that we have paid as good wages as any connect- ing lines and perhaps better. Taking it as a rule we pay more wages than any road "that connects with us either on thi^side of the river orthe other side. I have a state- ment of the method in which the hospital department is conducted. That state- ment was furnished by the chief surgeon who was here Saturday." " Is the company at present having to put up money to sustain the hospital over and above the deductions maoe from wages paid employes ?" Governor Stewart. Right there ; there was a statement of expenditures in that •department for the last year, from 1885 up to the end of February, 1886, and on the face of the statement it 'was clear there was a deficit of $20,000 ; that is, $20,000 more expended than the aggregate assessment amounted to. How was that $20,000 paid ? The Witness. The deficit is the amount that falls short in each month ; that was paid by the company, as I understand, each month. The repairs or improvements or -any work about those hospitals, a statement of the repairs or improvements is sub- mitted to me before the work is done, and I authorize the work. The work in those cases was done under the direction of the chief surgeon, Dr. Gotten, and it is either ^one by. our own superintendent of bridges and buildings, or the work is let out under £i8 direction. The total amount of monthly deductions for hospital depart- ment from pay-rolls and salary vouchers, from March 1, 1885, to February 28, 1886, inclusive, is $78,704.71. The amount of disbursements on account of maintenance of hospitals for the same period is $99,180.99, the company having had to make good a ■deficit in contributions of $20,476.28 in the last twelve months. [Detailed state- ment attached.] In this connection would say that all accidents occurring on the sys- tem, and burial expenses from deaths resulting from accidents, are not borne by the iiospital department, nor is same taken from contributions made from deductions from pay-rolls account of hospital fund ; but the entire expense is borne by the road upon which the accident occurs, it being charged directly to " conducting transportation." There is also a charge made in the statement before the grievance committee — I don|t «xaetly remember what the terms are, but on the Arkansas Division^that no man is •allowed to work unless he deals with the company's storekeeper ; that a man refusing to deal with the company's storekeeper is discharged. Superintendent Fleming, of the Iron Mountain road, in Arkansas, says there are no company stores, and that no deductions are made on the roll for-supplies furnished in favor of any merchant or merchants, except on the Arkansas Division, where de- ■dnctions are made to cover supplies furnished boarding-house keepers and foremen. These deductions are only made on proper orders, signed by the party or parties who have received the supplies. [Sample copy of this order attached.] 368 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Superiendent Frey, of the Missouri, Kansas and Telas, north, on April' 28, 1886,. states none of the officers or foremen in any department in the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, division north of Texas, are in anyway, either directly or indirectly, interesteS^ in any store at which supplies are purchased for use of eraploj 6s, nor in any company store. Deductions are only made in the pay of employes on account of hospital fund, in- surance premiums, hoard hills, and uniforms. These deductions are all made with the full knowledge and consent of the employ^ from whose pay ,they are made. At the time the employ^ is insured, contracts a board bill, or purchases a uniform, for- which deduction is'made, he gives the party with whom he deals an order authoriz- ing this company to deduct the amount fiom any pay due him for the month. Af the time the employes enter the service they are fully advised of the deductions vfhich will be made from their pay on account of hospital fund, and no employ 6 in- jured in the service of the company has been denied admission to the company hos- pitals. In fact, all deductions for 'board bills, pay for uniforms, and insurance pre- miums are made iipon a voluntary request of the employiS. Superintendent Drake, of the Missouri Pacific road, on April 28, 1886, says that he can positively state that no superintendent or section foreman on the Missouri Pa- cific division is directly or indirectly interested in any of this company's store. Superintendent Fagan, of the Central Branch Union Pacific road, on April 28, 1886, says that " so far as such charges pertain to this division, they have no founda- tion whatever; neither the section foreman, roadmasters, nor myself have any inter- est In any stores contiguous to the line of ttie Central Branch Railroad." Superintendent J. Herrin, of the International and Great Northern and Missouri,. Kansas and Texas, south, states that in Texas no deductions are made except in favor of lunch stands where trainmen get their meals ; this does not cover section- men nor laborers of any kind. The next charge is in relation to whether any mechanic had been discharged from. March, 18''.'i, to March, 1886, without a good and just cause. Mr. Drake, superintendent of the Missouri Pacific, in a letter of April 28, 1886, states that no mechanic had been discharged on the Missouri Pacific Division with- out good and sufficient cause, the principal causes being for drunkenness, incompe- tency, and insubordination. Two machinists at C.vpress quit work because other men in the shop accused them of not being loyal to the Knights of Labor. All other' reductions in force from March, 1885, to March, 1886, have been caused voluntarily, and other men not being employed in their places. The number of men dischargedi or who quit work for causes above stated I have not got here. Mr. Frey, superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Northern, in a letter of- April 28, states that no mechanics have been discharged on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division north of Denison from March, 1885, to March, 1886, without good and' sufficient cause. Thirty -four men have been discharged from March, 1885. One, a. machinist, was discharged for drunkenness and repeatedly absenting himself, and thirty-three were discharged from the car department on account of lack of work, With the exception of the thirty-four above referred to who were discharged, the reduction of the force on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division has been brought about by men going out of service voluntarily, and not employing men in their places. Superintendent Fleming, of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern, states, . April 28, 1886, that no mechanics have been discharged without a just cause, the causes ■ being generally for drunkenness, incompetency, or refusal to perform duty. assigned theni ; that no reduction has been made in the force of the mechanical department, except where men left of their own accord, and whose places -were not filled by new men. There are, however, very few instances where new men were not employed to replace men who had left or who had been discharged for cause. Superinjfcendent Fagan, of the Central Branch Union Pacific, April 28, 1886, states that none of his men have been discharged without a just and sufficient cause, the parties in all cases being apprised of the cause of their dismissal, and to my knowl- edge, none of the parties employed in the shops have appealed from the decision of ■the company's officers and demanded an investigation in the premises. He further states that he had a conference with a committee of strikers on March 9th, and asked them if they knew* of any cases in which they thought the men had been discharged without justification, and they answered to the contrary. With one exception the lorce was reduced by men quitting of their own accord, the exception being a case in which the grievance committee requested a reduction in the force rather than a re- duction in the working hoUrs, the committee being granted the privilege of designat- ing the six men to be relieved, there being only a few isolated cases in which new men were employed to replace men who were discharged or who had quit of their own accord. Superintendent J. Herrin, of the International and Great Northern and the Mis- souri, Kansas and Texas Southern, states that in no instance have any mechanics been ■ discharged during the period named on either the International and Great Northern,. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 369 or Missonri, Kansas and Texas Southern Division since March, 1885, or at any other time, without a good smA sufficient cause. The reduction of force on both the Inter- national and Great Northern, and the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Southern Division, have been men leaving the service voluntarily, or having been discharged for good and sufficient cause, and not re-employing men in their places. At Atchison the force was reduced by six machinists, and Mr. Kerrigan, as he states, instructed the superintendent to have the committee of Knights of Labor meet and say whether the men should work shorter hours or reduce the force six men. The committee decided to reduce the force, and this committee put a portion of the names in a hat and drew six from them, hut as th^ names of all the men were not put in the hat by the committee, it did not treat their own men fairly. I was on the Central Branch a short time before this occurred, and the superintend- ent there reported to me that there were six men in the machine shop more than he could use. I told him to call up his committee and leave the matter to them whether they should reduce the hours or reduce the force. He wrote me that he had called up the committee, and they agreed, after talking the matter over for two or three days, to reduce the force instead of reducing the hours. They picked out six men in the^op that they wanted discharged in redncing the force. The superintendent would not agree to that. He suggested that they take all the names in the machine shop and put them in a hat and pick oat six names in the hat. To that they agreed, and they got up the names and numbers themselves, and it appears they left out a prominent portion of the men ; that is, in other words, they left out all the promi- nent men iii the shops in the hat ; that is, men prominent among the Knights of Labor. Colonel BuKiros. Mr. Chairman, referring to the notices served upon various em- ployes, the gentlemen here representing the employes desire now to have read and made a part of the record one of these notices for purposes which will be manifest when testimony is introduced by them in rebuttal. It reads as follows : T. J. Miller, Mnancial Secretary ; ^District Financial Secretary, Diatriot Aseembly 101.] PASS0I7S, Kans., 3, 12, 1886. To the section men of the Southwest Gould system of railroads : In compliance with orders firom executive board of District 101, we ask you to im- mediately quit work, as said board has demanded $1.50 per day in wages for all un- skilled laborers. W. L. BUCHANAN, Chairman pro tempore Local Executive Board L. A. 3703. Then following it is a pencil memorandum, the first word of which is unintelligible, and that is followed by " 53 La Bette 3, 13, 813. F. H. Fitzpatriok, G. P. M." (Indorsed:) "I shall continue work so long as I have any tools to work with. Re- spectfully" (abbreviated), "J. D. Boyer, foreman." (Indorsed :) " Respectfiilly referred to E. K. Sibley, for his information, 3, 18. T. H.P." At the bottom of the paper is a seal, on which is " Parsons, Kansas, No. 3403. As- sembly founded March 29, 18j5." Mr. Kbrkigan. Here is a statement of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, of average daily wages paid February, 1886, and September, 1884 : Bate. n n i 1 o EH Missonri Pacific Bailway S Saint Lonis, Iron Mountain & Sonthem. ? Missonri, Kansas & Texas Baiiway S International and Great Nortbern Bail- ( Tpay i Central Branch Union Pacific Railway. . J J Average 5 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 $1 93 18£- 1 95 a 88 1 81 1 83 2 24 2 21 2.02 2 04 $1 S8 1 93 1 93 1 91 2 09 2 06 2 11 2 10 2 08 1 94 $2 06 3 01 2 07 1 98 $199 194 194 1 90 2 02 1 98 2 16 2 14 2 07 1 96 $1 80 1 79 1 80 1 79 175 1 84 1 97 1 98 1 63 1 67 Feb., 1886 Sept., 1884 199 1 95 2 02 1 98 2 01 1 97 1 81 1 82 $1 91 1 87 1 87 1 85 1 90 1 02 2 07 2 07 1 83 1 82 192 1 90 Agents' salaries based on commissions on tickets, February, 1886 ; sales 25 per cent, less than Sep- tember. 1884. sales. (See Exhibit I.) 370 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. From this statement it will be observed that the average wages paid our employes in bridges and buildings, machinery and oar departments, and stations, which includes - check clerks, laborers, &c., in February, 1886, time of present strike, is in every in- stance and on every division of the system higher than same class of wages paid in September, 1884. September, 1884, wages are the wages agreed upon in the settle- ment of the strike of March, 1885. In other words, the company has not only restored the wages of September, 1884, as agreed, bnt at time this present strike was ordered was really paying more wages than they did in September, 1884. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) That is taken from the books of the company, I snjyposBf— A. Yes, sir. Here is a statement of trains and loads moved by the Missouri Pacific system between March 29, the time that we resumed business, and April the 29th, 1886: " Summary of business performed from March 29 to April 28, 1886, inclusive, as com- pared with the same period of 1885 : Trains moved in 1885, 7,843 ; trains moved in 1886, 7,746; decrease, 97 ; loads moved during that period in 1885, 124,888; during that period in 1886, 126,230 ; increase in the number of loads moved, 1,342." I submit that statement. Here is a statement of the arrests made on account of the strike, which shows the causes in each case, and I don't know but what Judge Portis would want to make some' kind of a statement in relation to that. I find that in here. (The statement last referred to was afterwards submitted by Judge Portis. ) Here is a summary of the pay-rolls for each month for each road, by the months, from April, 1885, to Febru- ary, 1886. ■ Mr. Stbwart. You can furnish that to the reporter. It is not necessary to read it. The Witness (resuming). The average monthly pay-roll from April, 1885, to Feb- ruary, 1886, inclusive, was, say eleven months, |769,219 per month. (For statement of average monthly pay-rolls, see Exhibit N. ) Not furnished. H^re are a number of threatening letters that were sent to Mr. Hoxie. Mr'. Stewart. You can iiirnish the reporter with those letters. It is not necessary to read them now. Mr. BuRNES. We can return them to you if you have any other us»for them. The Chairman. Have you copies of them ? The Witness. No, sir ; they will have to be returned. That, I believe, gentlemen, is all I have to say. The following is a continuation of witness' statement in reference to the extent of the strike: PARSONS. March 6. — Strikers killed engine No. 102 ; drove round-house foreman away, and took possession of the shops. Leaders, E. B. HolHs, machinist; William Quarles, painter; Charles Tate, ma- chinist; and A. Wirth, switchman. Mp/reh 12. — Mob of about three hundred strikers killed engines Nos. 43 and £3 ; no names. March 23. — Mob of about forty Knights of Labor overpowered guard of fifteen men and threw engine No. 41 into turn-table pit ; no names. March 29.-=^Made a second attempt to get out a train. Got engine out ; mob of strikers surrounded train, and one MoGuire ordered fireman off, and Ed. Shivenor or- dered the engineer off or he would shoot him. Great excitement, and while atten- tion was called to the engineer McGuire and McAllister pulled mud valve open and let out steam, and McGuire turned water on fire, McAllister running away. Steam was so thick guard could not see what was being done. Got another engine out at 2 p. m. and started with train ; sheriff and guard of citizens one hundred and fifty strong ; got to crossing and was met by mob of four hundred strikers, who closed in on sheriff and citizens compelling train to stop, and pushing guards and citizens out of the way. Sheriff commanded mob to disperse, but mob oniy answered by throw- ing eggs at the sheriff and Mr. Kimball, who wason the engine' with the sheriff; and strikers killed engine, as in the morning. Passenger train No. 154 was thrown from track 4 miles south of Parsons at 12.20 a. m. On account of Knights of Labor hav- ing removed fish-plates from two rails, and the rails moved from their places. Pas- senger coaches and mail and baggage-cars thrown down an embankment of 8 feet and badly damaged. March 28. — Mike Drury, master workman Knights of Labor Assembly at Parsons, ordered Knights of Labor to prevent trains from being made up and running out of yard at all hazards. Strikers attempted to take possession of shops and round-house to kill engines, and were only prevented by strong guard. Knights of Labor armed to take nossession of train outside of city limits. / LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. , 371 March 30. — Got an engine out of round-house, went to the water-tank, and strikers made a rush for the engine, and one Wishaid opened mud-valve in the side and let out the steam, killing eiigine as on the day before. March 31. — ^A^ntant-Greneral Campbell met a committee of the strikers and made arrangements with them to let the trains run, and at 2 p. m. got out a freight train for Denison, without being molested. In the mean time Knights of Labor held a special meeting and decided not to let any more trains leave Parsons. At 4 p. m. started another engine out, and General Campbell in the cab, strikers came out in force and covered tie track, ran engine about 6 miles an hour, and one of the strik- ers, Mike Moran, jumped on the engine and kicked and broke the water-glass; cab filled with escaping steam and water and one of the strikers opened the mud-valve and turned the water on the fire. WiUiam C. Miller also saw Moran kick the water- April 1. — Got another engine out and up to the depot, when George Trinder, striker, opened the escape-pipe from the mud-drum, and F. E. Foley jumped into the cab and opened the mud-drum, letting all the steam escape. Engine was taken back to the round-house. One Frank Green, striker, broke the water-glass on the same engine. April 3. — Troops arrived during the night and took possession of the property, and several of the leaders of the strikers were arrested, and we commenced to move the trains. Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division,. DBNISON. March 6. — Knights of Labor pulled fire from all engines. They are now in charge of all freight engines. March 8. — Mob of about two hundred Rights of Labor disabled engine by discon- necting valve-stem and carrying off wedge-pins. March 9. — Knights of Labor killed another freight engine by letting water out and dumping fire. Mareh9. — Knights of Labor killed passenger engine by letting out water and dumping fire, and blew her out. March 17. — Some one broke in round-house and disabled stationary engine. March 21. — ^Masked mob went to round-house, killed three passenger engines, let water out of high tank at round-house, let the water out of all freight engines, put fire out in boiler-room, and disabled stationary engine. Shut guard of ten men up in small office and left guard over them with drawn pistols with orders to shoot the first man that moved. March 24. — Eoiights of Labor attempted to capture switch-engine coming from round-house, but were not successful ; sheriff gave chase and captured two of the strikers. WHITESBOROIIGH. March 8. — Strikers killed engine on work train by letting out the water and dump- ing the fire. UTTLE FOSSIL BRIDGE. March 17. — Little I'ossil bridge, north of Hodge, found on fire and burned down.. Stringers of bridge were saturated with coal-oil. Evidently the work of incendiaries, as tracks were found beneath the bridge in the sand. Reward of $200 offered for the capture of the perpetrators. • FOKT WORTH. March 8.— Strikers killed freight engine No. 16B by letting water out and dumping fire. March 8. — Knights of Labor killed engine No. 122 by letting water out and dump- ing fire. March 9.— Strikers kiUed engine No. 125 by letting water out and dumping fire. March 11.— Strikers killed engine No. 159 by letting water out and dumping fire. April 3. — Got a train of coal out of Fort Worth, accompanied by six deputies. When near the Fort Worth acd New Orleans crossing, train was stopped by some one unknown; Deputy Courtright asked the man what was wanted; the reply was "Nothing, we intend no harm." Courtright then saw a number of men crouched in the grass, all well armed ; he ordered them to throw up their hands, and the answer was a murderous volley from the ambushers. The guard returned the fire and the strikers immediately sought shelter behind trees and piles of ties, but were finally ■driven off. Three of the guards, named Tulford, Sneed, and Townsend, fatally 372 . LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. wonnded. The two latter died at compauVs hospital, same evening. Two strikers tilled, named Pierce and Naoe, and three others, natnes unknown, seriously wounded. This assassination caused most intense excitement ; all citizens arming themselves, and called on Governor Ireland for militia, which call was answered promptly by send- ing eight companies there. A great deal of incendiary talk engaged in by Knights (rf ' Labor, and threa^ts to bum and sack the town. Knights of Labor loud in their praise of the men that ambushed the trainmen. * ALVARADO. March 3. — Strikers killed an engine by letting water out and dumping fire. March 13. Knights of Labor disabled all engines in round-house by taking off throt- tle and valve stems. March 18. — Bridge No. 542, just north of Mingo, found on fire at both ends; train crew put it out. Without doubt the work of incendiaries. March 30. — Deputy Courtright and four deputies were guarding train No. 158 out of town ; engine No. 37 was sent out after train No. 158 to bring guards back; strikers took advantage of this act, stole engine No. 85 and started out after engine 37, intend- ing to kill both engines 37 and 85, and make the deputies walk back. Engineer of engine No. 37 took in the situation at a glance and overtook train No. 158 ; got Court- right and the deputies off of her and started back for engine No. 85 with her crew of strikers. The strikers saw them coming and jumped off and made for the woods. TSo damage. April 1. — Some time after midnight a mob of about 50 masked men assaulted the round-house and fired a volley at the guard of 15 citizens who were in charge ; the citizens returned the fire ; the mob then broke and run. No one hurt. WACO. March 9. — Knights of Labor killed engine No. 12 by letting water out and dumping Hre. TAYLOR. March 9. — Knights of Labor killed all freight engines by letting out water and dumping fire. MIKEOIA. March 7.— Knights of Labor killed engine No. 69, by letting out water and dump- ing fire. March 8. — ^Knights of Labor kUled engine No. 59, by letting out water and dump- ing fire. March 10. — Knights of Labor killed engine belonging to train No. 166, by letting out water and dumping fire. International and Great Northern Division. PAI.E8TINB. March 6.— Knights of Labor came from their hall and killed all freight engines in the yards and round-house ; a total of 26 engines disabled by having a portion of their machinery removed. March 8. — Strikers killed three freight engines by letting the water out and dump- ing the fire. March It.— Knights of Labor killed engines Nos. 710, 742, 750, 772, 773, 781, and 782, hy letting out water and dumping fire, and disabled them all by taking parts of their machinery away. March 19.— Mob of strikers disabled eingine No. 712, by letting water out, dumping fire, and blowing her out. Ma/rch 23. — Mob of about 100 strikers entered round-house and killed an engine that had just arrived. Sheriff made no resistance. Mob of about 250 strikers stopped crew from switching and took possession of en- gine No. 750 and killed her by letting the water out and dumping the fire. Mob of Knights of Labor headed for engine No. 768, standing in yard, fire up. They swarmed around the engine and killed her by kicking " bio w-olf cock" open and dumping fire. Two or three deputy sheriffs were around, but did nothing. Ma/rch 24.— Attempted to get out freight train. Mob of about 200 strikers swarmed around the engine and killed her by letting water out, dumping fire, and blowing her out. Sheriff rendered no assistance. LABOR TROUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. 373 March 25. — Mob of about 150 strikers killed switch engine. Sheriff gave no assist- ance whatever. Maroh 26. — Mob of about 200 strikers made grand rush for a road engine which was switching in yard and drove away yard crew, crowded into the cab, and a negro Enight of Labor struck the engineer with an iron bar. The engineer returned the compliment, and l^id the negro out by a blow on the head with a hammer. The mob finally threw the engine off the track by throwing the wrong switch, and then blew her out. The deputy sheriffs a\:ted as spectators and made no attempt to enforce the law. TRINITY. March 8. — Strikers killed one freight engine by letting the water out and dumping the fire. The Saint Lome, Iron Mountain and Southern Bailway. SAINT LOUIS. Maroh S3. — ^Yard clerk at Carondelet discovered that links and pms had been driven into the split switches at the west yard, with malicious intent. March 27. — Four cars were placed at Arsenal depot for loading Government stores and were burned, together with . Government depot and all Government stores con- tained therein. The fire was the work of an incendiary. April 2. — At Saint Louis freight station, between 2 and 3 p. m., a gang of twenty strikers came into the yard and forcibly drove away and maltreated the crew which was doing the switching, and said that they would not allow any switching done in that yard. They were recognized as Missouri Pacific switchmen strikers. April 12. — Four men boarded train No. 53 at west yard, Carondelet, and ordered brakemen off. Conductor Waters, however, prevented any violence until the train reached Grant's, when he had to cut the train in two in order to double the Mil. He went ahead with the first cut, and left two brakemen with the last cut of the train to flag. The four strikers then assaulted the two brakemen, seriously injuring Poster, one of the bra>k&men, who was struck with a billy. The conductor, coming back with the rest of the train crew, then drove the strikers away. HEMATITE. March 12. — Mob of striking Knights of Labor took possession of freight engine No. 422 at this point, killed her, and took the bolts out the rocker arms, thus completely disabling her. DB SOTO. March 6. — Committee appointed by the assembly of Knights of Labor waited on W. H. Harris, the master mechanic, and told him that he would not be allowed to mn any more freight trains^ or to get out any more freight engines. March 11. — About 200 Knights of Labor came to round house, burst in doors and windows, and forced engineers and watchmen out, threatening them bodily harm in case they refused to go. Mob was armed with clubs and pieces of iron. They dis- connected valve stems of all freight engines, and killed and disabled such engines as were fired up, and carried away parts of machinery, thus completely disabling the engines. They then rolled four passenger trucks in turn-table pit, in this way pre- venting engines from being turned. They then threw one passenger engine off the track at turn-table, trying in every way to disable the turn-table to prevent the turn- ing of passenger engines. Called on the sheriff for protection. None granted. DE SOTO. March 27. — The first freight train through this place since the blockade passed through here from the north about 12.30 p. m., and while its appearance created con- sternation and excitement in the ranks of the Knights of Labor, there was no apparent effort made to obstruct or impede its passage. In about an hour the second freight train, from the sonth, made its appearance. The effect of this was electrical upon the Knights of Labor. They rapidly gathered around the tracks and in the yards of the com- pany, seemingly intensely excited and determined to arrest its progress if possible. When the train was about 200 yards sonth of the depot a desperate attempt was made by the strikers to wreck it, by placing a link on the rail, about 12 feet in advance of the moving engine. The engine knocked it off, much to the disappointment of Tom Barry, who put the link on. Intensely angered at this failure, a Kjiight of Labor, 374 LABOR TROUBLES liST THE SOUTH AND WEST. named Moran, threw a coupling-pin at the engineer, which, luoiily, miBsed him and passed through the cab. J. Nelson attempted to arrest Moran and was by him struck and knocked down. The Knights immediately rallied to the support of Moran, when H. M. Tod, the yardmaster, interfered for the protection of Nelson. The whole mob of howling, maddened men, then turned on Tod, who ran for his life, the air behind him filled with links, pins, rooks, and missiles of all kinds, together with shouts of "hang him," "kill him," &o. Tod rushed to his boarding-house for protection, with the mob at his heels, howling for his blood, and threatening to break and l"ii'n down the house to get at their victim. They were met at the door by Mrs. John Duffy, the wife of an engineer, an estimable lady, and were held back and cowed by the moral cour- age of this delicate woman, who stood at the door alone, covering the wild mob of 200 men with the pistol of Tod, which she had snatched from his hand as he came fleeing through the door. Her extraordinary courage and coolness, without doubt, averted a terrible riot. The mayor then hastened to the scene and finally succeeded in dispersing the mob. March 28.— Knights of Labor served official notice on all engineers and train men, warning them not to take their trains out at the peril of their lives.' Discovered a plot that Knights of Labor had arranged to take rail out of track, just north of De Soto, to wreck the first freight train that came along. Knights of Labor threatened to dump the eoal buggies at the coal chute on the main track, so as to Dlockade the yard. March 29. — Knights of Labor soaped the track for about 200 yards, j nst 1 mile south of De Soto, but it was discovered before the evening passenger trains passed the point and was remedied. Fifty strikers marched from their hall and went north in a body, and another body of fifty went south. One of the narty going south was overheard to say that " no other freight trains should ever go through De Soto." Steps were taken to watch these bodies of strikers. March 30. — Knights of Labor evidently arming. Man named Burton, one of their leaders, seen going to the hall with a Winchester; another Knight of Labor with him with a gun aiS revolvers. March 31. — At 7 p. m. while Yardmaster Mallory was switching in the south end of the yard, he was rocked and shot at by a gang of strikers. He was not hit, and succeeded in making his escape. Ajrril 1.— Train 604, passenger, found two pieces of rail 3 feet long on track three- fourths of a mile north coal chute at De Soto, and knocked them off track. No dam- age done. Obstacles were placed on the track for the purpose of wrecking the train. April 3. — Strikers drinking hard, and are insolent and ugly. They waited on Isabel, a machinist, and others who had professed a willingness to return to work) and warned them not to do so at the peril of their lives. They also waited on the sheriff and told him no more coal carriages could be moved, and no more engines furnished coal at the coal chute. i April 5. — Committee of Knights of Labor went to the coal chute and tried to intimi- date the guards there, but were unsuccessful. April 10. — Otto Miller, an employ^, who was returning from work, was assaulted by two Knights of Labor, named Albert Wilson and Charles Ives, and badly used up. Wilson and Ives were arrested, and taken to Hillsboro, the county seat. BISMARCK. •Ma/roh 16. — Mob of Knights of Labor entered the round-house at 2 a. m., and over- powered the watchmen, and disabled the four freight engines there by disconnecting valve stems and carrying off parts of machinery. March 27. — Knights of Labor broke into tool-house and stole claw bar, spike maul and guage. IKONDALE. March 20.— Several large rocks were placed on track just south of Big River bridge. It being the intention of the perpetrator to throw train off the track as it was enter- ing the bridge. Fortunately the ri)cks were so large that engine knocked them off the track. No damage. MINERAL POINT. March 23.— Bridgeman found brake-shoe fastened on rail 100 yards north of paBSing track at Mineral Point. It threw his hand-car off and broke it. March 22.— Train No. 604, passenger, at about 2.35 a. m., found bridge No. 650, 2 miles north of Curtis, on fire; stringers ou one side entirely burned out, and ends of «11 ties burned off. This is the work of incendiaries. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST 375 BELMONT. March 17. — While turninK engine, mob of Knights of Labor took possession of en- gine and would not allow her to be turned, nor would they allow our employes to handle her. Called on the sheriff for aid. They also stopped the work on the incline and drove the men away. bird's point. March 17. — Twenty Knights of Labor from Cairo took forcible possession of switch- engine last night, and ran it 1 mile west, and killed engine, leaving it on the main track. NKWPOET. March 19. — Mob of Knights of Labor stopped a freight train at White Eiver, side- tracked the the train, and completly disabled the engine. The sheriff is a Knight of Labor. JACKSONVIIXK. March 19. — Extra north engine 360, with engine 361 and 466 in tow, found north switch at Jacksonville open at 12.30 a. m. Engine 360 and 2 cars ran into siding. Dead engine 361 struck the end of switch-rail and was thrown from track and turned over on her side. The switch-lever was broken with an ax which was found lying by the switch-stand. Eeward of $50 offered for arrest and conviction of each party connected with this switch throwing. LinxE KOCK. March 0. — Self-appointed Knights of Labor guards at Barring Cross shops, took such good care of the freight-engines in the shops and round-house that they considered it necessary to take from each engine the set-screw of the eccentric, and also took from the cupboard all the extra set-screws, thus completely disabling all freight-engines, rendering them unfit for service. March 11. — Mob of Knights of Labor stole engine and run her to Ensign and there killed and disabled it. One arrest made. March 12. — Arrangements were made at Barring Cross to take a half a dozen cars and switch-engine and go to Ensign after the disabled engine there, which was done. Four masked Knights of Labor then boarded engine (passenger) No. 408, and started after the switch-engine and train. They stopped at Little Eock and took on 20 more Knights of Labor, and overtook the switch-engine and train at Benton, and side- tracked the train and started back to Little Eock with the stolen engine, the captured engine and caboose. As soon as Superintendent Whedon learned of this, he called on the United States marshal, and with the United States marshal and posse, mounted a switch-engine and started in pursuit. They overtook them at Barring Cross Bridge and coupled into the stolen engine, and, throwing the switch-engine into back motion, brought stolen engine to a stop. The Knights of Labor then jumped off and made for the woods. The United States marshal and posse ordered them to halt, which order being disregarded, they fired on them and wounded one and captured six. March 22. — ^Passenger train No. 602 found a rail across the track between mile posts 452 and 453, but discovered it in time to come to a stop and remove it. No April 9. — At 12 a. m. a raid was made on the shops at Barring Cross by a body of between thirty and forty Knights of Labor all armed with rifles, shotguns, and revol- vers. The force of guards consisted of but ten, and were imder the comma'nd of Deputy Sheriff Ham Williams, a man noted for his personal bravery. The first in- timation Deputy Williams received of the attack was when F. H. Darby, a leading knight of Labor, accosted him and ordered Williams and his men away from the shops, stating that if they did not go they would be put away. Williams reply was : "I will just take you in right here," and forthwith seized Darby and looked him up in the B. &. B. office. Just at this moment Deputy Faitherly said " Here they are," and in the dim light of the morning was seen the body of Knights of Labor a short distance away. Williams stood on the steps of the 6ffice of the master mechanic and ordered the mob to disperse, saying that " he was there to protect the property of the company, and he would do it if he fell in his tracks." One of the Knights of Labor then called out: "Well, die then," and at the same instant they fired a volley. The deputies returned the fire, and the firing was kept up until about two hundred shots had been exchanged, when the Knights of Labor finally fell back and were lost to view in the darkness. As Sheriff Worthen and a posse of deputies, hastily summoned, 376 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■were going to the scene they meet three men, one of whom, Charles Shepp, a Knight of Labor, was armed with a double-barreled shotgun. They were ordered to halt, which they disregarded, but instantly obeyed as the ominous click of the poss^'a muskets rang out on the night air. They were taken into custody and found to U> all Knights of Labor. When the sheriff and posse reached the shops they found Will- iams lying on a cot in the telephone o£&ce dangerously wounded, having been shot first through the stomach and then as he fell received a charge from a shotgun through his back. Hastily summoning medical aid, they took an empty car and en- gine and tenderly conveyed him to his home in Little Rock. Eye-witnesses state that several of the Ekiights of Labor were wounded and were taken away by them when they fled. TEXARKANA. March 7.— On March 7 the Knights of Labor took possession of all company prop- erty and yards at Texarkana, and no attempts were made to resume business uiitil — March 23. — When on a promise from the sheriff to protect us we ran a freight train into this place. On arrival of train they disabled the engine and side-tracked the train. The sheriff was powerless to give us the protection promised, and the mob had everything their own way. March 26. — Upon assurance from the sheriff and citizens that they would give us ample protection, we started up a yard crew switching, and endeavored to start out a freight train, when a mob of 400 stopped the yard crew from switching and drove them forcibly from the yards, and killed the engine. They also killed the engine attached to the freight train and side-tracked the train. The sheriff endeavored to enforce order, but was hooted and hissed at'by the mob, hut was powerless to pre- serve the law, and, called upon the governor for aid to enforce same. March 26. — Some unknown parties pulled the spikes and took fish-plates off of rail near Williams's Farm, just outside of the yard limits at Texarkana. This was discov- ered at 3 p. m., and damage repaired. March 27. — The only engine at Texarkana, No. 467, which had not been disabled by the Knights of Labor, was t.aken possession of, the guards forcibly driven away, and the engine killed. C&ntral Branch, Union Pacific Division. ATCHISON. March 11. — Committee of Knights of Labor went through shops, ordering out all men who were at work ; they then took forcible possession of our shops and engines. Called on sheriff, but resulted in nothing being done ; sheriff and deputies are Knights of Labor. March 12. — Strikers, in presence of sheriff, boarded freight engine in yard, dumped her fire, and opened blow-off cock, killing her. Sheriff offered no resistance whatever. March 23. — About 2 a. m. masked mob of about forty Knights of Labor, coming direct from their hall, overpowered the guard, covering them with revolvers and threatening them with instant death if fliey moved, and then killed and disabled 12 freight engines by letting out water, dumping fire, and taking parts of machinery away. As extra east, with engine No. 327, got just outside of city limits, train was boarded by about fifty strikers,^ who set brakes, threw coupling pins in the river, and killed engine. At the same time the strikers killed two other freight engines. March 26. — Made two attempts to get out trains, but were prevented by mob of Knights of Labor, who pulled pins and kept the train cut up, so that the attempt was abandoned. March 29. — Made another attempt to get out freight train, but Knights of Labor ditched train by taking bolts out of switch-rod and shifting rails about one- half inch and spiking them ; the^ then soaped track several rail-lengths ahead, so that engi- neer could not stop engine in time to stay on track. They also boarded eugine No. 180, which was coupled on to train ready to go west, cut engine off, put a link in each pair of guides, and opened engine out; this bent the guides, broke guide blocks, yoke, back cylinder head, and bent one main rod and pin. Sheriff offered no protec- tion. March 30. — Masked mob of about one hundred men heavily armed raided shops again, and disabled the only two engines in service ; also yard engine No. 311, dis- abled the stationary engine, and cut up all the belting. No clue as to the parties that committed this depredation. April 2. — Track walker found rail removed and a tie strapped to rail on tte first bridge east of Greenleaf. April 11. — Gang of eight Knights of Labor assaulted an employ^, injuring him se- siously. Warrants sworn out for their arrest. liABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 377 GEEENI.EAP. March 20. — Strikers boarded engine in yard and killed it by letting out water and damping fire. DOWNS. March 14. — Committee of Knights of Labor from Atchison and Greenleaf waited on men at Downs and succeeded in inducing them to kill all freight engines at that point. March 20. — Engine was fired up, and when in front of depot Enights of Labor boarded her and Silled her by putting fire out and letting water out by cutting hose. Statem^it of train-wreclcs and accidents and depredaUons committed by strikers. March 23. — ^Train No. 28 derailed SJ miles east of Sedalia, caused by fish-plate being removed, spikes drawn on inside of rail and end of rail thrown out. Engine and six cars thrown from track ; engine 316 laying on her side on north side of track ; three loaded box lying across track ; three loaded box off track with broken trucks. Fol- lowing persons injured : Mr. Mason had left arm broken ; Mr. O'Neal had his right leg broken ; J. .J. Frey badly shaken up and bruised ; J. M. Spangler, conductor, face cut ; W. B. Lyons, train-master, general shaking up ; John DeLong, detective, left arm and shoulder bruised. ' March 30. — No. 154 thrown from track 4 miles south of Parsons at 12.20 a. m. , caused by fish-plates being removed from two rails and rails removed from their places ; tender of engine, mail-car, and baggage and first truck of smoker off track ; tender, mail, and baggage car down the bank, which is 5 or 6 feet high ; baggage-master and mail clerk injured. April 1. — Some one threw switch for side track at Wyandotte this a. m., and ran No. 2 into some coal cars ; several slats in pilot of engine 258 broken, and two coal cars damaged. April 10. — No. 4 this a. m. found rock weighing about 200 pounds on rail in second cut west of West Tunnel, at Barrett's ; conductor thinks was placed on track by some one. April 11. — Some one threw rock at train 154 about 3 miles north of Hiattville last night, breaking window in M. P. baggage car 120. April 13. — W.,St. L. & P. car 6639, loaded with barrel-heads, burned; car and con- tents a total loss ; car was standing on south or east end of L. & S. siding, at Nevada. April 14. — As first No. 3 last p. m. was passing Bartold Station some one threw a rock through sleeping-car window ; no one hurt. April 18. — Some one threw a large rock through two windows of a coach in train No. 9 last night, at Marshall's switch, near Pacific. April 20. — At 11.50 p. m., engine 29 and tender, one loaded and three empty cars were thrown from track one mile north of Alvarado, caused by two rails having been torn up. Engine 29 was thrown down an embankment and is lying on her back ; the tender and loaded car were also thrown down the bank ; tender lies on its side ; three empty cars crossways of track ; Engineer Barrett has his left arm broken ; Fireman Burns caught under tank, and has his ankle very badly mashed; Brakeman Condon has several bruises. April 21. — Some one let brake off three cars lumber on city track at Independence, while train 33 was switching, this p. m.; cars ran down and struck engine 243, on train 33, knocking hole in rear end of tank, mashing pilot and front end of engine ; platform off coach. The three freight cars badly damaged. April 26. — ^Train 38 has engine 862 and five cars in ditch halt-mile east of Wyandotte, caused by spikes being pulled out of the ties, and fish-plates taken off. Engine is turned over. Ben. Horton, fireman, and George Carlisle, brakeman, under engine and killed. Engineer J. H. Fowler was hurt about the head. April 23 (Abstract from letter of John Hodge, M. C. B., dated April 25, 1886).— "About six p. m. E. H. Brewer, foreman in Saint Louis freight-yard, and S. A. Norton, freight carpenter, were walking down our track on their way home ; when about opposite the oil mill of K. B. Brown Oil Company they noticed a man come down the steps at the Pratt avenue crossing, closely followed by three others. These four men turned west on the track and walked towards Brewer and Norton, whose atten- tion was just then attracted by the movements of some men in among the cars stand- ing on siding at that point. The man in advance of the party of four as he reached my men passed between them and seizing Brewer by the right arm said, " You work for the l^issonri Pacific," and, without giving time for any reply, struck Brewer, knocking him down. One or two of the three men following struck Norton, knock- ing him down also. Both men were hit and kicked while on the ground, being pretty badly bruised, especially Norton. One of the policemen on guard atthe Summit ave- nue crossing, L. Hulfish, seeing the trouble, started to run down the track, seeing which the parties making the attack left the men they were beating, and run away. 378 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. No arrests were made, and the men beaten claim to be unable to identify their as- sailants. Both men were able to attend to their duties yesterday." April 10.— On April 6, Otto Miller, a machinist, returned to work, and on morning of 10th, while on his way to work, was assaulted and beaten by two Knights of Labor ; was knocked down, and severely injured, receiving several cuts on the Head and face. On March 11, 1886, the following communication appeared in one of the Saint Louis papers, but was never received by the person to wh6m it was stated to have been addressed : GRIEVANCES AND DEMANDS. Sedalia, Mo., March 10. Martin Irons, chairman of the executive board of District Assemby 101, Knights of Labor, has prepared the following statement of grievances and demands of the employes of the Southwest system to-night and mailed it to Colonel Hoxie : " In order that the public may understand why the present strike is in existence oq the Gould Southwest system, and in order to show to the public the falsity of the circu- lar issued from the executive department of the Missouri Pacific railway, addressed to the employes of said road, but in reality intended for the public for the purpose of eliciting public sympathy. We consider the circular too insignificant to reply to io detail. It is indeed surprising that railroad magnates who have so long insulted the people with the epithet 'be damned,' will come down on their knees and cater to theni for sympathy. "The settlement of the strike of March, 1885, in which we had no voice, but which we accepted in good faith, and which has been kept inviolate by us, has been repeat- edly violated by the company, viz, by not restoring to all the employfo the wages paid prior to September, 1884, in several places on the Texas and Pacific Railroad, as well as on the Missouri Pacific road and its branches, and by the discharging of em- ployes contrary to the spirit and intent of the settlement. ' ' Now, it is the belief of every Knight of Labor on the system that the companies tjierein mentioned have inaugurated a systematic method for the purpose of breaking up the organization of the Knights of Labor on the system, and that the placing of the Texas and Pacific in the hands of a receiver and under the jurisdiction of the United States court is the main feabure of their scheme, and in order to meet and de- feat these contemptible and blood-sucking corporations and their governmental alhes, and iu order to secure redress for the foregoing grievances and the following demands, we have inaugurated this strike. "In order to bring about a speedy adjustment of the difiBculty now existing between the management of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, and the Texas Pacific Railway Company, and all its branches and their employes, the district executive board of District Assembly, No. 101, of the Knights of Labor of America submits the following basis of settlement to the management of the aforesaid roads : "First, a conference to be arranged with the management of the aforesaid Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, and the Texas and Pacific Eail- road, and all its branches, as party of the first part, and the district executive board of District Assembly No. 101, as party of the second part, for the purpose of settling the following grievances by arbitration : "First. That all unskilled labor employed by the roads previously mentioned now- receiving less than !| 1.50 per day be paid at the rate of |1.50 per day, the above to in- clude all section laborers, trackmen, and crossing-watchmen. Second. The abolishment of convict labor on the above-named roads, and that con- victs now employed in the Missouri Pacific leased and operated lines, and Texas Pacific Railway and all its branches be immediately discharged. Third. That the rate of pay of all bridgemen be restored to the rates of September, 1884, viz : In a gang of ten men, two at |2.75, four men at $2.50, two men at $3.25, and two men at $2. Fourth. That all house-repair gangs be rated as bridgemen. Fifth. That all boarding-bosses for bridge gangs shall be entitled to half rates of freight on all supplies for use of bridge outfits. Sixth. That when outfit cars are moved at night or on Sunday, bridgemen shall be a,llowed one and one-half time while being so moved. Seventh. That while bridgemen are compelled to work in water at washouts, &c., they shall be allowed double time while so engaged. Eighth. That when bridgemen are detached ftdm their gangs on special service they shall be allowed time and half time while traveling at night, and straight time for all other time until they return to their respective gangs. Ninth. That bridgemen having families shall be permitted to travel on their gang- dasses to and from their homes for the purpose of visiting their families at least twice der month. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 379' Tenth. That a system be established for the government of the employ and wages of apprentices on the Gould southwest system of railroads as follows : That four years constitute an apprenticeship, and that the scale of wages be fixed as follows : For the first year, $1 per day ; for the second year, $1.25 per day ; for the third year, $1.75 per day; and for the fourth and last year, |3.25 per day; and at the expiration of their term of apprenticeship they are to receive the average journeyman's wages of the department to which they belong ; and that no boys under the age of 17 years be ad- mitted as apprentices in any department on the above-mentioned roads ; and that in . each case articles of agreement shall be signed by the representative of the railway company of the first part and the legal representative of the applicant for the ap- prenticeship of the second part; and that in no case shall the ratio of apprentices be more than one to every eight mechanics, and that no more apprentices be employed until the number is reduced to the above-mentioned ratio. Eleventh. In view of the fact that considerable dissatisfaction and trouble have arisen on account of the discharge of employes without cause first being made known, therefore we demand that when any employes who are Knights of Labor do not give satisfaction in the capacity in which they are engaged, it shall be made known to- them in writing, that they may defend themselves in the following manner : The ac- cused party to select two persons to assist in conducting the defense, and the officer of the company in immediate charge of the department in which the accused is em- ployed be allowed to select two persons to assist in conducting the prosecution ; and that the accused be tried before three disinterested parties, to be selected in the fol- lowing manner : The parties assisting in the defense to select one and the parties as- sisting in the prosecution one, and the two thus selected choose the third. The ac- cused must be allowed to remain at wort until the charges are either disproved or substantiated. Twelfth. We demand that all men be paid the same wages for the same work ; in other words, that when a man quits or is taken off a job that pays a certain price, that his successor receive the same rate of pay. Thirteenth. We further demand that all men' who have been unjustly discharged from any of the aforesaid roads be immediately reinstated in their respective posi- tions at the conclusion of the existing difficulties. Respectfully submitted. PH. MARTIN IRONS, Chairman JSxeeutive Board, JDiatrict Assembly 101, Knights of Labor. Philadelphia, April 7, 1886. H. M. HOXTE : Yon are a God damn sucker. Yon don't dare to go home at night without you have a detective with you. I would give all the money I am worth to see somebody crack your skull, if you have any, you rotten sucker. You and Jay Gould are the two biggest lieing scoun- drels that walk in two shoes, you miserable vagabonds. • You don't dare to have this note published, for if you did people would know what a damn sucker you were. Curse you. I would dance over your grave if somebody would kill you. You s: a . Yours, in haste, (A friend of the workingman and an enemy to such devils as you are.) To hell with you and Jay Gould. Put a personal iu the N. Y. Herald and tell me how you like this letter. A. F. in the Heralds Postal card addressed H. M. HoxiB, Vice-President Mo. Pac, Saint Louis, Mo.: Chicago, April 3, 1886. If vou keep this thing ,up you will go to Hades sooner than you think you wiU. K. or L. 153. gs. Paper has cut of skull and cross-bones pasted in one corner. Apkil 30, 1886. To H. M. HoxiE : You can view yoursplf as you will appear in a very short time if you can be caught out on amy part of the sistum you are trying to con troll. All we ask in a chance at you, if it takes teu years to catch you. Yon might as well say your prayers. OxE OF THE Solid Committee of Avengers. 380 LABOR TROUBLES IN THL SOUTH AND WEST. • Omaha. H. M. HoxiB : Yoii will play with fiieaims ? Oh, you old rat ! You got it, did you ? Wait and see your master get It — Jay Gould. Lookout for breakers ahead. Gould will get it in the neck. Don't you forget it. I send you sketches of press reports of yourself. Beware 11 A K5NIGHT. (From The Labor Leaf, dated Detroit, Mich., 'Wednesday, April 14, 1886.] CKANKT NOTIONS. fBy J^oseph A. Labadie.] What a streak of good fortune it would be to this country if some foolhardy fellows would take it into their heads to kill Gould and Hoxie, and carry the thing out. If you know of some fellow intent upon suicide, who desires to go out of the world im- mediately upon doing a world of good to a world of people, induce him if you can to take one of these two beasts with him. But some one who reads this will hold up his hands at such a suggestion, and declare it a monstrous proposition. Well, it may be 80 ; but these samei people would not hesitate a moment to kill a'mad dog, and no mad dog ever caused so much agony and wretchedness as these two men. It is not proba- ble that there are a hundred people in this world who would mourn their destruction. They have used most brutally the power they possess. It is true, this terrible power was granted them by the law, but this only proves what a great amount of injustice flows from the law. If Congress and the States simply withdrew the protection they throw around these highwaymen, how long do you suppose they would be able to dominate over the lives and fortunes of hundreds of thousands of honest toilers ? Not an hour. No social injustice can be named that is not protected by the law. It is also true that Gould and Hoxie are but the legitimate results of capitalism, and were they removed other men, probably equally as bad or worse, would step into their places. But no one has a right to use undue advantages over his fellows, no matter how the power comes to him. The fact that so much injustice and suffering cpmes from the power in their hands is evidence that it is an evil power, and it is right to abolish evil, even though the most heroic means be used. And he who represents an evil must expect to go the way of all evil things. Gould and Hoxie must go. The paper, with above extract marked, was inclosed in an envelope addressed to " H. M. Hoxie, esq., V. P. Mo. Pao. Ry., city." . AUBERG, Tex., 3-9, 1886. H. M. HOXEYj You seme to Take a Big Dust in Thing That is going on, but Let me Tell you old man you have not many years to Live and you ought to Look for them, you have down Trodden poor men's swet Long enought and we cannot Stand it aney longher (turn over). , On reverse side is written : Mr. Hoxet: Dbak Sir : This note is from a man That is working for your Road & has never struck, but he is a Knit. Your Lief is not wort a dam, no more then a Dog's. Postal card, with address " H. M. Hoxie, Saint Louis," cut from a newspaper and pasted on. On reverse side is pasted a cut of a revolver, a cut of skull and cross bones, the word " beware" and signed " strikers," all cnt from some newspaper. Q. (By the Chairman.) I would like to ask one question before you retire. Had you any interviews or negotiations with the men who struck, not in the order of the Knights of Labor ? There were others striking as well as those in the order t— A. Nothing but what are in the interviews given you. With those who were not mem- bers of the Knights of Labor? Q. Yes, with those who were not members of the order. — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) I would like to ask one question before the cross-examma- tion is made. There has been something said from time to time about this demand for raising the wages of the common laborers to $1.50 a day. I suppose that applies to the trackmen, does it not? — A. That applies only to trackmen, as I understand it. Q. Now, have you ever received any communication or any demand from the track- men to raise their wages ?— A. No, sir ; I have not received a communication from any LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 381 one conuected directly or indirectly with the track in employing men that has stated that the men have made such a demand. We pay the same wages that other roads pay all over the country. Q. Do you know whether the trackmen themselves have presented that as a griev- ance, or whether that demand comes from the Knights of Labor? — A. As I under- stand it, it comes from the Knights of Labor. That is one of the grievances they make in that correspondence, which has been furnished. Q. And you say that not over 10 per cent, of the trackmen joined in the strike ? — A. I don't think there were ten per cent. ; but I gave ^that as an outside figure. As I stated, on the I. & 6. N. there was only one man went out, and that is a road of 850 miles in length. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) Mr. Kerrigan, when the order to strike on the Texas and Pa- cific was made, was there any correspondence between Receiver Brown and Mr. Hoxie with regard to the troubles f — A. I don't know of any, sir. Q. Have you any such correspondence in your possession or under your control ? — A. I have not, sir. Q. Did you receive any orders, any communications from Mr. Brown ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Or from any of the officials of the Texas and Pacific road? — A. No, sir. Q. You remember of none ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did yon communicate with Governor Brown, or any officials of the Texas and Pacific during that time ? — A. No, sir; there was only one communication received from Governor Brown that I know anything about, and that was his objection to our boycotting Texas and Pacific cars, the cars of his road. That was the Texas and Pacific cars. I don't remember the substance of that, but I expect we could get a copy of that. Q. How do you know, Mr. Kerrigan, that the wages of the Missouri Pacific are higher than they are on Eastern roads ? — A. I have been lately working up a com- parative statement of wages earned on roads east of the river and roads west of the river, which are our connections. I have not got that quite completed yet, but I know enough about it to know that our wages as an average all around are higher than those paid by any other road. [See Exhibit J.] Q. Do you remember how many roads you consulted with regard to their prices, and, if so, what ones ? — A. About sixteen or seventeen. Q. Ton base that opinion, then, upon the comparison of your wages with some six- teen or seventeen other lines ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I would like to ask you if in that comparison you took into consideration the difference, if any, between the price of living on other roads and on the Missouri Pa- cific? — ^A. No, sir; I did not. Q. It may be, then, that the price of flour, pork, and other necessaries of life were higher on those roads than on your roads, or lower ? — A. Well, no, sir ; I don't think they are lower. I think they are as cheap here as they are anywhere, as far as pro- visions of that class are concerned. Q. You think it is likely they are cheaper on any other road ? — A. I think they are cheaper here. This is right in the heart of the country where those things are raised, and I think they are cheaper here. Q. How do the prices which the men here have to pay for the necessaries of life compare with the prices of similar articles on the Baltimore and Ohio and Pennsyl- vania roads? — A. Well, I could not answer that. I have stated that once before. Q. Do you know the prices paid to trackmen on any of the roads in Ohio?— A. I said I could not answer that. I don't know what they pay there. Q. Do you know what they pay on the Kansas City and Southern Railway?— A. I do not, sir ; I think that is one of the roads that we compared with. Q. Can you give the prices paid on any of the sixteen or seventeen roads that yon have examined ? — A. I cannot, sir ; we could furnish that if you desire it. Q. Can you furnish us with a copy of that statement ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you do so ? — A. Yes, sir. [See Exhibits I and J. ] Q. Do you know whether the men on the Baltimore and Ohio get fiiU time ; that is, ten hours ? — A. I do not, sir. Mr. Stewart. Do you mean the trackmen, Mr. Burnes? Mr. BtJRNBS. Yes, sir; the trackmen. Q. Referring to your employes working on bridges and on the track, do they get full time ? — A. Yes, sir ; they get full time if they work full time. I will state right here, gentlemen, that Mr. Peck is going on the stand and can answer all those ques- tions; he is the superintendent of bridges and buildings. Q. Can you remember the facts sufficiently to enable you to answer this question : If a man ^ould or a company of men should be shipped on Saturday evening to a certain point to repair bridges or tracks, and should be traveling Saturday night and Sunday, including Sunday night so as to be able to go to work Monday morning, do they get any pay for the time in such a case ? — A. I do not think they do, sir. 382 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you know, Mr. Kerrigan, where the firing began that you alluded to at Pacific City ?— A. Not, except from the reports. Q. Tou were not there ?— A. I wasn't there, sir. Q. Did any of your reports convey the information that the firing was first from the train t— A. I don't think they did ; I have an indistinct recollection of eomehody saying that the firing was first from the train, but I think the report showed that the firing first came from the parties who came out of Ihe hall, supposed to have been Knights of Labor. The hall— I will explain, the tracks run along in the street, and the hall is j ust across the street from the tracks. 1 have had the hall pointed ont to me. Q. You know nothing about it except what you have heard and from your reports ? A ^J"o SIT 1 q'. I will ask you whether the removal of the rails or rail that ditched the train three miles from Sedalia was caused by Knights of Labor, within your knowledge, or is that based upon information only ?— A. Well, that has already been answered by the evidence at Sedalia. , Q. You were not there ?— A. I wasn't there, no, sir. Q. And of course, what you know is from information, and not personal knowl- ■edge? — A. My information comes through the reports. Q. You would make the same answer with regard to the raiding at the round- house? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What you have stated comes from information, not from personal knowledge?— A.. Yes, sir. Ql Outside of the section foremen, what is the average pay of seotionmen on the Pacific system ?— A. Well, it is from fl.lO to |1.25. The men on the regular sections fet $1.10 to $1.15 and the extra gangs get $1.15, and the yard gangs as a rule $1.S!5. here may be some exceptions to the yard gang getting that, getting |1.15. But the yard gangs are paid $1.15 and |1.25. Q. How much time are they compelled to lose from any time or other cause?— A. Well, the men work about 10 hours. If they work over that they get paid for it. I don't understand that they lose any time at all, whether they work 10 hours or not, as a rule they get paid for it, unless the man lays off himself. Q. Isn't the man often required to lay off for want of work or for the purposes of the company ? — A. Well, that has only been the case here lately, where these men liave been compelled by these organizations, Knights of Labor., The only time that I know of in the history of the road, after being on it 16 years, where trackmen have been •suspended, that is laid off and worked short hours, have been where these men have been connected with the organization. Q. And that was after the strike of March 6th, did you say f^-A. Within the last three or four months. Q. Within the last three or four months? — ^A. Yes, sir; we increased or reduced the force as we needed the men prior to that. Q, Did you do that as a discrimination against the men because of their order of the Knights of Labor? — A. I did not, sir; I don't think it is policy to work men short hours. Q. Have you any knowledge or information that men were thus laid off for that reason ? — A. No, sir. ^ Q. You are not yourself a Knight of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. You have no personal knowledge of the fact of these strikers being Knights of Labor, except as you got it from information ? — A. Except as 1 got it fe)m informa- tion of others. Q. In any case where violence has been used by a striker, do you of your personal knowledge know that such striker was a Knight of Labor at the time — you had in- formation to that effect, but you have no personal knowledge of the fact ? — A. Well, where violence was used, no, sir. Q. Do you remember of seeing the list of grievances that was handed to Mr. Hoxie's ■chief clerk on September last ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you remember that such a list, or that some list of that sort, was handed to the gentleman ? — A. I don't know whether there was or not ; I was not in the office. I was superintendent of the Iron Mountain road at the time. Q. Have you heard Mr. Hoxie say that such a list was handed to his clerk ? — A. I have not, sir ; I have heard Mr. Hoxie deny it right straight through that he ever ■did, or that he ever saw such a list. Q. Did you hear Mr. Hoxie's chief clerk say that such a list was handed to him?— A. Well, Mr. Hoxie at that time was a third vice-president, and when I was pro- moted I practically took his place as general superintendent. The chief clerk that Mr. Hpxie had there at that time I did not keep there, I think, longer than a week or ten days, mi.ybe two Weeks. I brought my present clerk there, and he sought em- ployment elsewhere ; worked a while in Texas and went from there to Chicago ; got eick there and jumped out of the fifth story window of one of the hotels during nls LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 383 sickness and delirium, which killed him. I will say this, that if anybody had left any grievances there I would have fonnd them in the records of that office. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) I was going to ask you the question' whether any such doc- ument ever was found there ? Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) What was the name of the chief clerk to whom you maderef- ereuoe, Mr. Kerrigau ? — A. Geoifry O'Hara, Q. Mr. Kerrigan, how do you account for the increase of business in moving cars and trains in March and April, 1885, under the circumstances of trouble detailed by you (see Exhibit K)?— A. WeU, we were just on the eve of a very large business. I think the increase was accounted for in that way, and a portion of that increase was accounted for in the detention of the business during the period that we were not moving trains. ' Q. Your idea then would be, I suppose, that a good deal of this business was not lost to you, but was simply retained for future days ? — ^A. Well, I believe it was a loss to us ; every day we laid idle, just the business we would have done that day was lost to us. Q. But if you did more than you did the year preceding ? — A. I think we would have done that business any way, this increase. Q. It seems that there was an embargo laid upon business here, and at many points, some of which we have visited, and it was often expressed that this embargo or strike was very disastrous to business generally, and as well to business of the road as to the business of the people. Now, in view of this increase of business in March and April, it becomes us to inquire why under the circumstances such an increase should be made. Yon have said that a great deal of this business was simply detained. May it not be that this extra business done after the troubles were somewhat settled com- pensated you for the delay that you had in March ? — A. I don't think it would, sir ; I think we were about on the eve of a great prosperity, and the indications were that onr business would be very large in March and April, a great deal larger than any year previous. Q. WeU, of course it is a mere guess, but suppose there had been no trouble, what increase in addition to this increase would you probably have had? — A. The increase would have been just the business we lost, or very nearly so. Q. Well, can you tell what you did lose? — A. No, sir; that would be pretty hard to do, to teU you what we did lose. Q. I will ask you how we can reasonably account for this increase of business, and yet this reduction of help, if yon did in March and April more business than you did in March and April of the year preceding, why didn't you require more men to do that business than you had in your employment in March and April of 1885f — A. Well, the decrease in the force was in the shops ; it wasn't in our train service. The men in the train service did not go out. Q. But were not the shops just as necessary in the one year as in the other? — A. Well, no, sir ; they were not. Q. Was there not a very large amount of destruction, injury to your property, to your engines, to your machinery ; was there not more work to be done upon your en- gines and your machinery in March and April, 1886, than in March and April, 1885 ? — A. That destruction to our machinery, taking the locomotives themselves, has already been stated half a dozen times before the commission to have been only tem- porary. I will state here that we sent to the makers of the locomotives in the East, and duplicated the parts that were gone from the engines ; by the time we were ready to resume work, could resume work, we had these parts right here in Saint Louis, or at the various shops to replace the parts that were taken away ftom the locomotives. Q. Mr. Kerrigan, what is the condition of your rolling-stock now, and your en- gines ? Are they all in a state of repair ? — A. No, sir. Q. Will you be kind enough to give us an idea as to how much repairing is now necessary? — A. We own about 17,000 cars, somewhere in that neighborhood. There IS about 5 per cent, of the cars in bad order, not exceeding 5 per cent. Q. What would you say as to the engines? — ^A. We own 593 locomotives, and we have 22 new locomotives that are either in service or ere route here from the maker's shop. I don't know the exact number that are in service of those new locomotives, but probably about 15 ; that would be 613 locomotives, and there is about 10 per cent, of those in bad order. Q. (By Mr. Stewart). Sixty ?— A. Sixty, Q. (By Mr. BuRlfES.) Have yon made any orders with regard to the repairing of those engines, the 65 engines, or the 10 per cent, of the whole ? — A. They are being repaired in our shops right along. Q. They are being repaired ? — A. Now, yes, sir. Q. It is your intention to have them repaired ? — A. To have them repaired, yes, sir. Q. How will this proportion of disabled oars and engines compare with the same oharacter of cars and engines at the same season of the year in 1885 ? — A. Well, I could not te ll tba.t. . 384 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST Q. Would you be able to give us that information ? — A. Yes, sir; I will state here, that about this time last year, or about the same time last year, the percentage of en- gines in bad order ran, somewhere about 8 or 9 per cent., and probably of oars about 4 per cent ; I, however, will give you the exact list. Q. (By Mr. Bu'rnbs.) Well, if you will give us the per cent, exactly, we will be obliged. I am req,ue8ted to ask you if you have any information from Mr. Hoxie or otherwise that enaSjles you to form an opinion as to whether the troubles would or would not have been settled if Mr. Hoxie had granted the interview as requested by Martin Irons ? — A. No, sir ; I have no information on that subject. Q. Are you not aware that Martin Irons did ask for such an interview ? — A. I read the request here. Q. But you don't know whether the granting of that request would have tended to settle the matter or not ? — A. No, sir. ' Q. Have you any information from Mr. Hoxie as to whether it might have settled it or not ? — A. No, sir. Q. The gentleman [referring to one of the Knights of Labor] would like to have yonr opinion with regard to that proposition, if you desire to give it ? — A. I have no desire to give it. Q. I don't think we can require you to give your opinion unless you wish. — A. Here is a printed sheet of correspondence I would like to read. It is the agreement of May 25, which has been read before, but the acceptance of it by the chairman has not been read heretofore. I think I had better read the whole thing. Mr. BuKNBS. Just read the acceptance. The Witness. This was a circular addressed to the superintendents by Mr. Hoxie, and he winds up as follows, to wit : " I have just received the following from J. W. Fitzsimmons, chairman of the griev- ance committee : " ' Sbdalia, May 25, 1885. " ' H. M. Hoxie, " ' Saint Louis, Mo.: " 'Yours of even date received. We thank you for favor shown, and hope there will be no more use for us as a grievance committee. We believe that all are satisfied with your message, which we will cause to be printed and posted in each shop on the system. " ' Very respectfully, the committee, "'J. W. FITZSIMMONS.'" That is the committee about which there was so much misunderstanding. If the cir- cular was not printed and posted up in the shops as stated, I presume there was nobody ,to be responsible for it, except the committee. Q. You don't know whether it was posted up or not ? — ^A. I think on some of the roads it was posted up and put in the shops. I am under the impression that I saw the circular in a number of shops myself ; read them over in the shops. Q. Do you know the amount of bonded indebtedness upon each of these divisions of the system ? — ^A. I do not, sir. Q. As you have furnished us information at the request of Mr. Hoxie, do yon know whether he has that information, and whether he could furnish it or not ? — ^A. I think he can, sir. Q. Referring to this man, J. J. McGarry, you mentioned him as a representative Knight of Labor. Upon what knowledge or information did you base your conclu- sion that he was a Knight of Labor and a representative one f— rA. Well, I don't know that I can better explain that than by stating the circumstances under which I mentioned his name as a Knight of Labor. These all came to me through tlie reports that I got of this case. This train No. 9 was stopped at Ewing avenue by strikers, headed by McGarry ; it was one of the short trains, a train rannmg between Saint Louis and Kirkwood. The train that was stopped had about one hundred and eighty passengers on it for Kirkwood and points intermediate between Saint Loiiis and Kirkwood. After the engine was cut off and taken to the shops it appears that some of the people on the train went out and found out who the leader was and asked McGarry for permission to let the train go on. He refused to grant it, After working around there for two or three hours they granted permission for the train to go back to the Union Depot at Saint Louis, and the train was taken back there by an engine. The next day a committee of the citizens thought they would try to see if they could not make arrangements with the Knights of Labor to allow this short train to ran. They called on McGarry. McGarry took them up and introduced them to Nolan, who was also a leading officer in the Knigbts of Labor. They stated what they wanted — that is, they wanted permission to let that train run without molestation. They asked McGarry who stopped the train. McGarry said, LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 385 "I did." They asked him who authorized him. He said he had authority from the Knights of Labor executive committee. He then stated to McGarry that he had no such authority, aud he turned to the citizens and told them that if they were friend» of the Knights of Labor, why they would submit to some inconvenience ; and if they were not, why it was immaterial whether they held tliem or not, and he declined t» take any part in it. This comes to me througli reports. We have got the names of those citizens that were in that committtee, and I think that we could Q. All I wanted was, that you do not know anything about his being a member of the organization of the Knights of Labor? — A. Except through the information I re- ceived as general superintendent of the railway. Q. Doesn't it appear that he seemed to be rather a leading striker than a leading Knight of Labor f — A. He is noted as the judge-advocate of the Assembly 101. What- ever that position is, I don't know. Q. Can you furnish us with a statement of the gross net earnings of the roads of this system for the past year since the 1st of January ? — A. Since the Ist of January. Q. Up to the 1st of last Jajiuary, for the year preceding the 1st of January 1886? — A. I don't think I can ; that has been published, though, in the papers. Q. It is published annually and we would like to incorporate it in the record, if you can furnish us with a statement showing the gross and the net earnings of the system prior to the 1st of January last ? — A. I don't know whether I have got that information or not. If I have, though, I will furnish it. Mr. Stewart. That would be thetiscal year. I suppose what you want is the fiscal year? Mr. Btjenes. Yes, sir. The Witness. Yes, sir; I understand for the fiscal year past. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Only one question occurs to me. I don't know but y6u have already answered it ; there has been a good deal said about the bridge people, and their grievance, and the question is whether any grievance in behalf of the bridge men was ever presented to you ? — A. No, sir ; there wasn't and I never heard of any grievances either of the bridge men or of any other department until after the strike was inaugurated. Q. It has been said that grievances , were presented or left with the ' clerk of Mr.. Hoxie, some time last September; was that prior to the time that you succeeded to his office? I think you said that at that time he was third vice-president? — A. He was third vice-president at that time and I think at the time that they said these griev- ances were left there with his clerk he was in the East. Q. You of course' succeeded to his office ? — A. I afterwards succeeded to the office of general superintendent, the duties of which were practically about the same as those which the third vice-president attended to. Q. Were you also appointed third vice-president ? — A. No, sir ; Mr. Hoxie is the only executive officer in the West. Q. You never found any list of grievances of employ^ in the office to which you succeeded? — A. No, sir. Q. Did the papers that were in his office, at the time it is said that that list of grievances was handed to his secretary or clerk, come into your hands when you suc- ceeded to it ? — A. Yes, sir ; my secretary took charge of the desk of Mr. O'Hara, the man that was supposed to have had these grievances handed to him, and I took Mr. Hoxie's desk ; the desk that he had used prior to his promotion as first vice-president. Q. You took his desk, and the desk of his secretary with the papers that belonged to that department ; all the matters then pending in that office ; is that so ? — A. Yes, sir. ■Q. And no such paper was in the office ? — A. No such paper was in the office. Q. (By Mr. Bubnes. ) Do you remember whether Mr. Hoxie got back from the East- before the discharge of Mr. O'Hara? — A. No; as I told yon, he remained in my offijoej eight or ten days after I was promoted. Q. Mr. Hoxie was then here, or was he East ? — A. I think he was here. ' Q. I would like to ask you now — as we have made but a partial investigation of it — the principles, modes, and methods by wh ich a grievance gets into proper hands. Take for instance, first, men employed in the shops, or take sectionmen. — A. Well, say John Brown has a grievance ; he would go to his foreman, and if the foreman did not attend to it, he had a right to appeal to his master mechanic. I am speaking abouti the shops now. Q. Well, take first, if you please, the trackmen, they would first appeal to their foreman ? — A. They would first appeal to their foreman, aud from the foreman to the road master, and from the road master to the superintendent. Q. And from the division superintendent on up to the general superintendent at headquarters ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, if you please, shopmen? — A. The shopmen go through the same course, appeal to the master mechanic and superintendent, and on through that way. 3984 CONG 25 386 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By the Chairman.) Mr. Kerrigan, was there anything said to you, or had jou any information, which would have led you to search for that paper containing the list of grievances ?— A. There was not, sir ; I never knew anything ahout the paper. Q. Did vou make such search and examination of papers left in your charge as it is likely you would have found that paper had it been there f— A. If the paper had been there I would have found it. Q. You would ?— A. Yes, sir ; because we handled all those papers over and disposed of them as they came to us. (Exhibits L and M were submitted by this witness. For statement of pay-rolls from April, 1885, to February, 1886, see Exhibit N. For Superintendent Kerrigan's reply to Martin Irons, March 3, 1886, see Exhibit Q. For statement of suit for injunction to restrain strikers from trespassing on railroad company's property, see Exhibit R. For comparative statement of average wages paid by eight other railroad compa- nies and wages paid by the Missouri Pacific Railway Compan , leased and operated lines, see Exhibit S. For circular issued by D. A. 101, January 9, 1886, see Exhibit T. For copies of threatening letters to employes, see Exhibit U.) HENRY Gr. STALL being duly sworn, testifies as follows: By Governor CURTIN : Question. State your age, residence, and occupation.— Answer. Fitty-six years old; occupation, merchant ; residence, De Soto. Q. Have you had any connection with the railroad disturbance? — A. No, sir. Q. Will you state as a merchant and dealing man what effect the strike had on your business at De Soto?— A. Business in general ; I suppose you have reference to business in general in the town ? Q. Yes, sir. — ^A. The effect has been very bad, indeed. Q. State in what respect— A. In the first place it fell off'; the genera] business of the town has fallen off, at least the town has been injured by the cause of the strike, to the extent of not less than $50,000 by the depression in business and the depres- sion brou^t about in the way of improvements. There were great expectations at the opening of the season that our town was going to have quite a strong growth, and instead of that, buildings that were contracted there to be erected the contracts have been cancelled, and now two buildings only have gone up this season in town. Q. What is the population of your town? — A. About 4,000. Q. How old is the town ; when did it commence to grow ? — A. I could n^t say, I have not been a citizen long enough of the town. Q, How long have you been in town ? — A. Three years. Q. Has it continued to grow all of the time until no w ? — A. Yes, sir. The first year I was there the growth of the town according to statistics was 110,000 in improve- ments; I remember reading the statement in the papers the first year I was there. Q. Did you feel it in your business? — A. In my individual business I did not very materially. Q. What is your business ? — A. Grocery store. Q. Your business is confined to retail ? — A. Yes, sir. By Colonel Burnes : Q. Do you mean that thia falling off of $50,000 in business was largely caused by less money being expended by the strikers ? — A. The strike was the cause of it. Peo- ple lost confidence in each other in the town generally and business fell off^, the retail business of the town ; merchants there told me whose sales amounted to as high as $3,000 a month, that they were reduced down to $1,500. Q. Then it was a loss of $50,000 of sales? — A. Not alone in sales, but in the busi- ness of the town, improvements of the town, money that would have been expended in the town. Preparations were made to expend it to erect buildings, and rents. A house near me I have in view that rented for $30 a mouth three months ago rents to- day for $10. That is one of the causes of the strike. Q. Has not your own business increased since the strike ? — A. My own individual business has increased. Q. How do you account for that?— A. I took the stand of a loyal citizen. I came out against the strike and the loyal citizens of the towu came to my rescue. I was told I would have to leave the town in a very short time ; I would be starved out for the course which I took, the stand which I took. Q. And in consequence of the stand the people rallied to you and bought more goods of you? — A. The loyal citizens did of the town. Q. Was your house about the only one that the business increased ? — A. I do not know about the others. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 387 Q. So far as your information goes? — A. Otlier merchants there who I have con- versed with told me their bnainess decreased. Q. The other merchants were loyal, were they not ? — A. They did not take this stand I look, sir. They were afraid of the boycott, K. M. PECK, being duly sworn, testified as follows: By Governor Ccrtin : Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Pacific, Mo. Q. How long have you resided there ? — A. I have lived there about twelve years. Q. What is your business ? — A. I am supprintendent of bridges and buildings for the Missouri Pacific road. Q.. What is the population of the town as near as you know ? — A. About 2,000. Q. There are shops there, are there? — A. Bridge shops. Q. Do you know anything about the disturbance there, or anything connected with it? — A. Yes, sir ; I was there the principal part of the time during the strike. Q. Just go on and state what you have to say about the strike. — A. Do you desire me to state what I know about the cause of the strike in the commencement ? Q. Yes, sir; any thing you know. — A. Well, the reason given by the bridge men there was that one of their members, I think, by the name of Hall, in Texas, had been dismissed. They stated that aside from that they had no other grievances. The strike occurred there a little later, I think on the morning of the 8th, instead of the morning of the 6th. It took place at a good many other places on the morning of the 6th. My remembrance is that it occurred there on the 8th. At nine o'clock a com- mittee came into my office and told my clerk the whistle would blow in fifteen min- utes, which was a fact. The whistle did blow, and the men all quit about fifteen minutes after they gave me notice in my office. Q. Did they all quit ? — A. Yes, sir, about all. There were a number, however, protested against quitting. Some of them did not belong to the Knights of Labor, and those that did not belong did not desire to quit, but they did quit, not with the in- tention — thosenot Knights of Labor— not with the intention of remaining out, hut sim- ply because the shops had been crippled on account of so many of the Knights quit- ting. Those that were not willirg to strike notified me immediately, at least the next morning, that they were ready at any time to go to work. That was on the 8th the strike occurred. From then until the 13th, there was nothing of any partic- ular nature transpired, except that the organization of the Knights of Labor had a great many meetings. The hall was immediately across the road from my office, where I could see them as they went to their hall and as they would depart. The business had been suspended almost entirely, as there were no trains passing Pacific. For that reason, I suppose, there was nothing for the Knights to do until the 13th. At that time they decided to stop some of the passenger trains that prior to that time had been running. The train due at Pacific on the 13th, at 4 o'clock in the evening, arrived abonttwenty-five minutes late, or about twenty-five minutes past four. On the arrival of the train the strikers proceeded to take possession of it and put it ou the side track and killed the engine. I was present. Q. That was a passenger train ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did it carry the United States mail ? — A. It was not a regular mail train. They may have been carrying mail at that time. I think they were. Q. You do not know that ? — A. No ; not positively. Q. Was that accompanied with violence ? — A. There was no violence, except the engineer told me he was threatened with violence unless he sidetracked the train. I did not hear the threats, as I ivas not close to the engine at the time they stopped it. That train remained on the side track I believe until the 23d. There was a train, however, due a little later, which came along in perhaps an hour after train No. 6 was sidetracked. The other train was the regular train, No. 2, a mail train. They took the passengers, express, and baggage off of that train, and brought it into the city that evening. Ou the 23d, if I remember correctly, there was a sheriff's posse came from Saint Louis under the charge of Judge Allen, the sheriff of Saint Louis County, and after quite an amount of parleying and trouble with the strikers they succeeded in getting the train switched onto the main track with the dead engine, and coupled another engine onto the train, and set the engine on the rear part of the train, and brought it into Saint Louis. 'This posse was composed of, I suppose, 40 men, a car full, and a number of others that were on the platform. The strikers made very em- phatic objections to the sheriff having anything to do with the train, and objected to his authority or right to move it. That, I think, was on the 23d of M9,rch. On the 24th, if I remember rightly, there was some freight trains, one at least, moved west. The train ran through the yard at a speed of eight or ten miles an hour. I do not think the strikers knew the train was coming, from the fact they seemed to be very much incensed after it got through that it passed. On the next day, the 25th day of March, another train came which was armed with the sheriff's posse of about thirty 388 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. men armed witli revolvers. Tlie striker! had evidently been advised of the approach of that train and they came out about the time it reached the east end of the yard, came out of their hail and walkeid east to meet the train, and walked east perhaps 100 or 150 yards. As they approached the train they picked up a heavy oak plank and threw 'it across the track in front of the engine. I was at the east end of the platform at that time, the train being distant some 100 yards cast. I saw the plank thrown onto the track and also saw the pilot knock the plank off. It must have been thrown on with the intention of wrecking the train, or the engine at least. It was going six or eight miles an hour. When the plank did not succeed in throwing the train off, then the strikers proceeded to climb onto the train. Some of them climbed up and undertook to set the brake. One man was knocked down by a stick in the hands of one of the sheriff's posse and others driven off the train. They followed the train, some on the ground by the side and others hanging on to the sides of the train, clear through the yard shouting and attempting to get the engineer to stop. This train passed about 1.20 in the afternoon of the 25th. Immediately after the passage of the train the strikers proceeded to ball. I might say right here, however, that train and others had been stoned by persons along the track, women and boys. There may have been some of the strikers with them. A great many stones had been thrown at men along there, ma'ung it dangerous for them to stay there As thistrain passed through it was stoned also. The train that came east that day met the other at the nest town west, the town of Gray's Summit, about five miles west. As I stated be- fore, just as the train passed out of the yard, and out of the reach of the strikers, they proceeded immediately to their hall. The train from the west arrived there about forty minutes after the train going west had passed, and had got almost to the depot— the center of the train had approached about to the depot — before, I think, the strikers knew she was coming. I am quite confident they were not aware of the train coming from the west that day. I do not think they knew it was coming until they heard the sound of the wheels on the track. They were yet in their hall, and rushed out in full force, and, as usual, the women aud some children, and perhaps some of the strikers, threw stones at the men on the cars, aud the strikers ran by the train as rapidly as possible in quito a body, probably 100 or more, and attempted to climb on the cars, and just as the rear end of the train passed east of the tank there was firing commenced. Q. What?— A. The iiriug commenced. This was the train that was fired into, I was close by the train. The firing from the ground and that from the top of the cars was so closely connected that I could not state positively which of the con- tending parties fired first, whether the first shot came from the ground or from the cars. My impression is and has been that the first shot was fired from the ground, though 1 could not state positively as to that fact. There must have been one hun- dred shots fired. Why there was no one killed is a great query with me. There was no one killed or no one hurt, but the strikers seemed to be terribly euragec^. It only lasted a short time, as the train was moving at a speed of six or eight miles an hour. As soon as the train moved out of reach of the strikers they of course still felt very much excited, and turned upon some deputy sheriffs in the yards — some three or four or four or five — and warned them to leave town under penalty of their lives. They came up the street of the town in their terrible rage, and I thought at the time they would either burn the town or kill somebody, from the appearance of the party. The town seemed to be entirely in the hands of the mob, and there did not seem to_ be any safety for anybody they felt like visiting their vengeance on,but as luck would have it we got through the trouble that day without any serious injury to anybody. On the morn- ing of the 26th the adjutant-general of the State, General Jamison, arrived withHhe arms for the sheriff's posse, who, in the mean time, had been summoned and brought. The sheriff's posse arrived on the evening of the 85th, the evening the firing hap- pened. They arrived on the evening of the same day ^he firing happened, and upon the arrival of the adjutant-general with a posse of men from Jefferson City, whom he had brought with him for his own defense, I suppose, he proceeded to turn over the arms to the sheriff, who had about forty men subpoenaed then in the depot; and the adjutant-general remained there some two or three days after that. That day, being the 26th, there was a tram came from Saint Louis about the time that the train going west on the prior day had arrived, about 1 o'clock, and the strikers came out with the evident Intention of attacking the train, notwithstanding there was a posse of men there. The men up to this time had not taken any position in the yards, but the guards on this train happened to be armed with breech-loading shot-guns, which I think deterred the strikers, and prevented them from attacking the train. That amounted to the principal part of the trouble in the town of Pacific. Of course there was a great deal of excitement for some days afterwards, and the strikers maintained a threatening attitude until the latter part of the month, or the 1st of April. Q. Is there anything more that you know that you have not stated f State fuUy what you saw. — A. There were a great many other things I might state, which per- haps would not be of much interest to the committee. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AXD WEST. 389 Q. Anytliing yon kuow i.f oonseqnoiice in reference to any violence tbere you liad better state. — A. I might add that when the strike occurred the strikers proceeded to take possession of our shops, and notified us they would put guards over the property, which they did. Q. I presume that is ahout all t — A. Unless you wish something more. By Colonel BuRNKS : Q. Were you a witness to the egress of the men from the hall of the Knights of Labor V — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they come out in a body or singly ? — A. They seemed to be coming as rap- idly as possible. They were coming down-stairs, and of coarse could not get down all at once. They came quickly and rapidly ; they were all running. Q. Was there not some firing done before the Knights came down out of the hall? — A. No, sir. Q. You are the superintendent of the bridge work of the entire line, are you not? — A. Of everything north of Denison, Tex., and Texarkana, on the Iron Mountain. Q. You superintend all the men engaged in building or repairing bridges in that territory? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You are called npon frequently to transport men from one job to another, are you not ? — A. I call upon the men to go from one job to another. Q. Do you know whether they get paid for the time that is consumed in traveling from one job to another? — A. They do in the day- time ; for traveling at night they do not get any pay. Q. Do they for Sunday ? — A. We have in some instances allowed the men for Sun- day travel, and in others not. Usually when nothing is allowed for Sunday there is some nnderstauding in regard to the matter before the trip is made. Q. Has there been any order given by yourself or any one under or over ycu in au- thority directing as far as possible that the removal shall take place at night or on Sunday? — A. No, sir. Q. Yon never gave any such order or heard of one ? — ^A. I do not think any one would give such an order, for it would not be a reasonable order to give. "We have men working on a bridge to-day, and they may finish the bridge to-morrow morning, and we could not hold them until night to transport them. We transport them by the first train that arrives. It will appear to be a very simple thing, and it will ap- pear to any one that such an order would network at all. Q. Now I understand you, I think, that when a job is completed, whether it is day or uight, you proceed ordinarily by the first train to the next job? — ^A. That is cor- rect. Q. And if the travel is in the day-time the man gets his time ? — A. Gets his regular pay. Q. If the travel is in the night he gets no extra hours for that f — A. No ; that is un- derstood. Q. Ajid if he travels on Sunday he gets no pay for that unless there is a special asrreement about it ? — A. That is correct. Q. Do you know of any such special agreement having been made to pay the men for Sunday f— A. That is a matter I have not thought of. 1 think I can refer to my books and know where we have done that. Q. You probably would not find it done very frequently, I suppose ? — A. No, sir ; we do not frequently move men on Sunday. We are compelled to do work sometimes on Sunday. I have always made it a point to do as little work as we can ; in other words, not to do any more work on Sunday than I can possibly help. I do not believe in Sunday work ; I do not believe we can gain anything by it. Q. The men are under youi; orders, and you' control and allow them their time?^ A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not think they should be allowed extra time for the time they consume in that ?— A. The point is this : We hire a lot of men on the 1st day of January, 1886. It is our expectation we will give the men employment until the Ist day of January, 1887. In that line of business, with which a great many men are familiar, carpenter business in the city, for instance, a contractor gets a contract to put up a building in the city of Saint Louis. He hires a certain number of carpenters to do that work, and they work with him until the building is done, and, as I understaiid the matter, if the contractor has no other contract when the building is finished, those men or- dinarily have to seek work elsewhere or remain idle. With our men we do not re- qture them to remain idle any of the time except as they choose to take their own time and remain idle. We pay them for every day, and when we send men we move them for their benefit as much as ours. We move them to get them to a point where we give them work. That has been thoroughly understood by the men all the time. I have talked with them, and with a very few exceptions I have had no complaint ontil since the strike. 390 LABOK TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You say when the men are hired it is understood that transportation is not to be paid for ? — A. Yes, sir. I might add in this connection that when we transport men over the road we transport them in passenger trains. We exfend them the privi- lege of going into any of the cars except the sleeping car. There are good coaches. The night trains have chair cars, and we do not object to their going into the chair cars and taking a chair and going to sleep. I have heard some of them say they could sleep as well iu a chair car as in a bed. I think the men generally feel that is not a grievance, not any matter of grievance. While some few might claim that, I think the generality* of them do not complain of it. Q. Prior to the 6th of March, for a year prior to that time, had any complaints been made by the bridge men for getting no pay for that time ? — A. I do not think there ever was a claim made to me about that. Some individual may have spoken to me about it, but as to making a complaint or demand they should have tiiue/there was never anything of the kind made on me. * Q. You are certain that none of them ever asked you to forward siioh a complaint to the general ofSce of the company ? — A. I have never received such a complaint from them iu writing, nor do I think verbally, except as I stated before., Q. During the time you mentioned just now, did you receive auy notice of any trouble witii the bridge men upon this question ? — A. No ; I have no remembrance of receiving such a notice. Q. Suppose you start out with a gang of carpenters to repair bridges along the line, and day after day you progress until you are at tbe end of one of your lines, being through with your work you discharge your men sometimes, do you not? — A. Some- times ; yes, sir. Q. Have you ever discharged them at a terminal point without paying them for the time necessary to be consumed in carrying thom back to the place from which they started ? — A. Not that I re'inember of. We may have done that, but I will say when we discharge a man we almost invaria,bly give him a pass to where he wants to go, Q. But then it takeshim some time to ride the pass out ? — A, Comparatively speak- ing, those are isolated cases. We do not move our men over great lengths of line of road, generally speaking. With the number of men we have our boarding cars and sleeping cars. They board and sleep in the company's cars. Wheu ue move men they board and sleep on the cars. That is the case on the Iron Mountain and the Missouri, Kansas and Texas. On the Missouri Pacific we have never used boardinjf cars from the fact that lioarding places are convenient, and there is uO trouble on that account. Q. Has auy such complaint as that to which I have alluded been mentioned to you by any man discharged at a distant point and not paid for tbe time necessary for him to return? — A. No, sir; not that I remember of. Q. I am requested to ask you if you are positive you received no notice from the ■ Iron Mountain road of trouble with the bridge men working thereon? — A. Withre- gard to what? Q. With regard to the hours consumed iu traveling — any trouble, any grievance ?— A. No. I received a statement from the men in regard to time checks some time ago, in regard to a delay claimed on account of not getting their checks. I wrote to them about it and tbey wrote me back that my explanation was satisfactory. That had no reference to the time allowed them, but to the time they got the checks, that is all. Q. When this Hayes agreement was made, were the wages of the bridge nicu raised in accordance with the raise of wages of the shop men and others? — A. I do not re- member about that, whether they were or not. My recollection is there was no reduc- tion at the time — it is my recollection the bridge men were not reduced when the shop men were reduced. Q. Were the wages you were paying on the 6th of March the same as in 1884 ?— A. I think they were; in a great many instances we had raised the wages of men. There were very few we reduced. While we have no system of apprenticeship on the Mis- souri Pacitic, yet we have a good many apprentices. We take a laboring man and put him in the carpenters' gang at |1.50 a day, and as he becomes familiar with tbe business aud iamiliar with the use of tools we advance his wages until he gets the pay of a carpenter. We have a large number of men on the road of that kind. At tbe same time we have never made a contract of apprenticeship ; still it amounts to ap- prenticeship in that way. I think it is a very good thing for the men. I think there are very few men who can earn money that way, receive full pay as laborers aud start iu with a carpenter's gang aud earn a carpenter's wages aud learn the trade. Q. What is the highest price you pay the carpenters ?— A. As high as $2.60 : in some instances |2.75. The price of carpenters ranges from |2.25 to |;i.60, in a few cases $3.75 a day. Q. What do you think the average would be ?— A. The average would probably be about $2.30 or |2.35. I could not tell positively without adding up and dividing. Q. In regard to pile driver No. 2 on the Iron Mountain Road, were there any griev- ances presented to you by Mr. Martin ?^A. No, sir. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 391 Q. Do you kuow of any being presented to him ?— A. No, sir ; I think the men who wrote me about time checks were men who worked on pile driver No. 2, if that is what is referred to ; that may be the matter the gentleman has under consideration. Q. Did you have any dispatch from Baring Cross with regard to trouble among the bridge-building men ? — ^A. I think on the 5th of March, if I remember correctly, the 4th or 5th, there was some gentleman at Baring Cross wired me and asked me'if he could see me in my office on Sunday. I think that may have been Friday, the 4th of March, some gentleman wired me ; I think he signed his name Darley, something like that ; I am not positive about that ; asked me if he could see me in Pacific on Sunday. I wired him back I would be in Pacific that day. I think on Saturday I received a dispatch from him stating he could not see me on that day. That is the only dis- patch I remember receiving from Baring Cross. Q. In certain emergencies where you are required to employ ioen in a washout in a rainstorm, do you allow them extra for work under such circumstances? — A. Not in regular hours ; we always allow them time and a half for over time. That is one of the peculiarities of the business. Every man understands he is to do that kind of work when he is hired. Q. If a bridge-builder or a carpenter employed in your department should conclude that he had a grievance against the company, is it his duty to present it to you in the first instance, or would he present it to his immediate foreman? — A. I have never laid down any rules in regard to that matter. I have generally allowed them to act as they pleased. If they want to present a grievance to me, if I should receive any I should refer to the foreman and get his knowledge in regard to it before I acted. I think the proper course would be to go to the foreman first. Q. If such a grievance were presented to you, you would consider it after referring it to the foreman ? — A. Of course I w6uld. Q. Have you ever refused to listen to a grievance ? — A. No ; I do not think it would be a sensible thing to do. So long as we have to work men we have to try to satisfy them. ■Q. Suppose you were to discharge a man whose wages were $2.60, and you filled his place by appointing some one else, would you pay him $2.60 because the man dis- charged got that, or would you pay him what you thought he was entitled to ? — A. I do not think I would pay the new man as much. I will tell you how we work that. We have a gang of men ; we have eight or nine men, and we have a good man we pay a little more wages than the others. If that man takes a notion, decides to quit, we usually promote a man out of the gang to take his place, and the man we employ we put down at a lower rate of wages ; such wages as he may be capable of earning. Such men who get that extra pay are considered little better men than the others, and of course we promote the most experienced man. We do not take new men and promote them. That is the case with our foremen. In making a foreman, a man works at $2.60 for awhile, and' his foreman quits, and we almost invariably give him the place of foreman, promote him to a place of $80 or $90 a month, start him at $60, and increase him until he gets the full pay of a foreman. Q. When did you take charge of the department ? — A. Ou the Missouri Pacific, I think it was 1871. Q. With the Iron Mountain ? — A. I am not right positive ; I think two years ago last month. Q. Has the gang foreman the power to increase or diminish wages ? — A. He usually- recommends that. Q. He recommends it to you and you decide it finally ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of any cases where a gang foreman has discharged a man for the purpose of hiring him over again at a higher rate ? — A. No, sir. Q. You think you would know it if it occurred ? — A. I think I would. A. W. DICKINSON, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stbwakt': Question. What is your office or official position on the Missouri Pacific ? — Answer. I am called superintendent of terminal facilities. I superintend the movement of the business about Saint Louis. Q. Of the freight ? — A. The movement of the freight and of the passenger trains, Q. Will you state your experience with this strike in your own way. I do not want any questions until after you are through with your statement. — A. I supervise the jnfn whose business it is to attend to the dispatch of trains, passenger and freight. With what are called mail trains we have had no trouble. With suburban trains run- ning west, and with freight trains, and with freight trains running over the bridge, we have had a good deal of trouble. Q. Will you state right here how many trains you dispatch daily from this station. — A. Qf passenger trains the receipt and dispatch is one hundred and sixty, I think. Q. How many freight trains ? — A. Freight trains vary. 392 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. The average?— A. They will vary from eighty to one hundred and twcnty-ifive. Q. Now go on. — A. For a good many days,,commencing March 6th, we had a great deal of trouble in dispatching freight trains and suburban trains west by reason of jparties of strikers interfering in diiferent ways, endeavoring to intimidate the men, ito'have them leave their engines, and pulling the pins in freight trains, pulling out the draw-har keys, turning switches wrong and a multiplicity of such acts as those. Q. Were you a witness of any such proceedings ?— A. I was of some of them. In most cases without heing able, I might say in all cases without being able, to iden- tify the parties by name. Q. Were they men who had been in the employment of the company ?— A. A great many of them. Q. Did you hear any declarations made by those men as to who those persons were— did yon talk with any of them ?— A. No special conversation which I could repeat. Q. Did you witness any acts of violence towards the men that were employed by the company ?— A. I cannot say that I did; I have, however, noticed the effects of violence. Q. In what way ? — A. In ^he way of bruised heads and faces. Q. Of men in your employment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You finally moved trains with assistance? — A. With the assistance of the police and paid deputies. JOHN HODGE, heing duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stewaet : Question. You are superintendent of the car department? — Answer. Yes; in other ^ords, called master car-builder. Q. Of the entire system? — A. A. Of the Missouri Pacific road. Q. Stationed here at Saint Louis? — A. Yes, sir. ,Q. I will ask you whether any grievances have come to your knowledge in your de. partment since the strike of 1885, and if so, what they were, and what was done *ith them?— A. No, sir; I do not recollect of any grievances. If there were any they were immedi; tely adjusted satisfactorily to the parties in my department. Q. Were you aware of any grievauces existing iu your department prior orup to the time of the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you converse with the men in your department or any of them a>t the time of the strike with a view of trying to find out what the matter was? — A. On the morn- ing of the 6th I came back from Texas; I was there ou the company's business, and returned on the morning of the 6th, and one of the men, who was vice-chairman of the grievance committee, came to me and stated to me they were going to go out at 10 o'clock on a strike. I asked him if he had got any grievances in connectiiou with the affair; "None," he says, "We have got no grievances." I asked him if he had con- sidered the matter carefully or his people had, and he stated to me they had. I asked him if there was anything I could do Wherein I could prevent its occurrence, and he said there was nothing. " We have got no grievances; we are perfectly satisfied ; but we are ordered by higher authority tor to quit at 10 o'clock, which we propose to do." He asked me if I would be in my oiHce at half past 9 o'clock, and I told him I' would. He said, "The balance of the committee will call ou you and the master mechanic" (our offices are iu the same room), " and will notify you that we are going out at 10 o'clock." At half past 9 o'clock he came in with four others, and they stated they were going to quit at 10 o'clock. We talked with them at the time, and asked them if there was any difficulty that existed which we could adjust, and I think also stated to them that our understanding had been heretofore, that if there were any grievances that the understanding was that they would be arbitrated and settled the same as other grievances that had oocnrred during the year, and he stated there were no grievances, nothing we could say that would benefit the thing in any shape or form. They came up at half past 9 o'clock and said, that is, notified us they w^re going out at 10 o'clock, which they did. Q. What became of your department after that ? What was the condition of things there ? — A. At 10 o'clock the bell rang, and in the master mechanic's department and mine also they all went out, and, I think; went to their hall, which was located iu that vicinity, and had a meeting. Q. The hall of the Knights of Labor? — A. Supposed to be. I have never been in the hall, and have no means of knowing just exactly about it. Q. It was what they called their hall? — A. Yes, sir ; they went to their hall and tad a meeting, as I presume, and between 12 and 1 o'clock, as near as I can recollect, they came back, a portion of them, and a few of them came to me and stated they were ready to put on guards to take charge of the company's property, which they did. That state of affairs continued on up to the 10th of the month, I think, when notices were put up, the one that has already been mentioned by the general super- intendent. They vacated the company's grounds, or this guard did that was located at the shops, and then guards or watchmen were put there in the company's interest. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 393 Q. They did not consult you as to who should be guards, but selected their own men 1 — A. No; they did not state to me who they would place there or anything of the kind. Ithink there was about twenty or twenty-five placed over the company's property in various localities surrounding* their works and remained there till the 10th of the month. Q. How many men did you employ in your department? — A. On the line of the road I had 3'^5, including clerks, watchmen, &c., previous to the 6th of March. Q. Did they all go outf — A. With the exception of the clerks at the Saint Louis works. At the local stations on the line of the road they did not. At some local stations where we had cai'-repairers and car-oilers stationed they did not. I could not give you the accurate number that went put on the 6th day of March, but at the Saint Louis works in my department they all went out with the exception of one or two foremen. Q. Did you employ the men in your department ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You had authority to employ and to discharge? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State what efforts you made to employ men when you resumed operations, if any? — A. We used every effort — at least 1 did — used every effort in my power to em- ploy men and also to persuade those who had already been in my employ who quit voluntarily of their own accord. I talked freely and asked them to come back. Q. What reason did they give for not coming back ? — A. Their reasons were vari- ous. Some said, well, they could not come back according to their organization ; that the organization they belonged to would not permit them to do it. Others would state they would be glad to come back, but were afraid to come back. That has been about the general way of it. Q. Did you employ any new men, outside men? — A. Yes, sir; as fast as we could get a man to go to work for us we employed him or a man that had been at work previously. We made no exceptions. If we could get a man who quit on the 6th of March to come back we were glad to reinstate him. Q. Glad to receive him at any time t — A. Yes, sir; it has been my policy all the way through from the beginning to the end. Q. How were the new men you employed treated, if you observed how they were treated, by the strikers? — A. Almost invariably treated rather discourteously and rather roughly. We had to keep them inside of our works. Finally after a short time we established a boarding-house, and we boarded the men there and slept the men there. They lodged there aud boarded there. Q. Why was that ? — A. Well, that was simply because they dare not go out. If they did they would most assuredly get beaten, and would be badly used beyond a question, which a number of them was. Q. Did you have access to those works all this time ? — A. Yes, sir; I went in and , out. Q. Did they allow anybody else to go in and out but yon ? Did they allow the other workmen to go in? — A. My foremen who did not go out with the others were allowed in and out the same as myself. I do not think they ever interfered with the foremen. Q. They did not allow you to resume control of the property, not until they were served with the injunction, up to the 10th of April? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you a witness of any acts of violence yourself, or did you hear any abusive language on the part of the strikers toward the men you employed ? — A. No ; I can- not call anything to mind at the present time. Q. You only state in regard to that, that the men were terrorized, and in conse- quence of that you were compelled to board them where they would be uniaolested ? — A. Yes, sir ; I knew of some of them that went out with a view of going home, and they were badly used up in consequence thereof. Q. Were they men who had families aud wanted to go to their families? — A. Yes, sir; they lived in the southern part of the city and undertook to go home, were way- laid, and were badly beaten. ^ Q. You were not a witness and could not testify to that? — A. No, sir. Q. You saw the effects of some of the beatings? — A. I did, most assuredly. By Governor Ccetin: Q. I am requested to ask you if the committee that came to you did not mention a matter on the road, and not in your shop; did they mention grievances on the road generally, and not in your shop ? — A. I, not having charge of anything outside of my department, would be unable to answer that question. By Governor Stewaet : Yon can state whether they mentioned any grievances? — A. No, sir; they .did By Governor Cdrtin: Who was the chairman ?— A. John B. Williams, I think, is the name. not. 394 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you know of the strikers havine; taken forcible possession of the shops?— A. No, sir ; I do not understand it in that way. » -o- • Q. You have stated they came there and took possession ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. That was not accompanied by any force ?— A. I do not know how you wonld term it. They came there in a body. I So not know whether you would call it force. They took possession of the company's property and held it just as I have stated un- til the notice was put up warning them oft' the company's property. Governor Stewaet. That would be forcibly taking possession according to law. By Governor Cdrtin : Q. I am requested to ask you if it was not for the purpose of protecting the prop, erty that the men took possession ?— A. That is what they stated. Q. By permission of Mr. Bartlett, did they say that ?— A. I could not say what per- mission Mr. Bartlett gave them. I am only stating the facts for myself. Q. Was there any violence done to the property while they were in possession guarding it ?— A. No ; not that I am aware of. Q. You answered Governor Stewart, but! did not exactly understand you. From the 6th to the 10th of March do I understand you that you or the men they permitted to go in or out ?— A. I did not state that I was prevented from going in or out at any time. They never interfered with me inanyshape orform. There is one thing Iwould like to contradict in relation to a statement that was made by a witness at Kansas City. It was stated there that one man by the name of Kimball, who was foreman for me in the car-shops at Independence, that his salary was cut down without any notice being given. I wish to state that that thing is wrong. That man had thirty days' notice that his salary would be reduced $10 per month ; in other words, from $75 to ■ ^65. He had a notice given him that this agreement was made on March 13, 1885. I can show a copy of the letter that was sent to him. I have not got it with me, but can furnish it, that that was the fact of the case. By Governor Stew .ae Q. Why did you cut down his salary ?— A. Simply because the position that he was occupying was not worth $75 a month. Q. The reduction of his salary left him the full compensation for what work he didt —A. Yes, sir ; I can show you he got everything he earned or any other man that would be placed there under the same circumstances. LEEOY BAETLETT, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stewart : Question. What is your position ? — Answer. Master mechanic. Q. What is your jurisdiction, and how much of the system ? — A. The Missouri main line and branches. / Q. Stationed at Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State your experience with this strike, what you know of its origin, and so on.— A. The first intimation that I had of any trouble was that Mr. Hodge's clerk notified me there would be a committee in the office about half past nine to see me. I thinly I was going to the city that morning en business. That being the case, of course I Wait- ed, and about 9.35 they came in. I think there were five gentlemen in the party, and Mr. Nolan, who I think was chairman of that committee, said', "We have orders to go out at 10 o'clock." I said to them, "What is the trouble ? Have you any grievance with the Missouri Pacific ?" Andtheysaid, "No; there is no trouble at all with tlie Missouri Pacific." Isaid, " Then Why do you go out ?" They said, "We have orders to go out." I then said to them, "Well, when this trouble is settled, do not have it said that any of our men destroyed any of the company's property." In reply to that they said, "We intend to look after that matter. We are going to appoint guards all around the works." We had a little conversation afterwards, which I do not remem- ber, that didn't amount to much, and they went away. At 10 o'clock the bell rang. I went right over to the shop from the office, and went into the shop and found the men all taking off their working clothes and getting ready to go out. They all formed in double file and marched out of the shop, the most of them. There were a few left who did not get prepared to go out with the others. In the sjiace of half an hour, I suppose, they were all gone. The guard came on very shortly afterwards, and they had possession of the works up to the morning of the ibth, about 9 o'clock. Notices were furnished me, notices of the injunction, at least notices warning people away from the works not employed by the company. I had them put up at a o'clock in the morning, and the men went and read them and went away as soon as they could. The committee told my round-house foreman that no engines would be permitted to go out of the house, except the engines that hauled the mail trains ; and those parties being in force there, and preventing any of the proper officers of the company from doing the work, we could not do it, and in fact we did not have force enough to do it. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 395 Q. Then this committee then and there gave notice they would not permit any engine to movet — A. Yes, sir; told my foreman of the round-house that. Q. Except for moving mail trains ? — A. Except for moving mail trains. They told my round-house foreman that, and afterwards told me when I talked with themi Q. The committee that you refer to was a committee of the Knights of Labor, was itt — ^A. Yes, without a doubt. Q. Then you understood from the start that the Knights of Labor determined you ehould not move any freight ? — A. Oh, yes. Q. What steps were taken to prevent the moving of freight ? — A. In the first place the men took possession of the round-house and of the locomotives, and prohibited by force, if necessary, the taking out of the engines. Q. Were any engines taken out before the 10th, except mail-train engines ? — A. No. I believe there were none taken out at all. Q. Well, after the service of the injunction and you were permitted to assume con- trol of your property and took possession of it, when you attempted to run trains, freight trains, w^here was the attack made on the engines ; was it made at the round- house or between the round-house and the depot, or after the engines were hooked out — A. After the men left the premises, the round-house foreman and myself, and what men I could get about the place, fired up some freight engines to have them ready for any train that would be called for. We fired up or got them warm, at least five of them ; I cannot say now whether on that day or the next au engine was or- dered for atrain, but at least in a short time had an order for au engine, and to the best of my recollection now, the engine went down to the freight yard, and if I remember right she came back with the engineer and fireman. The engineer and fireman, I think, were intimidated or warned not to go out, and three or four attempts more or less of that kind were made. Then there seemed to be a lull in the operation of trying to send out freights nntU some time after the 20th, I think. They sent for an engine, she went down in the yard, coupled onto the train, and the engineer brought the train to the shop yard, and I do not remember whether the train stopped at the crossing jrst below the shop or not ; at any rate it stopped in- the shop yard, and the engineer got oS, and said he was afraid to go out. He said there was a man standing at the crossing and held up a knife. I will repeat his words as nearly as I remember them and understood them, that he held up a knife, and says, " Tom, if you go out yon will not live," and he shook the knife at him, and he said : " In the face of that I do not feel that I can go out." I immediately asked another engineer, Mr. Hagerman, who was there, "Will you go out?" He said, "Yes, sir," and got on the engine and started. I am not sure but the fireman got off at the same time as the engineer. I am not quite positive about that. There was a great deal going on there at the time, and my attention was called to different points, and of course I do not remem- ber all the details in regard to it. At any rate, the train started with a fireman. After they had got perhaps 500 or 1,000 yards beyond the place of stopping, and while the train was moving, the fireman got off. There was a man or men on the engine as guards, I think, that said he would fire, and he did so. As soon as the train got out of sight I went to the oflSce and telegraphed to Kirkwood, a place 13 miles west, for the man on the pushing engine to get on the train and fire it to Chamois, and he did so. Q. That train got through f — A. Yes, sir ; the engineer who ran the train when he arrived at Chamois said he was very much abused and threatened, and I understand he hid there, that some one took care of him and protected him. He came back to- wards Saint Louis and stopped at Washington. He was afraid to come to Saint Louis, because he was notified by other men that it was unsafe for him to return to Saint Louis, because they threatened his life, and he stayed at Washington two or three days, more or less. Q. This you state on information, I suppose ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; at least he came to Saint Louis, went to his home, and stayed there a week or two. Q. Were there any acts of violence, threatening, or abuse that came under your per- sonal notice that you 'can refer to ? — A. No, sir ; I do not think there is. I saw the re- sults of abuse in a great many of the employes. Q. Of men abused ? — A. Yes, sir ; their clothes were torn from them, their heads cut open and bruised. Q. Who were those men, men you employed after the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Mechanics? — A. Ycs,Bir; some mechanics, men that we needed. Q. What efforts did you make to fill up the ranks left vacant by the strike t — A. I hired every man that applied, no matter who he was. I then went to the houses ot the different employes and asked them to come back; I did it in a number of instances. Q. What was the reply? — A. They said they would be only too glad to comeback. By Governor C0BTIN : Q. What? — A. They said they would be only too glad to go back, "but when we see men abused the way they have been in the streets we do not care to place our- selves in that position. Our lives would be in danger. " 396 . LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. By Governor Stewart: Q. That is the reply you got ?-^A. Yes, sir. Q. The men you did employ appeared with torn clothes and broken heads?— A. Some of them. We kept the men on the premises. They slept there and we fed them. Q. That was for their protection against acts of violence and outrage ?— A. Entirely; yes, sir. Q. Does that condition of things continue at this time?— A. Which do you refer tol Q. To the keeping of the men.— A. Or to the acts of violence ? Q. Yes, both?— A. We still keep the men there. Q. Do you think under the condition of things it is necessary in order to protect the men you keep them there now ?— A. I only judge of that from what I understand. I understand the boarding-houses about there refuse to keep these men that are termed scabs. Q. In othsr words, the boarding-houses are boycotted ; is that it? — A. That is the term they use. Q. And that state of things still exists?— A. To a certain degree I believe it does; yes, sir. I have heard a number of men express themselves on the works that they cannot get shaved on the avenue — that is the street south of the works — and one man said he was in a store buying a pair of overalls, and he had them done up, and lie had his money out to pay for them, and a man looked in the door and said, "You can't sell the goods," and the store-keeper took them and put them away on the shelves. Q. Perhaps when they read Mr. Powderly's advice published this morning in the papers they will stop that. — A. I hope so. I do not think there Are any acts of vio- lence committed to-day. Q. But t he boycotting exists ? — A. I believe it does. You understand this is merely a matter of opinion. Q. You are in a condition to know generally the condition of things among your employes ? — A. To a certain extent I do. Q. if there are any other facts or circumstances that ocourtoyou as being material in this inquiry you may state them. Of course we do not know what you know. We want to get all the facts. — A. There were a great may incidents of annoyance which took place which are hardly worth mentioning. What you want are the general facts ? Q. Yes ; and the minor facts ; we have heard and understand what the situation is. — A. On the day the injunction was served, just before the men who were on guard in the rouud-house went away, three of them went throagh the round-house and opened what we call the blow-cooks of the locomotives and let the water out of the boilers. Of course that delayed us somewhat. We had to do the work over again— fill the boilers. Q. This question is suggested to me : Will you state what you know about appli- cations being made for the re-employment of these men by a committee, if you know anything about that ? — A. There was an article in the paper purporting to be a set- tlement, a terrific communication, I think, from Mr. Powderly. On the morning ou which that was published a committee came to the oflipe and said to me, as near as I remember the conversation, " We have come up to talk with you." I knew very well what the subject was, because I had seen the morning paper. Part of them were Knights of Labor, and I said to them, " Gentlemen, I have nothing to say to you; in fact, I have not time to talk to you." I was busy writing. Some reply was made to that, and they went out. That was all the conversation that took place. I do not thiplc they were in the office ten seconds. ■ Q. Now, with reference to the employment of men in your department. You haVe already employed some new men, as I understand you, that were not in the employ- ment of the company at the time of the strike, have you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And they are now in your employment ? — A. Yes, sir ; as I told you, I employed every man that came along, and up to the time the strike was declared off I had be- tween 130 and 140 men employed. Q. How many men do you require in your department in addition to the force j^ou have already secured 1 — A. I can get my work done, I think, for the time beinff, with ■ about 160 or 170. Q. And yoUihave how many ?- A. I had up to the time the strike was declared off between 135 and 140. When the strike was declared off I re-employed fifteen or twenty, more or less. I cannot tell the exact number of the old men who applied individually. Q. Since the strike was declared off?— A. Yes, sir ; there were three or four or five, possibly eight, that came to work before the strike was declared off. Q. Did you make any objection to taking them ?— A. Not at all ; I sent for them. I would be glad to have them go to work, and they were glad to go to work. Q. State whether at any time since the strike was Inaugurated up to the present time you have been unwilling to employ any of your old men who came back and LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 397 asked for employment. — A. I think, perhaps, there was an application which I re- fused. Q. For what reason ? — A. At that time that man had been very actively engaged about our works in the interests of the Knights of Labor — too actively, I thought, for a responsible man, at least — and I told him I could not employ him. Q. Wliat do you mean by actively employed? What had you any reason to believe he had been doing f — A. He had made remarks to my jonnd-house foreman that I thought were not proper — the remarks I do not remember now— and took a great interest to prevent anything being done except what he received instructions about from the committee. Q. He had advised the obstruction of your business ? — A. He had not been advising it, but had been doing it. Q. And for thatreason you did not employ him? — A. Tes, sir. Q. Aside from that objection, which perhaps was covered by Mr. Hoxie's proclama- tion, had you any objection to employiug the old men ? — A. Not proper ones ; no, sir. Q. That applied to you individually ? — A. No, sir ; I would have been glad to have had them come bark. Q. And you had solicited their coming back ?— A. I had. By Governor CurItn ; Q. Had you a good class of industrious and skilled men in your department before the strike ? — A. That brings up the little history of 1885. I must say that, generally speaking, previous to 1885 we had as good a class of mechanics as yon will find in any railroad shop. 1 was satisfied with them. While I demanded of the men strict attention to business and a fair day's work, I believe we received it. After the strike of March, 18f 5, and the company entered into an agreement with the men I saw a growing insubordination in a certain way, and not until the latter part of the year or the beginning of this had that growing insubordination been enough to warrant my saying anything. I do think the men during the latter part of 1885 and the early part of 1886 were not doing what was fair in many instances. We had men there that it made no difference with. There were some others that I thought took advantage of us ; in fact I know it. By Governor Stewart : Q. You mean to say that some were demoralized by the strike of 1885 ?— A. I cannot consider it demoralization intbatsense. I think it was aggressiveness. Ithinkthey felt they had the power which they could wield and showed it in that manner. Q. In what manner; you must specify ? — A. By refusing to do what was right, be- ing indifferent as to the amount of work they did during that time. I will mention an instance. My foreman came to me and said that a piece of work had been given to an apprentice boy, and this apprentice boy told the foreman he did not think he had any business to do that kind of work. " Well," he said, "I want it done, and if you are used to it you will have to do it." The boy said, " I will have to see the committee first before I do it." Everything at that time of any juoment was referred to the committee. Q. Was that a condition 6f things that did not exist before the strike of 18-5 ? — A. No, not at all. We had perfect discipline then, and as I said before, the men of our shops were as good a set of men as you could get in any raih'oad shop. By Governor Cuetin : Q. I am requested to ask you if, in your opinion, it was the organization of the Knights of Labor that caused this disquiet in the shop and insubordination f — A. I judge so from the fact Q. Whether you know it certainly ; then we will take your judgment, whether you know it? — A. I cannot say I know it. Governor Stbwabt. He expresses it as his opinion. The Witness. I judge from the fact that a great many questions were referred to the committee. The committee were in the shop and were very busy during the early part of 1886 in discussing questions, in fact they neglected their work to do it, to be plain, in many instances. Q. Did you advise some of the men to join the Knights of Labor ? — A. I did, and will tell you why. Q. You have the right to state your reasons for it. — A. There were three men in the shop who came to me and said: "We are importuned in the street, in our resi- dences, and everywhere we meet the men, to become Knights. What would you do about it?" I said : "Gentlemen" — I speak now of three men only — " in order to save annoyance to you, for it is certainly annoyance, the best thing you can do is to join them. The fact of you three men joining or not joining will cut no figure in the re- sult." For that reason and that only I advised the men to join. , 398' LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. By Governor Cuktin : Q. Was the demand for the foreman to quit in consequence of his insubordina- tion?— A. What foreman? Q. Gilts.— A. Gilts was an incompetent man for the position he was in, andhe waa insubordinate. Q. Were not those guards placed in the shop by your permission ?— A. If the ques- tion was put to me I do not remember it, arid consequently I must say I do not think there was anything said about it ; however, I am not positive as to that statement. Q. There was no violence, except yon described the fact they took possession- there was no violence offered ?— A. There was no violence offered. The men while there, I must say, behaved themselves in a very gentlemanly manner, except in a few instances some remarks might be considered as insulting to the foreman, which was of no consequence. That was happening at all times. Q. Then work was stopped there from the fact that the men were withdrawn, the men had left ?— A. I want to understand what you mean. Q. What I mean is this, from the 4th to the 10th.— A. Work in the shop was stopped in repairing locomotives except what could be done by the round-house fore- man, myself, and my general foreman. Q. You heard no threats from those men who were left there to guard the place?— A. No, sir ; not at all. Let me say here, that the Knights detailed two or three me- chanics to do the necessary work upon the mail-train engines and would not permit any other work to be done. Q. They were there? They did not force any person put to work to go away? — A. ' They were there and said they would not permit it to be done. I will state we had an engine, No. 257, which had been out upon a long trip and needed a few repairs, and needed apout five hours to complete her, when the strike took place. I went to Mr. Nolan and Mr. Williams, of the committee, and asked them if they would not permit work to be done on the engine if the other engine broke down ; that I would like to have the engineer that ran it make some time ; that as long as the locomotives were , run we let the engineers make some money in drawing mail trains. The committee, those two, agreed to it, but after consulting the balance of the committee at their rooms, they refused. I asked them three different times to permit the work to be done and they refused in all cases. By Governor Stbwart : Q. The judge (Judge Portis) asks me to ask you whether when the men took pos- session they put out the fires and drew the water out from the engine ? — A. I cannot state that, whether they did so or not. The first complaint 1 had of the water being drawn out was on the morning on which the notices were received. Then three men went through the round-house and let the water out of the boilers. There was one instance of a passenger engine standing in the round-house where the fire had been started where they put the fire out. Q. You have stated you refused to employ a certain man that applied to you for employment, and that you had reason to believe or knew that he had been active in preventing the operations of the trains. Now wiU yoli state how you know that, what your knowledge is? — A. From his actions in the round-house, and from a remark he made to my round-house foreman ; but let me state here, some three or four weeks after the application of this man, he came back to me and asked for work, and he said, "I have withdrawn from the Knights of Labor." I said to him, " I will look into your case and will let you know in a day or two," and did so. I made the proper inquiries, and found that the man was really sorry for what he had done — the part he had taken — and acknowledged it, and, being the first man to withdraw frbm that order, I said, " You can go to work," and he did so. Q. Then you did finally set him to work ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think he is as faithful a man as we have got to-day. By Governor Curtin : Q. Did you give his name in your testimony? — ^A. I did not. Q. WiU you give his name ?— A. I do not know whether he would like for his name ' to be given or not ; I am not sure. I suppose he is well known to the Knights. By Governor Stewart : -Q. To what extent did the insubordination you have mentioned that you say existed in the shops after the strike of 188.5, to what extent did that insubordination exist?— A. That we were not producing results that the number of men we had should have done. Q. Can you state numerically to what extent?— A. No ; I cannot. It was evidence from the general appearance of everything that there was an indifference on the part of some men to do what was right. I had been told in one instance by my foreman, and I have no reason to doubt his word, that he asked a man to try and get apiece of LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 399 work done in a certain time, which was possible, and the man told him if he wanted more work done he should hire more men, that there were plenty of them in the country. Q. State whether or not you had men enough or more men in your employmeht at that time than was necessary to do the work. Were the men you had there capable of doing the work necessary to have done? — A. Yes, sir; I think they were. Q. Are you positive about thatf — A. I have the word of my foreman. Q. How long does an apprentice serve you before he is entitled to journeyman's wages ? If there is any system about it, state it in this connection. How do you treat your apprentices t — A. If we take a young man in the shop and he is adapted to the business generally, we push him along as fast as be can absorb the business. I will say we have apprentices there who have worked four years that will do in their par- ticular line just as good work as men who have served twenty, just as satisfactory, and that is some of the best work in the shop. There are others who will never make mechanics if they work their lifetime. Those boys are given some work they can do and are paid for what they can do. There is no time set for a young man learning the business, but just as fast as he absorbs we give him the work. Q. Do you mean you keep your apprentices on a particular branch of the business, or do you allow them to learn the trade generally ? — ^A. We first put them at work in the tool department running machine tools. We change the boys in from three to six months from one tool to another, in order that they may become proficient in aU branches of tool work. If we fijid a boy imusually stupid we keep him on a machine longer, and if he is keen we change him more rapidly. Q. Take this example you have mentioned, where a boy works four years,and where he has become skilled so, as you say, he does his work as well as a man twenty years in the department ; how do you rate his wages when he reaches that point of skill f Do you advance his wages, or do you keep him at the wages of an apprentice f — ^A. Let me state an example and you will see. A man running a tool doing a certain class of work may be getting |2.60 a day. One instance happened of this kind. A man was paid |2."70 a day, and he quit. I told the foreman to take the oldest appren- tice, the most skillful one, and put him on the tool and see what results we would get. 1 thought it due to the boy, and he did so, and the work we received from the machine was equal to that of the man that quit. The boy had been working three or four years in the shop. His pay had been raised at odd times u;:.-Ml he was paid 1^1.85. fie went onto the lathe and was paid the same amount. In November last I voluntarily, without anything being said to me by any one, wrote a letter to the superintendent advising a raise of pay of all the apprentice boys, and after six weeks or so I received an answer — the correspondence I cannot give you at present, but it finally ended in permission to raise the boys 10 and 1^ per cent, respectively, accord- ing to merit. The raise of pay took place on the 1st day of February. The strike took place on the 6th of March, and the regular pay day would have been on the 13th of March, about. Of course they received the benefit of this raise for the month of February. Ton wiU understand that every boy that comes in our shop is given the privilege to acquire a business whereby he may earn his living. In ordinary machine- shops in Saint Louis apprentice boys are paid $3.50 a week, or $3 at the most ; more generally $2.50 a week. We pay our apprentice boys 75 cents a day when they come in the shop. They have an advantage first in pay over apprentices in ordinary ma- chine-shops. We consider that every boy who works for us has an advantage, also an opportunity to learn a trade, and it has never been the custom when a boy has worked there three or four years to give him the full pay of a journeyman, but gen- erally speaking we make a boy's pay from $2 to $2.25 a day when he does journey- man's work, and after working at that rate a year or more, we gradually raise him until he gets a journeyman's pay. Q. That is your system ? — A. Yes ; we consider that we have the boys to benefit. Q. What was the tool you mentioned ; was it a lathe that the boy worked on that yon advanced? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are the apprentices confined to the tools— the lathes ; is that all the work they do ? — ^A. Mostly. In very few instances we have taken them on the floor in the erect- ing department, but we do not put them down there as often as I could have wished, owing to certain things occurring in the shop which prevent us doing so ; however, when we find a boy has acquired proficiency in the tool department and is physically able to go on the floor we put him there. I had one or two boys in the shop who have only been on the floor on one or two occasions, who are physically unable to do the work because the work is too laborious. Q. How long would it take an average boy to learn the trade according to your system so as to become proficient and entitled to men's wages f — ^A, I think in four years an average boy would be proficient enough to go in any machine-shop with any tool they would give him. Q. How long does it take to become skilled in the use of the lathe you speak of? — A. That depends entirely on the ability of the boy. 400 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Tlie link motion, the facing motion, and setting valves, that is iucluded in the trade, I aip told? How long does it take to accluiie a journeyman's skill in that work ?— A. I want to have you put the question a little differently, if you please. Q. I will put it in this form : How long' would it take an apprentice hoy to learn how to do any part of the work that is done on a locomotive that is inthe machin- ist's line ?— A. To any single part ? j. ^ t Q. All the parts ?— A. I have been at the business twenty-four years, and I do not know that I kiiow it all yet. There is something new every day. I will state I have seen men who 'worked forty years in a machine-shop and could not set a valve, andl consider them good men. Q. Was that because they had no opportunity of doing it ?— A Their capacity was not large enough. By Governor Cuetin : Q. You spoke of a man that was insubordinate and quit and you took him back, and he told you he had resigned from the Knights of Labor ; if he had not resigned would you have taken him back ?— A. Yes, sir ; there have been fifteen or twenty men applied to me for work, and in only one or two instances have I ever asked them the question. I do not care whether Knights of Labor or not so long as they do their duty. By Colonel Burnes : Q. Do you remember a petition with about fifty names on it being presented to you f — A. I saw an account in the paper where a petition was presented to me, or at least a list of names which was presented to me by the committee, and I selected seven- teen, so the paper stated. There has never been a list of names presented to me by the Knights of Labor or any other body of men whatever. Q. It was stated in the papers you had received such a list and scratched all off but seventeen or nineteen. — A. There never has been a list of names presented tome by any person for the cancellation of any names whatever. H. G. CLARK, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Curtix : Question. What is your office ? — Answer. Division superintendent of the east end of the Missouri Pacific. Q. What do you know, about the strike ?— A. I know they stopped our business,' and I could not get any trains out, freight trains, for a few days, because I could not get any engine. Q. Where were you? — A. At my office at the shops, at the yards. Q. Are you stationed at Saint Louis? — A. My headquarters are here. Q. I will ask you what is your personal knowledge, what came under your personal knowledge and obseivation, first, as to the cause of the strike ? — A. I could not find out any cause. ,' Q. Did you have any conversation with any of the employes?— A. Yes, sir; I asked them the cause, and they said they had an order ; that was all. Q. State all the reasons given you in any conversation you had with the employfe when they went out, what they stated to you as to the reason of their going out!— A. 1 did not discuss the matter with any except my own men. I had some trouble with the freight brakemen. They told me they were paid well, the work was easy, and they had no grievance, but they could not work under the existing circum- stances. Q. They were ordered out? — A. They were ordered out. Q. Do you know anything about any acts of violence or any obstructions placed in the way of moving' trains ? Confine yourself to what you personally know ; the effect of obstruction already appears. — A. I saw men intimidated, the engineer and fireman. Q. Who? — A. The man Williaios and a fireman named Chase, and a fuel agent named McNamara. Q. How did they intimidate them ? — A. By telling them there was a hereafter and they 'would remember them ; that they had better not go out. Q. Any other acts of that sort? — A. I saw one man named Thompson; he had a stick in his hand ; he stood right at the side of the engine and talked to the engineer, Sturdy ; told him to be a man and not to go, and he would remember them. He did not use any violence, but he was shaking the stick in the presence of the man. Q. Do you know whether they were Knights of Labor? — A. Only by hearsay, and their admissions that they were. Q. Did you hear them say anything 3bout it?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What did they say ? — A. About being Knights ? • Q, Yes. — A. They said they belonged. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 401 Q. Anything else in that line that occurs to you ? — A. Nothingmore than -when we ■went to get the train out once -we found the draw-bar keys had been pulled out. I went to set out some of the cars, and set out two or three on one switch ai)d pulled up and went to throw the engine and the remaining part of the train back on the train proper, threw the switcn, and four or five men threw it for the side track. Mr. Kerrigan threw it back again for the proper track, and they came and threw it again. By this time the engine was in motion backing, and by that time the strikers went be- tween the cars and the pins dropped, and they were loose, and they raq them against the other cars. Q. Do you know who did those acts ? — A. Not those ; I was at the hind end of the train, five or six cars away. Q. You only know the train was obstructed ? — A. Yes, sir. By Colonel Bornbs : Q. Do you remember any brakemen telling yon they had joined the Knights of La- bor after the strike f — A. It was so near the time I would not say it was after ; I think it was, though. Q. You say you do not remember any brakemen telling you that ? — A. Yes, sir ; they told mo immediately after the strike. There was lots of them went up in a body and joined, for I was trying to keep myself informed in that matter, and was surprised there were so many Knights of Labor among the brakemen. I found they had cor- ralled them and taken them in in a body, as they told it themselves. As far as ob- structions axe concerned, I would like to go back to the first days of the strike, when the man Nolan and Williams came to me and told me I might run regular mail trains and the regular number of ears, but that I should not have engines and cars for other trains. By Governor Stewart: , Q. Were they a committee of Knights T — A. I do not know whether they were a committee. Williams intimidated engineers and Nolan was with him. I asked him about evenings — about once a, week, when we had extra passengers and we put on an extra coach or two — and they said we could not take the cars. We had an engine that brought in a local train, and we found the engine was killed in the morning, abd word was received that we could not have an engine for that till we delivered that engine up. I advised Mr. Bartlett that we must have that engine. Q. What became of the engine? — A. It was hauled to the shops, as they demanded it should be. By Colonel Buknes : Q. I am instructed to ask you, if you received any grievances or any complaints from the men in the employment of the company withregard to alleged mistreatment of them by yourself, and if they carried the grievances over your head to your superior officer t — A. Since when? Q. Since the 15th of March, 1885 ! — ^A. Yes ; well, it was not a grievance you might say; a brakeman on the Sedalia section went to Mr. Hager, then division superin- tendent, about the promotion of a certain man. The man has never been promoted, because I took him and talked to him afterwards and he could not bear examination on the time-card. He said, "Give me a position in the caboose and I am satisfied." His name was Thompson. Q. Did you understand they carried that complaint to Mr. Hoxief — A. I didn't know they did. Q. Have any of them ever told yon they carried it to Mr. Hoxie? — A. No, sir. Q. I misunderstood it. It seems the petition was never sent. — A. I thought not. Q. You said you heard of such complaints being made ? — A. I said I never heard of it being taken to Mr. Hoxie. Q. Did you hear of it being in existence with a view of sending it to Mr. Hoxie? I will call yonr attention to what Mr. McCnllagh told you. — A. He talked about a grievance — I do not know exactly the grievance. He talked about taking it to Mr. Hoxie. Q. Do you remember seeing the petition ? — A. I never did. Q. What was the trouble you had with McCnllagh; what did he say was in the petition? — A. He used the expression that they had a little matter they would like to have settled. They had started to take it to Mr. Hoxie. Q. We, understand the brakemen on the light run get more pay than the baggage- men ; do you know why that is?— A. The brakemen get paid according to the agree- ment of March 15, 1885, and the baggage-men's pay was not changed, because there was nothing said about it. McCnllagh said it was a mistake they made in not in- cluding the baggage-men in the agreement. Q. Do you not think a baggage-man does more work than a brakeman ? — A. No, sir ; he has a perquisite from handling express packages that I have no doubt raises it up to what the brakeman gets, and more. .^9S4. rONft 26 402 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST^. Q. Does he not assist the brakcrnan ? — A. Yes, he assists when the other man can- not do what is to be done. ' i Q. Can the brakemen do their work withouf assistance of the baggage-meii'aiid switchmen ? — A. On the light run ? Q. Yes ?— A. They could if they gave them time to. Q. The time is limited, I suppose ?— A. It is on all trains. Q. Did the passeftiger brakemen complain to yoa of their hard service and inade- quate salary ip making np trains at the depot?— A. No, sir. FRANK STILLWELL, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Governor Stewart: Question. What is your business ? — Answer. , X am assistant superintendent of termi- nal facilities of the Missouri Pacific at the Union depot. Q. Did you hear the testimony of Mr. Dickinson? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you anything to add to it ? — A. Only that I had a conversation with the switchmen the night they struck. They struck at 5 o'clock and I went out to them and said, "Boys, what the devil is the matter with you?" They said, "Well, -we have quit." I said, " What have you quit for ? Have you any grievance ?" They said, "No grievance." One of them did the talking, and said, "We have no grievr ance, only we were ordered to strike, and we struck." Q. How many of them were present ? — A. About ten at that time. Q. Did you have any other conversation with any of those men ? — ^A. Nothing bear- ing on that. I asked them to go to work when I would see them, and they would tell me they were afraid.. Some of thf m went to work, one or two, and they came around, the next morning with their heads tied up and their eyes blacked. Q. Did yon witness any acts of violence yourself towards the men that went to work ?^A. The "first man we hired to attend to switches. I do not remember his name. He had been at work about an hour and I saw five men a[tproach, and they, talked to him a little while, and I saw one of them make a motion as though he was throwing, and the man fell, and I was olf 50 or 100 yards. I didn't know what the conversation was or anything of the kind. When I got to him he was bleeding, and said he had been struck by a chunk of coal. Q. He was what they call a scab ? — A. Yes, sir ; the man came from Texas. ■Q. Did he continue to work afterwards ? — A. No, sir. •Q. He quit ? — A. He quit then. ■Q. Any other acts of that nature ? — A. None that I saw except myself and the assistant yardmaster went to the shop after a passenger train. Our men did not strike when the others did ; they struck when the notice was put up to vacate the company's property ; they went out at that time. The assistant yardmaster and my- self went to the yard, coupled on to the train, and started withit and got to the Sum- mit avenue crossing, and a man jumped on the engine and handed the engineer a note, and as soon as he read the note he reversed the engine and went back on the side tract. I went to him and said, "Larry, what is the matter ? " He said, "Frank, I got a note, and can't go." I said, " Won't you take the engine to the depot ?" He said, "Jfo,I dare not." I went and got another engine and started wilt it, and the same man got on the second engine and spoke to the second engineer and asked him to get off; he shook his head, and he went about 50 yards, and he said, "They doti't want me to take the train down." I said, "It is all right ; you have got it started now, and it will go, if I have to run it myself;" and we got there. Those were the only acts of intimidation I witnessed. JOHN B. KENDALL, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stewart : Question. What is your position?— Answer. lam yardmaster of the Iron Mountain Boad. Q. Stationed here at Saint Louis? — A. Y'es, sir. Q._ What did you observe of the strike and its consequences ?— A. There was a de- tention to business and an inconvenience in doing work. Q. Didyoutalk with any of the men that struck? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At the time of the strike or immediately after ?— A. After the strike, after they went out. Q. What did they say to you ?— A. On asking them to return to work, they told me they could not return to work on account of the Knights of Labor; that they had grievances over which they had no control. Q. Did they state what the grievances were ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ask them what they had to complain of or whether they had anythingt- A. Yes, sir. LABOE TEOUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. 403 Q. What did they say to that? — A. They said they had no grievances, nothing to complain of; that they were simply ordered to quit work. Q. Did yoa see any acts of Yiolerce towards men that were employed ! — A. I did not. T. W. KENKAN, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stewart : Question. What is yonr business ? — Answer. Division superintendent of the Mis- souri Division of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern. Q. What was your observation of the strike ? — A. Do you want me to commence at the begiiining ? Q. Yes. — A. The first notice I had of any trouble at. all was on March 4. I left De Soto, where my headquarters are, and on my arrival at Saint Louis I receved a message from my trainmaster that he had been notified by a committee of the Enights of Labor that we would not be allowed to handle any Texas and Pacific cars. I said all right, to have them set out, that we would not try to handle them at all. On that evening I returned home, arriving there at 6.45, and before going to the ofBce Istopped to get my supper. I sat down and my clerk said we had a Texas and Pacific car loaded with hogs in the yard; that they had set it out and said we conld not move it. I asked to have the old yardmaster, whose name was Page, come over, that I would like to see him. He came over and I asked him what was the trouble that he conld not let the car go through, and he said, " We got orders not to allow any Texas and Pacific cars to pass." I tried to reason with him ; asked him where he got his orders, and -he said he got them from his master workman. I asked him his name, said I would like to see him. He went over and brought ' Charles Langh- lin, who said he was master wprkman of the De Soto lodge. I asked him the ques- tion if he would not allow us to run the car through, as the car of stock had left Poplar Bluff' before we received the order boycotting the Texas and Pacific cars, and it had got there without the trainmaster noticing it was a Texas and Pacific car, otherwise it would have been reloaded before it got there. They would not allow the car to be moved. At last Laughliu agreed to allow me to move it if I conld get any- body to handle the engine. I went over with my clerk, went over and asked the en- gineer if he would handls the engine and he said he would. I went down and threw the switch myself. Ho got back within about five lengths of the car when the engine all of a sudden stopped. I got down and walked up to the gangway of the engine and asked what was the matter. He said, " I just got orders not to couple on to the car of stock." I said, "Who gave you orders?" Hesaid, "Laughlin was here and gave me the orders, said I had better not and must not," and he says, "I can't do so." I said, "All right, I will put you back where I found you." I got on the front end of the engine and rode down to the switch and put him on the switch, on what is called a scale track. All I asked then was to have the car unloaded in the stock-yard, a small yard, probably would hold two car-loads of stock, and told him at the time, " If you will let us unload it you can put a guard over it as long as you have a mind to. We would like to unload it so we can feed and water, so it wiU not suffer." We tried till one o'clock trying to get the stock out. The train we expected to start it on went out after dropping the car of stock, not trying to get it in that train. We gave it up about one o'clock. The next morning we started at it again. They left a guard ;with a red light on each side of the car, a guard over it all night. The next morning Mr. Flem- ing came there, who is the general superintendent of the Iron Mountain ; his title is superintendent, but he is superintendeijt of all the divisions. He came there and asked to see Mr. Laughlin, and he came up to the office. At first he would not consent to anything. The fact was, he didn't intend the stock should be unloaded or be moved. At last he agreed we could unload it and put it any place w e pleased. We moved the car by hand opposite the De Soto Hotel, wlich is situated near what they call the park there, and unloaded the stock ; got it partly unloaded and were driving it in the yard — the yard is close to the track — and the proprietor of the hotel came up, and he says, "You can't drive those hogs in there ; you must take them away; I have got an order from the Knights of Labor that they will boycott my house if the hogs are put in there; yon must take them away." Previous to that we had tried to buy some corn to feed them in the car before we had undertaken to unload them. We had gone to two parties there who kept feed stores, and, as quick as we went there a com- mittee waited on them and told them as soon as they sold feed for the hogs they would boycott them. We unloaded the stock and put them in the park, and from there drove them down to the stock-yard and put them in; and by that time we had an agent hunting all over the town, and every place he had gone they had followed him up, notifying them they could not sell feed for the hogs. When we went to the yard wo were notified we could not feed the hogs. It remained that way until 2.30. Q. That was hard on the hogs. — A. It was getting a little hard on the hogs by that time, and Laughlin came and said to Mr. rieming and me that we might load them 404 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. in another car and let them go through. This was done, and -we started theiQ Out that night about half-past six. Previous to this I asked Laughlin, m fact, I think he said it himself without being asked ; he said that they had no grievance against the Iron Mountain Road— none at all. I told him if he didn't I couldn't see why he could Dot let them go : that we were obeying their orders, baycotting the Texas and Pacific oars, but that it left Poplar Bluff before. He said it made no difference. The next day he told Mr. Fleming and me the same thing, that it was merely the orders he received he had to obey. , , . r, .n. i- » Q. Let us see how long they kept the hogs without any feed.— A. irom the timel was notified, which was about 7 o'clock, they were kept from then— they remained from about 6 o'clock p.m.; they stayed in the car until 11.10 the nest morning. They were loaded at Poplar Bluff about 5 a. m,, and that made them in the car about thirty hours. , . Q. Without anything to eatf— A. Without anything to eat or dnnk. Q. Then, after you got them unloaded everything was boycotted T— A. Yes, sir. Q. In the way of feed, and you took them down to the stock-yard, and how mnoh more time elapsed before they allowed you to load them ?- A. It was 2.30 ; they told us we could load them. Q. The same day T— A. Yes, sir ; the night before they stopped it, and the next af- ternoon at 2.30 they notified us we could load the car of hogs and let them go through. Q. Did they get anything to eat before you sent them off?— A. Yes, sir; they were well fed. ' . .„ Q. Where did you get that grain?— A. I am not sure where the agent did get It; the agent procured it. Q. Now go on.— A. The next morning about 9.40 Mr. Harris, the master mechanic, came to me, and he says, "I have just heard the whistle is going to blow at 10 o'clock, and the men are all going out on a strike." We waited in the office until 10 o'clock, and sure enough the whistle did blow, and the next thing we saw was the men march- ing in double file out of the shop across the road onto the sidewalk and from the side-., walk to their hall, which was nearly opposite the depot, about four doors south of the passenger depot, where our office was. We continued running our trains until even- ing wiuiout their bothering us any, but as soon as it came dark they commenced pull- ing pins. We worked that night from 7 o'clock until about 2 in tlie morning trying to get one train out, but they could take the pins out faster than we could put them in. We gave it up then, and the only train we got through then was the one ibat was run through about 15 or IS miles an hour, which took them by surprise, and they had no chance to stop it. The next morning we tried to get an engine to take the 'train out that we had been trying the night before. They had a guard at the switch and positively refused to let it come out. The switch was thrown once and the en- gine came out. It was thrown for the main side-track, and the strikers threw it again and told the engineer to get back on the switch leading to the turn-table. This they made .them do, and told them positively they could not run another freight train. This was the last freight we run until the morning of the 11th. That was Thursday morning. Q. I do not knbw as it is worth while to go into details on that subject. We have been already advised about the delay and obstruction there and at other points. In regard to acts of violence ? — A. I will take it that morning. You do not care for threats. There were a great many threats made to me personally and to the men run- ning the train. Q. State any threats that were made ; that is proper. — A. At 7 o'clock we starteda train north from De Soto, an engine and eight cars with three or four cabooses and as many men to man them. They had a guard stationed in the yard and around the shops; all of them wore stars, who said they had been sworn in as special deputy marshals by the city. They told us that the train could not go and there would be trouble if it did go. I told them that the train was going and that therfe was not enough of them there to stop it, and it went. The next thing that wasdoue was about 9.15. There was a procession started from the Knights of Labor hall headed by my yard-master, that had been yard-master. Page, and marched down opposite the shop, north on the sidewalk opposite the shop, crossed over, and as they came to the round- house they separated. Part of them went around in front and the balance in behind, as I could see from the window from the telegraph office. I saw a party in front break open one of the large doors and go in. I went down there myself, followed in the same w«y and ordered them all out. They told me to get out myself. I went to where I could hear them hammering on the engines. By that time they had discon- nected the hose on the tank and the water was running out of the tank. I could hear them hammering on the inside where there were three stalls partitioned off. I started to go in there and a man stopped me and said I could not go in there. I asked him for his authority and he said, '' It don't make a damned bit of ditferenee, you can't go ir." I stayed there long enough to see I could not go in. There were too many of them there, and' I saw I could not get in. I went back to report LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 405 to my superior officer, Mr. Fleming. At tliat time a freigtit train came from the nortn and I saw some one throw a switch and run them on the side-tracls, and I saw them take full possession of the engine and disconnect the hose. I stayed there till it was all over. I saw it was no use. It was on the side-track and there, were too many of them, three hundred. I let them go. They made a good many threats, a good many personaljihreats. Said, " Throw him off the engine." "Do him up." Q. Who made those threats t — A. It was the men that I knew had been employes of the company. At the time I did not know what they were. I only supposed they were Knights of Labor. Afterwards they were pointed out to me as Knights of Labor by men who had been Knights of Labor. I do not know it personally except by seeing them going into the haUway leading to their hall. Ineverwasin their hall, and never expect to be. Q. State whether any personal injuries were inflicted on any men employed. — A. Well, there were several of our meu that went to work, they -were assaulted and beaten up, but I did not see them until afterwards. Q. Did you see the result of the beating? — A. Yes, sir ; on Otto Mnller, at the time they thought he was going to die. He was beaten up very bad^y. He was a ma- chinist. Q. Did you see anything of the heroic woman's performance, defending the man that fled to her house ? — A. I did. I was at the south end of the yard standing guard at one end, about at the side-track leading to the freight-house. After the train passed I saw a commotion down below and started to run there as well as I could. By the time I got there it had passed ovej' the crossing that leads from the west side of the yard to the east side of the yard, and before I could climb over the hox cars and under others — every track was fiUed^and by the time I got on the other side I could just see Todd running, the yard-master, the newly appointed yard-master, and I started after him and followed him up. I did not get there until Mrs. Duffy got out and she was holding them at bay with a revolver in her hand. I waited there till I was satisfied that everything was safe, and she was going to hold them there. Tbey could not get by her. I went back to get her husband and some of the boys to get them to go there. I with one engineer were the only ones there at the time. Q. Did you hear any threats made by the men? — A. "KiU him. Kill the son of a bitch. Get the scab oat." They used all the mean language you can think of. They went so far as to call Mrs. Duffy a bitch. A woman on the other side of the street said to pull her out and hang her, too. There were quite a number of meu I knew personally there. Some of my brakemen were in the crowd and a great many of the other men I knew were employes from seeing them in the round-house and in tha •hops. Q. State whether there were any grievances to your knowledge existing on the part of the men against the road or the administration. — A. I had it from the master workman tbey had no grievances at all, none. Q. Who was he t — A. Charles Laughlin. He told Mr. Fleming — he told it before my clerk on Friday, and told Mr. Fleming and I as wo were standing in Mr. Fleming's car near the round-house. That was both in the forenoon and after dinner. Q. He was the active man in preventing the movement of the stock car you men- tioned ? — ^A. He and Page. Q. Both of them Knights of Labor f — A. That is what they claimed they were. Q. I infer so from the fact that they felt bound to go out on an order. They would not have felt so if they were not Knights of Labor. — A. They claimed that every man in the shop was a Knight of Labor. Of course, I do not know ; but, as i t proved afterwards, I suppose it was about right. I do not suppose that there were over two or three in the shop that were not Knights of Labor. Q. That is all? — A. That same night, Thursday night, the llth, they broke in the round-house again and finished up disabling the engines they left in. the morning to take care of the freight train, Q. Disabled the engines? — A. They disabled the engines that night by disconnect- ing the valve-stems and taking bolts away, and some valve-stems were bent, and they took the fountain-valve out of each engine. Q. And carried it off? — ^A. And carried it off; yes, sir. Q. How many engines did they disable? — A. Ail told, they disabled seventeen, three in the morning. There was only sixteen they disabled, and one on the side- track with a train in front of her and behind her was as disabled as she conld be. She had no water in the tank and we could not get her out. They killed the other engines, disabled them by taking away part of the machinery. Q. How was that supplied afterwards ; was it found?— A. A few pieces were found but most of them were sent away for to take their place. ^ Q. I do not know but we have the same fact from some other witness. The car of stock was moving JErom the west side of the Mississippi onto the other side ? — A. It was on the way — ^it came from the Texas and Pacific road, and was billed to the Union Stock-Yard; I think the Union Stock-Yard at East Saint Louis; that is, went by way 40G LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. of the bridge. From Thursday until the day we started the trains, on March 27, there was a guard on duty at both ends of the yard. For a few days they probably had from 100 to 150 men on guard all the time. The lowest time I ever counted any was forty. That was the day Mr. Fleming came there, the day before we started the trains. Wo walked down there, and looSed around to see. I told him I did not think he would find many there. We went and found forty. He. said, "I think they are keeping up a pretty good guard." The day we started the trains there were ob- structions placed on the track, and others tried to put them on, but were presented by a man standing on the engine with a revolver in his hand ready too shoot the first ihan that threw one. But from that time we have had more or less threats. There have been rails put on the track and rooks put on the track. This I can give of course. I did not see them. They are only reports that came to me. I can have a memorandum of all I have said here and perhaps a little more made. There is an- other thing put in that I would like to show. It was thrown on the train, on train 607, on April 21, at He Soto. [Producing a paper which reads as follows] : " To the traveling public : " In the interests of humanity, and those who may become the innocent victinisof corporate cupidity, we beg leave to state the following facts as pertaining to the sys- tem of railroads now affected by the great strike in the southwest : " The withdrawal of nearly the entire force of skilled and experienced mechanics and trackmen from the service of the company, at a time of the year when frost is coming out of the ground, and when every tie and rail on the road needs attention, and which renders a large force of trackmen imperatively necessary to keep the track in order, the absence of such force is dangerous to travel. " Engines must needs be overhauled after every trip, or it becomes dangerous to use them, and skilled men are needed to perform the work. "Switches and bridges must be handled with skill, or danger results. "The bungling work of unskilled men may cost life and limb, and we feel it a duty to warn the travelingpublic against the condition of the'Missouri Pacific, Iron Mount- ain, and Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railways, who are running with one-fonrth of theirnecessary force, and those they have are a class who can never get employment save when good and experienced men are on a strike. "EXECUTIVE BOARDS, D. A. 17, 93, AND 101." Q. I think we have had this same thing before, " To the traveling public. In the interests of humanity," &c., warning people not to, travel. You can state the factin your testimony when such a thing occurred. It is a printed document, yon can state, signed by Executive Boards D. A. 17, 93, and ,101. You say this was thrown into a car? — A. Yes, sir; they were distributed through there at De Soto on April iX, and there have been twenty-five or thirty distributed at Belmont on the mail train. (See Exhibit O.) Governor Stewart. It is the same printed slip warning the people against riding on the railroads, which has already been submitted. The Witness. Here is a copy of a request that was handed to one of our braise- men, William Push, hrakeman for Conductor Corey : " You are requested not to go to work, until the present trouble is over. We stand b.y those who stand by ns. Ex- ecutive Committee." Here is the seal of the lodge. This was given himatLesper- ance street, where the train leaves Saint Louis. There has been a complete state- ment about what I could testify here to Mr. Fleming, and I think it has everything embraced, by its showing just what was done in regarcl to the acts and placing ob- structions on the track. (The witness produced a paper.) Q. How can you authenticate this statement of yours ? — A. The biggest share by personal knowledge, in seeing all the facts coming from the men, and afterwards going there and seeing it was done. In regard to disabling four engines at Bismarck, March 22. Q. Have you any objections to letting the committee have this ? — A. No ; I have a cepy of it already. , Governor Stewart. It will be received. It is not necessary to read it. The Witness. In regard'to intimidation, I would like to say something in regard to that. In De Soto, I was there most of the time, and there was a great deal of in- timidation there. Our ehgineers received notices, some of them two and tl^ree no- tices, and some had committees to wait on them. I was called everything you could think of. They intimidated everybody — not only our employes, but they intimidated citizens ; and I speak as a citizen of De Soto, they had full possession, and until the law and order league was formed there, they had possession of the town. They walked around with their canes, with a nut or a piece of iron screwed on the end, and they Tan things as they pleased generally. Q. Was there any boycotting f — A. Yes, sir ; they boycotted Mi;. Stall. LABOR TP.OUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 407 y. Who was he f — A. A grocery keeper ; and they boycotted Slawsoii, aud they boy- cotted G. R. Rathbnn. Q. What fort — A. For daring to speak out and say they were doiag wrong, and ^hoy had no right to go as far as they did. When they broke in the doors one morn- ing Q. What doors? — A. In the round-hoase, on the mornin" of the 11th. They were locked. They broke them in. That night they were locked and nailed up tightly, and they did the same thing. There will be witnesses here that were down there who can prove and show you how they were driven out, whether they walked in peaceably and asked them to get out or forced them to get out. Q. There are witnesses heie who can testify to that ? — A. There are witnesses hero who can testify to that. Q. Of course the business of your location at De Soto, all business there was sus- pended ?— A. Business was almost suspended, about the only persons doing anything at all were the grocery stores, merchants doing very little; about the only trade they were doing was the country trade. Every one of them complained they were doing nothing. In fact they got so near out of goods they run close, being so near Saint Louis, and being so many railroad men there. We had a roll of $45,000 every month, I think that would be the average roll paid out for De Soto. Nearly all the engi- neers lived there and firemen, and half of the conductors and brakeraen. There was a very large force of employes there. Q. Their s^Dplies were cut off. — A. Their supplies were cut off. They even started wagons to Saint Louis. They run out of coal-oil I know, and had to send to Saint Louis f.ir coal-oil. Q. How far is it? — A. It is forty-two miles and a half by rail, I do not know how it is by wagon-road. It must be five miles farther, though. Q. They sent wagons up here you say? — A. Yes, sir. The Witness. I desire to submit this written statement I have here as part of my testimony : ' "de SOTO, MO. '■ On Thursday, March 4, in compliance with general orders, instrnctions were is- sued from this office to all agents. Missouri Division not to load any T. P. or N. O. P. cars until farther notice. " On the evening of that date T. and P. car No. 5513 arrived at De Soto from the South, loaded with hogs for Saint Louis. " Upon entering the yards this car was cut out of train and side-tracked by order of R. S. Page, the yard-master. "Mr. Page and Charles Loughlin, representing the executive committees of Local Assembly No. 3634 of K. of L., then called on me andinformedme that this car would not be allowed to go forward or would not be handled by any member of the K. of L. ; but said they wonl^ not interfere with others handling it. "Accordingly we made an attempt to pull the car down to the stock-yards, for the purpose of unloading the hogs and transferring them into an I. M. car, when the Knights of Labor interfered, Charles Loughlin personally interfering by getting on switch-engine and preventing Engineer Nick Farmer from coupling on to the car. " On the following morning they again refused to allow the hogs to be unloaded until about 10 o'clock a. m., when Charles Loughlin notified me that they' would al- low us to unload the hogs for tlve purpose of feeding and watering them. We then received permission from the proprietor of the De Soto House to place the hogs in his park, but before we had finished putting the hogs in the park a committee called on the proprietor of th6 hotel and threatened to boycott his house if he allowed the hogs to remain there. "We then drove the hogs to company stock-yards and placed them therein. The same committee then called on all the merchants of De Soto and informed them that they must not sell the railway company any feed under penalty of being boycotted. " About.2.30 p. m. Mr. Laughlin notified us that they would allow us to load and forward the stock. We then loaded and forwarded the same evening. " At 10.30 o'clock a. m., Saturday, March 6, the whistles at the shops were sounded, and all hands in the shops quit work. " The, sounds of these whistles had haidly died away when the switch-engines whistle blew forth their shrill notes as a signal for all switchmen to quit work. The switchmen and shopmen then joined together in one large body andmarcTied out of the yards and up to Knights of Labor hall, where they had a Aieeting and ap- pointed a large number of guards, who took possession of the yards and shops. These men were sworn in as deputy city marshals by the honorable city mayor of De Soto. " The guards held possession of the yards and shops until March 10. On the morn- ing of March 7 we endeavored to send out a freight train, but the strikers prevented. " On Thursday, March 11, the strikers, about three hundred in number, marched 408 LABOR TEOUBLES IN xilE SOUTH AND WEST. in double file to the round-lhouse, wliere they proceeded to disable engines in various ■ways, such as cutting hose, disconnecting valve stems, rectooving fountain valves, &c . ''Before they had completed their work of o.jsaBling the engines extra from the north, engine 427, James Noimile, engineer, arrived. The strikers then left the round- house, side-tracked the train, and killed the engine. . ^ ^. ,, , , "On theevening of the same day the strikers wontagainto the round-house, broke open the doors and entered, fmishmg their work of disabling the engines. They also rolled five pairs of trucks into the turn-table pit. " On the mornino- of the 11th, before the strikers entered the round-house, we en- deavored to move a train north, and with much difficulty succeeded in getting out an engine and six cars. The strikers endeavored to pull the pins, intimidate the crew, &c., but failed to stop the train. "On March 12th, a party of strikers went from here to Hemitite and disabled en- ^™^The "same day a party of strikers went to Blackwell for the purpose of disabling the engines at that place, but we were advised of their intentions and had the en- gines removed before they got there. ^., ^, „n^, i> j. ■ m-, "Nothing of any importance occurred from this time until the 20th, when tram 611 was side-tracked at north end of De Soto yards by some unknown party throwing switch in front of train. , t, „ ^ -i. ^ ■ ^ -e " On March 27 two freight trains were run through De Soto without inteiterence, the strikers supposing they were Government freights. " On the morning of March 27 extra north was run through De Soto, when tlie strikers interfered, and as the train was passing the crossing south of the depot, a striker by the name of Peter Moran threw a link at Engineer Green, but fortunately missed him. , , , , , ^ ^ ,. ' " Officer Nelson attempted to arrest Moran, but was knocked ^own and beaten by the mob ; Yard-master Tod went to Nelson's assistance and was struck in the back with a club ; at the same time some one in the mob exclaimed, kill the , when .the TOob, fully three hundred in number, chased him to the residence of Mrs. Duffyj , who seeing the mob following him, grasped a weapon and met them at her door, com- manding them to halt, thus preventing them from entering her house. " Strikers Tom Berry, J. S. Carney, and others placed obstructions, such as links, pins, &c., on the track to derail the train. " On the night of the 28th, about 200 yards of track was soaped by unknown parties about one mile south of De Soto. " On the 29th a large rock weighing about 500 pounds was placed on track about 2 miles south of De Soto. A freight train struck the rock and broke it in pieces, doing no damage to train. Another rock was put on track same day, but was discovered iH time to prevent any accident. "On March 31 two steel rails were placed across the track just north of De Soto ahead of passenger train 604. The train struck them while running at a low rate of speed, and pilot of engine pushed the rails off of the track. " On the morniDg of the 10th of April, Otto Miller, machinist, while on his way to work, was assaulted by two Knights of Labor by the name of Charles Ives and Albert Wilson and severely beaten. These two parties were arrested at Hopewell, Mo., ■wen tried and acquitted. "Numerous letters of threatening, character were received by different employes. " CAROXDELET. " On March 8 twenty strikers from Saint Louis took engine 434 and went to Caron- delet. Arriving at Carondelet at 4.30p.m., went into yards and ordered all switch- men to stop work. "BISMAKCK. "On March 22, about 2 o'clock a. m., a Knight of Labor, James Dolan, enticed the night hostler iiway from round-house, and while away some parties disconnected the valve stem of four eugines and carried away the pieces. They kept them for four or five days and theu brought them back and threw them where they could be found. "On April 20 thirty-live Knights of Labor went from Pilot Knob to Arcadia and made car-repairers quit work, and threatened to make them trouble if they returned to work. "piedmont. " At this there was no trouble. Cost of guards here, 1135.50. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 409 "POPLAU BLUFF. " The only trouble at this point occarred on the 20th of March, when seTeral men, enpposed to be from Little Rock, removed pop-valves from engine 355, Ccet of guards, $196. " CHAKLESTON. "No trouble. Cost of guards, $297.06. "bird's point. " On March 26, -while Engineer Woodruff and Yard Master Parcel! were in office getting orders to go to Charleston with engine 478, a gang of strikers presented a pis- tol t6 fireman and ordered him to get off. They then run the engine a mile west and killed her, leaving her on main track. " On March 29, Earnest Hinchey, night watchman, had notice read to him by par- ties unknown, giving him twenty-four hours to leave town. These parties were sup- posed to be Tesas and Saint Louis yardmen. "BELMONT. " On the morning of the 8th of March, all the Knights of Labor at this place quit work, at the same time yardmen were in the act of taking six loaded cars from yards at that place to transfer boats, when strikers interfered and ordered the cars side-tracked. From this time until March 18, strikers had control of our engines and cars, even to the locking of switches with other than railway locks. On March 17, while bridge contractors were at work on wrecked incline, at Columbus, Ky., repairing it in order that we could transfer passenger and freight trains, strikers interfered aud prevented the men from further work. The parties interfering were John Halter, Fred. Minger, M. C. Groening, John Batey, Samuel Summers, and Charles Kling. The mayor of Solumbus furnished protection for the men, and they resumed work on the night of «he 18th. "On the 18th, an extra freight train, consisting of thirty-four cars of grain, arrived at Belmont with instructions for engine and crew to return to Charleston, but were prevented from so doing by the strikers. The crew made an effort to get engine out •n maiu.track, but switch was thrown back by a striker by the name of Munger aud atrikers would not allow the engine to move. Another attempt was made to get traia ant, when strikers took possession of engine and ran itinto the round-house and killed it. " The names of the leaders were L. Perit, John Holder, Fred Munger, Charles Kling, W. C. Groening, and John Crotty. On the night of the 18th, two of the strikers, Fred Munger and L. JPerit, broke fastening on round-house door, but were prevented from doing any damage by the night watchman. "The cost of guards at this place is about $300. "Yours, respectfully, "T. W. KENNAN, "D. Superintendent. "April 20. Thirty-five Knights of Labor went from Pilot Knob to Arcadia aud made the car-repairers quit work, saying they would return again inp.m., and if they found ^e car-repairers had resumed work would do them up. "April 28. As train 3 622 was passing through Carondelet, some unknown parties threw rock through Conductor Childs' caboose. "April 29. As Conductor Hall was switching his train 619 in Carondelet, switch was thrown wrong, letting engine 433 and threw cars off track. Lacy, engineer. " April 29. Conductor Ifobertson, 3 620, while near mile-post 43, some unknown per- son threw rock and pins at caboose. 3. 50 p. m. " April 29. 3 6il, Conductor Brownwell, engine 445, Engineer O'Connelly, found rock and T rail on track between mile-posts 43 and 44. "April 30. Train 605 struck brake beam and rods that were fastened in frog be- tween Missouri Pacfiic crossing and Robert avenue. "April 30. Train 611 struck T rail that was placed on track one mile north of De Soto. Conductor Dates, engine 420. This was discovered by deputy sheriff, who flagged the train. . " April 30. Man by the name of R. P. Hall, a wiper in the round-house at De Soto, had his house stoned. " 410 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. "W. II. HARRIS, being duly sworn, testified as follows . By Governor Stewart : Question. Where do you live ? — Answer. In De Soto. Q. What is your business ? — A. Master mechauic. Q. At that point f — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have heard the testimony of the division superintendent, who just testi- fied?— A. Yes, sir. 1 Q. What do you say as as to his statement, so far as comes within your knowledge, of the condition of tilings at De Soto, the killing of engines, the injury of engines, and the acts of violence on the part of the strikers ? — ^A. It ia all correct, as far as I know. Q. Is there anything in addition to the statement ? — A. Ko ; I think he knows a Mt- tle more about it than I do. Q. Is there any fact in addition to what he stated that transpired at that point that you would like to state ?— A. I can't think of anything. Q. You confirm his statement as to the mischief and damage done and general con- dition of things, do you ?— A. Yes, sir. At this point the committee adjourned the further taking of testimony until 9.30 a. m., May 11, 1886. ' Saint Louis, Mo., May 11, 1886. The committee, consisting of Messrs. Curtin, Stewart, and Burnes, met at 9,30, and the hearing was resumed, as follows : H. M. HOXIE, being duly sworn, testified as follows : / By Governor Cuktin : i Question. You are the vice-president of the road ? — Answer. I am vice-president of the Missouri Pacific road ; yes, sir. Q. How long have you been in that position ? — A. I have been connected with the system, some part of the system, since 1870, but as vice-president since ISSfl, second vice-president, and as first vice-president since last September. Q. I want to ask you one or two questions, and then Colonel Burnes will examine you. I want to know whether yon had notice the strike was going to occur before it did occur ? — A. We had notice. The strike was not a strike on the Missouri Pacific. It was a boycott of the Texas and Pacific, using the Missouri Pacific to boycott it. We had a notice of the boycott before the notice of the strike. Q. The reason of the strike was alleged to be the discharge of Hall ? — A. What do y-ou say ? Q. The reason of the strike was alleged to be the discharge of Hall ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you tell us whether you had anything to do with the employment of Hall or discharge of Hall ? — A. No. It may be well enough to explain that I had charge of the Texas and Pacific road up to December 16, when it went into the hands of ths United States court, who appointed two receivers, and from that time forward we have had nothing to do with the management of the road. Q. And no control over Hall f — A. No control over Hall. Q. Or over the action of the authorities? — ^A. No, no control of the action of Hall or the receivers, or the action of anybody on the Texas and Pacific road. Q. Do you know, Mr. Hoxie, whether the persons who ordered that strike knew of the fact that you and your system had no control over Hall ? Have you any knowl- edge on that subject?— A. No knowledge except that everybody knew it. It was a matter of public concern, of public notoriety. Q. I suppose the details of the management of your various roads andtho employ- ment of men had been dependent upon your subordinates ? — A. Yes, sir ; the road consists of the Missouri Pacific, the Iron Mountain, the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, the International and Great Northern, which Includes the Galveston; Houstoa and Henderson, and the Central Branch of the Union Pacific, each one under a superin- tendent, each superintendent reporting to Mr. Kerrigan, general superintendent, aad he reporting to me, and all traffic men reportine; to the general traffic manager, and he reporting to me. The accounts are kept in the auditor's office. Q. Mr. Kerrigan yesterday in testifying produced memoranda which he said rep- resented your knowledge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that correct ? — A. Yes, sir ; that statement was prepared ; I had it prepared before I was taken ill Friday night, expecting to appear before yon a week ago la«t Saturday. Q. That paper with the notices and memoranda of what you would say was put in evidence yesterday and accepted, but I take the liberty of asking you if it is correct, LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 411 and tUei'ofove it would seem to be unnecessary to review that ? — A. Yes, sir ; it is cor- rect. It was prepared by myself and my assistants under my direction for tiie pur- pose of placing it before the committee. I did not feel able-— I do not feel able to go through wit4i that. Q. Oh, no ; we will not ask it. Does anything occur to you that is not in" the state- ment which would be of importance in this examination ? — A. I do not think of any- thing now, governor, although possibly if I were to look it all over again I would see something more that I would want to say. By Governor Stewart : Q. It has been said — some witnesses have testified at some time — I think there is a little confusion about the dates, but it is said that in Septembsr a list of grievances was presented to you or left at your ofSce'with your cleife, and the inference has been drawn, or attempted to be drawn, that you must have had that list of grievances, and 1 think it is laid that such a list of grievances was left by somebody in the hands of yonr clerk last September, and that you never made any response thereto. What do you say about having been presented with a list of grievances or a grievance from the Knights of Labor that you did not respond to or pay any attention to ? — A. I do not know of a list of grievances or grievance that has been presented to me by the Knights of Labor, and there have been many of them in the last twelve months, that I did not act upon. I have seen it stated in the papers that one Mr. Palmer had presented grievances. If that be so, it must have been in iny absence, and the gen- tleman who occupied the position of secretary for me at that time has since died. I was away from home if it was at the date they said, and I have not seen them. I have no reason to believe they ever were presented. As I say, no grievance was ever presented to me to my remembrance, and a great many have been, that I have not acted on in some way, either adjusted them or settled them, Q. That has been your general policy for the last year in that respect in dealing with your men ? — ^A. The general policy from March, 1885, to March, 1886, has been to settle the grievances in favor of the men rather than have a strike, and my instroc- tions to the superintendents, to Mr. Sibley, Mr. Herrin, Mr. Kerrigan, and Mr. Fagan, have been emphatic on the subject that we could not afi'ord to have a strike, and we have given way a great many times to matters that we would not ordinarily have done. Q. Ton refer to the concessions in the Wabash and Missouri, Kansas and Texas matters? — A. Yes, sir; and minor instances all through the year. They did not de- sire to discharge men, but to reduce the number of hours work and the discharge of foremen . Q. Did you have any communication after the strike was declared on Ihe 6th of March with any representatives of the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir ; with Mr. Irons and Mr. Powderly. Q. In that interview was anything said by either of the gentlemen as to the cause of the strike ! — A. I had no interview with them. You asked me about communica- tions. By Governor Stbwakt : . Q. Those are before the committee already ? Governor Curtin. They are. By Governor Stewart : Q. Then I do not wish to ask about that. What was the necessary effect, in a busi- ness point of view, of the demand made by the Knights of Labor for you toboycott the Wabash system — to refuse to handle their cars? — A. Last September or August? Q. Yes, sir. What was the effect of that in a business point of view upon the busi- ness of the country, that demand, if it had been complied with and carried out and had not been settled f — ^A. Well, the effect would have been disastrous on a great many people who were dependent on the Wabash for the transportation of certain things. It must he understood, you probably do not understand, we have a contract with the Wabash road whereby they run over our track, or rather we haul their cars between Hannibal and Moherly. We had also contracts with them for taking care of their engines anicars at different places and doing their yard work. For us to have absolutely stopped and not handled the Wabash cars would have been violating the contract and made our company liable in damages — liow much I cannot tell you. Q. What was the effect upon the business of thef country — tha is, of this part of the country that is served by this system — of the demand of the Knights of Labor that you should refuse to handle the Texas and Pacific cars?— A. That would have pre- vented a very large portion of Texas from receiving supplies from Saint Louis, Kansas City, from all over l^e north, and I might say the southeast, 6oming in by the way of Memphis and Mobile, reaching a large territory, I should say 800 to 1,000 miles of their local roads, which cannot be reached by any other route for the same class of 41^ LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. articles, not for all of the same class, but largely the same class of articles. It ■would have involved the consumer in paying much more for his freight on articles . that were to be consumed if, they had to be hauled in by -syagons, or if you had to go back to tjie old way of doing before railroads were built. I do not know that I can make myself clear ; I am not very clear myself. It is the first time I have tried to sit mp, and it worries me a little. Q. If you desire not to be questioned any further, I will stop here.— A. I may be able to come back to-morrow and feel better, gentlemen. Governor Curtin. I think it is quite unnecessary for you to say you are ill, anft therefore we will' discontinue the examination with the expectation of seeing yon here •r in Washington. > The Witness. I am very much obliged to you, gentlemen. JOSEPH CRAMER, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Buknes : Question. State your name, age, and place of residence. — Answer. Joseph Cramer; residenee, De Soto, Jefferson County, Missouri. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I have been employed as painter in the Iron Mountain shop up to the 6th of March. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March? — A. When the whistle blew to go out on the strike I went home the same as the rest of them. jQ. When did you resume work? — ^A. I have not resumed. Q. Do you know anything of the cause of the disturbed condition of things be- tween the Missouri Pacific Railway and its employes ? — A. The cause of the strike was on account of the man Hall in Texas being discharged off of the Pacific. Q. Do you know anything else of your o^n knowledge in regard to the cause of ^e strike — aBy dissatisfaction on the part of the employfe ? — A. That is one of the principal causes. Q. What were the minor causes? — A. There was lots of talk among the men them- selves about some men ought to have more wages. Q. Had that been going on tor some time prior ? — A. They were talking all summer about grievances. Q. What were the grievances they talked of f — A. General dissatisfaction among the men. Q. Did they specify wherein the dissatisfaction arose? — A. No, they never. It was Bst a few that were doing all the talking. Q. Did you hear of their making any complaints to the officers of the company !— A. No, sir. Q. Was the question talked over why they did not make complaints?— A. They jiust talked among themselves. Q. Do yon know anything else of your own knowledge ? — A. In regard to the dis- turbance there ; what they have had down there ? Q. Tell what you saw and what you know. — A, In regard to stopping trains and such as that — I was asked several times to stop trains, and I refused 1o do it. On the 14th of March they called at my house about 10 o'clock at night. A man came and sapped at the door and said I was wanted at the coal-chute. I said, " What is going on ?" and was told, " The master workmen wants you up there." " What for?" they said, " To stop trains." I said I would do no such thing. On the 17th they notified me again, and I said I would have nothing to do with it, in troubling the company's property. On the 18th they sent me a written notice which I have, signed by the officers of the lodge. Q. Will yon read it ?— A. (Reading:) " De Soto, March 18, 1886. "Joseph Ckamer. "Deak Sir anp Brother :' You are hereby notified to come to the hall at once and report for duty to Master Workman Charles Laughlin. " By order of Local Executive Board 3634." They first sent a man there and Iwould pay no attention to it. They sent me this and I concluded I would go and see what was the object in having me there. He 8&id he wanted a few more men to go to the coal-chutes. I said, " What is going on at the coal-chutes ? " They said, they wanted to stop trains. I said I would do no such thing, and he said, " If you don't want to do it you need not, but just go to swell the party." I said I did not propose to do that and would not violate the companys' laws ; that it was not any of my business. He says, " You are a coward." I said, " Imay be a coward, but I am not afraid of you or any other individual wlxen it comes to be a coward." Q. Where did the conversation occur ?— A. lu the Knights of Labor hall. Q. In De Soto ?— A. Yes, sir. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 413 Q. Was the master workman there 1 — A. Yes, sir ; I helieve that is his signature. He is the one that did the ordering. Q. The man that brought the order to you, was he a, Knight of Labor ? — A. I do not know. I was not at home. Q. You spoke of a party of men coming to yon ; did you recognize them ? — ^A. I knew one of them the first night. I knew his voice. Q. Are you a member of the brder yourself ? — A. The second party. I did not know him by name. I knew him when I saw him. Q. Are you a member of the order ? — A. Not now. I have been. Q. Look at this list, and look over it and see who they are, if you recognize them. [Handing him a paper which reads as follows : " List of names of parties who h-olce into round-liouse at De Soto and disabled engines and machinery, on March 11, l!^. " Joe Benchler, Frank Merrill, Thomas Modder, Henry Snow, Ben Whittington, Charles Weernacher, Dan Smith, James Smith, John Dnmphy, E. S. Page, Herno Gib- son, George Campbell, Joe Sneed,Pat Burgen,Pat Flynn, Edward Sloan, John Der- mot, Robert Hearst, William Labeg, Charles Rogerson, W. G. Watson, G. E. Burton, Gns Martin, Fred Dunsford, Lam Millard, Ban Sullivan, Dan McDonald, A. B. Jack- son, Ben Metz, Joe Collahan, Jake Mahn, Jonn Downer, Mike Dowd, Nick Wilwert, JakeTesson,PeterBlank, George McMnllen, Thomas Foley, Thomas Brown, D. Havers- back, L. M. Bratton, Pete Moran, John Reynolds, Felix Martin, Harry. Crosby, Ed Howard, H. T. Murphy, Thomas Robinson, George Merrill, John Sweeny, James Schwab, James Daussman,Gus Benton, James Moore, William Fehr, S. J. Carney, Thomas Dugan, Charles Williams, Ed Robbery, Ed Post, Al. Swanguist, Frank Ryan, Oscar Findley, Joseph Goodwin, Thomas Ogle."] A. Yes, sir ; there are several on here that I know. Q. Are they members of the order ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; several of them. One of them is on the executive committee that I recognize. He is one of the men that abased me terribly because I would not do it. Q. Mention his name. — A. A fellow named Rogerson and McLaughlin. They said : " Well, do you suppose the Knights of Labor will ever allow you to work in them shops again?" I said: "That is an after consideration." That meant if they won the fight that I should not be allowed to work again. There are several names here that I know to be Knights of Labor. Q. How many on the list do you recognize as being Knights of Labor? — A. There is Beuchler, there is Page, Dumphy, Rogerson, Watson, there are two brothers of them, I don't know which one it is ; Ben Metz, I know him ; Mahn, Downer, Dowd ; there is Mike Dowd, and there is Jim Dowd, I don't know whether this is the same or not ; Foley, Swanguist ; Al. Swanguist is the man that brought me that letter, I believe. Q. Were they also employes of the Missouri Pacific Railroad ?— A. There are som» of them ; the majority of them were employes. Downer is not an employ^. By, Governor Stewaet : Q. You spoke about threats or abuse to yon ; what was that ? — A. He told me Q. Who? — A. Charles Laughlin, master workman of the assembly down there. When I refused him I told him point blank I would not have anything to do with it, and he says: "You are a coward. Do you suppose the Knights of Labor Will ever allow yon to work in them shops again ?" By Colonel Burnes : Q. Whose writing is that ? [Referring to the notice produced by the witness.] — A. The signature I think is McLaughlin's. It corresponds with other signatures of his. Q. Have you seen him write?— A. I have seen his signature, and it corresponds with that ; I cannot say it is. Q. When did you withdraw from the Knights ? — A. I did not withdraw ; they ex- pelled me fbr that very act — for refusing to stop trains and destroy property. Q. When were yon expelled ? — ^A. That same night. They went as fS,r as to offer a suggestion to give me twenty-four hours to leave town. Q. Were you present ? — A. No, sir. Q. How do you know that such a resolution was offered ? — A. There were members that told me it was offered. Q. Then it is hearsay? — A. A man at the meeting told me so. Q. When did you become a Knight of Labor? — A. Last year. Q. What time last year? — ^A. When this excitement was going on they talked everybody into joining it. 414 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What time in the year was that— what month ?— A. It was after the latior trbn- ble last year, in March. Q. Shortly after March, 1885 ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You remained a memher, then, something like a year ? — A. Yes, sii Q. You did not remain in the lodge when they tried you and voted on the ques- tion ?— A. No, I didn't go to that meeting. ' Q. How were you notified of the expulsion ?— A. I didn't receive any notice. It was common street talk in the neighborhood ; even the women in the neighborhood knew it the next morning. Q. You had no official notice of your expulsion ?— A. No, everybody passed me by. They would not look at mc on the street the next morning. I should judge that was good evidence. Q. That might be evidence that they were offended with yon ; not evidence that they had expelled you. — A. They kind of treated me with contempt. Q. Were any other members expelled when you were from the order ? — A. I heard so. Q. Do you know the process by which they expel a member of the order?— A. They take a unanimous vote. One fellow jumps up and states the casq and they all vote on it. Q. That is your understanding of the mode ?— A. That is what they done in my ease and others. Q. Were you present when the case was tried ?~A. No, sir. Q. Are yon acquainted with the constitution and laws of the order? — A. I have a copy of it at home. Q. Are you acquainted with the mode of trial as laid down intheir by-laws ? — Ai Yes, sir ; it says that all charges shall be referred to the local court, but in a case of gross violation of the order they can be expelled by a unanimous vote of the assem- bly, and that was done in my case. I expect that was a gross violation. Q. Are you sure that is the way it is laid down in the laws of the order? — A. That is what the constitution says. Q. You feel sure of that, do yon?^A. If I understand the constitution, that is the way I read it, that every one under charges shall be tried, shall have a legal trial, but where there is a case of gross violation of the laws of the order they can expel witiout any trial. Q. Have you ever talked with the master workman about your case? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you talked with any member of the order who is yet a member of the or- , der? — A. No, it would not do an,y good, for there is too much prejudice. Q. Then you have no information from the Knights of Labor that you are expelled! — A. I talked with an officer of the lodge and he told me the next morning. Q. Some officer of the lodge told you you were expelled ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you regard as a gross violation of the laws of the order ? — A. To refuse to obey an officer's command. Q. Does the constitution lay it down as a gross offense? — A. It does not specify what the offense shall be, but it says a gross offense shall subject a member to expul- sion. Q. That may be an immediate proceeding ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It requires, as I understand you a unanimous vote? — A. Yes, sir. / Q. Then you were uuamraously expelled from the order? — A. Yes, sir; they did it on account of my being opposed to them. By Governor Stewabt : Q. What is the name of the man ? — A. Charles Laughlin is presiding officer, the master workman of the assembly. Q. He was the principal leader in the raid upon the railroad property and stopping the running of trains ?— A. I do not know what he done. He is the one that ordered me. By Colonel Bubnes : Q. Can you name any individual on this list whom you saw actually committing trespass or violence ? — A. I did not associate with them. I don't know what they done, ' Q. Did you see any member whose name is on the paper engaged in any act of violence ajgainst the property of the company? — A. No, sir ; because they did the work at night time, and I was not there. Q. The question is whether you can now identify a single member engaged ii an act of lawlessness ? — A. No, I don't know what they done because I didn't go out at night. Q. Did you see any act of violence, such as stopping trains, disabling engines, pulling coupling-pins, orthelike, by anybody ? — A. No; the only distnrbanoelsaw was the time they run the man to Duffy's house. Duffy lives right next to me, and I saw the crowd about his house. I happened to be at home and sOpW the men Buiroaudiog the house. LABOR TROUBLES I\ THE SOUTH AND WEST. 415 Q. Of your own knowledge you cauuot say that any particular iiersou committed any act of violence against the property of the Missoury Pacific Railway Company ? — A. No; I don't know what anybody done. I know what they tried to make me do, that is all. Q. Do you understand that the order sustains the master workman, or that there is any law authorizing the master workman to do any act of violence ? — A. I said, "Is there anything in the constitution which says I shall violate any State or national laws?" " Well," he says, " There is nothing in there that says you shan't do it." That is what he told me. Governor Stewart. He construes liberally. By Colonel Buknes : Q. Are you a member of the Law and Order League in De Soto ? — A. Yes, sir. NICK O'BRIEN, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Buenes : Question. State your name and residence. — Answer. Nick O'Brien; De Soto, Mis- souri. Q. Were you in the employment of the Missouri Pacific on the night of the 6th of March ? — A. Yes, sir ; 1 was foreman of the machine-shop. Q. Did yon go out with the rest of the boys ? — A. No, sir. Q. You are a member of the Knights of Labor? — A. I was a member of them. Q. How long had you been a member prior to March 6th? — A. I joined the latter part of September. Q. 1885 ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. When did you quit the order? — A. Monday after the strike I called for a with- drawal card, and there was not men enough to grant it ; so I severed my connection with them. Q. Did you see yourself any acts of violence on the property of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State what you saw. — A. I saw the party of the Knights of Labor that went to the round-house on the 11th. I was not there when they entered there, but I fol- lowed in there about five minutes afterwards, and the water was running out of all the engine-tanks. They all were Knights'of Labor in the round-house that were doing it. , Q. How many men on this list do you recognize as members of the order (handing witness the list which was shown to the previous witness) ? — A. Beuchler, Merrill, Snow, Smith, Dnmphy, Page, Flynn, Dermott, Hearst, Rogerson, Watson, Martin, Dnnsford, Millard, Sullivan, Metz, Collahan, Hahn, Downer, Dowd, Tesson, Blank. McMuUen, Foley, Brown, Haversback (tLat should be Haverstick),-Bratton, Reynolds, Martin, Crosby, Robinson, Sweeny, Findley, Goodwinn, and Ogle. Q. Were any of the men whose names you have called there seen by you in a ny act of violence, or were they with the party you saw in the round-house ? — A. Yes ; a dozen I saw in the round-house, but there was no man in there I saw doing any act of violence. They were the leaders of the party, and the work had' been done before I got there. There was one member there who disconnected the hose of engine 427 as the train came down, twenty minutes afterwards, and let the water out of the tank, and deadened the engine. Q. What is his name ? — A. Peter Blank. Q. Did you see any other violence committed by any of them? — A. No, sir. Q. Do yon know of your own knowledge of any acts of violence ? — A. 'fowards the company's property ? Q. Towards the company's property or employes? — ^A. Yes; Ikuow of threivtsbeiug made to several members there. In fact it was not safe to walk in the street. The witness who preceded me, I can substantiate what statements he made ; in fact I will confirm them. Q. In what respect ? — A. In regard to him going to wreck trains. If these men thought they were obliged to wreck trains they were mistaken. This man looked at it in another light, and proposed to be on the safe side. In regard to the strike, it was not necessary to go to Texas for it at all. The men had worked the thing in De Soto for the last six or eight months previous to that. It was not safe for any man to be out of their ranks. It was a case of intimidation, aiud a man had to join them or take the opposite side. The result was they wanted to stop anything that came in conflict with them. It was not connected with the business altogether. Another thing : they were not doing justice to the company, and if you remonstrated with them the result was you had a committee wait on yon, who said : " We will attend to your case." That thing had been going on for upwards of eight months. The result was they tried to get a strike in De Soto, and were choked off there, and they had to go to Texas, and see what methods they adopted there. They educated them up 416 LAUOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. for the work they had for them. It was not for a man to think for himself. They -had other men thinking for^them. If they were living in a free country I don't know where it was. It was nOt in De Soto. Q. Do yon know who the men were that preteuded to do the thinking for the bal- ance ? — A. Yes ; they had about a dozen of them there. Q. You might name them. — A. I don't know as it is pecessary to do it, although if you insist on it, I will name them. Q. We will not insist on it at all, but we would like to have it if yon desire to state it.— A. Page, for one, Beuchler, Sern, a man that had no interest in God Almighty's world there, and never would if he lived in any country. If he got $10 a day it woulcl he the same thing at the end of the year with him. Q. When you found the feeling against the company's interest, did you feel it your duty to go and tell any officer of the company that they were doing that f — ^A. Nof I proposed to choke them oflf and heat them on their own ground ; and that I did. Q. You were playing detective? — A. It don't make any difference what I was play- ing. Q. During the eight months that you speak of in Which this strike was incubating it seems you understood what they were doing, and understood the injustice they were practicing on the company. Now, I would like to know, and I think it affects yonr testimony, as to whether yon communicated to the company the facts which you had . observed ? — A. Yes ; as far as their not doing justice to the company. Q. You mentioned that matter ? — A. They know that ; the men understood that themselves, and I gave them to understand so. I told them I would not tolerate any eiioh thing; that if they chose to abide by the decision Of the committee that would not satisfy them, and they allowed the committee would know, and I said I was not working for the committee ; that I was working for the Iron Mountain Company. Q. What ofiScer did you communicate these facts to ? — ^A. Just where the men were i.ot doing their duty. The master mechanic and myself had different conversations in regard to it, that they were not doing justice there. And as far as the statement in regard to Mr. Kennan's testimony yesterday, I will confirm a portion of it in regard to engine 27, and also the mob that tried to stop engine 428 that came from the South, and Nelson, the party that tried to arrest one of the parties that threw the link at the engineer. I went to his rescue when he had not less than 100 men around him. They were so thick around him they could not get near him. The result was that the mayor of the town eventually got onto a wagon. Q. Let me inquire the nature of your employment by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company at the time of the strike? — A. I was foreman of the machine-shop. Q. What salary were you receiving ? — A. Is that bearing on the question ? Q. Yes. — ^A. One hundred and fifteen dollars a month. Q. Did you receive any extra compensation for that ? — A. I was not under any extra pay. The company paid my salary, and I suppose they knew precisely what they were doing. Q. They had a right to your entiretime. Were you assigned at any time tothesecret service of the company ? — A. No, sir. The day after the strike, though, the day after the engine went from the south, I volunteered my services the next day to the city officials, and there was only eleven of ns that went into the service without any pay, and we done so for the protection of ourselves as well as the company. We were doing nothing : no more than any law-abiding citizen would do. There was plenty of them willing to do it, but they had not the backbone to come forward. Q. Were you foreman of the machine-shops or of a gang ? — ^A. I was foreman of the machine-shops. Q. Does that include both the machine-shop and the sang?— A. Yes; that includes the entire machine-shop, or general foreman, "if you wish to call it so. The Tuesday night after the train went on the Slst of Marcu, on the Miller street crossing, in the Bouth end of the town, I went across there and met two strikers or two of the parties connected with the strike, and as I went by they watched me very close. I camo back in about fifteen minutes and they done the same thing. I asked Williams, one of them, what he was wanting, and he allowed that it was none of my damn business, and at the same time put his hand on his right hip pocket. " Hold on a minute," 1 said, "I will see whether it is any of my business;" and on that he walked to the west sidewalk and disappeaired. I stayed there half an hour and sawno more of him that evening. He was one of the parties who were very officious in getting at Nelson when he was in charge of the marshal. And as far as any grievances with the men, they had none at De Soto. If they had I have never heard of them, either in or out of it. Also in regard to the stock train that was stopped there. Mr^ Kennan made a state- ment about it yesterday. The statement was correct in everything that he repre- sented there, and they were Knights of Labor that had control of it. By Colonel Barnes : Q. Have you anything else to state ?— A. I have got though, if you have nothing to ask me. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 417 Q. Do you remember of having any talk with the men with regard to grievances prior to the 6th of March t — A. No, sir. Q. Were any demauds made for increase of wages? — A. No, sir. Q. Were any com plaints made of inequalities of pay for difl'erent classes of work T — A. Nothing — only the boys, the apprentice-boys, inquired if there was any possibility of their wages being raised. Q. Were any demands presented to you by your men that you failed to consider t — A. No ; there wae none. JOHN FRENCH, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Governor Stewart : Question. What is your employment? — Answer. Blacksmith, Q. On the railroad ? — A. On the railroad. Q. Where?— A. At De Soto. Q. What did you see there in connection with the strike ?— A. In connection with the strike ? V Q. Yes, sir. — A. Well, about all I saw in connection with the strike was the mob walking the streets with clubs in their hands. I happened to be in town a couple of days after it occurred. I live out of town about a mile. Q. What did you see ? — A. That is about all I saw : men parading the streets with elubs. Q. Who were they ? — A. I could not mention half of their names. Q. I do not want you to mention their names. Had they been in the employment of the company ? — A. Yes, sir ; in the employment of the company. Q. What did they say ? — A. I drove through them. I did not stop to talk to them. I did not hear them say anything. Q. Did you have any conversation with them ? — A. None whatever. Q. Did you ever hear them state what the trouble was ? — A. I had been well aware for four months what the trouble was going to be. The talk about Hall in Texas — I think it was only a pretense. I think the trouble originated right in' De Soto. Q. What was the trouble ? — A. The trouble seemed to be that some men were not getting along fast enough, and the more they got the more they wanted to get. Doo- Ettle was made foreman, and everything went along fine for a while. The first thing they had complaints against him ; they wanted to get him out of the way, as well as I could see into it. The thing kept on until the last of December. They were not doing right. I discharged two of them and put two men in their places. That caused an in- vestigation of it — in regard to their working there ; some thought it was not right and others thought the discharge was justifiable. The two men that took the situations, there was a great deal of feeling against them. They could not get the fight in De Soto, but at the meeting in Texas they got it there. I don't know how they worked it. I always had confidence in one of the men in particular that went, and thought that he wouldn't allow it; that he would stop it. By Governor Stewart : Q. So far as you know, was there any injustice done there in De Soto in the treat- ment of the men ? — A. Not that I am aware of; everybody seemed to he pretty well satisfied with the exception of some men who wanted a higher position than they got, and no doubt they were pretty strong there. Q. Did you strike ? — ^A. I did not ; they made me strike. Q. Who made you strike ?— A. The company ; they suspended me ; they led me to believe that they had no use for me. Q. That was in consequence of the strike ? — A. That was the result of the strike ; they caught me in bad company and thought they had better get rid of me. Q. Are you now in the employment of the company ? — A. I am not. if. Do you know McLaughlin, the master of the Knights of Labor, there ? — A. I do. . Q. Did you work for him or under him ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. What was his business T — A. His business was boiler making. . Q. Ton never worked with himt — A. He worked in the blacksmith shop forme a little while, for a few months ; he came there as blacksmith helper. Q. What sort of a workman was he ? — ^A. He was a helper. Q. Did he work well ? — A. Oh, yes ; he is a splendid workman. Q. Mr. Doolittle, yon say, was appointed foreman? — A. Master car-builder. Q. And some of the men were dissatisfied on that account ? — ^A. Only two of them ; it seemed to work up a little feeling. Q. Did the Knights of Labor take any action in reference to that matter? — ^A. They did. Q. What was it ? — A. The resnlt was the Executive Board decided in favor of the eompany and they took an appeal, and they brought charges against' that board and worked a feeling up to elect themselves to go to 'Texas. There was a special meet- 3984 CONG 27 418 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ing, as I understand, to try the Executive Board there, and those two men, they got themselves elected to go in the place of those men that there was charges against to represent them, as representatives of the district assembly. When they got to Texas this strike was stirred up. I hardly think it was through Hall being discharged. My opinion is It was not. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. I was. Q. Are you not now ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you retire voluntarily? — A. I retired on the 8th of March. Q. Immediately after the strike!— A. I called for a withdrawal card immediately after the strike, on the Monday evening after the strike. Q. Why did you do that ?— A. Because I could not tolerate the business that was going on there with them ; I did not feel like I was doing myself justice to stay with them. Q. What were they doing ?— A. There was too much agitating altogether; a man, because he has got iive oT six hundred men at the back of him, wants to get another man out of his situation, and I don't believe in such business. By Governor Cubtin : iQ. Did you apply to get back into the service of the company?— A. Not yet; Iwa« simply suspended. Q. That is all ; and I suppose you are under the impression that when they warn you they will send for you ? — A. I suppose they will. By Governor Stewart : "Q. You say that some of the men were dissatisfied because they were not pushed ahead fast enough ?— A. They seemed to think they were not treated right ; I could not see where they was not ; I couldn't come to any other conclusion than they thought that others was subject to a little more prosperity than was allowed to them. Q. Was not McLaughlin one of those men ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was he pushed ahead by anybody f — ^A. Not that I am aware of. (Judge Portia here suggested to Governor Stewart that he ask the following ques- tion : ) Q. Will you look over that list and say who are the Enights of Labor, that is those that you know to be so ? Just name them as you run your eye over and see if yon recognize any of them as Knights of Labor ? Governor Stewart. I don't see any use in making any question about this. There isn't any doubt that Knights of Labor were engaged in those riots, that is already proven. It has been shown that the master workmen and every man in the concern' refused to allow tliat oar to go, and it was declared that no freight train should move. I confess, I don't see any propriety for making any question of it before this com- mittee. Judge PoKTis. Then I will withdraw it. Governor Stewaht. I don't know what the other members of the committee think on that subject, though. Governor CURTIN. I am of the same opinion. Governor Stewart. There was a question as to whether it was authorized by the constitution of the Knights of Labor or not, but this is not that qne.stion ; that these men participated in the acts there is fully proven, and it is time unnecessarily wasted , to go over that. That is the way it strikes me. Governor Curtin. Yes ; and it strikes me further that we are here to ascertain whether violence has been committed and whether there was any reason for the re- volt. We do not dispute the right of the Knights of Labor to retire feom the employ- ment of the company at their pleasure, but we are to inquire whether they acoom- panied that with violence and destruction of property and whether they interfered with others. Governor Stewart. That is the only question. Governor CURTIN. And it is unnecessary to show further whether the Knights of Labor were involved. What do you think, Mr. Burnes ? Colonel BuBNES. It has been shown that there wfire individual cases where Knights of Labor participated in the violence ; so far as individual Knights of Labor partici- pated in these. troubles, I have no doubt of it. At the same time it is a question whether the Knights of Labor as an organization authorized or sanctioned it. Mr. Stewart. That is entirely outside of this evidence. For instance, here is a list of names of parties who broke into the round-house at De Soto, and disabled en- gines and machinery, on March 11. One witness says that a number of men, whose names appear here, were Knights of Labor ; and it appears that this man McLaugh- lin was active there in preventing the moving of a stock-car loaded with hogs. Judge FOBTis. He was the master workman, and it has been stated that the assem- bly had directed them to do it, and expelled one man because he would not obey the order. , LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 419 Mr. Stewart. It strikes me we have |;ot a general idea of the situation ; there were Knights of Labor who participated in it. That is all there is of it. Governor CxTRTiir, Yon have identified the names from th^t list. Have yon wit- nesses to show that those parties participated in the violence f Jadge PoRTis. Yes, sir. By Colonel Busnes : Q. I want to ask yon with regard to a meeting that you say was held in Texas for the purpose of trying the local hoard of De Soto. How do yon know such a meeting was ordered or held ? — A. I know it from what passed in De Soto. A call was made by the local master workman to try the executive board there. Q. How do you know that, did you see the call ? — A. I did not see the call, h'nt one of the men who worked for me told me he was going to Texas. Q. That is what I want to know, whether the information was derived from others 1 — A. I got this from M. B. Mahoney, that charges were brought against him and he had to go to Texas. Q. Was he a delegate of the district convention from De Soto f — A. Not a delegate then, because he was under charges that disqualified him ; they elected or appointed other men to go in his place. Q. Do you know that those men thus appointed went to the meeting f — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is, you heard so ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the result, so far as you heard, of that meeting in Marshall T — A. The result of that meeting — Mr. Hall, he was discharged Q. With regard to the executive board? — A. They were sustained ; their act was sustained in regard to what passed in De Soto. HENEY P. DECKER, being duly sworn, testifies as follows: By Grovernor Cdktin : Question. Where do you reside ? — Answer. De Soto, Mo. Q. What is your business there ? — A. Merchant tailor. Q. Are you living in the town ? — A. In the town, yes, sir. Q. Are yon a Knight of Labor f — A. I was, sir. Q. Until when ? — ^A. Until they expelled me ; I don't know exactly when that was, sir. Q. Were you a witness to the violence committed there ? — A. I was, to a certain ex- tent. Q. Did you see any parties destroying property there f — A. I seen them stop the en- gine in front of my door ; not more than '200 feet from my door. I seen them stop the engine. I seen them get into the cab and on the different parts of the train. I see men disconnect the hose from the tender to the engine ; I seen that from my door. Q. Did you know any of the men ? — A. Well, I did know them at the time, sir ; their faces were aU famiUar to me. Q. Were any names on that list engaged in stopping that engine ? — A. This man Buechler, I know him. Q. I am not asking you whether you know him, I am asking you if you noticed any man on that list engaged in stopping that engine ? — A. Oh, yes, sir ; quite a number •of them here, sir. Q. Name them. — A. I seen Mr. Buechler and Frank Merrill ; those two I seen ; Ben Metz, I won't be certain of him, but I think I seen him ; I seen Thomas Modder and R. F. Page, and A. B. Jackson ; I seen Jake Mahn there, too. These ones that I have named I saw. Q. You identify those men ; do you know that they belonged to the Knights of Labor ? — ^A. T have met them in the assembly rooms. Q. Now, will you say at what time and for what cause you were expelled T — A. X don't know, sir ; some of them told me my name was read off as one of the expelled ; I don't know what time, because I have not been near them lately. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor up until the strike T — A. Yes, sir; I was in good standing up to that time. I was but one meeting after the strike. I was requested to go there one night, and I was there a while, until they commenced to detail pick- ets. I asked them what that was for and they said to go and guard the roads ; I don't know whether I am allowed to use language that I use sometimes. Q. Yes, sir. — A. " Well," says I, " I'll be damned if I go and be a picket ; I have ■done my picketing," and I got up and walked out and I never went there since. Previous to that, previous to the strike, I received a note, a letter, from the ofSce, throngh the office, which I would like to read. <|. Eeaedit.— A. [Reading.] " De Soto, Mo., March 4. Brother Becker : It would be a good thing for the welfare of your son not to make himself so busy. B. R. D.," it is signed. I went over immediately Colonel BuKNEB. Let me see that letter, please. 420 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The Witness. Do yoii want the envelope, too f Colonel BuRNBS. Yes, sir. The Witness. It is addressed " P. H." instead of H. P. I went over immediately to the office— my son is a clerk in the office under Mr. Eennan, the divWon soperin- tendent, and I handed him that letter and told him to read it. Says I, " My son, do yon understand that? " He says, " I do." I says, " My son, I want you to attend to your legitimate business ; whatever the company requires of you to do, do it faith- fully, and anv man that interferes with yon and your business, shoot him, and, by God, I will stand b v you." That is the way I talked to him. Governor Curtin. 'That is language not to be mistaken. [Laughter.] Mr. Stewart. That is expressive. The Witness. That evening Mr. Mike Connel, I believe his name is, came into my shop and he addressed me; says he, " Commander," says he, " I would like to talk with you." Says I, "All right, sir." Says he, "I don't want you to get excited." Says I, " I hope I won't." This was before the strike on the evening of the 5th. Says he, " I come in to tell you, to speak to you about your son Elmer; it seems he is busying himself around a good deal, and," says he, "it will be to your advantage, and also to his'n, if you would have him attend to his business." Says I, "I thank yon for your kindness for coming in and telling me this, but," says I, " I received a letter purporting to be just what you said," and there I used some language in regard to the man who wrote it not signing his name to it. " Well," says he, " it will be to your ad- vantage] your business advantage, and also to Elmer's, to make him just attend to his legitimate business, and if he don't," says he, "after this thing is over," says he, "perhaps he can't stay there." I says, " Why 1 " He says, ' ' We will have him turned off." Says I, "Just as long as he attends to the business right for Mr. Kennan and the railroad company he will stay there." He says, " Stop ; Mr, Eennan won't stay there ; perhaps we will turn him oif." I says, "Not by a damned sight." That is the lan- guage I used; that is my way of expressing myself. Governor CuBTiN. I should say it was. [Laughter.] The Witness. I reiterated to him what I had said to Elmer, that I would stand by him in any emergency while he was doing right and not disobeying the laws. If nec- essary I can tell you what he had doue. There was a car-load of hogs passing through there which was boycotted. Q. The hogs were ? — A. Yes, sir ; or rather the oar was. Q. Did the hogs complain? [Laughter.] — A. Yes, sir; they wanted something to eat and drink. Well, my sou was taken out of the office with Mr. Kennan. I seen Mr. Eennan himself, and knew they were there unloading the hogs, and I presume that was the reason for his speaking to me about my son attending to his business. I thought that was his business. Then I passed on. I come now up to the time that I see this stopping of the engine. That was in March — I don't know exactly the day — hut my son came in and told me, as he is connected in the office. Says he, "Pa, there will he a train from the north in about an hour." Of course we was on the lookout, looking for the train, and the train came and passed on through. There did not seem to be much attention paid to that as there was to the train that come from the south. My house, my place of business — the depot is off diagonally to the right from my place about 150 tieet, and my place of business is elevated about 3 feet above the pavement, I presume, aud we were all there when the train came in from the south. It was coming pretty fast, and there was a crowd up above at the crossing. They congregated there and they whooped and hollered. I could not see that they done much there, because there was so many of them, only I seen the American flag- some man disgraced it ; he laid it down for the oars to run over. Q. Do you know the flian ? — A. No, sir ; and thank God I do not in one respect. Well, the train passed on ; it came along at a very fast rate, and a man by the name of Thomas Dugan and a young man by the name of— or his father's name, I don't know what his name is — but his step-father is this man Connell that I have spoken of. Him and another man, a brakeman in the yard, started and -run up the track, and they hollered " Eunl Run! " and I thought they were running to the switch, but the train was coming so fast that they laid something — I couldnot tell exactly what it was or how it was — they throwed something on Sie track ; it looked to me like a link or a pin. I don't know the third man, but two of them I do know ; I seen them throw something on the track, and a lady also and my wife and others seen the same thing, seen them throw something on the track. By Governor Cdhtin: Q. Has the strike had any effect on your business ? — A. Yes, sir; to a certain extent it has. Q. You saj you had finished your time of picketing; where did yon picket t— A. In the Army, sir. Q. In what army? — A. In the Union Army. Q. Did you?— A. I did, sir; and I am proud of it. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 421 Q. Yon didn't like to see tlie flag dislionoredt — A. No, sir ; and I don't like to sea any red flag raised in my presence. Governor Curtin. -You are right, sir. By Colonel Bcknes : Q. When that train came there, was it in the day-time or in the night-time t — A. In the daj-time ; I conld not have seen it at night that distance. Q. What efl'ect has the strike had npon the value of property in De Sotof — ^A. My property I have there I wonld not havo taken less than $4,000 for it ; to-day, if a man ■would give me |2,800, I wonld take it ; and I don't know but what I would take $2,500. Q. Is that because you are discouraged, or is it the general feeling there ? — A. No, sir ; it is a general feeling ; property is not as valuable as it was, sir. J. F. JOYCE, being duly sworn, testified as follows: By Mr. Bdrnbs : Question. State your name, age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. I am thirty- three years old, locomotive engineer, and reside at De Soto, Mo. Question. State if you know anything of the cause of the strike. — Answer, On March 6 I was the engineer that pulled train 601 from Saint Lonis to De Soto. I arrived at De Soto at 11:05. It is customary to change engines, and the engine to take my train was standing on the main track. The yardmen generally cut the train off, but there were none there. A braken^an who happened to be there cut my train off. I ran up the main track and found I had nobody to attend to the engine but myself and the tireman. There was a crowd of men on the street, and I saw a great many men in the Knights of Labor hall. I asked the cause of it and somebody said there was a strike in town. I had to get off and unlock the switches and let the engine be £and!ed by the fireman, so that the other engine could take the passenger train out. I had to do it myself in order to get my engine back opposite the round-house. When I got down there I saw my hostler, who belonged to the Knights of Labor, was there. I asked him to take the engine, and he said, " I have been requested by the committee not to take this engine from you, and I don't propose to handle any more." I went out that night and I kneV no more about it until that evening about 10 o'clock. That evening one of our engineers came to the house and told me my chief engineer, Kelley, wanted to see me. I came down the street and met him, and he told me ne was requested by a committee of strikers, which I believe were Knights of Labor, to have a conference with them, that they wished to have a committee of conference with a com- mittee of engineers that night. He asked my advice, and I told him I could not see any impropriety in it ; that I would be willing to do it. Six of us met those gentlemen in a room at the hotel in De Soto. One of them explained to us what he thought was the cause of the strike. He explained to us that the trouble originally was in Texas and was caused by the discharge of Hall. He said they were ordered to strike, and that they proposed to strike. Another gentleman said some grievances existed on the Texas and Pacific JRoad, and they were going to have it settled before they would go to work. They asked us if we could give them the sympathy of the engineers. We told them the position we took with the company ; that we had a contract with the company, and that we proposed as honorable men to live up to it. We told them that in a few words. In the mean time one of the men got up and said he wanted the company to recognize them as Knights of Labor, and not employ^ ; that they started in this fight to come out ahead, and would make use of all honorable means, but if it was necessary they would resort to foul. Some time after that I was called to Sedalia to attend to some business for the engineers, and when I got back — the second day, I believe — I got through the post office an anonymous letter of a very dangerons character, if anybody would pay attention to it, warning me — the letter was read the other day before the committee here; Major Clark, from Jefferson City, read the let- ter — warning me of peril to life and limb if I went on performing my duties as an engi- neer. I took that letter to Charles McLaughlin, as known to be one of the Knights, and who, it was said, was master workman of the Knights of Labor at De Soto. I asked him what was the cause of my getting that letter. He took the letter and looked at it, read it, and says, "I never authorized anybody to write you that letter; I don't know anything about it ; but," he says, " if any man done it, it was the hoodlum element I cannot control." He says, " You know as well as I do there is an element in this that town that I cannot control, and this work must be confined to this hoodlum element." I told him the reason why I showed him that letter ; that if he authorized it I wanted him to know that I got it. I told liim that I intended to go on and perform my du- ties to the railroad company according to the contract, and that all the letters he wonld write would not stop me ; that if any of his hoodlums wanted to interfere with me I would be prepared for them. After that I received no more letters. I know the extent of the damage done to the engines, but I was not a witness to it. I saw what 422 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WKST. I call robbery. Taking machinery away, I consider it as much stealing as if a man broke into my house. I would consider that stealing. At least part of those engines were gone and I don't know that any of it was brought back. It was very essential that tney should be there in order to get the engines to work. I was also there the day the crowd got after this man Todd, who was acting yardmaster in De Soto. I was one of the first men who got to Mr. Duffy's house about the time the crowd dia- - persed. I was standing close to the shop when the train came through that attracted the crowd. When the train put in its appearance, coming from the south, at the ap- proach of the yard the crowd rushed out of the Kuights of Labor hall; they come down-stairs in one, twos, and threes, and all made a rush for the track ; they congre- gated on the tracks in every possible way they could get on the ground at all, the track the train was coming through on.- They flagged the train, and those men that put the link on the track, as Mr. Becker just spoke to you about ; I picked that link up myself after it was put on the track. By Mr. Burnes : Q. It was a link.— A. It was a link. I did not see the man put the link on, hut a gentleman pointed out the man, who setting on a tie by the track, and he said that they were the men that had put it on, and I recognized the men, and know them to-day. I picked the link up in their presence, and put it where it is in safe keeping to-day. We were standing there a few minutes and the crowd rushed towards Duf- fy's house. One of our engineers there told us that there was a crowd congregated around Duffy's house, and that they were going to tear it down, that is making threats of that kind. As we started up there we met some of our own men and we started to the house. It was an engineer's house, and we did not propose to have it torn down, and I was one of the first men that went over the crossing, and as I went over I saw that McLaughlin was standing in the crowd. He took a white handker- chief, out and threw it up in this way [indicating], and hollered, "To the hall." It went through the lines and the crowd followed Jiim to the hall. When we got u)) there we found Mrs. Duffy terribly bad soared up. She told us the extent of it. A deputy sheriff came there and said this man should be taken somewheres where he could be taken care of, and I was deputized by the sheriff to take this man over ti> Kennan's office. A couple of engineers walked along with us, and as we went aloo); by the Knights of Labor hall some hollered " rats," and some "scabs," but we couldn't see who they were. Ever since that when going along the street — sometimes in day time, and sometimes at night — 1 have.pnt up with those insults, but they always do it after I have got far enough by so that I could not recognize the crowd. The only way I could prevent it would be to tackle the whole crowd, and I thought I had not better do that. This letter came, as I have good reason to believe, from one of the Knights of Labor, at least he was represented to us as such, and I have good reasons to believe that this committee we met, in which a man said, " We will use all honorable means, and if we don't win we will resort to foul " — I kave good reason to believe they were Knights of Labor. Q. State the names of the committeemen who waited on you? — A. Charles Mc- Laughlin, chairman ; Mr. Paget, one of the committee ; a gentlemen by the name of Mitchell, a machinist, who worked in the shop ; another gentleman by the name of Dan Park, who worked in the coach shops at De Soto ; a gentleman by the name ol Eogerson, and a gentlemen by the name of Shoup, who represents himself as an or ganizer along the road. Q. The Laughlin you mention, is he the master workman of the Knights of Labor?— A. He is recognized as such, and says he is. Q. State if there was a committee of firemen present at the time. — A. No, sir ; there was one man present that belonged to both orders, the firemen and engineers, but he had very little to say ; in fact, he came in when the session was about half over. Q. Do yon know the name of the fireman who was present? — ^A. Mr. W. J. Edie. Gentlemen, in thinking the matter over a little carefully I would say there were some firemen present. Q. If you think there was a committee of firemen present, state your best impres- sion as to that. — A. If I am not mistaken Mr. John Tully, master of the firemen's order ; I think he was present. Q. What member of the committee which waited upon you in that meeting made the remark that they intended to win the fight by honorable means if possible, but if they could not by honorable means they would reesort to foul means?— A. Dan Park. Q. Did the master workman Laughlin say anything in regard to it at the timet— A. No, sir. Q. He did not object to the statement made by Mr. Park?— A. No, sir. By Mr. Stbwaet : Q. Where was Laughlin at the time of this outpour of the Knights of Labor that LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 423 •went across to Duffy's house? — A. I couldn't tell you. The first 1 saw of him he was Btauding in the crowd when we were going towards Duffy's house. Q. The crowd had been there some time ? — A. Probably ten or fifteen minutes be- fore we were notified what all the excitement was. We were down at the other end of the yard. Q. Yon say Laughlin was there f — A. The only way I know is I recognized him in the crowd. Q. What time was it that he waved his handkerchief and called out "To the hall," was it when you came up f — A. Yes, sir ; on our way to the house when we were going toward Mr. Dnfly's house. Q. How near were yon to him when he did that ? — A. I was as close to him as I am to Mr. Bumes now. Q. You say these men turned and went back to the hall at that time f — ^A. Words went through the lines from one end to the other, and by the time we got to Mr. Duf- fy's house you might say the crowd was all dispersed. Q. Was Mrs. Duffy then standing in her door with her pistol in herhand t — A. Yes, sir; and she objected to my coming in. As I went in the pistol came up and she said •' Mr. Duffy, don't you think too many are coming in here?" I got out of the way of the pistol ; I didn't think it looked good. Mr. Stbwart. That is all. The Witness. 1 would like to state, gentlemen, what I think the effect is that the strike had in De Soto. I think property there has depreciated fi-om 35 to 50 per cent, on account of this, for I am satisfied that men that owned a little home there worth from 11,000 to 151,500, could not get more than two-thirds of that for them, and I doubt if tbey could get half. There is no market for them. By Mr. Stewart: Q. Was that in conssquence of the lawlessness that prevailed there t — A. Yes, sir; that was the general cause of it. By Mr. Burnes : Q. During the time of the puisnit of this man who took refuge in Mrs. Duffy's house, did you hear of any charge or complaint against him other than that he was a scab? — A. No, sir. Q. Do yon know of any apprehension in the minds of the people there that the company has threatened or proposed to remove their shops from De Soto ? — ^A. Well, you can hear a great many different reports, but I have heard no word ofScially from anybody supposed to know that the company has deterraiued to do this. Q. Do you think that an apprehension in the minds of the people that they might do i c or threaten to do it has affected the price of real estate ? — A. Well, I think it has some. I will tell you why the people think so. The people think, that is the good thinking people of De Soto, that the company is not justified in starting those shops up again when they have really no protection there, or did not have during this trouble, in case of an outbreak. By Mr. Stewart: Q. So that you only put the depreciation of real estate one step farther back; if it is consequence of the threatened removal of the shops, the removal of the shops is consequence of the strike, so it don't remove the cause ? — A. Yes, sir ; if them shops were started up to-morrow it would take five years before you could get things back as they were. By Mr. Burnes : Q. Had there been any talk about the removal of the shops before the strike ? — A. Not that I heard officially, from anybody supposed to know. M. ROBERTS, being dnly sworn, testifies as follows : By Mr. Stewart : Question. What is your employment? — Answer. Locomotive engineer. Q. Where do you live ? — A. At De Soto. Q. Tell your experience at the time of the strike. — A. Well, is it necessary for me to tell all of my experience, because I have had a pretty rough one. Q. Yes, sir; tell the whole of it. — A. The first time I had any trouble was on the 3d of March. I was in Saint Louis and our yardmaster told me there was an order not to receive any more freight, from the Texas and Pacific road ; that the Knights of Labor had boycotted it, and notified the Iron Mountain Company net to handle any Texas and Pacific cars. On the 4th there was a T"xas and Pacific car in De Soto loaded with hogs. There was quite an excitement in DeSoto, and theKuightsof Labor would not allow the oilicers of the company to move the car. It was set out on a switch, where it staid all morning. Sohie of the people there thought those hogs 424 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. onght to be fed and they took them out to feed them. There was considA'able had feeling caused by the unloading of the hogs. I was present myself, but that night I left De Soto at 5.30 in the evening with about 57 cars, I think, if I remember right, and in the 57 cars was this car of boycotted hogs— I don't know whether it was the hogs or the car that was boycotted— and 6 miles south of Saint Louis in the city lim- its there is a double track. About 8.35 I see a man throw a switch, something like this [indicating] ahead of me, and the result was it ditched my engine and niiie cars right in the face of a passenger train on the south bound taack. The «-ngine dancing over the ties, it put her signal lights out, and we had nothing to flag the passenger traip. Very fortunately we got up a torch light and got out and ilagged the passen- ger train in time. Kelley was engineer on the passenger train. We got the wreck cleared up in about four or five hours. We got back in De Soto on March 6th, and the whistle was blowing, and I seen the men swarming before the shops, but I did not know then what was the matter. The yardmaster walked up to me and told me to pull the pin between the engine and the train, and says to me " Put your engine in and let her stand until this trouble i^ settled," in a quiet way. , It is usual for a hostler to take engines from us, but no hostler showed up. I staid there a half an hour and still no hostler came. I had left Saint Louis early without breakfast and was getting hungry. I went up to a hostler and asked him to take charge of the engine, and he said he couldn't do it, that they were out on a strike. I told him all right. My fire- man and I staid there by the engine, by spelling one another, until 1 o'clock. Then I was one of the committee of engineers that met the committee of Knights of Labor, which was on, I think, Wednesday, the 10th. Previous to this I had went to Sedalia to see the feeling of the men there. I am a representative of the Brotherhood of En- gineers on this system, and it was my duty to see them and to see that the engineers lived strictly to their contract, a portion Of them especially under my jurisdiction. When I came back there on Wednesday I was notified then that the master work- man of the Knights of Labor wanted to see me, with a committee of locomotive en- gineers, with regard to what action we would take in the strike. I met them, and on that committee was Mr. Laughlin, who claimed to be master workman ; Mr. Park, a carpenter ; Mr. Shoup, who is also a carpenter, and he is an organizer also ; Mr. Mitchell, a machinist ; Mr. Paget — I don't know what he is -and one or two other gentlemen that I can't recall their names now. I knew them all at the time. They stated to me, by my questioning them, in regard to their grievances. I asked them if our master mechanic and our manager had not treated them well, and they said that they had ; that they had no grievances at all, only Lfiughlin said he was fiUing the place of a man who had been getting 30 cents and he was getting only 23 cents — I won't state positively the figures, for I may be mistaken— but that was his grievance, and he said he could not have it adjusted ; that the master mechanic told him he had to seek an order from Mr. Hoxie, and he s^id he had found it impossible to reach him. He didn't say he had tried, but he said the trouble was on account of the sectionmen and the bridgemen on the Texas and Pacific, and what brought the strike on at that time was the discharge of a Mr. Hall, a carpenter, at Marshall, Tex. I explained to them our position in the matter, and I think, if I don't make a mistake, that our con- tract with the company was read in the presence of that committee. I won't say positively that it was. fit it was not, articles in it was dictated to them from mem- ory by some of the members, showing to them that we could take no part in the strike, that we had no grievances, that the company had lived up strictly to their contract, and that we, as men, proposed to do the same thing. Well, they all proposed great friendship for us, and seemed to give us lots of credit for the manly stand we had taken ; but still they thought we was not extending the brotherly love towards the workingmen that we should do. I explained to the master workman at that time — advised him what to do ; I told him if I was him and had the control of those men in De Soto that he claimed to have, that I would advise them if they had nogrievance to go back to work ; that on the infor- mation I had got so far, and knowing what impositions had been imposed npon the company by Knights of Labor on different portions of the system, that they would iiever be treated with on that stand, and it would only injure the prospect of those men in De Soto that had little homes there and living comfortably. Well, he couldn't see it in that, way.. He wanted to do everything honorable, but still on closing his remarks he said that unless they could win the fight by honorable means, that they must win, and they certainly would use foul. I went to kind of pleading with him, tried to touch hisfinerfeelings, and I asked him if he thought for a moment they were justified in committing acts of violence, as ditching engines, and I told him what had occured to me. He said, "Well, no," and he asked me if I knew that a Knight of Labor done it. ,1 told him I didn't know, but since that time I don't think any other man other than a Knight of Labor would stoop to such a cowardly low trick. That is just my experience. He said if it was one and he would be found out he would be expelled. I myself would consider that a very light punishment. Of course the loss of my life wouldn't amount to mnoh to the Knights of Labor, but I suppose that I am LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 425 ■worth as much to those that I belong to as any one else. The aTgnment I gave them did not satisfy them, bnt they pledged to me before they left that onr engines shonld not be molested. Just a day previous to that all the engines at Little Kock was dis- abled. This was brought np and they pledged positively that onr engines shonld not be ditched. On the following day about 10 o'clock they made the raid on the round house. I was not there. That night I was going — I think it was the same night — I was going home about half-past nine in company with a lady, and we heard the i^^heelB rolling in the turn- table pit. It was my mother-in-law that was with me, and while we was half a block off I heard the noise, and I said to her, " Some one is filling the turn-table pit with oar-trucks." I started to go over there, but she wouldn't let me go. The next morning I went over to the lound-house and my engine was the first one I looked at; parts were disconnected, and part of her was carried away and has never been re- turned to this day; the hose was cut, but they did not take time to take them off; , they were left there, and I was thrown out of twenty-four days' work, which is worth $96 to me. After coming back from Sedalia — I was in Sedalia at the time — Mr. Weller got official notice from the Knights of Labor to leave town. The first notice was twenty minutes, but by some friends of Fitzgerald's and Page's of the Knights of Labor — Fitzgerald is editor of the Labor Union, I think it is called, published in SeOalia — byliim and Mr. Page interceding for Mr. Weller, they got the time held back until No. S's arrival, which is about 3.55 in the morning. Of course his family was terribly upset about the matter, and some of the influential citizens in Sedalia came to the hall where we was, and got a member of our comniittee to go to see the newly-appointed postmaster — a Mr. Russell, I think. He was also a Knight of Laborj at least, so I was informed, and he went to confer with Mr. Page and some more of them up there, and they got the order withdrawn. The only charge against him was he took entirely too much part in the company's interest after the engines got over the turn-table. They gave him to understand that his business was in the shops and not out on the road. When I came back to De Soto I found there my wife almost sick in bed and crying. She said that people came to her and told her that I was going to be roughly treated, that I was taking entirely too active a part. And I got transportation and sent her to Chicago. I thought I could fight the thing better alone if I had to have a fight. On the following day a committee of ^nights of Labor stopped me andtold me what my wife told me. They were all friends of mine. I told them I had done nothing but my duty, and that while I sympathized with them personally, I couldn't uphold the work they were doing. They thongbt it was best for me to leave town until the trouble was over. I was in Saint Lonis on the 29th, when Mr. Powderly ordered the strike oflf. I went home that night and the morning of the 30th we went to resume business, but we had no engines to move freight with. Our master mechanic had ob- tained parts of the engines that had been stolen. He obtained the new parts &om shops in Philadelphia, and Paterson, N. J. I went to the shop there and found he was working ou those parts to the engine. I joined in and helped him without his solicitation, and we got out eight engines. Tliere was rumors of war all through the town. I went home to dinner ; my own engine had gone to Saint Louis. I had got her ready first, and another engineer, not a machinist, went out on her. I stayed tliere to help the master mechanic. Previous to that I went home to dinner. When I came out my wife said that some of the Knights of Labor had told her that it was rumored that I was helping Mr. Harris get engines ready for service. I told my wife that I had been informed that the strike had been ordered off by Powderly ; that I had been to the city on Monday and heard it. '' No," they said, " Mr. Irons had not ordered it off." A party of four got around me and told me what they had heard, that I was working over there, and they wanted me to stop. 1 told them that I guessed I could. I had all the engines ready for service but one, and I didn't know whether they could get that ready until they started the machine shop. I stated the case to Harris, and told him the remark I made to them, that I was in the employ of the Missouri Pacific, and there was no strike on it ; that Powderly had ordered it off, and I said that I felt that any man that wanted to work was justified in going to work. I asked the men, two of them I knew to be machinists, and I asked them to go to work. " Oh, no," they said, they couldn't do it. " Well, all right," I said, " I am working for Roberts, and I am going to work." I told Mr. Harris what occurred, and he says to me, "Well, I guess yon had better take your engine when she comes in." While we was talking, the engine came and turned around ready to go to Saint Louis. I came out on her to Saint Louis, and on my return there was a letter there ; I don't know who it came irom or where. It had a skull and cross-bones on it, warning me to leave town, and if I went ont on my engine I would never come back alive. I took that to a coaple of them and showed it to them. Of course they claim that Knights of Labor never wrote it, that it was the hoodlums. Well, I told them that I intended to work ; that I believed the strike had cost me about aU I was going to let it cost me ; that I 426 LABOK TEOUBLi:S IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. would rather die on the deck of my engine, earning au honest living, fclian to be starved by a lot of hoodlums — as they said it was the hoodlums that were trying to keep me away from work and not the Knights of Lahor. Qn the 10th of April, in company with Mr. Joyce, I called on Mrs. Diiffy, after she had had her little experience there. I had left for home, and about a quarter after 10 I was alone about a square from my own house, when I was stopped by four men. They wonldB't tell me who they were and it was a very dark night. I couldn't see who they were. It was cold and there was 2 inches of snow on the ground. They had their coats up around their throats and their hats pulled down. I thought I rec- ognized their faces. I asked them to come to a saloon on the corner, about forty steps from there, and talk the thing over. They gave me to understand that it was best for me and my family not to know who they were. I tqld them that that only corresponded with all their other cowardly acts that was perpetrated in our town. That they had followed my sister-in-law, who keeps a hotel, where locomotive engineers and firemen board ; they had followed her and called her a scab and other dirty and filthy names that no gentlemen would apply to a lady. In fact, I Would hate to repeat them in front of men. I told them about this, and on Sunday I went to see Joyce to tell the matter to him, but I could not get him alone, and I did not want to circulate it for fear they might think that I was getting afraid. I went out Sunday evening, and my wife, mistrusting something, wanted to go with me ; she made the excuse that she wanfed to call on the wife of the gentleman I wanted to see, and she went with me. On coming home they were there, but they seen a lady with me and they started and run when we got within about 20 feet of them and did not stop me. So on Monday, I think it was Monday, I came to Saint Louis about 8 o'clock in the evening. I came in the city limits and some one threw a pin through the cab and knocked the windows out right in front of my face — about eight inches in front of my face — a coupling- pin that goes between cars. I was getting pretty well rattled about that time. I went to De Soto Tuesday, I think it was Tuesday ; I won't say positively ; but the Knights of Labor was in session, or their hall was lit up, and I went down there, and the young man, a machinist, who was a member of them, or I suppose he is, he was down at the foot of the steps as a kind of sentinel. I went up to him and asked him to please go up and tell the master workman that I wanted to speak to him. He told me the master workman was not in town, but that Shoup, the organizer, was tliere,,and he asked me if he would do. I said he would, and he came down and wanted to know what was the matter with me. I asked him if he would call a recess for about five minutes and take me up into the hall. He said he didn't like to do it. 1 asked him if he would then carry to the assembly what I had to say. I then repeated to him the indignity that I and my family had been subjected to. "Now," I says, "Mr. Shoup, this will not be tolerate.d any longer by me, for," I says, " I am going to get permission to carry arms, and the next person that insults my wife or any of my family has got me to fight. Further than that," I says, " the first man or men that stops me or follows me, he has to shoot me first or I will shoot him." I says, " I want you to tell that to the assembly, be- cause I don't want to shoot any one that belongs to the Knights of Labor ; perhaps I will get a hoodlum." He took the matter in a kind of joking way. I told him I didn't want him to take it as a joke. He said, " The boys think you are acting as the agent of the Iron Mountain Railroad Company, and some feel hard against you." I says, " I am doing nothing of the kind ; when I work 1 get paid, and when I don't I don't." He says, " Well, if it is your wish, I will go up and tell the assembly." He did so, or at least I suppose he did, for I promise you not one of them has ever said a word to me from that day until this. The only thing they done was to put up notices, " Engineers beware," in all the most prominent places in town, and on the house where I boarded with my sister-in-law, and on the tree in front, they had them smeared all around, and on the wells, they had them there; it was used as a kind of shop well, and a notice addressed to my sister-in-law was, " If you don't drive these infernal scabs from your house, the well will be doctored." From that date to this a guard has been kept at the well. That is all I have to say about the matter. By Mr. Stewart : Q. Do you know anything about the Knights of Labor intimidating any members of their order that did not want to strike? — A. Well, sir, I went to a deaf and dnnib man there, a machinist, and I don't suppose he belongs to them simply because he couldn't hear, and he would not be able to take the obligation. I went to him and wanted him to go to work. He is a good scholar. I think I have what conversation occurred between him and I on paper at home. I haven't got it with me. Q. Ton wrote this conversation r — A. Yes, sir; I wanted mm to goto work, and un- derneath that he wrote to me, he shook his head and says, " They would do this" (in- dicating), and he wrote on the paper he wanted to go to work but was afraid to ; he wasBifraid they would sneak np behind him because he was hard of hearing and kill him. I think it was an envelope he wrote it on. LABOK TROUBLES IN THK SOUTH AND WEST 427 Q. What was his name ? — A. John Sullivan. Q. Is there any other instance that you know of intimidation, anything about a man by the name of Dummy f— A. Well, that is what we called him, everybody knows him by the name of Dummy ; every one most calls him that. Q. ion can state the effect of the strike on the value of property ; you have al- ready referred to that ? — A. I am only just speaking for myself. I have saved up about f 1,900 since I have been in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Com- pany, and I could safely say — well, I will just speak abont two lots that a contractor was trying to buy for me previous to this strike, about two days. He came to me — they, were lots that I paid $50 apiece for — ^he came tonfe, and I wanted $500 cash for the two lots, and he offered me $500, $200 down and $300 in six months, and I wouldn't take it. About two days after this strike I seen him and asked him what he thought abont the lots. Says he, " I won't have them if you would give them to me.'° I says, " I won't give them to you ; I will go on paying taxes for them." This is tie way I feel. The $1,900 I have invested iu that town I would willingly take $1,000 for it to-day. Q. So that on the whole the strike has not been particularly beneficial to you f — A. The strike as a whole, I would just say, has cost the engineers and firemen on the Missouri Pacific system, I would judge, about $7,000 a day — ^the engineers and fire- men. Q. In throwing them out of employment t— A. Throwing them out of employment. Q. They being only paid for the time they are in service? — A. Tes, sir; only for the time they are at work. By Governor Cubtin : Q. Do you know that any of the Enights of Labor did any of the intimidation or committed violence on the property of the company? — A. Goveruor, I will answer that by asking a question : How am I to know any man is a Knight of Labor? Q. Then you don't know ? — A. I don't know that any man is a Knight of Labor. I have heard some say that they were not Enights of Labor, but you have only their word for it. Men that tell mo that they are a Knight of Labor, dare I believe them, or dare I say what they are on their word ? Q. Had those communications you received a seal on them ? — A. Yes, sir; what I consider a seal — a skull and cross-bones ; that compares very favorably with the work that they done. Q. Have you any of the communications with you ? — A. No, sir ; I have not. I can produce it if it is necessary. Q. If they have got the seal of the Enights of Labor on them we want them. — ^A. That is all the seal they had. I am not conversant with their seal, but I judged that was it ; that was all. Q. That is not the seal on the papers now iu evidence ? — A. No, sir. LOUIS KELLY, being duly sworn, testifies as follows: By Mr. Stewart : Question. Are you an engineer? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Where do you live? — A. In De Soto. Q. Will you tell your experience with this strike ? — ^A. Well, the morning it broke out in De Soto I went down to go out and was told abont nine o'clock the men were all going to stop at ten o'clock. My run was out of thereat 11.10. Q. On a passenger train ? — A. Yes, sir; mail train 601. I left De Soto Saturday morning and returned back Sunday evening, and on Monday morning, or at Monday noou rather, I was to dinner and three gentlemen came to the house and wanted to see me. I went to the door and asked them in. I knew them all three, one was Richard O'NeU, another man was Bill Ross, and another one was named Page. I asked them their business, and they said they were sent there to have an interview with me with regard to grievances. I asked them if they were sent by a committee of Enights of Labor, and they said they were. I told them I would do no business with them as a commiitee of Enights of Labor, but if they was willing to meet a committee of locomotive engineers with a committee of Enights of Labor, I would lay the matter before the men and meet them if it was satisfactory. On that they went away, and I think it was Wednesday noon after that that I met this Mr. O'Neil again and he asked me if we would hold a conference with a committee of Enights of Labor, and I told him we would. I had laid the matter before several engineers, and Mr. Joyce and Mr. Roberts was with the party. So we met them at Dement's Hotel. Also we had some firemen with us. They wanted to meet a committee from both sides of the engine, I suppose, to state their grievances. They stated their grievances all around, and I guess they must have talked, those that belonged to the Knights of Labor, au hour or an hour and a half before any word was spoken from either the firemen or the engineers. What they wanted was our sympathy and they wanted to know then 428 LABOK TEOUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. if there was not some way in which we could co-operate with them in legard to car- rying their point against the railroad company. ,1 told them I didn't know of any aa far as the locomotive engineers was concerned ; that our little division at De Soto, numbering fifty men, that we were powerless to act with them, and if there was any means by which we could operate with them it would have to be done by the higher officers, by the division master and Chief Arthur. As far as the cause of this strike is concerned, I don't think anybody is able to tell what is the cause of it, not even Mr. Powderly himself. By Mr. Stewart : Q. You say you ran a mail train ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. They did not interfere with the running of a mail train T — ^A. Yes, sir ; they did • Q. How ? — A. By placing obstructions on the track. Q. State how. — A. I will state that I have got a letter, an anonymous letter, that I received, I think, on the 28th day of March, if I am not mistaken. Q. A printed letter ?— A. No, sir ; it is dated De Soto, Mo., third month, 28th day. Shall I read'this letter ? Q. Yes, sir.— A. (Reading:) "L. Kelley, Esq. Dear Sir: My profound respect for your personal safety, in connection with your responsible and hazardous occupation, compels me, as a friend, to warn you from further efforts as an engineer, for I am in possession of such facts as assures me that life and limb will not be safe under the existing circumstances. Bewar« ere it is too late, for I know whereof I speak." Q. That is not signed.?— A. No, sir ; they are not men enough to sign them. I re- ceived this letter on the 29th day of March. Q. Through the post ? — A. Yes, sir ; through the post-office. Q. Is it a drop letter ? — A. I suppose it was a drop letter; it was post-marked De Soto ; in fact, I think there was no post-mark on it. They were too poor to put a stamp on it; it is De Soto, though. Q. You could not get it through the post-office unless it is stamped. — A. It is post- marked De Soto. I received this letter on the morning of the 29th. I went to the barber shop and read it While I w as in the barber shop. I did not open it in the post- office, as I surmised what it was when I took it out, because some had been circu- lated that I heard of. I came along up the street and met Laughlin, the master work- man. Him and I have always been friends ever since he was in De Soto. He said, " Lou, I would lik^ to have a talk with you for a few minutes." 1 says "All right," and' I walked across the street and he told me the contents of this letter, not exactly word for word, but the sum and substance of it. Q. That is, he gave yon the same advice that the letter did? — ^A. Yes, sir. I went to Saint Louis that evening, and took my run out that night. I went out here on 611 and we was running very slow, and consequently very late. I went to Poplar Bluff and then came back on 604. I came through about nine in the evening, and a mile north of De Soto there was an obstruction on the track in the shape of three bars of iron; one was a T-rail, about 10 feet long, and there were two shorter pieces or ob- structions placed on the track, about 4 feet long. When the eugine struck them I put the brakes on and stopped, and sent the conductor and fireman back, but I staid with the engine. They went and found what the obstruction was ; that they con- sisted of a T-rail, 10 feet long, and two pieces about 4 feet long each. Q. Was it dark ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You had a head-light ?-^A. Yes, sir ; but it was on a curve where the obstruction was laid. Q; Did you have any passengers ? — A. We hardly ever go over the road without we have passengers down there. Q. You did not see ic before you struck it ? — A. No, sir j it was on the curve ; we running slow — running abont 12 miles an hour. Q. Suppose you had been running at the rate of twenty-five miles an hour, what then ? — A. It is hard to tell what the consequences would have been if we had been running at a high rate of speed. Q. That is the first response to that letter you had ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you get any more ? — A. No, sir ; I have got one other letter here, thongh. Q. Of the same purport ? — A. Well, yes, sir ; only I think it is a little harder. Q. Well, let us have it. — A. This is written by the wife of a Knight of Labor — that is, she signs herself that way. She says : " Mr. Lo0 Kelly : "Dbak Sik: Ere you will reoive this yon will no doubt see notices posted informing engineers to beware ; " those are the notices brothers Joyce and Roberts spoke abont ■when they were on the stand ; ' 'which you will,if you were in the posssesion of facts that 1 am, give your earliest attention. For while I am the wife of a Knight of Labor, and in no sympathy with their cause, I cannot, knowing that they, intheirdesperajtionto insure justice, are determined to adopt measures in the immediate future shocking in LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 429 their nature, and of snch murderous results, any longer refrain fi:om letting you know that, if you persist in running, death' and disaster awaits .yon. The Knights intend this for the last warning, after which they say the fan begins. Now, I am in igno- rance concerning the details of their plans, but this much Iknow, they are arranging to use some agency that will instantaneously destroy the boiler or engine, with no re- gard to either fireman or engineer, for they claim that the work will be done when and where the least suspicion will be given. I give this information cheerfully, for rather th:in know that death has been cansed I would submit to defeat. Will yon please put your brothers on their guard f I have no rest or peace at present, I can- not sleep, for horrid dreams hauut my slumbers. "Tours, in sympathy, "A LADY FRIEND." Mr. Stewast. Let me see that letter. The Witness (passing letter to Mr. Stewart). I don't think it was ever written by a lady. She was in very poor business if she did write it. Mr. Stbwakt. It is a very good handwriting ; 1 think it was written by a woman. The WiTKESS. Well, it might have been. Mr. Stewabt. But I am not a witness, so that I don't testify on the subject. Ton have already stated that no obstruction was put in your way after that % — ^A. No, sir ; I have seen no obstruction since that time up to the present, although there has been obstractions placed on the track since that, but I did not happen to catch them. Q. Do you know who wrote that letter ? — A. No, sir, I do not. The one I read first, I think I know who wrote it. Q. Who wrote itf — A. I don't know that it -would be policy for me to say who wrote it, because I intend to take some action on the letter. Q. Very well, I won't press the question ; you say the master workman gave you the contents of the letter orally f — A. Not in the words, but the sum and substance of the letter he did. Q. He gave you the same warning in substance ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the committee state at the time — the committee of Knights — were you pres- ent at that conference ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did any member of that committee state in the presence of the others that they would use honorable means to win the fight and if necessary they would resort to fonl means Y — A. Yes, sir; Mr. Dan Park is the man that made that statement. Q. Was McLaughlin there f — A. Charley Laughlin was there, chairman of the com- mittee. Q. What did he say when that announcement was made ? — A. He didn't say any- thing ; it appeared to suit him pretty well. Q. How long have yon been an engineer on this railroad 1 — A. The Iron Mountain t Q. Yes. — A. Seventeen years. Q. Have you stated all you know about this matter f — A. I don't know that I have any more to offer. M. SLANSON, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Mr. Stewakt : Question. Where do you live T — Answer. I live in De Soto. Q. What is your business f — A. Hardware merchant. Q. What did you observe in regard to this strike or its consequences f — ^A. My observation and sympathies up to about the 1st of March have been with the labor- ing men, for I have been a mechanic always ; that is, I worked ' ' jour, work " as a tin- smith the earlier part of my life, and my sympathy is always with the laboring man, and I was conversant somewhat with what was being done last summer, and I thought it was a good thing and a very proper thing that they should be organized, and up_ to about the first of March, when this car of boycotted hogs came along, and the action that they took at that time turned me entirely against them. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. I never was a, Knight of Labor, but I have been solicited many times to join with them, as it would be beneficial to me in a business way. I abhor the idea of going into anything with a mercenary motive, and if I could not do them any good unless to go in with them for the purpose of increasing my trade I couldn't think of it, I couldn't do it ; they told me all the other hardware men were in it and that I should lose if I did not. I told them I should have to lose then, for I was getting rather old and did not care about be- ing out, and as I could have no other motive, only a mercenary one, and I would not do that. About a year ago, nearly a year ago, in talking with some of them, I found that they advocated some measures that I protested earnestly against. I told them they ought not to have anything of that kind ; that it was a good cause and a righteous one, and if they would drop all those things, such as the boycotting, as I have read of in the Iron Age and the Metal Worker, which I take to keep posted 430 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. m trade and commerce and so on and prices — that they boycotted a merchant in Williamsport, Pa., atid I have read all the particulars, and I told them that is not right ; it is not at all right. For instance, I buy a thousand dollars' worth of stoves as I done last tiall, and everything is all right. I get a thousand dollars' worth of stoves, and by paying for them cash down I can get a discount of 5 per cent. Well/ after I had bought those stoves, I stirred around and got what monfiy I could raise, aid it took about all that I had to pay for them to get the 5 per cent, discount, and I instanced that as an argument why they should drop these things, and I told them that was not right, for I was not a party to it ; I had no notice of it, and it would be impossible for me to bny|other stoves, and it would be a lossof more than the cost of the stoves; it would be a loss of the cost and profit, besides disabling my business, and they ought not to go into anything of that kind ; that if they had a real grievance, if they would bring it before the proper authorities, the proper ones; I have no doubt they would listen, and if they wore united and harmon ions they' could carry any point tiiey might raise. When this car-load of hogs was stopped there I told them I would not even sympathize with any one that would commit such an act. Says I, " Here the hogs are turned loose into the "park and the man is immediately notified that he must take them out of the park or you will boycott him." Then notices were sent aruuud to the merchants that feept feed of the same thing, if they furnished feed for the hogs. I thought that a very singular thing aud I earnestly protested against it, so much so tliatthey rather singled me out and have done so from that time on to the present time ; it seems as though they had their principal fight against me. Q. They boycotted you ? — A. Well, partially, not in the regular way, althottj^ft I have been threatened with it by different individuals aud even one said to me "We have spotted you and we will see to you," and they said " You are a man that lends a man ten dollars, but when he wants two dollars to join the Knights of Labor you won't let him havfe it.* I had never heard of that, although I had knowledge of the fact that I lent a man ten dollars and he, when the strike came on, wanted to borrow two dollars and I refused to do it because I knew he was going on a strike, aud I should want the money before he would be likely to get it and give it to me, and then I considered the fact that my trade would be decreased and that these fellows wonldn't have money and wouldn't pay me up, and I had to be looking out for every dollar; I had bills'beooming due and I had goods to purchase and I couldn't do it, and besides I don't always trust a man because he is honest. I trust him because I think he will pay when he has the money. ' Q. Perhaps w6 have had enough on that subject. Did you observe any other acts open to criticism on the part of these men and their conduct there ? — A. I have seen nothing, only the endeavor to stop freight trains ; which I think was three weeks ago or the first day at any rate on which they started to resume business in the way of carrying freight. I saw that; that was immediately in front of my door. Q. Was that the same train that we have had described as having been stoppfidf— A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, I don't care about that ; is there anything else that you saw t — ^A. Only that the Knights of Labor have congregated in front Of their hall aud -at various places, and obstructed the sidewalk, and cried out after respectable citizens, " scabs" and " rats," and something to that effect. I thought at first it was not much to en- dure to be called a scab, but when they came to cry it after me I felt very indignant and quite hurt, inasmuch as I had been in De Soto for the last nineteen years and no- body could lay any charge against me that I had done anything against" any individ- nal in the town, and I had the interest of the town at heart and the interest of these men at heart ; I felt indignant, and I went to the mayor and told him there was a nuisance wjiich I wished abated. It had been going on at that time about four or five weeks and I thought it was time to have it abated, and that it was within his power to do so. He gave the marshal orders to see to it — that they insulted decent people no more and that they keep off the walk. Well, they cleared it off in the course of an hour or so, and there was not any more than a dozen or so in front of the hall, and then they became less and less. They showed many indignities to citizens that were for the interest of the town, and so manifested themselves. Q. They called yon a scab? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You did not mind much about it at first, but after awhile it got rather mono- tonous ? — A. It struck me hard the first click. I think it was Wednesday or Thursday night, when passing through the crowd, they calledme that, and the next morning I had business to go to the depot, and passing through the crowd, they cried out those things at me, and then I made complaints to the mayor immediately, and they said nothing until the next Sunday momitig, and then we had organized in such a way that yre did not feel Intimidated by anything which they done or said. Q. You refer to the organizing of the Law and Order League ?— A. Yes, sir ; that is what they call it, Q. Was it necessary to preserve the peace there that such an organization should be had ?— A. I don't think anything else would meet it, because at that time, before LABOE TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 431 that time, they were disorderly, high-handed, insolent, and impudent to all the old citizens, and the best citizens that we had. Some of the Knights of Labor I know that are respectable and decent people, and I have no doubt that they discountenanced all such acts, but there is quite a number, a snfScient number, so that they overawed the law and order people — I don't mean the Law and Order members, for there is only two classes down tjiere, some are members of the organization and others are just as much for law and order as though they were members ; others are Knights of Labor, and others are not, hut they are just as much Knights of Labor as though they be- longed to the organization. You can tell them in talking with them in about four minutes or less. ' Mr. Stewart. That is all. The Witness. I might mention one other thing, I would like to. Mr. Stewakt. Very well, I don't know what you know. The Witness. Well, my point is that they undertake to rule everything and say " You should do this and you should do that, and you shan't do so and so." The Pres- byterian ladies were going to paint and paper their church, and they gave out in- structions to a committee to see for them for what it could be done. They submitted it to one man, who was a Knight of Labor, and his bid was $75, I believe^ and they submitted it to another man and he would do the same work,with the exception that they would furnish the paper, which would cost some $15 or $20, and he would do all the rest of the furnishing for $29. Then they instructed the committee to close the contract with the man for |29. He was not a Knight of Labor, and that night they came in and one of them that was a Knight of Labor and informed one of the com- mittee that he would not be permitted to do that job the next molming. My son is one of the committee, and be told me that Mr. Pyle had been in there to see him and notified him that he would not be permitted to do the work ; that they would drive him out of town. Then I thought the best thing I could do would be to go and see Mr. Pyle. I halted him in the street that morning and told him -what I had heard. He reiterated to me that we would not be permitted to do it. I told him we would for all that he could do Then he intimated that he would bring something to hea^ and I understood it very quickly that it was the order of the Knights of Labor. I told him I did not care a^out that, that he should do the job, and I wanted him to understand that I was very sorry — he was a particular friend of mine, or has been a particular friend of mine — and I was sorry he had taken the course he had for he would certainly regret it in the future ; that I had influence and power enough to bring to bear ; that if the man wanted backing I would give him all the backing he panted ; and that if he was willing to do it I should give him the job. I advised him to drop the subject right there and carry it no further. He insisted on it, and I left him. Well, the man done the job all right. There is one other matter brought to my mind by reading Powderly's secret letter instructing the members of the order that they must deny everything. I find that that advice was entirely unnecessary, for they deny everything now, and have done so. We have always understood that De Soto was the most orderlj' place ; that during the weeks of this strike there has been less disorder, and less violations of 'the law, and less of crime, and less of every- thing disorderly than there was before. Whereas the fact of the cases are right the reverse. Perhaps there might not have been quite as much drunkenness, but I don't know that that was particularly their fault. As to the influence upon trade, it has decreased there among merchants that was sympathizers or Knights of Labor— for most of them are — ^it has decreased perhaps 2) per cent., and with those that were Knights of Labor it has been more injurious on them than upon the others, for they have sold the goods, but they have not got their money, and I don't know that they ever will. There is a butcher there that I know has trusted out nine hundred dol- lars. He was a member of the Knights of Labor, but the funds gave out and he had to quit. He said he got |42 out of the $900, and he would be willing to take half of that amount for the rest of it ; that he did not consider the balance worth anything, and a good many have suffered in that way ; and in the value of real estate probably the decrease is quite SSJ per cent.; in fact there is no object in buying to sell. They have stopped building. They have stopped a building which was contracted for by the Odd Fellows. By Colonel Buenes : Q. You make an allusion to a letter or circular of Mr. Powderly's in which, yea stated, he directed the Knights of Labor to deny everything; have you seen any such letter or circular ? — ^A. I read it last evening in the Globe-Democrat. Q. What knowledge have yon that it came from Mr. Powderly ? — A. That is very easily told ; it came through the Chicago News, and had Mr. Powderly's name signed to it, and it sounds very natural. A person can tell Q. All you know about it is that it appeared in the newspaper with his name at- tached to it ? — A. If you know that, yOn know all. Q. In addition to that you have seen it in other papers ? — A. Then a man has his 432 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. reasons, his judgment to pass upon things — you know that when anything appears in the paper you can judge of its truth or falsity by certain rules Q. I am uot asking you to judge of this or that ; I am asking you for the legal facts and not what you judge. You speak of this as a publication in a newspaper that you have seen, and you say it was copied from the Chicago News ; is that the evidence upon which you rely to prove the fact that Mr. Powderly signed it ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you allude to this second secret circular of Mr. Powderly ?^A. Yes, sir; the one that came out in the Globe-Democrat yesterday. Q. You think that is in that circular?— A. I think it is in the circular, yes, sir; and I believe the circular is from Mr. Powderly, the same as I did the other one when it came out, the secret circular. Tuesday, 11, 1886. NATHAN H. KARL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. BuRNBS : Question. State your full name, age, occupation, and residence. — ^Answer. Nathan H. Karl ; I reside at De Soto, Mo. ; occupation, locomotive engineer. Q. There ^as been some testimony here with regard to breaking into the roand- house and destroying property belonging to the railroad company. State what yon saw, and what you know with regard to that occurrence. — A. I will state that in the month of March and in the month of April I vras acting as night round-house fore- man at De Soto, Mo. As to breaking into the round-house, I think it was on the night of the 11th, at some two or three minutes before 8 o'clock, some one came to the door. We had the doors all fastened, you Understand ; and I had orders not to admit anyone to the ronnd-house unless I knew who he was and what business he had. Some one came to the door, and I asked who was there. Some one outside says, "Lahey," and I says, "I guess you have got the wrong voice ; that voice don't belong to Lahoy." I was personally acquainted with Lahey, you understand. Well, then ho said, "It is all right, let me in, Henry," and I says, "I can't do it, we have orders not to do it, and I can't let you in." We parleyed back and forth there for three minutes, perhaps, and they told me it would be better for me if I opened the door and let them in, and so on, and I told them that I wouldn't open the door. Then. I heard remarks on the outside, saying to break the door in, and then they struck it with some heavy instrument from the outside, I judge. It is a small double door, you understand, and one part of the door come open, and I see that there was quite a number right at the door. The first man I saw was a man named Bech- ler, who stepped inside. Just as he stepped inside, there was a man who works in the blacksmith shop, named Foley, Juicked the other door in. When they first broke the door in, only half of them came in, you know. They are double doors. And this man named Foley kicked the door in. Bechler stepped right up to me and says, "Put out that lamp, Karl." I had a lantern in my hand. I didn't make any effort to put the lamp out, and during this time there was a crowd pressing into the door. They stepped into the door as fast as they could get in, and commenced saying, "Pat the lights out, put the lights out." Before the lights were out, I seen some of them had sticks, and some of them tools, and so on, in their hands. One of them had a lantern ; who he was, I don't know. He wa8 one of them I didn't recognize. I recognized a good many as men I had seen about the shops, former employes of the company, and this one fellow also told me to put my light out. I didn't .put my light out, and some one kicked it, and it went out; and so Foley then took his hat, and one of the lamps on the side of the wall he put out with his hat. He knocked the chimney off the lamp, and then put the lamp out with his hat. I then heard a remark from somebody over on the opposite side of the tank of the engine, say- ing, "Put the s b s out," and another one made a remark shortly after that, "Kill the damned s b s." I says to this man Bechler, " If you are going to kill anyone, let us go around and see who it is." He says, "No, you don't. You don't wanit to go down there at all." Then some one spoke to me and put his hand on my shoulders and gave me a push, and says, "You get out of here, too," and by that time there was quite a crowd in the round-house, and I thought there was no use staying, and I did get out. I went to the opposite side of the round-house, and went to the door, and went out, and went to the superintendent's ofSce, and reported the matter. Mr. Morris, the master me- chanic, was there, and I reported the matter to them, and lit my lamp, and went hack down to the ronud-house. .lust as I got near the round-house, I seen quite a crowd going down the track onto the side-track, and went in, and found, that while I was gone, they had disabled all the engines in the house. I found they had taken away the connecting rod- pins, the valve-stems, and rooker-arms, and had taken the pack- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 433 lug ont of the valTe-stems, and broken sorae of the cocks of the engines, and also had mn some car-tmcks into the turntable pit. I could recognize -wholly this Bechler, as the first man I saw, and Foley was another one I recognized, and a man by the name of Ryan. I recognized those men. Q. Do yon know of any other acts of violence against the property of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company f — A. Well, I think on the 27th, I think it was about the 27th, I saw a train come through De Soto. The first freight train that went north through De Soto. I saw some things that took place on that day ; attempting to stop a train ; also, I saw three parties running over from the side-track over to the track, run over to the track, pick up something, and then step back, and as they stepped back, I saw it was a coupling-link that they couple cars with that was lying on the rail. I don't know which one of the three it was. One of those three put it on, as it wasn't on before they went to the track, and was on as they left it. I see one stoop down. I oonldn't recognize the man. Q. What is the ordinary effect of a link on an iron rail, in regard to the train ? — A. Well, if the engine struck it in such a manner as to knock the link off, there is no eflfect to amount to anything ; no delay. If the engine struck it in such a way as to run over it, nine times out often it will throw the engine from the rail if the wheel runs over it. In this case the engine knocked the link off the track, as good luck would have it, Q. The train knocked the link off in passing over it^— A. I suppose probably the •wheel when it struck it, in place of going over it, strnck it in such a way that it knocked it off the rail. That is the snposition. Q. It was lying there when the engine came upon it t — ^A. Yes, sir ; it was lying there when the engine came to it. Q. Is that the link that was spoken of here by one of the engineers here, who picked it up afterwards t — A. One of our engineers picked it up afterwards. Yes, sir; I think it is the same Unk. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Is that fellow Thomas Foley T— A. I don't know the first name, sir. He is a blacksmith, who works in a blacksmith shop. Q. A blacksmith ? — A. Yes, sir ; I don't know his first name. One of those strikers, a former employ^, who has been employed by the company for the last -two years or more as a boiler- washer, told me in the presence of a man named Hibbard, that if the Knights of Labor didn't win this matter any other way, they would take up their guns and win it with their guns. Judge T. J. FORTIS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. BuRNES : Question. Judge, we will get yon to state to the committee what you know with re- gard to the extent of these trouble in so far as efforts were made by legal proceedings to restrain and prevent trouble. — ^Answer. Soon after the commencement of the strike, and the taking forceable possession of the property, and preventing the officers and em- ployfe of the road from having anything to do with it, I advised the company, as their legal adviser, to issue the notices that nave been read here ; first, notifying the men who had voluntarily left the service of the company, that they were no longer in its em- ploy, as they claimed to be employes in the company, and to have a ri^t to remain upon the premises, and to notify them that they must leave the premises, as has been testified, and all the other notices that were given. That having been done, I then advised and instituted the injunction suit that was testified about in Mr. Harrigan's testimony, here in Saint Louis, and also along the line of the road in this State, and in other States. And I have a list of the number of those suits that were instituted, and the injunctions, all of which were granted, which I can, if it is desired, furnish you with. In addition to that, I advised that all who were guilty of any violation of the crim- inal law of this State, and of the other States through which the toads run, should be arrested, when they could be identified ; and, in some of the counties in which courts were in session and grand juries were in session, advised that the prosecuting attorneys be advised of the facts, and furnished with the names, to present those cases to their grand jury. The result of all that was, that in the States of Missouri, Ar- kansas, Kansas, and Texas, a total number of 360, up to the time this statement was made, had been either arrested or indicted ; some of whom had been arrested, and others have not been found yet, because they have gotten out of the way, or kept out of the way ; a number of whom were tried before justices of the peace and in police courts. Some were acquitted, others found guilty and fined, and others found g[uilty and imprisoned ; and, in fact, quite a variety ol results have taken place. That is all. I think about 11 or 12 injunction suits, in this number of 360 arrests, made first and last, and indictments against parties who have not yet been arrested. Q. That memoranda you will file with the secretary 1 — A. Yes, sir; this memoran- dum states the causes of complaints made against the parties, not by name but gen- erally. (See Exhibit "P.") 3984 CONG 28 434 LABOB TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, Q. That was the nnmher of arrests. How many have been tried. Judge, np to date ?— A. That I conldn't tell you, colonel, for I have not got that. I nave a detailed statement of the entire thing, on a very large roll of paper. It is a large document, but with which I could furnish you, if yon desire, which gives them by name. Q. Have there been any convictions ?— A. Yes, sir ; quite a number. Q. What has usually been the punishment ?— A. Well, sir, from paying the costs, np to |100 fine. Varying from %1 to flO and so on to $25, and in other cases, imprison- ment. Some cases, I believe, fine and imprisonment, and some, imprisonment with- out fine. . T J li Q. Have any of them been tried for felony?— A. I think not, sir. I don't remem- ber of any one of those ca^es having been jet tried. There are a number of indiot- ■ ments. I also advised, when these notices to the traveling public first came out, and were posted around, and served on parties, advised the officers of the company to have all of them gathered up as fast as they could, with such evidence as they could get of the persons who posted them up, or scattered them around, th^ names and residences of them sent to my office, and, pursuant to that request I have got this number of them, a large number of them, which I am holding for further use [referring to a bundle of papers in his hand]. They were posted in all the places, important places, along the line of the road, and distributed in various manners. Q. Who, generally made the affidavits for the arrests?— A. Well, sir, I couldn't tell you that ; that was generally done through the prosecuting attorneys, or some of my assistants out ou the line. I have not seen them. I don't think I have ever seen one of them. It was only reported to me that they had been arrested. At this point a recess was taken until 2 o'clock p. m. M. H. PALMER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as foll,ows : By Mr. Stewart : Question. Where do you live, Mr. Palmer ? — Answer. Saint Louis. Q. What is your occupation I — A. Carpenter. Q. In whose employment ? — A. I can't consider that I am in anybody's employment just at the present time, as I understand that I have been discharged by the Missouri Pacific Company, or rather blacklisted. Q. You were iu the employment of this company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At what time did you cease to be in their employment ? — A. Well, I suppose, ac- cording to the company's opinion, on the 6th of March, when the men walked out of the shops. Q. Were you one of the strikers ? — A. Well, if walking out of the shops and ceasing to work is considered being a striker, why I guess I am included as a striker. Q. Well, I believe that is what they generally call a striker. Of course we just use the word to describe it. You went out with the rest of the men on the 6th of March f — A. Yes, sir. Q. What for ? — A. Various reasons, sir. Q. State them. — A. In the year of 1885 I was a member of the executive board of the Knights of Labor, not the executive board of the eijnploy^s of the system. The Knights of Labor was in vogue on the system at that time, but they were not organ- ized into a district. About the 10th day of August, or previous to the 10th day of August, I was called to Denison, Tex., with the understanding that — to take some action with regard to grievances existing ou the road at that time, and which had been since the contract of 1885. I arrived there on the 9th of August ; the 10th of August the executive board held a session and heard the grievances that were pre- sented to them. At the adjournment of that meeting, we telegraphed up to Mr. Hoxie for passes, stating in our telegram that we desired to Oiul ou him. He an- swered that telegram, nimished us with passes, but stated that he intended to go East. We came to Saint Louis, however, with the passes that he had furnished ns, and we went to Mr. Hoxie's office, and we was informed that he had left the city. Mr. O'Hara was his chief clerk at that time, and we asked him about Mr. Hoxio, where he had gone. ' He said that he did not know any further than that he had gone East. We asked him if he could not trace Mr. Hoxie for us. He said ' ' uo^" he Sid not think he could ; he did not know where he had gone to, or anything about that ; that Mr. Hoxie had left no word with him, and we told him, when we called again — some four or five days after that we called again — we asked him if he had heard anything about Mr. Hoxie's whereabouts. He said no, when we left a list of grievances in Mr. O'Hara's care. Q. Have you got a copy of that list?— A. I don't know whether there is a copy of that in existence now. There probably may be. The members of that board came to Saint Louis, there was six of us : R. W. Drew, of Sedalia, was chairman ; H. Mahoney, of De Soto, was a member of that board ; C. A. Hall, of Marshall, Tex., was a mem- ber of that board, and J. M. Burnes, of Chamois, and K. P. Marshall, of Palestine, inolud- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 435 ing myself. Those men were all present when those crievances were presented to Mr. O'Hara, with the instruction that he would present it to Mr. Hoxie as soon as he ar- rived, which he said he would do. "He looked over the pfrievances, and there was one little word in it hg took objections to, and said the word demand, if we had no objec- tions to erasing that word demand and inserting the word request, he would present it to Mr. Hoxie ; that he thought Mr. Hoxie might make an objection if the word de- mand wae in there. So we erased the word demand and inserted request. These grievances were in relation to a violation of the contract made in March, 1885, claim- ing that men's wages had not been restored at Big Springs, Tex., at Fort Worth, and at Chamois, Mo., and also at other places, to the best of my recollection ; and it also spoke of their grievance in relation to the foundry at Parsons, Kans., the removal of work from that foundry, giving it to contract shops, which caused the cessation of work at the foundry, thereby depriving the men of working the whole time of the week. They were only making three days a Week, whereas they had been making six days a week. And there was also this demand that I have stated, which was after- wards made a request, that all unskilled labor receiving less than $1.50 per day should receive $1.50, and ten hours should constitute a day's work, and all in excess of that time should be paid time and half. I called at Mr. Hoxie's ofScd two or three times after he had arrived in Saint Louis. I had requested the master car-builder, my superior officer, to notify me when Mr. Hoxie arrived ; that he failed to do ; whether it was through forgetf ulness or neglect, or how, I don't know ; but he didn't notify me. Mr. Hoxie was in the city probably some four or five days before I heard of his arrival, but just as soon as I did have oc- casion to go down on certain business matters I called up at Mr. Hoxie's, office and I asked if Mr. Hoxie was in; they told me yes; I asked if I could see him ; they said that Mr. Hoxie was busily engaged at the present time in consultation with some railroad officials, and had instructed the clerks through the office not to admit any- body, under any consideration. I waited around there' till it was about 5 o'clock, thinking that probably those parties would leave, and then I could see Mr. Hoxie. Having occasion to meet other parties with connections with little troubles that happened on the road at this end, I couldn't wait any longer. So I left. Some time afterwards I called again at Mr. Hoxie's office. They told me no. I asked when he would be in. They said they didn't know ; couldn't tell me. I then thought he was in, although of course I was not positive. My reasons for thinking he was in was, that morning I had some dispute, or a dispute, v> ith our master mechanic with re- gard to some man he wanted to discharge, the discharge being on the grounds of work having been taken away from the shop — Wabash work, I have reference to— being taken away from the shop ; that he would have to reduce the force, he claim- ing that he had too much of a force, after this work being taken awav — a force of six men that he wanted to discharge. And I told him that I didn't — or previously to this, I had also been in consultation with him in regard to the same matter, but this time he had called me up in the office, informing me that he had positive instructions from Sedalia to discharge those six men. I had claimed all along that the proper course would be to shorten the hours, and allow those men to w6rk ; he claimed that the hours could not be shortened in the round-house. Still, at the same time, he desired to discharge a force of men employed in the round-house. Then, when he said that he could not shorten the hours in the round-house, as they had to run twelve hours on a stretch, to run the whole twenty- four hours, I suggested that the men be distributed in the different departments. He said that could not be done, as each department had its complement of men, I then suggested that they be put all in one department and the hours reduced in that department. He said that that could not be done with all. I told him that I dis- liked very much to see those men discharged, thinking, at a point like Saint Louis, where so much business was done and so many men employed, that there could be some arrangement made by which those men could be retained. He claimed that he disliked very much to see the men discharged, too, so I suggested that he give me further time in regard to the matter and I would consult the men's wishes in regard to what could be done with the men. I told the men about the discharge to take place, and the suggestion was made to me that they could not see anything else to be done but allow Mr. Bartlett to dis- charge the men, and I couldn't see anything else at the time either ; so I told them that inasmuch as we had a lot of men around the shop that no doubt was objectionable to the company, if the proper officers of the road knew it; that I thought that class of men should be discharged in preference to good, reliable, ind a strious, sober men. They thought so, too ; so I made out a list of names, and I called up to the office Monday afternoon or— yes, it was Monday afternoon, right after dinner hour — and I seen Mr. Bartlett and spoke to him in regard to the men that had been discharged and told me that we didn't desire to have any trouble on the road : that we wanted to do everything that was reasonable and just, and we expected to be treated likewise, and that we would agree for him to discharge six men, but that we would claim the privi- 436 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. lege of selecting the men, inasmuch as the men that we would select no doubt would be men th^t the company would discharge, or at least the proper officers would, if they knew that that class of men would be employed. He said, " Very well; what is the names of those men ?" So I read the names off to him, and he claimed that they were the best men in his employ. I told him I didn't see how he could consider that, when they were men that were known to be drunkards, that had been drunk time and again in the shop, that even had went so far as to go out of the shop during work hours to fill their bottles full of whisky and bring it in, and not only get drnnk themselves, but induce others to get drunk. One of them even went so far as to run bills at whisky shops, aud to make the men working there pay for the whisky bill , that he drunk. And he claimed then, he said, he didn't care what the men done ; that when he hired a man that he never asked him if he was a drunkard or what he was ; as long as he performed his work in the shop, it was all he desired. He acknowledged picking one man up out of the gutter, thinking he could make a man out of him, and he failed and acknowledged that he had failed. In one instance be had dis- charged one of the men for drunkenness, and through his pleadings that he would re- form he had taken the man back and given him another trial, and he had found that the man had not been doing much better; but still he didn't think it was right that those men should be discharged, claiming that they were all good men. So I told him that that was immaterial to them in the shop whether he discharged them or not; he could keep them if he wished ; but I thought Mr. Hoxie would not sustain him in doing so if he discharged those men in place of other men. He said that he would talk to Mr. Sibley, and I said "All right ; you can talk to Mr. Sibley about the matter, and I wiU see Mr. Hoxie." He said, " I don't want you to see Mr. Hoxie." And I said, " I will have to see Mr. Hoxie,'' and that was the time — the afternoon— that I went down to see Mr. Hoxie and was told he wasn't in, and Mr. Bartlett, I think, was at the office that same day himself, and was in consultation with Mr. Hoxie in regard to those men. The men were never discharged though, so that is all I know in reference to the agreements which were left at Mr. Hoxie's office. Q. He did not discharge the six men at all ? — A. No, sir; he did not discharge the six men. On the 15th of last February, or previous, I was called to Marshall, Tex., to attend a meeting of the district assembly there. It had been erroneously stated by some of the men at De Soto, that De Soto had been trying for months to get up a strike, and they could not get it up in De Soto, aud got it up at Marshall, Tex., in regard to some few men who had been discharged there and that is why this meeting in Denison had been called. I can state that every word of that is false. The special meeting was called to Marshall for the purpose of changiug some reso- lutions passed in our convention here in Saint Louis, and which some of the Texas assemblies did not think was proper. We met in Marshall, Tex., and everything went on in a peaceful manner, and no trouble of anykind occurred. I arrived there on Saturday evening; a committee was there at the depot that met us and escorted us to a hotel. At ttie hotel I was stopping at I was displeased with the food, and had stated so to the committee. Next morning I was at the depot along with some of the committee from Marshall, Tex., that was attending the reception of the dele- gates, and I met Mr. C. A. Hall, and he says : "Palmer, I am glad to see. you. I want you to come up to the house and stop with me." I told him no, that I thought that would be an imposition ; as long as my expenses were being paid, I thought it would be the proper place to stop at the hotel. " No," he says, "I want yon to go up as a ftiend of mine and stop there." I says, " Very well, I will go up." So we stood talking for some time, and he says to me, " I have been elected a delegate to represent my assembly in this convention, and I don't think I can attend." I says, " Why I" " Well," he says, " I have got to ask permission from my superior officer, Mr. Cosby." Just at that time he seen himjind says: "Why, there is Mr. Cosby now; wait till I go over and speak to him, and see if I can get permission to be absent.'' So he left me and approached him, and I heard him make the remark : " Good morn- ing Mr. Crosby " to him, and he says " Good morning, Mr. Hall." So I walked off then, and sauntered around ; a few minutes afterward I met Mr. Hall again. " Well," he says, " I guess I. can attend the meeting." " Well," I says, "I am glad tohearit." So he gave me the way he had asked Mr. Cosby's permission; said he told him he was elected a delegate by his assembly to represent the assembly in the convention, arid would like permission to be absent a little while. He said that Mr. Cosby has asked "How long will it be?" "Well," he says, "probably one, two, or three days. I can't state exactly, but I don't think it will be longer than three days." Mr. Cosby says, " Very well." This is Mr. Hall's testimony that was given to me then^andhe said that Mr. Hall replied and also said that he would make it his business to be at the shop an hour in the morning after the bell rung, and an hour at 1 o'clock, after the bell rung, to see that everything Vas cut out— all the work was got out, and that his men were furnished with plenty of work, and had arranged everything so that there would be no trouble during his absence, and would leave a man in charge dur- ing his absence, and Mr. Cosby says : " That is very good ; I am glad you mentioned LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 437 it." And Mr. Hall attended that convention, whioli lasted three days, andadjonined at 2 o'clock on the same day — it practically adjourned at 12 o'clock, I am not sure, though ; they had a little open meeting about 2 o'clock which lasted a few minutes. Mr. Hall was there a few minutes and says: " Gentlemen, I would like for all the delegates to go through the shop. If you wait here, I will go over and see if I can get permission." So he went over to the shop, and got permission for the delegates to go through the shop, sent word over there by a delegate from that point, that had ac- companied him. So we all went through the shops. It didn't take probably any more than three quarters of an hour or an hour at the most. So after we had went through we sauntered off in different directions, I in company with several others, for some time, and finally I left and started for Mr. Hall's house, where I was stopping. I met one of the employes of the shop, and he says : " Have yon heard the news, Palmer t" I says, "No, I have not." Well he says, "Hall is discharged." I says "' What for ?" He says, " I don't know." Of course I was par- ticularly anxious to get home to hear Mr. Hall's story, so I went home, and Mr. Hall was out milking the cow when I got there. I seen him, and says, " Why, I hear you had some trouble." He says, " Yes ; I don't think it will amount to much, though. I received a letter a short while after you folks left the shops, or at least I went to my desk and found a letted lying on it ; " and he pulled it out and showed it to me : " Mr. C. A. Hall— Dear Sir : Your services are no longer required by this company. Please call to the office and get your time." Signed Mr. Cosby — I think J. C. , I am not positive. So I says, " What did yon do ? " He says, "I went to the office, and asked Cosby what the letter meant." "Why," he says, " it means that you are dis- charged." Then I asked him what it was for, and he says "For being absent &om your duties. I replied, "Didn't I ask your permission, Mr. Cosby, to be absent t" Mr. Cosby replied, " That don't make a particle of difference. Hall; I intend to put a man in your place that the men are afraid of." "Why," he says, " I can't under- stand you. Haven't I turned out as mnoh work as any of my predecessors f " " It don't make a particle of difference ; I intend to make a big change here. There will be a big number of men discharged." So he says he couldn't get no satisfaction, and he withdrew, and he says : " Now, what is troubling me the most, there was somebody in my company the time that I asked permission to be absent, and for the life of me I can't think who it was. I don't remember whether it was a delegate or whether one of the employes here ; but somebody was present when I asked Cosby's permission, and I can't think who that was, for the life of me." So we stood talking for a few minutes. After supper I took a walk out, and went up to the hotel where a majority of the members were stopping, and the first word they accosted me was, "Have you heard that Hall is discharged ?" Audi said, "Why, yes." And says one of the men, " Did you hear what it was for ?" And I says, " Mr. Hall claims that Mr. Cosby says it was for being absent from the shops without permission," and one of the delegates jumped up and says : "Why, he can't claim that, when I was present and heard him ask permission," and I says, "You are the man he is looking for. He told me some one was present when he asked permission and had heard the whole conversation, and couldn't think who it was, and I am glad to come across you." "Yes," he said, "I was present when Mr. Hall asked permission and heard him grant it." How far the matter went there in regard to the settlement in Texas, I don't know, as I left the following morning. That is as far as I know in relation to the trouble ot Mr. Hall, I have heard it stated by parties who claim to have heard other parties state that Mr. Hall was a competent man. Whether those statements are true or hot, I don't know., Mr. Stewart. I suppose the other branch of the committee have probably made a thorongh examination of that matter. The Witness. Since coming to Saint Louis here, or since this investigation has been going on, I have noticed a man present here, Saturday afternoon, I believe, or yesterday morning, I don't know which, who was present when Mr. Hall asked Cos- toy's permission to be absent from the shop. I have not seen him since. I noticed him here, and know his name. There have also statements' been made by Mr. Mc- Millan, of the Missouri Car and Foundry Company, saying that I was one of a com- mittee that waited on him. I wish to state that that was false. I didn't wait on Mr. McMillan. I was one of a committee of three that waited on Mr. Gardner, the vice- president of the Missouri Car and Foundry Company, I never saw Mr. McMillan in my life to my knowledge. I wouldn't know him if I seen him ; never spoke a word to the man, I waited on Mr. Gardner in reference to the work the Missouri Car and Foundry Company claimed they had a contract for this company. The men down there were very much dissatisfied with doing this work, such work as getting out draft timbers and brake beams, and brake blocks and truss timbers, and dead woods, and such stuff as that— work, to my knowledge, that I do not believe that the Mis- souri Car and Foundry Company ever performed for the Missouri Pacific previous to this trouble. And they felt that they were doing the men on the strike an injury by doing this work, and asked if it could not be stopped, and, if they refused to do it, 438 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■what they would do. I ■was one of that committee that was appointed to wait on Mr. McMillan. We went to Mr. McMillan's office. He wasn't in at the time, and they told ns that he was absent some place, I don't remember whether from the city or where ; but they said that Mr. Ciardner would be In in a short while, and that if ■we would wait that we could see Mr. Gardner ; so we waited there probably fifteen minutes, and Mr. Gardner came in and went into his office, and the clerk said, " That ■was Mr. Gardner now ; if you wish to see him step in," ana we went in and said good afternoon, and he spoke very pleasant to us in making a reply, and says : " Gen- tlemen, what can I do for you." We told him that we was on a little matter of busi- ness that probably migh^i be of interest to him and might like to know. H^ says, " What is your business f" and wc told him. I was the one that was doing the talking, and I told him that I was a striker, and that his company was doing work for the Mis- Bouri Pacific road that was an injury to us ; work that they had never done before. " Why," he says, " do you folks come in here to dictate to me ?" We says : "No, sir ; we don't make any attempt to do anything of the kind. We just simply come up to advise with you, and treat with you. We don't make threats or dictate to you at all." He says : ' ' What is your name ? what is your name f what is your name ?" trying to frighten us, " and by whose authority are you coming up here to dictate to me f" We garve him our names and showed him a letter of instructions we had how to act. So that eased him a little, and he offered us seats, and he says then: "Let us hear all about this matter." So I told him in regard to this work ; that he wss turning out work that had never been done by them before, and that if the company conld by any means or other cease doing this they would oblige us and themselves, too ; it was an injury to us. "Well^" he says, "gentlemen, I am under contract with the Missouri Pacific to furnish this work." We told him we didn't doubt his word, although we had not seen any contract to that efiect. Then he commenced saying he was under contract to famish draw-heads, and all such stuff as that, and then we told him we didn't speak anything in relation to castings or repairing cars or building new cars ; it was only this matter of turning out nuts and bolts and brake-beams and trestle- sills and draft timbers, &c. Well, he says, " We have been furnishing this for the Missouri Pacific for years." I says, " I have been working for the Missouri Pacific quite a number of years, and I have never seen a foot of any of that kind of stuff that has ever been furnished myself." Well, he says, " We have been furnishing it." I says, " It is funny ; I've worked up at Saint Louis." He aays, " We take no notice where we have been sending the work to. We get it out, and they ship it wherever they ptease-. We don't know where it is sent." We asked him if they couldn't stop doing the work, and he says, no ; they couldn't do it ; and says, " I suppose you in- tend to call these men off t" I says, " We have got no authority at all to call the men out." And we didn't call the men out, If there was any call-out made, the men made it themselves. They came out themselves simply because the work couldn't be stopped ; made no threats at all of any kind. I can positively swear to that. He claimed that if they didn't do the work that other companies would. We told him probably that would be so, but we couldn't help that ; it was to our interest, though, to have this work stopped ; if this work could be stopped it would help us materially. He claimed that we had no grievances ; that we went out on a wild- goose chase, and didn't know what we were striking for, or anything of the kind. I Bays, " That may be true, as far as you know ; but Ithink there is a great many that know better. I don't think it looks reasonable to suppose that a lot of men would Btrike and didn't know what they were striking for. ° By the Chairman : Q. Well, now, Mr. Palmer, what yon know state fully. Do you know anything else that occurs to you that relates to this subject f — A. That is about all I could think of. I have an idea that when we telegraphed, at least when we came to Saint Louis, and found that Mr. Hoxie was absent, tnat he had skipped, that he was fol- lowing ■the tactics of Mr. Talmage, who had done the'saiae thing; couldn't learn where he was ; didn't desire to see us. I don't believe he did. As far as the state- ment about the grievance being lost, or Mr. Hoxie never seeing that, is concerned, I don't know nothing, nor whether he ever saw them, or whether Mr. O'Hara ever pre- sented them or spoke to him about them. I don't know anything of the kind ; but I know that the grievances were left there. Q. You have stated the substance of the grievances, have you? — A. Yes, sir; it was no fault of ours that Mr. Hoxie didn't see them. He could have seen them very well, I know. Q. Do you know what pay the sectionmen get on the Missouri Pacific Railway t— A. Yes, sir ; I do. I know the sectionmen, previous to the cut in last September, 1884, were getting $1.25 per day. Whereas from that time on, and up to the present, they are only getting $1.20. Their wages never were restored. Of course they were not the strikers at this point ; neither were the shopmen at Saint Louis strikers. Their wages were restored, however. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 439 Q. I eappose yon know it is claimed — and I think those are the terms of the con- tract as I have seen it — ^that there was a claase that related to the restoration of wages f — A. Related to the strikers J Q. Yes ; well, it does. — A. We had trackmen strikers at diflferent points : we had trackmen strikers at Sedalia ; we had trackmen strikers at Kansas ; the Saint Loais shopmen were not strikers, and still their wages were restored. Policy, I suppose, of the company was the cause of it. Q. Under the rules of your order what action wonld be taken with any man found guilty of violence? — A. What action? Q. Tes ; or have yon any rules on tiiat subject? — A Sir, I don't think there is any of the members, by any of the parties that was in power in this strike, has been coun- seled to do violence of any kind. I know that I have been up in the assembly differ- ent times, and have counseled the men time and time again to use no violence, to do everything that was honorable and fair. Q. (By Gov. Stewaet. ) Now, that we may understaiid exactly what you mean by an act of violence, would you call the forcible stoppage of a freight train an act of violence? — A. I would, sir; that is, if the men clamored around and hammered the engineer; but simply getting up on the engine and asking the engineer not to go out with an engine, I would not call that violence. Q. Would yon call it violence to pull'the pins in a train, or to turn a switch? — A. , Well, I don't know as I would call it violence. Q. I am merely asking you that question to get at your ideas ? — A. No ; unless there was something destroyed or injured. Q. Would your order, under your rules and practices, under such circumstances, where you had struck, would you consider it as a disorderly thing, let alone any ques- tion of violence, that needed the discipline of the order, if a man should interfere with the running of trains in any way, to discourage the running of trains, or try to stop them?-^A. Well, if you would consider pulling pins • Q. Or is it according to the principles of your order to stop the running of trains on the road when you strike ? — A. No, sir ; only as far as withdrawing the force. Q. Can you tell how it happened that at so many points on the road the testimony tends to show that men in your order did that very thing ; did they do it in violation of the principles of the order ? — A. I don't know what happened at other points, and- as far as violence is concerned, I never seen anything of the kind, never seen any vio- lence at all. Q. I am speaking now, not of what is perhaps technically termed a violence, the actual use offeree, but where four or five hundred men , for instance, get on the track and say that they do not propose to have any trains run, and turn switches, and pull pins ; that is not exactly violence, in the common sense of the term, but it is an interference with the running of trains. Now, my point is this, whether your order justifies on the part of the men, or its members, where there is a strike like that on the Missouri Pacific, that sort of policy ? That is to say, do you claim the right to stop business on the road during a strike ? — A. No, sir ; I don't think we claim any right of that kind, nor we don't claim that that is justifiable. Q. Or are the teachings in accordance with the principles of yonr order, what you mean by a strike, simply quitting work yourself ? — A. Quitting work ourselves. Q. Now, I want to ask you another question, there ; whether the men of your or- der claimed that it is right to interfere with the employment of other men who may go in and take the places of these men and stop them ? — A. No, sir ; I do not think they do. Of course, I consider any fair means we use in inducing men to quit work, such as persuading, or coaxing, or anything like that, but of course any violent meas- ures I don't believe in. Q. Well, would you justify the boycotting of people who board them, for example, or calling them opprobrious names in the streets as they pass by ? Do you think that is right ? Is that the general sentiment of your order? — A. No, sir ; it is not. Q. Then, if I understand you, those acts that I have described are acts that are outside the general principles of the order ? — ^A. Outside ; yes, sir. The company have me blacklisted — ^not tha't I am very particular in regard to that respect — but I don't think that they can produce one single bit of evidence against me that I have done, counseled, or was the cause of others doing any acts of violence of any kind. Still, they have blacklisted me, as I understand it, Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. Well, I mean there is an immense black mark across my name. In fact, I have been told there is a larger mark than any other has got. I suppose it is done for the purpose of blacklisting me. I don't know. Q. That is what somebody has told you ? — A. I have got it from pretty good au- thority. I asked that party why that mark was placed across my name; was it be- cause I had done anything or counseled others to do any violence ; and they said no, that they didn'tknow of me doing anything of the kind, and in fact they had always thought well of me ; that I had treated them right and done everything that was fair by them, and they would take me back just as soon 3.s any other man. 440 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 'Q. About the hospital; what do you say about the hospUal ? — A. Well, sir, I have evidence here in my pocket in regard to that hospital fund. I went down to the pay- master's office, I believe 4 or 5 days ago, thinking that my check was down there. I told the paymaster that I believed there was a few dollars coming to me, and that I would like to draw it ; so he looked ovpr the rolls, and says : " There is a time-check up at the office for you." "Is that so? I understood that it was here." He said: " No ; there is a time-check up there." So he studied for a while, and says: " Why couldn't you go up and get that right now, and come down this afternoon and get it cashed ? " I says : " No ; I don't propose to go up on the company's works. As long as I have been escorted, as long as I would have to be escorted under guard, I haven't done anything, and I don't propose to travel under guard, when I have done nothing of the kind." So the following day I went up there, and had the pleasure of going without a guard, and went up to the office, and asked the clerk for my time, and he gave me this check. I looked at it, and found I was charged ^5 cents for hospital fees. I asked him if he would not be kind enough to give me an order on the hospital to get some court-plaster, and he laughed and said "no." And I said, "I don't see why I should be robbed of that 25 cents. I don't think it amounts to much, but I think it is a piece of highway robbery." I have never received over probably |1 worth of med- icine from the company, and then I was told I was afraid to take it, simply on account of not having any confidence in the doctors that was in charge. They were nothing but students ; they were young men ; didn't look to me as though they were over nineteen or twenty years old. I. didn't think they were the class of men that should be employed for that purpose. I understand that there was men that received checks amounting to only |4 or $5, and that a quarter was kept off of them. I suppose if they had only worked a q uarter of an hour or so, that probably the company would have them indebted to them for hos- pital dues. Q. I am requested to«.5k you this question. Do you consider blacklisting a man byarailroad company the same as boycottingby a number of men? — ^A. Ido,Bir; every bit. Q. Perhaps I ought to tell you that the railroad men have testified on that subject that there has been no blacklist on the road, nothing of the sort for more than a year.— A. I think there were some suits decided against the company daring this strike, for blacklisting. I am not positive, but I think I have seen that in the paper; I don't remember the names. Q. Did you ever make any objection to paying hospital dues ? — A. No, sir; I didn't think it would do any good. If I didn't pay them I would have to git. That was the way I felt about it. I thought it was compulsory upon e rery man to pay their hospital fee. Q. Have you a copy of the agreement of March, 1885 ? — ^A. No, sir ; but I think it can be produced ; I have not got one in my possession. Q. You have read it, I presume ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know what its purport is? — A. Well, I don't believe I could tell you; it is something as that all strikers shall be taken back without prejadice, and that the wages shall be restored to all striking employes, and that overtime shall be paid at the rate of time-and-a-half for all overtime. Q. Is there anything in that agreement about discharging the men, if you recol- lect ? — A. No, sir : I don't recollect. Q. You stated that you were a carpenter. — A. Yes, sir. Q. Speaking of your interview with Mr. Bartlett, in connection with the discharge of those men A. Yes, sir. Q. (Continued.) I suppose your official duties did not bring you in contact with those men, so as to observe how they did their work : those that were in another de- partment, yoa did not know? — ^A. Yes, I was in another department. Q. Do yon think you were as good a judge of their qualifications as Mr. Bartlett? — A. Well, I have seen two of the men personally myself drunk right at work. Q. I don't speak of their habits, but I refer to their skill and industry while they ■were at work in the shops. Do you know anything about that, whether they were competent workmen? — A. No, sir; I do not. I know they couldn't be when they were under the influence of liquor most of the time. One of them I know was under the influence of liquor I might say all the time he was in the employ of the shops. You couldn't go within 10 feet of him but what you could smell it. Q. He must have drunk uncommon bad whisky- — A. He did. Q. Did you report these employes you saw drunk to any official of the road ?— A No, sir ; I did not. The same man was sent out on an engine, and was just as ftall of drink as any one could be when he went out on the engine. He was sent out as » fireman. _Q. Do you claim, as a Knight of Labor, and is that part of your system, in dealing with employers officially, that you have a right to determine what men shall be dis- charged and what men shall be retained ? — A. No, sir. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 441 Q. Or does that belong to the employerf — ^A. I didn't insist that he shonld dis- charge those men at all ; I didn't insist. Q. Then, what yon said with reference to the discharge of those six men was hy way of advice ? — A. I claimed if the managers of the road knew they had that class of men in their employ that they would discharge them in preference to discharging good men. Q. The point is, you say yon did not claim that as a right — ^to dictate what men shonld be discharged T — A. I didn't insist at all. Q. In fact, the railroad company yielded that point, and did not discharge any- body t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Although they had not any work for them they kept them because they didn't want to have any trouble ? — A. As fax as work for them was concerned, they always seemed to be busy, both before and after this occurrence ; I didn't see that' they were idle at all. Q. I suppose it is true, that at the time of this meeting at Texas that you attended, at the time of your conversation with Mr. Hall, I don't know anything about the date ; at least I have forgotten it if I did, but that road, at that time, had gone into the hands of the receivers, had it not?— A. So I understood. Q. I am requested to ask you this question : Did you ever advise the stoppage of trains on the Missouri Pacific system anywhere J — A. I advised it in this way, by withdrawing our forces. Q. That is not what I mean ; I mean did yon advise the stoppage of trains after you went out? Of course you withdrew from the service? — ^A. If you will just allow me to explain, I will tell you how I advised it. Q. Very well. — A. We furnished a certain number of men, and allowed them to stay there; at least they staid there without permission. They would be out, if it was desired that they should come out. It hurt them to stay in — to see that all repairs was done on passenger engines and kept in proper order, and also on aU passenger trains, that they should be attended to. We had a certain force of men detailed for that purpose, and I advised the withdrawal of those men, for the purpose of stopping everything, if we conid stop it in that manner. Q. Were yon present at any time during that period, when they were trying to move trains here in the yard, and did not succeed f — A. No, I was not. Q. (Continued). Andinterfered with; were you present? — A. No, sir; I was not pres- ent all the time. I was down there different times Q. At any time ? — A. Yes, sir ; at different times I didn't Q. Did you exert any influence with these men, or try to persuade trains to be made up and go out without any interference ? — A. No, sir. Q. What was your position in the Enights of Labor? — A. I was a member of the local executive board ; that was since this trouble occurred, my position in the dis- trict, the second highest office in the district. Q. Did you see any one put the United States flag under the train here ? — A. Ko, sir; I did not. Q. Do you know James Mangan ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. I know a John Mangan. Judge POETis. I guess it is John. Q. Here are some questions that are suggested that I will ask : What right did you have to wait on Mr. Gardner? — A. What right? Q. Yes, you were not in his employment ; you had nothing to do with his business. What right had yon to go there ? — A. I went there at the request of men in his shops. Q. At their request ? — A. Yes, sir ; they came np and made that request to ns. I had nothing to do whatever with calling the men out of their shops. I didn't go down there that evening when they had a meeting ; wasn't near there ; made no radicEkl speeches of any kind whatever. Q. Do you know of any other Enights of Labor that were there and made speeches ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. I conldn't positively say that they had a meeting ; don't know anything about it. Q. It appeared here in evidence that some outside Enights of Labor were there ; I don't know who they were. You don't know anything about it ? — A. No, sir; Idonot. Q. You spoke about a letter of instructions that you had when you went there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you get that letter of instructions from the men employed in that establish- ment or from the Enights of Labor ? — ^A. Well, I got it from — you might say, tho Knights of Labor, yes. It was merely credentials, merely showing that I was a mem- ber of the board. Q. Well, then, you went there under some sort of instructions ftom the Enights of Labor, didn't you ? — A. Well, I thought it was proper to have something to show, that I didn't go there with my own free will. It was not any authority to take any action in regards to calling out the men, or anything of that kind. While I was there, Mr.' Gardner stated also that he was running the shop, and they were not actually paying 442 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the interest on the money they had invested. They were simply running it just to help the men along. They had a good class of men, and desired to keep them together, and that they paid their hands hetter wages than any similar establishment in the country, and that they would probably have shut np may be some of those times, and go up to Cambridge City, Ind., and open up shops; that they couldn't get labor cheap enough here. I told them that I thought it was a generous feeling for them to run their shops for the benefit of the men, and that the men ought to thank them for being so considerate. ,, .ij.,, Q. Whd called the men out then?— A. I don't know, sir; I couldn't tell you. Q. Didn't you recommend to the men that they go out?— A. No, sir, I did nothmg of the kind. , , • -i-..^ ^ Q. Who did you refer to when you spoke of a Mr. Talmadge ? Did you mention a Mr. Talmadge ?— A. I think so ; I did mention his name. Q. Who was he?— A. He is general manager of the Wabash road. Q. Did yoii say that Mr. Talmadge skipped off to avoid meeting the men?— A. That was the general understanding, yes, sir. i, ,^ j. , Q. What reason had you to believe that?— A. Because the men couldn't get no in- terview with him. They said they couldn't find him. Mr. Hoxie certainly knew of our coming, and he answered our telegram when we asked for passes, stating that we were coming to see him. Q. How do you know that the trackmen were paid $1.35 prior to March, 1885?— A. We were told so personally. I think we can bring them np here on the stand. Q. Told so by whom ? — A. By the trackmen themselves. Q. Do you r6member any man who told you so?- A. Yes, sir; I produced a list of the names to Mr. Litchman. Q. Do yon mean by $1.25 that was the general pay?— A. I mean that was what they got paid here in the y^rds. Q. In the yards ? — A. Yes, sir. I don't know what they got paid out on the road. I understood that they only got $1.20. I know during the winter months here that our trackmen only worked three days a week. At least those that were Knights of Labor I know only worked three days a week. Q. What did you say, Mr. Palmer, when the question of stopping the trains was dis- cussed, or advocated in the meetings of the Knights of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir; only as far as withdrawing our force that we had delegated to take charge of trains. Q. If the subject of interfering with trains, that that should not be allowed, was discussed you were there and would have heard it ? — A. That was not discussed at all. Violent measures of all kinds was denounced. Once in a while a man might get up and advocate such and such things, but he was immediately shut down; we wouldn't listen to it. Q. Was the subject of preventing men from working during the strike discussed?— A. Yes, sir ; persuading them all we could. Q. That was a subject that was discussed ? — A. It was advised that we use our in- fluence in that direction, and pleading with them. Q. How long have you been in the company's service ? — ^A. Since May, 1880. Q. Six years?— A. Yes, sir; I think I started on the 10th day of May, 1880. I have done various work in the line of carpenter work since I have been employed there. I have the confidence of my superior officers as being a good and competent work- man. I believe they will give me credit for that. Q. Was this hospital system established when you commenced work ? — A. Yes, sir Q. Then you understood it, before you went in, didn't you ? — ^A. I didn't understand it until it was ktpt out of my money. Of course I very soon found out and complained, and they said that that was the custom. They kept 50 cents out ; only the last couple of years, I think, they decreased it. Q. I will ask your personal judgment on that subject, whether some such system— perhaps this system ought to be modified some — but whether a general hospital sys- tem on a railroad, situated on a road such as this is, wisely administered, is not, on the whole, an advantage to the employ^ ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think so, if it is dope with a philanthropic feeling. If it is done to make money Q. Suppose it appeared that during the last year the railroad has paid $20,000 out of its own treasury in order to make up the deficit in carrying on the operation of such a system, it would not seem as if they made any money out of it. That is the financial exhibit made here. — A. I can't see where it is any charitable feeling towards their men in establishing the hospital ; why go to any extra expense in keeping it up f Q. If you were employed on the road you would not recommend, would yon, that the hospital system should be abolished, would you ? If you were to recommend anything, you would say, perhaps, there ought to he some changes made ? — ^A. Well, I don't know ; it is very good probably for men that have got no friends. Of course they received some kind of treatment. Q. Of course there are some men that never are sick, who probably would be taxed LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 443 for the general benefit ? — A. As a generfil thing men didn't care about going to the hospitals — men that had any homes. Q. No, unless they had some surgical opera4}ion performed, or something of that sort ? — A. If they could get a doctor, I don't think they did. JAMES MURPHY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: By Mr. Burnes : Question. State your name, age, place of residence, and occnpation. — Answer. lam twenty-two years old ; live here in Saint Louis ; machinist's apprentice. Q. How long have you been in the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany ? — A. Off and on since I was fifteen years old I have been with the company — sixteen years old rather. Q. Are you in the service now 1 — A. Not since the 6th of March. Q- What wages had you been receiving? — A. Up till the last month I worked I got $1.60 a day ; I got a raise the month before we went out ; a raise of 20 cents a day. Q. What kind of work did you perform f — A. Machinist's apprentice, sir. Q. You say thai since you were fifteen years of age you have been working for this company off and on ; how much oft' and how much on? — A. I quit working for the compaBy and went to the Vulcan Steel Works to work for about a year and a half. I left there and went to Sedalia at the time they shut down, and staid down there till last October, and came down here to work. Q. Aie you receiving as much wages as other employes of your class t — A. Well, I am here in this shop. Other shops ? No, sir, I am not. Q. Have you ever made any complaint with regard to the price that was paid youT — A. No, sir, I have not j other boys has ^ I have never. Q, Have you any grievance of any kind against the Missouri Pacific Railway or its officers ? — ^A. When about the 1st of March the foreman out there gave me a job of work to do on the machine, I started to do it, and he came around and told me that wasn't the way I should do it. He says, " Do it right ; do it this way." I says, " If I do it the other way It will be better." He says, " Do it the way I told you," and I started to do it, and then, after I started to do the woifc, he says, "You fool ; don't you know that is the wrong way to do that?" I says, " I wanted to do it the other way," and he says I didn't, and I says I did. He kept on dictating, and I told him he was a liar; so I went down to Mr. Nolaii, and he seen me talking to Mr. Nolan, and he went and reported me to the general foreman. Q. What did the general foreman do f — A. He talked to me real nice. And told me it was the first time I ever had any fuss in the shop. Q. He didn't discharge you f — A. No, sir ; he didji't discharge me. Q. Have you any other cause of grievances against the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of your own knowledge of any mistreatment on the part of any of the employes by the company, or any of its officers ? — A. There was some boys worked a good while 'in the shops, been there three and four years, getting $1.20 a day. Q. How many boys were there that have worked three and four years who are only getting $1.20 ? — A. I don't know how many, just as they told me. Q. In this matter of disagreement that you had with the foreman, wasit not his right to judge how the work was to be done, and to direct you how he would have it done T — A. Yes, it was; but then, after he had told me, and I started to do it his way, to curse me — ^I don't think it was right for him to curse me. Q. Who was Mr. Nolan? — A. One of the machinists in the shop. Q. He was not in authority over you, was he? — A. No, sir; he was a machinist. Q. As soon, then, as you found he had mistreated you, you told it to the foreman, and the foreman treated you fairly? — A. Yes; when the assistant foreman seen me talking to Mr. Nolan he went down to the general foreman, and reported me to the general foreman. , Q. Do you mean that Mr. Nolan was the assistant foreman? — ^A. No, sir; he was a machinist. Q. Mr. Nolan was simply an employ^ in the machine shop ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you go to him ? Are you an apprentice ? — you being an apprentice, he had a right to direct you, I suppose. What position does Mr. Nolan hold in the order of the Knights of Labor? — A. He was grievance committee. Q. A member of the grievance committee ? Mr. Dblay. Of the shop or the Knights of Labor ? Witness. Of the shop. It wasn't of the Knights of Labor but the shop. Q. You were a member of the order ? — ^A. I was. Q. You went to him, then, because he was one of the committee on grieyaneeg< A. Yes, sir. 444 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. W. McADAMS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as foUo-ws : By Mr. Bukneb: Question. State your name, age, and place of residence.— Answer. My name is W. McAdams ; and I am twenty-two years old ; and am living in Saint Louis. Q. Occupation. — A. I am a blacksmith's apprentice. Q. How long were you in the service of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company t— A. Three years the 10th of January. Q. What wages were you receiving prior to the 6th of March T— A. One dollar and ten cents a day. , i, v Q. What wages did you receive when you first started in the employ of this com- pany? — A. One dollar. Q. i)id you ever apply for an increase of wages »— A. Well, I applied se vera! tmies, time and again ; but all I was told was, that they couldn't give it. Q. To whom did you apply t — A. To the foreman of the blacksmith shop,, and to Mr. Bartlett. . Q. What did they give as a reason for not raising your wages I— A. The toreman he says, several times, that he couldn't possibly do it. Their pay-day in February there was about 8 or 9 of the apprentices waited on Mr. Bartlett, and asked him for a raise, and he says that he would have to see Mr. Sibley about it, so he told us to wait, and see what answer he got from Mr. Sibley. We waited, but we never got no answer from either Mr. Bartlett or Q. He kept you waiting, then, under the belief that he was going to report it to M% Sibley ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the class of work that you were doing In March *— ;A. Work that regular blacksmiths— journeyman blacksmiths— done, regular blacksmith's work. I worked at the fire for about 2 years and 9 months. Q. Well, had you learned the trade pretty thoroughly ? — ^A. I had learned it pretty well. 1 Q. Was your pay raised in January or February, prior to March T — A. January and February ? This January t Q. Yes, sir — A. No, sir. It was raised about six months after I went to work in the shop, and I never got a raise since. There last October, 1883, I think it was, that raise of 10 cents was cut away. All the men got cut ; I was cut ; all the ap- prentices were out, too. And then, after that strike in 1883, when the men received the cut back, why we got the 10 cents raise again. Q. That was, then, just a restoration of the wages you had received before t — A. Yes, sir. Q. And since then your wages have never been raised t — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You are a member of the Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir; I went to the general foreman several times, and he would put me off with promises, and the last time he said he had no authority, said he didn't have no authority ; said that he didn't have any control over us ; said that we would have to go to see Bartlett. Q. How long were you a Knight of Labor ? — A. I guess about a couple of years. Q. Were you ever instructed in a lodge of the Knights of Labor, or an assembly of the Knights of Labor, to violate or transgress the laws of the country ? — A. No, sir j we were instructed just the opposite ; to obey the laws. Q. After the strike of March 6th, did you take part in any of the efforts that were made to stop trains and derail them ? Just state what you did in that direction, if you desire to do so. You are not bound to state it. — A. I didn't stop any trains. Q. You say you didn't stop any? — ^A. I didn't try to. ' Q. If yon did any act of intimidation or violence you are at liberty to state it if you wish. If you didn't you can say so. — A. Well, I was going down the track, and I was knocked down by one of Furlong's men, and Lhad a warrant out for him, and he got a counter warrant out for me, but he was fined and I was acquitted. That'i all I know. W. McFAELAND, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnxs). State your name, age, place of residence, and occupa- tion. — Answer. My name is W. McFarland ; I live in Saint Louis ; I am twenty-two years old, and I did work for the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Q. In what department ? — A. Round-house. Q. How long were you at work for that companv prior to the time of your quit- ting ? — A. Something over three years. Q. What wages did you receive ? — A. $1.40 a day. Q. How many hours did you work? — A. I worked ten hours in the day time. Q. Have you any cause of grievance as an employ^ of the company ? — A. I have. I have worked all day, and been called at night to work, and I would have to be on duty twelve horns at night, and receive ten hours' pay for it. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH Am) WEST. 445 Q. Did you report this grievance to anybody ! — A. Well, I spoke to the boss about it, and he says : "I don't suppose yon worked much." Q. Yon complained to your boss, did you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you carry the complaint to any one above him ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. Did he promise you that he would look into it, and give yon redress ? — A. He said It was not customary to give them time and a half. Q. How much of this extra work were you called upon to do ? — A. Well, I don't know exactly. It was Ifist summer, when they were short of men at different times. I have been called on ; different times I have been called on, and on Saturday evening we received — supposed to get pay for an hour's extra work we had to do every Satur- day evening, and we was getting a day in the month for working that extra hour every Saturday evening. And they took oflf half of the day, and just gave us half a day for the extra hour we worked. Q. Have you any other grievance or cause of complaint against the company? — A. I had to work every Sunday fov ten hoars' pay. They only give me ten hours. Q. Anything else ?-.-A. No, sir; I believe not. , Q. What kind of work did you have to do on Sunday ? — A. Taking care of engines; different kinds. Sometimes we was putting them in the shop, and sometimes we was cleaning them. Q. Is that the same work that you did on other days of the week ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you what they call an engine-wiper? — A. Yes, sir. (Judge Portis here asked Mr. Burues to ask the witness if he was a Knight of Labor, stating that it was with a view of connecting him, as a Knight of Labor, with the recent disturbances, and saying that he had the names of the parties engaged in that work. Mr. Bnrnes, after conferring with Mr. Stewart, the other member of the com- mittee present, replied that he and his colleagues were of the opinion that, where the question is as to the conduct of the men with regard t(> violence, or striking, or any- thing of that sort, the question has not heretofore been asked. And the question was, therefore, not put to the witness as requested. ) E. BURNS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuRNES). Mr. Burns, state your name, age, place of residence, and occupation. — Answer. E. Burns; twenty-three years old; occupation, black- smith's helper. Q. What grievances have you had against the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. I went to work for the Missouri Pacific Railway Company the 28th day of Febru- ary, 1884, and 1 went to work in the blacksmith' shop, and I got a job helping at the furnace, with the pay of $1.50, and the foreman left me there a couple of months, and put me at regular fire-helping, which pays $1.65 — 15 cents more than the job I was working at before — and I worked there a week at that job, and I don't know whether the foreman had raised me or not, and I met him one day, and I says : " Mr. Mitchell, you was to raise me ; now, the others get |1.65, and I'm entitled to it." He told me yes; he had done raised my wages; and I told him all right, and I was satisfied.' Arid I worked there some time. I worked until the 28th of Septem- ber, 1884. That was when the big lay-off was, laid off all the men, and I was one of them men, and I got $1.65 up to that lay-off, and left the city then. I came back again in 1885, and struck the same foreman again for a job last spring a year ; audi went to work again for him this spring a year on the 20th of April, and he gave me the same job I was working on before at the furnace, where he paid me $1.50, and I worked on that same job, and he left me there till July, and took me away again, and put me at regular firing, where they paid $1.65. They also paid $1.65 for that work, and he paid me only $1.50 where I oi^ght to have got $1.65 a day, and I worked at that right along until this late trouble, on regular firing. I asked him for an increase one day this summer, and he told me he couldn't give me any more. He told rae that was all I was worth. I told him. How was that ? I was getting $1.65 before. Well, he told me he couldn't give me any more ; that was all the satisfaction he gave me. Q. You didn't carry the matter to any oflSoer above him ? — A. No,' sir. Q. Is there anything else that you know of? — A. That is all that I know of. Q. Were there any other persons engaged in the same kind of work that you were ? — A. Yes, sir ; fellows working right along side of me, doing the same work, got 15 cents a day more than I did. Q. Did they do more than yon did ? — A. I done the same work ; they didn't do any more than I did. Q. Did yon do your work as well as they did ? — A. Certainly I did. Q. Did you call the attention of the foreman to it? — ^A. Yes, sir; that is what I told him, because it was the first time I worked for him that I got $1.65, and when I came back the second time be paid me only $1.50, 15 cents less than the first time I worked for him. 446 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. W. H. McGEE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Mr. Buenes). State your name, place of residence, and occupation.— Answer. Name is W. H. McGee ; I live at Saint Louis; by occupation a blacksmith. Q. How long were you in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Company?— A. I, Was in the employment about twenty- seven months — two years and three months. Q. When did you quit their employment ?— A. I went out of the shops the 6th day of last March. Q. Have you any personal grievance against the company ? — A. I have. Q. State what they are.— A. Well, I was doing the work that a blacksmith before me was doing, who got ^.7.5, or something near there, a day, and when be left, or was discharged, why I got the work, and I got |2.05 a day for it, and I asked the fore- man if he couldn't do a little better by me. I didn't ask him for as much as the other man was getting, but I thought I ought to have a little more money. He said he couldn't do nothing for me. He said he couldn't raise the wages, and so that settled the thing there. Then, there is a blacksmith worked right along side of me, who was doing inferior work to what I was doing, and he was getting |e.40 a day. And I told him about that, and asked him how that was Well, the only comfort and con- solation I got out of him was, he says, in cases of a lay-off, that man will have to go and yon will stay. WeU, that didn't help the matter at all. Q. How long did they keep yon at $2.05 a day, when you ought to have had more f — A. Well, I have been working about a year at $2.05. Q. And you think you ought to have had more ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think I ought to have had $2.25 or $2.50, because what I learned I didn't learn at the Missouri Pacific I went there because circumstances compelled me to take the job. Q. Were you doing as much and as good work as the man who got $2.40? — ^A. I think the foreman will bear me out in saying that I done as much, if I didn't do more. Q. What is the practice or rule, if there be any rule, with regard to discharging and hiring — say they discharge a man who is receiving $2.50 a day and employ a man to fill his place, who can do the work just as well, do they pay $2.50 ? — A. No, sir; it has been the practice right straight along the last year, since the contract with the employes of the Missouri Pacific, when a blacksmith quits they always put a small- price man in his place and works him at the same work. Q. Do they put him in his place, or do they promote some one already in the line of promotion and hire some one at the bottom of the list ? — ^A. If he is an apprentice, of course, it is promotion ; but if not, it is not for promotion ; it is a matter of dollars and cents. If a man that knows his trade comes in there he can't get the class of work he can do. He has to take just the class of work they give him. Q What length of time do you regard as necessary in the blacksmith shop for an apprentice to become a good mechanic ? — A. I think a man that has got any get-up about him will make a pretty good blacksmith in about three years ; less time, prob- ably. Q. Are you acquainted with the apprentices in that shop ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. To such an extent so that you can tell us how they have progressed and how they have performed their duties ?— A. My friend who just preceded me here, Mr. McAdams, has been working alongside of me a year and over. He has been working in the shops I have been in about two years, ever since I have been there. I know I have had several conversations with him, and from the class of work he would do and the wages he was receiving, I didn't think he was being paid a great deal. There was other parties in there — apprentices — that was getting more wages — 10 to 15 cents a day more than he was — when they come in there some time afterwards. Q. Were you engaged in assisting the stopping of trains, intimidating men from working, &c. ? —A. No, sir ; I was not ; I never stopped no trains, and I don't remem- ber but once I had a conversation with a gentleman that had made application down there lor work and I told him how the situation was, and that is aboat as far as it went. As far as using any violence was concerned, orliarting him or anything, I never done nothing of the sort. Q. What reasonhad you in your own mind for going out on the 6th of March ? — ^A. My reasons were personal ; then I had others, besides, for the section men. That is one reason. I done a good deal of Work for the section men, such as dressing picks and tamping-bars and switch-rods, &o., for them ; and when they would bring work in the shops we would often pass a word or so, " How is times ?" or something of that sort. In the winter time they told me how hard they were pushed and how their time was cut down and what they was making, and said they were only getting about $1.10 a day, as I understood, and was working about three days a week ; and of course that is the way I got acquainted with their situation, and I came out in sympathy with them. I thought they ought to have more. Q. With a view of helping them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You didn't go out, then, because of any consideration in regard to yooi own pay?— A. Sir? LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 447 Q. You didn't go out because of their failure to pay you as much as you thought you were entitled to t — A. No ; I didn't go out altogether on that account. I thought if I could have my own adjusted it would all be very well, and 1 would be very much pleased, and have theirs also. Q. What influence over you did the order of executive board of District Assembly 101 have in regard to going out? — A. Well, I thought, as I understood it from what the grievances were, and the way they had presented this Ihmg to Mr. Hoxie and all, that they had been mistreated, and I thought they should be treated with a little more respect, and I went out to adjust matters, and that was another object. Q. Would you have gone out if the order had not been issued by District Assembly 101? — A. Well, I don't Know; I had a pretty strong idea of going out myself, but not asking anyone else to go out. I contemplated something of the sort, but I don't know whether I would have done it or not. Q. Well, could an individual, single-handed, accomplish anything for the good of himself or anybody else, by simply going out, when he needed the employment ?-'A. Well, if I had gone out single-handed, I would have went ont for the good of myself, because there would have been no use going out otherwise, it is very reasonable. Q. You say that going out by yourself would not have tended to influence th^ set- tlement of grievances in favor of anybody else ? — ^A. No, sir ; I never made my griev- ances known to the committee, anyways official, because I didn't want to start any trouble of that sort. I thought if we could adjust matters otherwise, it would be best for everybody around. I had a pretty good idea of what would result in case of defeat. Q. Did you think that by going out single-handed and alone you could not have got your own grievances adjusted ?— A. No, sir ; I didn't think I could. I don't think I could bring that result about at all. Q. Mr. Stbwaet. That is too obvious. Of course it wouldn't do anything of the kind. Mr. BuBlTES. Governor, you mustn't hold me responsible for everything that has been asked here. Many of these questions do not emanate from me. JACOB ZIMMERLY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burnes). State your age, Jacob. — Answer. Jacob Zimmerly ; I am nineteen years old and six mouths ; living in Saint Louis ; occupation, machinists' apprentice. Q. How long have you been working for the Missouri Pacific Road ? — A. Four years. The first two years I worked there I worked for $1 a day ; then I kept asking Mr. Bartlett for a raise, and he says he couldn't do it; I says — he says I would have to run my chances. Then I got a raise of 10 cents, and I had that a short while, and was cut down again, and got a dollar a day again, and I got that raise back again, and I then had that $ L.IO a day for a long time, and I asked if there wasn't a show for another raise, and he says no. I believe there was a new foreman come in, named Howard, and he came around and asked all the apprentices how long they were with their employers, and one thing and another, and we told him, and he says, " Well," he says, "I will see what I can do for you boys, if I can't get you the raise." All right. A month passed along, and no raise, and we asked him no raise yet ? And kept on that way about four months. So at last we asked him again, and he says he hasn't got the power, neither has Mr. Bartlett, to give us a raise. So a couple of us apprentice boys went up and had a little conversation with Mr. Bartlett, and he says he would see what ho could do for us. Then I got 10 cents raise ; that made $1.20, and it seemed to me that that wasn't enough, because I was doing a man's work, and I have got lots of proof for it, too. There was men there before I come to that machine-shop, some was getting a dollar and eighty-five as machinists, and didn't turn out half as much work as I did ;, and I asked him if he couldn't do any better than that, because it was a big family, and we couldn't hardly support it, and he told me no, that was the best he could do. Q. What wages were you getting on the 6th of March. — A. $1.20. Q. You quit work on thd6th of March, did you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of any other grievances against the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company ? — ^A. Well, I thought while the rest of the men was doing it, I might as well go out, and that one will help another, because I knew there was men besides me getting low wages. Q. You spoke of a large family. You don't mean that you have a large family ? — A. No, sir ; but there is eight of ps, and my mother has been sick, now, over seven months, and still laying in bed yet. Q. Are they dependent upon you for support ? — A. Well, my father is only making $1.35 a day. Q. You contribute, then, to the support of your mother, do you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you take any part in stopping trains ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't. 448 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Or did you ever attempt to intiniidate any of the men or employes 'of tlie road to stop them from working ? — A. No, sir. Q. What was the reason bearing upon you to induce you to strike on the 6th of March ?— A. Well, I thought to myself, it was no use for me, myself, to he staymg in there, seeing the rest of the men going out, I thought it would not do for me to stay in and hare all the men down on me just on account of staying, when I thought if I would turn out, and all turn out, it might happen to do us some benefit. Q. Had yoQ heard of an order on the part of the executive committee of Assembly 101 for the men to go out f — A. Well, I have seen the notice when the day was to come, and I went out. Q. Did that influence you to go out ? — A. Yes, sir ; it did. Q. If that order had not been given, you probably would not have gone out, would yon? — A. No, sir ; not as long as the rest of the men wouldn't have went out. Q. Did you think it would be beneficial to yourself in the settlement of your own grievance? — A. No, sir; I don't think I could do that. JAMES BARRETT, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Burneb). State your name, age, place of residence, and occu- pation. — A. I am a trackman, I live on 17th and Dawson street. Q. What were your wages on the 6th of March last ? — A. The 6th of March last was $1.20 at three days a week. Q. Just go on and tell us the grievance that you may have against the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. Well, winter before last we worked at a dollar and twenty-five until March, and then they cut us down to $1.20, and then this winter they cut us down to three days a week at the rate of $1.20. I thought that was very small, and then we had to go out any hour of the night, when the weather was snow- ing and blowing away, at 12 and 1 o'clock, to repair the track, no matter how it blew, we was ready to'help them through when they broke down or when rails broke. We was ready at any moment to go to repair them. I thought that was very small to do that and board yourself. Q. What was your pay when you were called out at night f — A. We got, if we was the whole n'ght out, we got a day and a half for it, at the rate of $1.20. Q. And when you were called out for less than the whole night? — A. Well, we got at the rate of that. We would be paid accordingly. And when the weather was bad, and we kept on working for four days a week, we had to lay over then a day or so, to make up for that, except the weather was too bad. That was in March and February when the weather was bad. There was a great many more of the boys that worked with me last winter that were around here, but they are not here. Q. What were the wages you were receiving in September, 1884 ? — A. We got $1.50, and then we were cut down to $1.40, and from there to $1.30, and went on down to $l.a5, and from that to $1.20 ; kept on eoming down all the time. This was the worst cut of all — this winter. Q. When, in the spring of 1885, there was an adjustment of matters between the railroad company audits employes, were your wages' raised to the same extent tliat they were before the strike of 188.5 ?— A. No, sir ; the rates kept on ,all the same; no matter how the wages is the rents was all the same. In the little place we are in, a little reom and a kitchen, we had to pay |6. Q. I was not asking you about rents. You were at work for this company in 1884, were yon not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You remember that in 1884 there was a strike in December, by which the rail- road company agreed to restore the wages that had been paid prior to the time after March, 1885. Were your wages restored to the previous rates ? — A. No, sir. Q. How much did it lack ?— A. It lacked 5 cents of it at that time. Q. Did you mention the matter to your foreman ? — A. No, sir; we didn't. Q. Have you never complained of it to any officer of the company ? — A. No, sir; we didn't. Of course we was expecting every day to have our wages raised, but they didn't do so. Q. Of course yonr wages were subject to the hospital tax ?— A. Well, we was pay- ing 25 cents a month out of this $1.20 a day and three days a week. There was 25 cents kept out of that for hospital fees. Q. Did you ever get any benefit from the hospital ?— A. No, sir ; I got abit of stick- ing plaster to put on my finger that I got hurt when we were unloading ties ; that was airi got, about 5 cents' worth, I think, and they dressed it up a couple of times, I guess, up there. Q. (By Mr. Stewaet.) You work here in the yatd at Saint Louis ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You didn't strike in 1885 ?— A. Well, I don't know of about striking. Q. Did you strike in the strike of 1885, last spring ?— A. No, sir ; I didn't. No, sir; I wasn't in that. Q. A year ago this spring ?— A. No, sir; I was not. LABOR TEOUELES, IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 449 Q. (By Mr. Burkes.) How many hours constitute a day's work? — A. Ten hours, from seven to six we had to work. Q. How many hours did you work t — A. We worked ten hours a day. Q. When you worked over ten hours did yon get pay for the overtime ? — A. Yes, if we was called out after 6 o'clock, or 12 o'clock, or Sunday, we got paid for that> Yes, sir ; if we was called out after 6 o'clock. Sometimes we was kept after 6 o'elock when the work was heavy, and we got nothing for that. Q. How many days did you work in February? — A. Well, I couldn't say exactly. I don't know exactly how much I did work in February. I could find out from mjr foreman. Q. Do you know how much money you received for that month's work? — A. Yes^ sir ; I think I do — close on to it ; I think it was $22 and some cents. Q. How many days did you work in March ? — A. Six days in March. Q. Where were you at work in 1884 t- A. I was working out on the track at La- clede Junction, going out to the lake, and at other places on the branch from Chel tenham to Carondelet. Q. Where have you been since ? — A. I have been working here with Mr. Hatfielcfi two years and a half. Q. Have you worked under more than one foreman? — A. No, sir ; not since I cam» here in the yard. Q. Within the last year? — A. No, sir ; not in the last two years. Q. Who was your foreman ? — A. Mr. Hatfield. Q. Were you assisting in stopping trains or in any acts of violence to the property- of the company ? — A. No, sir ; I was not. Q. What was the reason of your going out on the 6th of March ? — A. Well, w* thought we ought to get a little more wages some way or other. I thought we ought to get as much as the Bridge and Tunnel Company. They were paying |1.40 and w* were only getting $1.20, and they were on full time and we were on half time, so L thought we ought to have the same. Q. You thought probably by means of striking that you would increase your wages? — A. Well, I thought I would ; I never asked. Q. Did you go out because of a certain order issued by District Assembly 101 ? — A. No, sir; I didn't see any order to the trackmen by anyof the officers of that com- mittee. Q. Would you have gone out if that order had not been made ? — A. Yes, sir, w» should. I think thah was the calculations of all the trackmen to go out on a strikft- in the spring for a little more wages than they was getting. Q. You think you would have gone out even if that order had not been issued? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) When you speak of all the trackmen, do yon mean the track- men in the yard or on the whole line of the road ?^A. The trackmen in the yard or all over the road is j ust the same. I think there is some here in the yard gets 10 cents more than tlie men out on the road. They have a good deal of work, and are called out here at night, on account of more switching and break-downs, and; these men are getting 10 cents more than out on the road. Q. Do you mean to say that all of the trackmen were thinking of going out if ther«r had not been a strike ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. How happens it that most of th^m did not go out ? — A. I think all of them went out. Q. Oh, no. They went out in the yard, but they didn't go out on the road. — A. I think they went out all over the road, sir, from here to Kansas City. Yes, I under- stood they all (^nit work at about the same time from here to Kansas City. Q. All those about here, you mean ? — A. From Saint Louis to Kansas City, on the line of the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Q. I suppose you don't know how many went out ? — A. Well, I don't know, but I understood that every foreman's gang hadn't a man on it. Q. Do you know why it is that yon worked only three days in the week ? — A. Well,, I don't know why that is. ' Q. Was it not because there was not work enough to keep you employed the full time ? — A. Work enough ? Yes, sir ; there was work enough for a hundred right along,, let alone the six men that was on. They could work twice as many men and hav» just as much as they could do. Q. Then you understand that there was plenty of work, but the railroad company would not let you work more than three days in the week ? — A. Yes, sir ; there was plenty of work, because there wa» breaking down every day, and the track was left in bad repair, and there wasn't men enough to do it in the few minutes they was on;; ' they couldn't do it. Q. (By Mr. Bornbs.) Were yon allowed time for the period that intervened in trav- eling from one point to another, or did you do any such traveling ? — A. Well, we went 3984 CONG 29 450 l'aboe teoubles in the sou'th and west. out here a few miles, about to Cheltenham. We we'-e laying some track this summer. Of course they took us out there to do that work. Q. Did they give you time from the time you started to work ? — A. Yes, sir; they gave us our day for "it. We left here at 7 o'clock in the morning, and it was after 6 when we was getting in in the evening, and sometimes by leaving a little earlier we would work half an hour at dinner, in order that we could get through to he coming in when the train would be coming in here at 6, or something like that — as close as we could. D. H. HARTLEY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Buknes). Please state your name, age, residence, and occupa- tion. — Answer. My name is D. H. Hartley ; thirty-one years of age ; residence. Saint Louis ; occupation, brakeman. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific ?— A. I think it is four years this last November. Q. In what department ? — ^A. Transportation, and also in yard work, yard depart- ment. Q. Have you any cause of complaint or grievance against the railroad company!— A. We did have, before this strike. Q. What had you on the 6th of March ? — A. There was some circulars issued in 1885 agreeing to pay us overtime, the same as engineers and firemen. After this cir- cular was issued and signed by Mr. Hagar, there was another order issued that countermanded that — that circular calls for from the time we was called, we was to get 20 cents an hour overtime, if we was on the road over twelve hoars, and so that was a cause, and you know you was called for only two trains at night, and if we went to work at 6.25 in the evening, and didn't go out till 10 o'clock at night, we didn't get no overtime. Most of the men live so far from the depot that there would be no object in going home again, getting a train down not till 8.50, and then irom the time you commence till you register at the office, it was three hours lying in the yard, and you have got to be twelve hours on the road before you get any overtime, and you didn't get any pay for anything less than the honr, and if you was on the road two hours and fifteen minutes, you only got paid for two hours, and if you were on the road one hour and fifty minutes you only got one hour extra time. Q. Was there much of that sort of thing done F— A. Well, we didn't get in a great deal of overtime, only in this way, and then yon didn't get it only from the time we would register at the office, and probably it would be three hours from the time we were first put on the board till we would leave that ofificb, so as to start out on the road. Q. Did you mention this matter to any of your superior officers? — A. No, sir; it was left in the hands of the committee. This committee was in Sedalia, and after this bulletin-board order was put up I didn't go myself individually to report to any officer. I didn't suppose there would be any use going individually after the order had been put on the board and then countermanded. 1 didn't think there would be any use of me saying anything. I supposed the committee would attend to it, and as long as they didn't why I didn't say anything about it. Q. Was there any other cause of complaint that you had on the 6th of March t— A. Nothing in particular. I was in Chamois when this strike went to work, and the company discontinued the trains, and deadheaded us home, and after we had been here three days they wanted to know if we would go out, and I, for one, told them I wouldn't go out till the trouble was settled. Q. Were you paid for over twelve hours, or for schedule time f — A. The order in the first place called for two hours over schedule time, but that order was rescinded, and we had to be twelve hours on the road from the time we registered in Saint Lonis here till we got into Chamois. If we was on the road twelve hours, though, we got two hours overtime, but if it was eleven hours and fifty minutes, we only got one hour. They didn't even give us an hour and a half. Q. It was that refusal of theirs, then, to count a fraction of an hour, that was the trouble ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What committee was it you speak of ?— A. It is on the circular there; I don't remember the committee's names. Q. On a printed circular? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) A committee of the Knights of Labor?— A. No, sir. Q. A committee of what?— A. United Brakemen of the Gould system. It started in Sedalia. It was no brotherhood affair or no Knights of Labor. It was the brake- men in Sedalia and Dennison, I understand. Q. Do you know whether they presented this question to the authorities of the road ? — A. Which question ? Q. The one you have stated,— A. It is signed there by Mr. Hagar, and the order was recalled. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 451 Q. I know ; but this grievance that you complained of? — A. I don't know whether that was ever presented by the committee or not ; no, sir; I do not. Q. This committee seems to be Bigley, Heckler, Koos, Alexander, Hubler, and Es- son f — A. Yes, sir ; that is the committee. Q. That is the committee to whom you mentioned this matterf — A. No; I didn't mention it to the committee ; I saw one of them and talked the matter over, but he didn't give me any satisfaction and I didn't say no more about it ; I just let the mat- ter go. Q. Did yon assist in stopping trains or intimidating engineers? — A. No, sir; there was one man I asked if he was going to go to work ; he was a young boy about eighteen years old; he said he was; I says, "Are you going to go to work when the men are all on a strike here ?" and he says yes ; and I says, " I wouldn't do it ; " and ho turned and went away. ^ Q. Yon stated you didn't go to work because the men were laid off ?— A. The com- pany discontinued us themselves, and deadheaded three crews out of Chamois ; three went to Sedalia, and three crews came to Saint Louis. Then, because after the strike was declared off and they went back and reported for work, they wouldn't put none of us to work because we wouldn't work while the strike was inaugurated. Q. Was there an agreement that you should be paid the same rates for overwork as the firemen and engineers ? — ^A. Engineers and firemen, yes, sir. There is the cir- cular there, signed with Mr. Hagar's name to it. They get pay from the time they are called, the way I understand it. Q. Did you get paid according to that circular? — ^A. No, sir. Q. How much did it lack ? — A. Well, it lacked 3 hours on some trains ; the train ■that was marked for 6.25 is second 23, and we didn't go out till 9.30 or 10 o'clock on 27. There was three hours that we generally lost. Q. Were you frequently called at night, and then discontinued until morning? — 4- Well, that has happened to some of the men, but never happened to me but once or twice that I remember. One train used to leave at 10.50 ; we was called for that train and there was no certainty about the train running every night, and once in a while they would call it through, and have them down in the yard, and after they come down there they would cut the train off and send the men home again, and they wouldn't get no pay for that. Q When the company asked you to go out on this train some time afterwards, why didn't you go? — A. What train? Q. When they asked you if you would go? — A. There was no train ready. Q. If there had been a train, and you had been requested to go, would you have gone ? — ^A. Not under the circumstances, when they had to have men armed to make up trains. I wouldn't feel safe in going out in a case of that kind. I wouldn't want to have a revolver on me to work. You can't pay much attention to your work if you have got to have arms along with you. , Q. Have you been refused work ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have, most emphatically. They wouldn't even give me a clearance that I had left the road in order to go to work any- where else here in the city. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) To whom did you apply for work ?— A. Mr. Clark, the train- master. Q. Did he give you any reason for not employing you ? — A. Nothing ; only that ho said that I had passed remarks about him and about the train-dispatchers, and I of- fered to go before a notary public and make an affidavit that I had said no such thing, aud I would like to have him give me his informant or prove it, and he wouldn't give me any names at all. Q. Then his reason was, as he gave it to you, that yon had been talking against him ?— A. That is what he said. He said he had heard that I dropped remarks about him. Q. Then it was really a personal matter ? — A. I asked him if it was personal or -ofQcial, and he said ofQcial.- Q. Well, I say it was a personal reason. It was on some pique on the part of Clark that he would not employ you ? — A. It looked a good deal that way. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) Do you know how many brakemeu have been given work that have applied for it since the str'ke ? — A. There was forty brakemen on the di- vision at the time the trouble occurred. There was two of them that went to work be- forethe trouble was settled. Three of them that went to work, I think, two or three weeks after the trouble occurred, and then there was another went to work about two weeks before the trouble was settled, and that is five. Since the trouble has been settled there is two men went to work, aud one of those men made two trips and was discharged. . . Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) Had the company employed other men to take their places as brakesmen ?— A. Yes, sir ; the day this man was discharged they hired one man. Q. Had they employed a man to run these trains ?— A. They had some men ; I don't know how many men they had. 452 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q, Do you know how many they wanted to fill up the necessary numhei f — A. No, sir ; ■when these two men went and asked for work, he told them to come around in a day or so, and it was only a very short time when they came around again that they went right out to work. Whether they took anybody else's place or not I don't know. Q. (By Mr. BuRNES. ) Were you in counsel with anybody, Knights of Lahor or other people, advising the destrnctiou of property or the interference with the running of the trains? — A. No, sir; I was not. Q. Did you ever hear of any such instruction in any assembly ? — A. No, sir; I never did. J. D. KNOWLTON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. BuRNBs). State your name, age, place of residence, and occupa- tion.— Answer. J. D.Knowlton; forty years of age; residence, Saint Louis for thirty: odd years. Q. What were you engaged in, in the service of the road, prior to the 6th or March ? — A. I have been engaged with the Missouri Pacific Road since, I think, about May or June 9th, 1885. Q. Why did you quit the service t — A. I was disoharged'i Q. Do you know for what reason ? — A. Yes, sir, Q. Have you any objections to stating itf — ^A. I can state it. Q. Well, sir, go ahead and state it. — ^A. I have been employed by the Missouri Pa- cific Railroad Company for several years as conductor and foreman of construction a,nd roadmaster. I was running a freight train out of Saint Louis in '80 or '81 ; was- taken off my train and put in charge of a construction train here in Saint Louis, with the understanding that I could have my freight run back when the construction work, ■was completed, and they gave it back to me, and put me off again to put me in charge of work opposite the Union Depot, removing a bank of dirt. I worked in the neigh- borhood of 100 men, and when that work was completed — or they put on a steam- shovel — I was given my freight run back. And they started work at Carondelet, and I was put in charge in the engineer's department. I had charge of two construction trains, and a number of men, say over 100 — in the neighborhood of 100. When that work was completed Mr. Talmage sent me to Deuison, Tex., as roadmaster, on ac- count of being hurt on the road. I was not able at the time to run a train. Before I went down there I asked him if I couldn't fill the bill as roadmaster, if I could have my ran back, as usual, on the main line out of Saint Louis if I got dissatisfied, or the company was not satisfied. They told me I could. I went to Denison, Tex., took charge under, I believe, Mr. Eddy, who was general superintendent. I was there two years about. I am giving you, now, the statement of the cause of my discharge. I worked under Mr. Eddy a short time, probably a week or such matter, and he was removed and Mr. Van Dyne came out. I worked under Mr. Van Dyne. He was a nice gentleman enough ; I had no trouble with him, and under Mr. Courtney, the general roadmaster, who always seemed to think that my work was first-class, and never heard any complaint. I worked from June or July until last February under Mr. Courtney, and he was a very honest arid upright, straightforward man as far as I tnow. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You mean a year ago last February? — A. Yes, sir. About that time we ha,d a change of officials, and a man by the name of D. F. Rundle was appointed general roadmaster. And the first day he took charge he came to me and wanted me to go down over the line, and inform my section foremen that they must deal at a certam store, at a certain place. I told him I had not been nsed to doing business that way. He said he had some men that he had to put to work as foremen a few days afterwards. He came to me and introduced a man to me by the name of Robert Arnold, and says, " I want you to give him a gang of colored men near Min- neola." I says, "Mr. Rundle, I have been on the road here and I have just taken charge of the Minneola division, and the men I find there are competent. I have no reason to discharge anybody." Ho says that didn't make any difference ; that I must discharge them ; so I went down the road and discharged a man named Pete O'Hara, one of the best section foremen we had, as I learned afterwards. Ho was- not only a good foreman, but he was posted in the business. He had quite a library of books on section work, track work, &c., and he very readily got a section on the G., H. and S. A. Road. And this man Rundle told me, " You can tell this man Arnot to carry :flve men and work three ; and he is a mau who will keep his mouth shut." And I says, "That ain't the way I do business. I have been on the Missouri Pacific road quite a while, and I don't do business that way." I, however, put down Arnot, as I was instructed to; a few days afterwards he came to me and says, "I have got a man named Clark" — by that time, however, the division was changed and I was throwed under Mr. Herrin. Mr. Herrin charged south of Donison, and that throwed me under Mr. Herrin's jurisdiction entirely, and this man Rundle was cut oif at Den- ison. He had charge as far north as Muskogee, but on account of the change of the system, he was cut off at Deuison, and had charge from Denison to Tyler, Tex.,. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 453. and my division was placed from Denison to Mineola, and Denieon to Gainesville. 'Consequently, I had charge of the main line as far as Whitesboro'. He came to me and says, " I want yon to discharge a sectinn foreman at Whitesboro'." I says, " For ■what cause ?" He says, " I want Clark to have it." Q. Who said this? — A. The general roadmaster. That is what caused me being -^discharged. I says "Why," says I, "he was here when I came here, and has been here and in Saint Lonis under Grove and other roadmasters, and has given good sat- isfaction." He says " This man will do more work with one man than " — I can't recall the section foreman's name. He was a cripple, however — "than the foreman yon Lave there will with five men." I says, " Very well, if you want him discharged, I will discharge him." So I went down to Whitesboro', and took this man with me, and put- Clark in charge, and discharged the foreman. A few days after Eundle came to me and says, " 1 want you to discharge Mr. Willis." He had charge of the Beaver section. And I took the man down he introduced to me and put him in • charge, and went out on the section with him, and we had some work to do, and I saw that the man had no experience, and I asked bim if he had ever worked on a section, and he said he hadn't. And I went into the office that evening and I says, " Mr. Enndle, the man you put on down at Beaver is not a competent man." He said " We will make a good man out of him." I says, "There is not much conis ency in that — discharging a man at Whitesboro' to put in a man that will do more work with one man than the present one will with five, and then discharge a very compe- tent man who has had eight or ten years' experience, and put on a man who has had no experience and say you -will make a good man out of him." In the meantime Mr. Herrin came np over the road. I never had met him, and he examined the track and -of course he found fault with the work. I didn't blame him for that. I think he is a very fair man, and done his duty. He discharged me without ever asking me any don't think, Mr. Bartlett, you have treated me right. I have done everything in my power to work for the interests of the company ; as long as I was in the position I was, he ought to have treated me manly ; " and I told him this, and he told me, " If you don't like it, just hand in your resignation ; and you might hand it jn any way." So I went to see Mr. Haynes, and he told me that the best way would be to resign. Said he, " If you can't get along with him you had better resign." So I handed in my resignation, and here is the reply I got to it : , " H. GUELLS, Esq., " General Foreman Lopomotive Department. Saint Louis : " I am in receipt of your letter of January 5 tendering your resignation, which t have sent to Mr. Bartlett, with instructions to arrange to relieve you as soon as pos- 460 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Bible. I hope that you will be able to secure a better position, and that you may bo euccessf nl in any enterprise -which you may nndeitake. " Yours, truly, "E. K. SIBLEY, "Supmntendent." Q. Is Mr. Bartlett still in the employ of the company ?— A. Yes, sir. Q.During the time you were in the shops did yon see anything wrong with the men with regard to their feelings toward the company ? — A. Well, no ; not against the company. So far as the company is concerned, I believe that the men have beed -treated always well. Q. Did Mr. Bartlett complain of any of the men doing anything wrong? — A. Well, Mr.. Bartlett was very impartial. The idea is with him if he has anything against a jnan, whether right or wrong, he picks at him, and others can do just as they please, and he has no objection. Q. You used the word "impartial"; I suppose you meant partial? — A. Impartial, I mean. Q. You meant that be is not impartiial ? — A. Well, he doesn't give a man justice. ■ Q. What was the feeling with the men in the blacksmith shops, so far as you know, with regard to their treatment by the company ? — ^A. Well, I have not come across much complaint about the company. That is, there have been complaints that men -didn't get a fair treatment through some of the officers. Q. Tliat did not extend to the general officers, as I understand it ? — A. No. Q. Did you notice any particular difference between the talk of the men prior to . March, 1885, and subsequent to March, 1885? Did you notice any difference in the feelings or sentiments towards the company before March, 1885, and since ? — A. Well, before March, 1885, the ill-feeling was then that the time was reduced and the pay was reduced. Once they reduced 10 per cent., then 10 per cent, again, and I don't know but 20 per cent, was deducted from the pay, and then I heard that there was going to be 12^ per cent, again, and then the men were for some time entirely dissat- isfied, and besides working twelve hours, as little as eight hours a day. Q. Is the feeling since March, 1885, better than it was before ? — A. Very. Every- body seems to be satisfied. Q. Where did Howard come from, that took your place? — A, I believe he was in the Manual Training School; came from the Manual Training School, Q. Was be a skilled mechanic in that department? Did he understand machin- ery? — A, Well, as far as I have seen, he was not, He ordered things which no me- •chanio would order us to do, At this point an adjournment was had until 9,30 a. m. to-morrow. Saint Louis, Mo., May 12, 1886. The committee, consisting of Messrs. Curtin, Stewart, and Bnrnes, met at 9.30 a, m,, jand the hearing was resumed as follows : WILlvIAM HAWKINS, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes: Question. State your age and place of residence. — Answer. Forty-one. Q. Your occupation. — A. Bound-house fireman. Q. You reside at De Soto ? — A. At Saint Louis, Q. How long have you been in the service of the Missouri Pacific? — A, Twelve years. Q. Have you any grievance against the company ? — A. I would rather answer ques- tions. Q. Do you know of any wrong they have done you in any way ?— A. I know I have not got my pay 1 ought to have got. At the time before the agreement before the governors before the reduction they allowed me one day for Saturday night which I -did not get. , Q. Anything else ? — A, For Sunday work I didn't get anything but single time. Q. How are you employed, by the month or day? — A. By the day, Q. You say youworked on Sundays without pay ? — A, Sunday ten hours and didn't get anything but single time, Q, Did you ask them for it? — A, Yes, sir. Q. What did they say f — ^A. They gave me no satisfaction ; said the company would mot pay it. Q. Did you carry your complaint to the general officers of the company? — A. No, «r. LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 46 1 Q. Just spoke to the foreman about it? — A. Yes, sir ; I thought if it went any fur- ther they would discharge me. Q. Did they agree to pay you more than that ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then they paid all they agreed to pay you t — A. They just paid me single time. Q. Did you work any at nights f — A. Well, no, only worked up to 5 or 6. They al- lowed me extra time for that when the others left at 5. Q. That is all you have to complain off — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you ever been crippled in the service of the company f — A. Yes, sir; I got- one finger taken off and the other one disabled. Q. When was that? — A. Four years ago. I waa working at night work at that time. I got nothing for that at all. JOHN DOYLE, being duly sworn, testified as follows: By Cplonel Buknbs : Question. State your name, age, place of residence, and occupation. — ^Answer. My name is John Doyle ; I am twenty- three years old ; tinner in the shop. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the company ? — A. Six years. Q. Wherein do you think the company has mistreated you ? — A. Well, here last summer I was melting the bottom out of a can and the can bursted and burnt my arm. I was laid up two weeks ^ith it and come to work and they told me I would have- to sign a sort of contract for a dollar that I would give up all claims on the company,, and they would employ me as long as they saw fit. So I asked them for the dollar and- they said I was not supposed to get it, that that was just a form. Q. You signed the release? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And went back to work ? — A. Yes, sir. They told me I would have to sign that or quit. Q. What position were yon in on the road ? — A. I was a tinner. Q. Did you ever go out on the road to work ?— A. Yes, sir. Last January therfr was an order came and the foreman came to me and asked me to go out. He came a- little before five o'clock. I got the tools ready and fetched them over on the engine, and the bell rung, and I kept on getting ready to go out. I went home and got my. supper and came back and waited for the engine to back down, and went on the en- gine and transferred the tools and things to the baggage-car. I rode all that night, and the next morning I just got there in time for the train to leave and could not work on it. The next morning I got up at daylight and started. 'J'he agent there wanted me to get the cars ready for an excursion. They were going down Hanging Stair, near Nevada. I got up and hunted for a ladder and could not get one. I got up and fell oS of the car, and there was ice and snow on the car, and hurt my eyes, and hurt my arm. I got a ladder and finished one car, and my hand begun to swell. and I could not do anything, and telegraphed to Mr. Hodge and he sent another man. I was laid up three days with that. I only got thirty hours for it. Q. How many hours did you lose ? — A. I lost thirty-one hours. Q. How many hours did you say you worked ? — A. From when I got the order un- til I came down I was gone about forty hours — forty or fifty hours. It was fiom_ five- o'clock Wednesday evening, and I got back Saturday night and could not do any- thing. My arm was swelled and my wrist was swelled and I could not do anything. I had to lay off until I was better. Then f hey told me I could not go to work until I signed that again. That read the same thing, and they never gave me any dollar, and only allowed me thirty hours for the three days I was away. Q. What time did you go back to Saint Louis? — ^A. Saturday night. Q. What time ? — A. Pretty near seven o'clock. Q. You were gone, then, just three days of twenty-four hours each ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you allowed for your expenses in traveling ? — A. No, sir ; I was allowed my board. Q. You were not paid the dollar ? — A. No, sir. Q. You were j ust allowed three days for the ti me ? — A. Yes, sir; three days for while I was up there. Q. Did you assist in stopping the trains or interfering with the engines ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you attempt to intimidate any of the men engaged in work ? — ^A. No, sirj never spoke to one. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you go out? — ^A. 1 belonged to an order, and I suppose I went out on that account. i Q. Would yon have gone out if the order had not been issued, the order of 101 ? — A. No, I don't suppose X would. Q. Yon say you would not have gone out if the order of District Assembly 101 had not been issued ? — ^A. No, sir. 462 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Why wouldn't you have gone out T — ^A. Well, I don't know. I BuppoBe I belon|[ to an order and obey the order. Q. You would not have gone out on account of any grievance of your own T — ^A. I didn't suppose it would do me any good to go out by myself. If I went out by myself they would discharge me. BENJAMIN NELSON, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your name, age, and place of residence.— Answer. My name is 'Benjamin Nelson ; I am 84 years of age, and live at 2937 Chouteau avenue. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway ■Company f — A. I was employed about four months, from the 4th of November uutil '6th of March, f Q. In what department f — A. In the tin shop department. , Q. Have , you any cause to complain because of their treatment of you t — A. I have a small cause, I suppose. I was the man sent up in Doyle's place to finish np the work. I left on Saturday evening and done the work and- got back Monday night. When the order came for to send a man up there, Wilcox came to Gibson and asked Doyle to go, and I overheard the conversation, as I worked alongside. He aaid to Doyle, " I want you to keep track of all your time and expenses, and your time will go on from the time you leave here till you get back, night and day." After Tae had asked me to go, I left Saturday evening on the 6.20 train, and got up to the ' place at half past nine in the morning, a littie town called Butler, Mo, The train left there at half past nine, and could not do anything until half past nine Sun- day evening. The cars did not get back. I left there Sunday night for Saint Louis, -and got here Monday night at 6.20. When pay day came I was $3.90 short in my pay, :and the foreman came to me and asked me how much time I had put in, and what luy expenses were. I told bim he knew what time I had left and the time I got back, and I told him my expenses. He put In my time, and said, " They told me in the office they did not pay anything for riding at night," after Wilcox had stated to keep the time, that the time would go on night and day from the time we left until we got back, and our expenses paid. Pay day came : when I should have drawn $64.90, 1 only drew <61.25. Q. Who is Mr. Wilcox ? — A. Mr. Wilcox is assistant under Mr. Hodge. ■ Q. He told you expressly that your time should be counted from the time you left until you returned ? — A. He told Doyle expressly, and I heard the conversation, and I •supposed the same arrangement would be with me as was made with Doyle, but I never said anything about it as long as Doyle had gone to find out whether he could get his time. Q. You thought as Doyle could not get his time that yoji could not either, and therefore you did not press the matter ? — A. 1 did not press the matter. Q. Have you any other complaint to make against the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. You went out on the 6th of March ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you go out? — A. There was a special call to that effect to go. Q. You did not hope to remedy your own grievance by going out? — A. I didn't know. I did in one respect. Q. Would you have gone out if the order had not been issued? — A. No, sir; I didn't have grievance enough to go out on my own account. It would not be any use for one man to go. Q. Did you go out because you supposed you would better the condition of your associates around you, associates in work ? — A. Yes, sir. ^Q. Did you do any of the mischief that was done on the engines or trains? — A. No, «ir. JOHN WILLIAM NEELEY, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your name, place of residence, and occupation. — Answer. John William Neeley ; Saint Louis ; occupation, blacksmith. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. Three years and a little over. Q. What wages were you receiving on the 6th of March ?— A. I was receiving on the 6th $2.05 a day. Q. When you started in there three years before, what were your wages ? — A. When I started in there I started in as a helper for $1.65 a day, and in the course of six months I told the blacksmith boss that I was a blacksmith and would like to take a fire under instructions. He said, "All right, I will let you have a fire under instruc- tions and give you a raise," and he raised mo to $1.85 a day, and then on ho raised LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 463 me up to $2.05. At that time wheu I got my $2.05 I bad been working there a year and three months. Since that time when I have been receiving |2.05 I have kicked various times for aiaise and they would not give it to me or any satisfaction what- •ever. I thought it \i'a8 getting pretty dim, and I thought I would kick again a couple or three mouths before the strike. He said, "I can't do nothing for you, because I have got no power whatever. The power is taken away from me altogether. I can't even raise your wages. I can't discharge yon, I can't hire you, and you can't blame me for it. You will have to go and see Mr. Bartlett." I called on Mr. Bartlett and asked him if he was at leisure. He said yes, and he wanted to know what I wanted. I told him I wanted a little conversation about the rate of wages I was getting. He said, "All right; step to one side." I took to him and commenced talking about mj wages. He said, "I will tell you one thing, Neeley, I can't do anything for you. The power has been taken completely away from me, and you will have to see Mr. Sibley." I says, "I can't go round and see everybody. I supposed if I would see Mr. Sibley he would ask me to see Mr. Hoxie. Mr. Hodge said for me to come to yon, -and now you say go to Mr, Sibley. What can I do?" He said, " 1 can't do anything for you. I think you ought to be well satisfied with $2.05 a day." I said, "Why so"? "Look at the poor sectionmen only getting $1.10 a day. How do you think they live?" I said, " I don't know how they live. I know darned well I can't live with the wages I am getting. I know the work I am doing is worth more money than the work which you used to pay $2.60 for. Why can't I get $2.60 a day ? a little more than I am getting." "Well, you can't get it." 1 thought it was no use talk- ing to him, for he talked right up and down that I could not get it. I commenced talking about the sectionmen, and he says : "I don't think the sectionmen are living -on those wages. I think they are waiting about and taking what they can get. They can't live. Here is myself. I am receiving big money, and I can't hardly Uve •on that. I lay awake at night and wonder how they get along." I said, "Why -don't you try to do something for them and me ? I have stated the case to you, and told you the debt 1 was in." He paid no attention to me. Q. You seem to have insisted on your pay being raised. Suppose yon had gone any further. Did you have any fear that you would be discharged f — A. If I went any ■farther to insist on my wages being raised ? "^ ' Q. Yes. — A. I could not insist on it any farther than I did. Q. They never deceived you, never promised you more and failed to give it to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When was that ? — A, A month or two before the strike came on Mr. Bartlett promised me and tjie rest of them that he would write to Mr. Sibley and the rest of us and see what he could do, and thought in a month he would raise our wages. Q. Did he write to Mr. Sibley ? — A. I suppose he did. He said he would. Q. Why did he deceive you ? — ^A. Because he never gave us a raise. Q. If the man who spoke to .you wrote to Mr. Sibley as he promised he would, he ■didn't deceive you. He told you he had no power to raise your wages. — A. That is what he told me. Q. Who is the proper party to determine the wages that ought to be paid to a man in your department f — A. I think the proper man at the time I went there was James Mitchell, general foreman in the blacksmith shop. Q. Who was the proper party at the time before the strike, when he told you he •would write to Mr. Sibley ? — ^A. Mr. Bartlett told me he would write to Mr. Sibley to csee what he could do. Q. You have stated the foreman told- you he had no power to raise your wages ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any other cause of grievance against the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you engaged in perpetrating any of the wrongs alleged against the prop- erty of the company, the engines or cars? — A. Not in regard to injuring cars or en- gines, but I did say something to one man, a man that went out of the shop during the strike, and one of the heaviest men, I suppose, that was around, who wanted to <3o this and that and everything to injure the company's property, and nobody would sanction him, that said he would go to work becau'se he could do nothing. Whenhe -came out at night I asked him his reasons for wanting to do such a thing, and he would not make anyreply. I told him, " Never mind, I will hit you yet if it takes me ten years." That was all I said to anybody about violence. Q. Yon committed no depredations against the company's property ? — A. No, I did not. Q. Why did you go out on the 6th of March? — A. I went out because I was called ■out. Q. Would you have gone^ut but for the order issued by District Assembly 101? — A. I could not positively say whether 1 \^ould or not, because I have laid oflf after- noons and tried to better myself at other places. If I could have done it I think I would have taken a better job, whether I was called out or not. 464" LABOR TRODBLES IN THE SOUTH AXD WEST. JOHN P. CROW, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your age, place of residence, and occupation.— Answer. My age is- sixty years; place of residence, Pacific City, Missouri ; occupation, bridge carpenter. Q' How long have yon been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ?— A. I have been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific about twelve years. Q. What have been your wages since March, 1885 ?— A. Our wages have been $2.40 per day for ten hours' work. Q. What were the wages you received in September, 1884? — A. The wages we re- ceived in September, 1884, were |2.50, if I am not mistaken. I would not say posi- tively as to that. We were cut 10 per cent. then. Q. The time that was consumed in going from one job of work to another, was it allowed to you ?— A. Well, sir, if I rode I would leave our headquarters at Pacific City, where we worked — if I was to leave there at work time — seven or any time after seven^. I would get time for it until six o'clock in the evening ; but if I left thern at night- say on the night train, the night train leaving there at 9.42, which was the generality of travel for us bridgemen — to stay there and work in the yard that day, and, after quitting time, get our tools down to the platform or depot, as the case may be, and stay around for the train, if it was 100, 200, or 300 miles, and go to thatpoint, and we got nothing for riding at night at all, not a cent ; and more than that, if we could get a bed when we got there, we would get it, and if not, then not. If we were anhonr late getting to work after seven o'clock and they found it out, we were docked in our department. Q. Did you complain of this to ydur foreman ? — A. It was complained of often. Q. What answer was made ? — A. The answer was made that we could not help it, that Mr. Hoxie or Mr. Peck, whichever i t was laid before, they were doing the work; if the yard foreman he would say Peck was doing it, and if Peck it would be Hoxie. That would be the excuse given us. Q. How long did that custom prevail with the Pacific Railway Company?— A. That custom prevailed ten^yearS that way. I recollect when Peck issued the order. I recollect the order well. I was not foreman at that time. I was working a gang. I was at work at Carondelet at the time. I wish I had kept the order and broughtit with me. I think I can recollect it : " Hereafter all foremen shall make it couven- , ient to move froiu one job to another by night and may receive nothing for his time, as man can sleep reasonably well iu his seat," and then it is signed R. H. P. I think that is as near word for word as it can be got. We have stood it on till this timft. . Many a week I used to run on the road a great deal and do all the little chores, and many a week 1 have rode five nights or a part of five nights, may be all night, and worked every day and got pay for nine hours' work a day. That would be in the winter time. By Governor Curtin : Q. When absent in that way did you pay your own board ? — A. Yes, sir; if I had allowed the second board bill returned against liie to the office I would be discharged. One board bill is allowed to be returned to the office against any man in the employ- ment, but the second one is final discharge of anyone in the employment of the company. By Colonel Burnes : Q. Did other bridgemen or bridge-carpenters receive the same treatment you did as far as your observation extended ? — A. Yes, sir ; the same treatment to all. Q. Did this cause dissatisfaction with the men generally?— A. A great deal of dis- satisfaction ; a great deal, Q. State if you were allowed to go into the chair caw. — A. No, sir ; we were not by the conductors of the trains. I believe as much as I have run over the road I have got in a chair car as high as twice ; that is as much as I recollect of going into a chair car. Our seats were in the smoking car or emigrant car, and if we went into the la- dies' car they objected to it. Q. Were there vacant seats in the chair cars you might have had? — A. Yes, sir;, there were. Q. Did you tell the conductors the superintendent had given orders that yon might ride in the chair car ? — A. We never got any such orders from our superintendent by any means. Q. Had you any other cause of complaint against the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. I do not know that I had really any other particular cause. Q. State generally what were the accommodations for this night travel ; what kind of cars were provided for you ? — A. We generally traveled on the passenger trains, generally on a night train. It would be what is termed 3 and 4 of the Missouri Pa- cific. A smoking car generally was our car that we got into, and often we would have LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 465 to sit on a coal box for 100 or 200 miles ; could not get a seat or stand up in the aisle. We were not allowed to go back into the ladies' car to look for a seat even. With some conductors you couldgo back into the ladies' oar andtakeaseat, and with others you could not. By Governor Ctjrtin : Q. Did yon ever complain of the conduct of the conductors? — A. Often. Q. To whom did you complain? — A. I never complained to any one more than to onr superintendent of bridges and buildings and the foreman in the yard, aboat the con- ductors. I never complained to anybody else. I complained to the conductors often. I told them I thought when I was carrying a pass on the road I ought to be considered as a passenger; that I ought to be allowed to go into any car, as a passenger would, be allowed, not that I was nothing more than a deadhead. By Colonel Buknks : i Q. Was this matter ever presented to Mr. Hoxie to your knowledge f — A. Yes, sirj I think I have a copy of our grievance in my pocket. Q. Do you know that it was presented to Mr. Hoxie? — A. I could not exactly be qualified to that, that it was presented. I am pretty well assured it was taken to his ofiSce. Q. You did not take it to his office ? — A. No, sir. Q. Whom did you give it to ? — ^A. There is the gentleman (referring to a person present). Q. He would be the proper party to testify as to what disposition he made of it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March? — A. No, sir; I did not go out on the 6th; I went out on the 9th. Q. Will you tell us what influenced you to go out ? — A. I thought I had grievance enough against the company to try to contend in some way for better treatment. Th.it is juat the way I done it. I thought they had been notified of all the facts before. Q. Would you have gone out if the order of District Assembly 101 had not been issued ? — A. I do not know as I would, individually, because it would have done me no good. It would have been about the same way as it is now ; I would have been out of a job. Q. Did you engage in any act of violence against the company's property ? — ^A. Not in the least ; I never committed any act of violence. Q. Were you at Pacific City at the time of the shooting that has been mentioned here ? — A. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. Tell us, as briefly as you can, about that fight, that contest. — A. I can tell it just the best I can. I didn't see the commencement, the first shot fired. We were in our hall at the time the train came along, and I did not come clear out of the hall. I went out into an ante-room and looked out through the blinds, turned the blinds up and looked through them. I conld not say whether the first shot was fired off the train. I never saw a shot fired only what was off the train. I never saw a shot fired from any individual only them on the train. I am sure there was not one of our men outside of the gate of the hall when the first shot was fired. I will be sure of this fact. . I do not think there was any of oiir boys had revolvers ; there may have been one or two. The order was the day before that that the marshal take the arms from every citizen of the town that he could find, and it was a general order for everybody to lay their arms down. There may have been one or two, maybe as many as three of our boys had revolvers. They may have had twenty-fours, little twenty-fours. I did not see them. Q. Did you see anybody placing obstructions on the track ? — A. I did not. I heard since I came to Saint Louis this morning of some pieces of rails being thrown across the track. Q. You saw nothing of it ? — A. I never heard of it. Q. Were youi in a position to see the track? — A. At times I was, and times I was not. I heard of a piece of timber thro wed on the track. I did not see a piece of tim- ber thrown. I saw a piece of fence board after the train passed an inch thick and 6 inches wide, cut in two, it looked, by the driving-wheels of an engine. That is the only obstruction I knew of being put near the track at Pacific, or the track being ob- structed in any way, shape, or manner. Q, How do you account for the piece of board being placed on the track? — A.' Somtbody pitched it in front of the engine ; who it was, I didn't see. Q. That piece of board had been run over by the engine ? — A. I saw the pieces, but didn't see anybody put it there. The way I came to see it somebody said to the mar- shal somebody had thrown a piece of timber across the track and he stopped him. "Hold on, my friend; if you call a fence boardapieceof timber, that is whatitwas. Ihave been and looked at it. If you will go, I will show it to you." Three of us went and saw it, and that is how I came to look at it. 3984 CONG 30 466 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Then it was not sufficient to tbrow the train off of the track T — ^A. Not sufficient to throw the train oflf of the track by any means. Q. Do you remember of a man being fired at who wa^ attempting to throw the switch, who was guarding the switch? — A. No; there were some deputy sheiifis, some men deputized there, one of my near neighbors in Pacific, and another one 4 or 5 miles out, that was deputized and stood by the targets of the switches to guard them. They said a man at Pacific had attempted to throw the switch and throw the trains off, which I never saw anybody do ; and those men were stationed at the switches, which were 60 or 80 iFeet apart, the two head blocks, and those men on the cars fired on them men so bad they had to run and leave their posts ; both of them had to leave their posts. Q. Was the fire returned?— A. No, I saw no fire returned ; those deputies that were at the posts I do not think they had anything to shoot with at all. I do not think they had as much as a revolver. I know they had nothing else. They might have had a revolver ; I do not think they had anything more. Q. Who were the men that were guarding the switches ? — A. One was Charles Woods, and the other's name Cratchett, I think ; I think his name was Cratchett. He lives near the Summit — Claggett. Q. Do you know how many men have been indicted since for placing obstructions on the track at Pacific ? — A. There has been four or five indicted for other work ; no- body for placing any obstruction. Q. You do not know what the indictments are for, there at that place? — A. No; there were different matters. Q. Nobody has been tried or convicted? — A. No, sir; the trial will not come off un- til next week. M. J. REED, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Buknes : Question. State your name, age, place of residence, and occupation. — Answer. M. J. Reed, Pacific, Mo. ; age, forty years ; occupation, laborer. Q. How long have you been employed by the Missouri Pacific? — A. A little over six years. Q. What were your wages on the 6th of March last ? — A, fl.lO. Q. At what work were you employed ? — A. On the track. Q. Have you lieen promised any more wages than that ? — A. No, sir. Q. How many hours in a week did you work, or how many days? — A. Through the winter we averaged from twelve to fifteen days a month during the winter. Q. Did j(Ri want to work more than that? — ^A. Yes, sir; we would have worked every day. Q. Was tliere work there to be done ? — A. There was work if they would have let us work. Q. What wages did you get in 1884 ?— A. We got $1.15. Q. Were you getting $1.15 in September, 1884 ?— A. We were. Q. Why were not your wages raised after March, 1885, to what you were receiving in September, 1884 ?— A. I do not know. We asked for it. Q. They would not give it to you ? — A. No, sir, Q. What did they say ? — A, They said they could not do it, I asked the section foremen, and they said they would do the best they could, and that was the last of it, Q, Do you know that any of your- associate workmen were treated in the same way ? — A. Yes, sir ; I know they were all. Q. Did this cause dissatisfaction in the minds of the workmen ? — A. Yes, it did. Q. I suppose among yourselves you were frequently talking about it as bad treat- ment? — A, Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March ? When did you quit the companv's service? — A. On the 6th of Mijrch. Q. Why did you quit ?— A. I quit for my wages. Q. Would you have gone out but for the order of District Assembly 101 ?— A. Yes, sir ; I would have gone out anyway when that came, Q, Have you done any of the injuries complained of by the company to its property? — A. No, sir ; I have not done any, although I was arrested for doing injuries, W. H. HAINES, being duly sworn, testified as follows: By Colonel Buhnes : Question. State yourname, age, residence, and occupation.— Answer. W. H. Haines, age forty-five, occupation blacksmith. Q. How long have yon been in the employment of the company ?— A. Between seven and eight years. Q. What wages were you receiving in September, 1884 ?— A. $2.75 a day. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 467 Q. What wages were yon receiving on the 6th of March last ? — A. The same wages. Q. The wages were not changed from 1884 up to that time? — A. No, sir. Q. Will you state wherein the company has done you any injustice or violated its contract with you T — A. Personally, not at all. Q. Have yon any knowledge of any wrongs done to any other employes ! — ^A. Our helpers in the shops were only receiving fl.tiS where at other points they were re- ceiving $1.85 or $1.90. Q. Whose business is it to rectify this ? — A. Tb is all with the superintende'nt. Q. You mean the general superintendent ? — A. No ; the superintendent of the bridge and building department, Mr, Peck. Q. Do you know of any other causes of grievance that any of the employes have T — A. No more than the gentleman stated before me, night travel. They always make it a point to start the men out at night when they would do work. Q. That was the general rale ? — A. Yes, sir ; work all day, and start them out at night. Q. Do you know of men being discharged without having their grievances heard ? — A. They generally give him time to get out of the shop, walk in and say they don't want him ; that is all the time they give him. Q. Have they treated any men that way since March, 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Of how many can you remember who were discharged in that way t — A. I could name a number. They discharged a good many of the helpers, different men, and they never gave any notice. If we want to quit they exact us to give ten days' notice. Q. Did you go out on the 6th of March ? — A. No ; I went out on the 9th. Q. Did you participate in any of the acts of violence complained of by the com- pany? — A. No, sir. Q. Did the order of District Assembly 101 influence you iu your action in going out f^A. Partially ; of course it would do no good for one man to go out by himsel£ They would very soon iiUhis place if one man went out by himself. Q. Do you know of any circular issued by Assembly 101 previous to the strike T — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you got a copy of the circular? — A. I have not got it with me; I have got it at home. Q. Could you state the contents of it? — A. The contents was something in this style : Each assembly was to take a vote whether they would sustain their commit- tee in having unskilled labor get $1.50 a day, and reinstating Brother Hall, and other grievances, such as the night riding, and so on. It was an acknowledgment of the committee. Q. The night riding by bridge carpenters was a matter considered in the circular which was issued prior to the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was submitted to the subordinate assemblies? — A. Yes, sir. Q. They were called upon to determine whether that was a sufficient cause for a strike or not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How did your assembly vote on the proposition ? — A. They voted to sustain the executive committee. Q. Was that unanimous ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you this question : Was not the vote of the assembly also to require the company to recognize the ordtr as an order ? Yon have the option to answer or decline to answer as yon please. No presumption can be made if you refuse to answer the question. — ^A. I decline to answer the question. Govtrnor Cttktin. In reference to the other question put by Colonel Burnes, the witness will understand that while it may be the duty of the committee to ask such questions, because we are seeking for truth, it is at the option of the witness to de- cline to answer, and, as Colonel Burnes says, no presumption can be said to prevail . on account of the refusal. The Witness. I would decline to answer the question. Governor Stewakt. Does that question refer to the vote of the order? Colonel BUKNBS. Yes, sir. Governor Stewart. I desire to state in connection with the question and refusal to answer, that my personal judgment is that when the Government of the United States is making an investigation of the facts touching a great public question that the rules of any organization which is secret in its operations do not preclude the right of the Government to make an inquiry of its members pertinent to the issue which is pending before that committee. I merely desire to put my judgment on record on the subject. Colonel BuKNES. Alongside of the judgment of my colleague, I think it would be proper to state that I am inclined to hold the law to be that neither the Government of the United States nor any other power can lawfully inquire into the secrets of a lawful secret association until a foundatioik has been laid by evidonee indicating or establishing a conspiracy on the part of that society to violate the law or overthrow the Government, and I do not think at this stage of the examination there has been 468 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTU AND WEST. sufficient evidence to indicate a coLspiracy on the part of the Older of the Knights of Lahor. Governor Siewart. This is not a question of overthrowing the Government. It is a question of an entirely different character. The committee is not sent out to in- vestigate any question of treason or conspiracy to overthrow the Government. It is sent out to ascertain the cause of the interruption of inter-State commerce, and any action of anybody, whether organized or as individuals, which has any tendency to reflect any light on that particular question, is a proper subject of inquiry. Of course, parties may decline to answer, and I, for one, would not insist on a reply, hut at the same time I am not one who will admit and ready to concede that the power of this Government is so far limited in regard to a subject of this kind, that by hedging themselves about by a set of artificial rules they can shut the door to the in- quiry. I think the power of the Government is supreme, and the right of inquest (where there is a certain condition of affairs) as to whether or not there is a con- spiracy exists in the Government. Now, Brother Burnes and I have placed our re- spective judgments on record as to this question, and it is proper, I suppose, that we should hear from the chairman next. Governor Curtin. I cannot see that there is much difference. It is in evidence over and over again that the strike occurred on the order of District Assembly 101. Now, |in the line of your judgment it is perfectly prdper that we should put that question just as Colonel Burnes put it. That is in the line of our duty in the inquiry proposed by Governor Stewart, and then, just as you say, the witness can decline to answer. Inasmuch as it is in evidence, it is proper that we should ask the question ' if it is the pleasure of the committee making the examination. Every one knows we are not here to take part on either side of the controversy ; we are here representing the people ; we are here to ascertain, as Governor Stewart states, what was the cause ' that led to the disturbance of the public peace. Governor Stewart. In other words, to put the question in a more concrete form— - I do not know what the fact is, nor I do not assume there is any such fact in exist- ence, but if these organized bodies determine to strike for a declared purpose, aa for example in order that the railroad company should recognize the order as an existing, - organized identity, I think that is a proper fact to show. That, I understand, is the purport of the question, whether or not the bodies in their deliberations put that as a reason why they should strike, and if they did put it as the reason, I do not see any reason why they should be unwilling the matter should go on record. However, that is a matter for them to determine, and if they insist on not answering I shall not insist on it. Kev. rather C. F. O'LEAEY, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Colonel Burnes: < Question. Please state your place of residence and position. — Answer. I reside in De Soto; I am a Catholic priest; my age is thirty-six. Q. Will you be kind enough to go on in your own way and state as briefly as you can the occurrences at De Soto during the late trouble ? — A. I had been absent from De Soto on the 6th of March. Upon my return I found the strike liad taken place. I knew the majority of the strikers ; they were some of my best members, law-abiding, good, honest, sober citizens and church members. I was an indifferent spectator at first. I looked on and saw the attitude of the two. I naturally side witn the weaker party. I did not inquire, didn't make it my business to inqviire, into the merits of the case ; but I saw this, that the company used every endeavor, were unscrupulous in their means, in my judgement, to crush the Knights of Labor by selecting men to do work during the strike, many of whom I knew to be fit for the penitentiary, and I stated so publicly. For having stated such the superintendent at De Soto, as the mayor informed me, damned and cursed me ; said I was the worst man in town. The very morning he had said so I was on my way, being invited by the mayor who was invited by the railroad officials, to use my influence with the men to break the blockade and let trains out of the yard. I met the mayor, who told me what the superintendent had said. I was naturally very irritated, seeing that I was on a mission of peace, tp be insulted in that manner. I demanded an apology for it. Then I looked into the merits of the case, and I inquired since, and from what I inquired I think I thoroughly understand the causes that led to the strike. In tjie first place the Knights of Labor, as I have observed, is an association or organization for the purpose of teaching its members the principles of social economy, and also to exert a moral influence over jts members. I find it from my communication with the or- ganization there are many addicted to liquor and dissipation in every way, and I attribute in part to the Knights of Labor that they have reformed. The organization teaches its members in the principles of justice and equity. By looking upon the whole system of railroad corporations the whole thing is a grievance, in my judgment. It is begotten in fraud ; it is carried ou by trickery, and the whole thing is a griev- LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 46& *anoe. Then that grievance, burning in their mind, culminates by little trivial causes. I do not consider that any one cause is sufficient or justifiable for the strike, and I be- lieve a chain of causes led to the strike. Among them is the rottenness, injustice, and spirit of tyranny that exists on the v^hole system from Gould down to the lowest offi- cial. That is my experience, and I have been a close observer. Then, again, I have been present ever since, as I have said, and have taken an active interest in the matter. I have addressed them, encouraging them to keep on the platform laid down to them by Mr. Po wderly. All the ministers in De Soto addressed them. They were made honor- ary members of the association. I have no reason to doubt them. I did think they used their endeavors as au association to observe law and order. Individual members, irritated, as I said before, by the action of the company — by the character of the men employed by the company to oppose them — were now and then driven to acts of vio- lence, maybe. Bat I can't say they were Knights of Labor ; in fact, one man brought before the court in De Soto, and charged with having thrown a pin at a car vras not a Ejiight of Labor, as I was informed, but a mere sympathizer. I was present at the so called riot in De Soto, which was nothing but a gathering of boys, the msgority of them, and they ran after the man who pulled out the revolver. I was present also when the first train passed south, and they were very much excited because it was done, natur- ally, in opposition to their views and desires and provoked a great gathering of boys, principally. And this man named Todd it appears pulled out a revolver and also an- other man named Harrison pulled out a revolver. This excited the crowd and they ran after Todd more to frighten him than anything else. Then the boys gathered around a man named Nelson and tried to seize him, but, those who attacked him were boys. I do not know whether there were any Knights of Labor or not. The whole thing ■was much ado about nothing. There were men shot down, ten murders in last year* there, and there was no stir about it, no law and order clnb to keep the peace of De Soto. It was ado about nothing. I think you might safely place the law and order in the hands of the Knights of Labor as far as can understand the spirit and character of the men. I have talked as much to au official in De Soto, I was very glad the organization was in the hands of and under the directions and control of such good men, and he coincided with me. The cause of the strike I believe was a series of grievances. Men dp not get sufficient pay. A dollar a day and work oiily fifteen days in a month is certainly unjust treatment of any man. Then, again, I saw that the action of the company intimidated the men. I was speaking to a brakeman the other day on a passenger train. He said he was afraid to speak to the Knights of Labor for fear he would be discharged. That naturally irritates a man educated in any school of independence. It is opposed to the American spirit. The whole system is enslaving and I have raised my voice agauist it. Mr. BuRNES. Were you a witness to any of the acts of violence alleged to have been committed in De Soto? The Witness. I was a witness to the supposed riot that was there, as I have said before, and it was no riot at all. A number of boys that associated and gathered- — By Governor Stewart : Q. What do you refer to ? — A. I refer to the riot — the supposed riot — that was spoken of in the papers. I was present. Q. Do you mean when they assailed the woman, when that crowd went up to the woman's house ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is the case I refer to. I was present on that occa- sion. It was a number of boys. The Knights of Labor as an organization were not represented there ; that I know, because I took interest in the Knights of Labor at the time, and I noticed they were only boys. By Colonel Burnes : Q. Did you see any attempts made to disable engines ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you see the men breaking into the machine-shops or round-house f — A. No, sir ; by the way, I can give a little explanation of that. I know it has occurred, and I do not think that it officially emanated from the organization, but Mr. Kennan promised them he would not move the engine from By Governor Stevitart : Q. Are yon testifying what you know personally? — A. What I am informed by the officers of the Knights of Labor. I am under oath. Q. That is hearsay testimony, but I have no objection. — ^A. And the fact he prom- ised not to move the engines, and the fact be attempted to move them in the same breath naturally irritated them. I mean to say that provoked this trouble. We are trying to arrive at the cause of things, and a cause of irritating men or a body of men. is to deceive them, is to promise them and in the same breath go to work to undo or, contradict what you have said. Recognizing the boycott of the Texas and Pacific and in the same breath trying to remove it. Those things were annoying to the men. 470 LABOR TROUBLES IN THJE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Wha1i do you mean by trying to remove the boycott ? — A. They lecognized the boycott on the Texas and Pacific, the company did. Q. Ton said they tried to remove it : what do you know about that f — ^A. Certainly I do. They did their endeavors, and forced cars along the line, did it by force. Why promise it, and then do it by force ? ' Q. You say they forced the Texas and Pacific cars along the line t— A. I am informed so. I speak from information that I consider reliable ; 1 would not say so otherwise. This is what I intend to say and have said, that promising a body of men, an organi- zation, and respecting them by making certain promises or contracts with them that they would not remove the engines from the round-house until the matter was set- tled, and promising and respecting the boycott they placed, whether just or unjust, on a certain road, and then immediately afterwards breaking their word with the organ- ization is what naturally irritated them and drove its members, who may not be un- der the control of the organization, to commit acts of violence. I have been publicly accused in my church and by the railroad company as blamable for most of the acts of violence. By Colonel Bubnks : Q. Father O'Leary, I wist to ask you a question based upon assumed facts. Ton have expressed a very favorable opinion of the Knights of Order at De Soto and their conduct Governor Stewart. Knights of Labor, you mean t The Witness. Knights of Order ; that is the same thing. . By Colonel Bdrnes : Q. (Resuming.) Knights of Labor, and I ask you if you were satisfied by Incon- trovertible testimony that the master workman of that assembly, accompanied by three or four prominent members of it and surrounded by several other men, had with violence broken open the doors of the round-house and machine-'shop against the resistance of the lawful occupants of those places and thus forcing themselves into it, had injured the property within, would you still have the same favorable opinion of them that you have expressed t— A. Well, I would not indorse that action, but I think the circumstances that I have partly referred to would palliate the crime. We must understand that an organization is composed of men, and this organization is composed of men with many grievances, and it is not natural that they should be, at least all their members, kept within bounds, and especially during the exciting times. This thing must be taken into consideration. They are small things, and what was done was only taking some little part of the engines and hiding them — not breaking the engines, I understood. I inquired into that. Even that I would not justify, but I think the circumstances palliate it. Q. Well, would you make the same answer with regard to the instigation and sup- port and maintenance of a boycott 1 — A. The boycott is nothing but a retaliation for the blacklisting. The boycott is evil for evil, an eye for an eye. Of course the boy- cott is a powerful weapon, and must be used with discretion. I believe in bringing men to their senses by any means that are potent and efficacious. By Governor Stewart : Q. With dynamite ? — A. Even dynamite. Understand me, when you ask the ques- tion I answer directly. Under what circumstances ? I do not believe in using it at random ; I do not believe in Socialism and anarchy. When you asked me I took up the word in the same sense. When the power of a corporation is acting in the de- struction of humanity — and it is demoralization, because poverty and exasperation lead to demoralization — when a corporation continues in that way, and poor men are driven to the wall, I say that they should act, and any power that they can etfioa- ciously handle is legitimate. Q. Isn't that anarchy; is it not lawlessness?— A. I do not understand it in that sense ; no, sir. Q. If they do anything in violation of law it is lawlessness. — A. That is another question. I do not know that the boycott is in violation of law. 1 can deal with whoever I please. Q. I was taking you at your word ; you said any means? — A. I said any means. Q. Do you mean any unlawful means? — A. I did not say unlawful means. We were preaking of an organized association and a given thing, the boycott. If you want to yasry me to the question outside of this present case I would probably go further than can wish me to go, into nations. Q We are talking about this nation, society here, and nothing else. — A. Then we are not speaking of dynamite at all. That is out of the question. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 471 Q. My point is this, whether you indorse the use of any unlawful methods under a government of law to redress grievances? That is a square proposition. — A. If you brine me to that, too, I will speak candidly. If a people find that legislatures can be purchased by Gould and that the States and Government are almost bought up and corrupted, I believe there are cases where the people can take the law into their own hands. I believe, governor, if you go into the abstract causes, speaking on abstract^ questions, I will answer you on abstract questions. I have given you an abstract statement. Q. My question was a very simple one. I do not think there is any difSculty in answering it yes or no. — A. 1 answered you. Q. You suppose a case that does not exist. I do not suppose that you will say that the legislatuiie of Missouri is so venal as to be purchased by Mr. Gould? — A. Well, that is a matter that is to be investigated. Q. Do you say so? — A. Ko, I do not say so. Q. Then your supposed case has nothing to do with my question. — A. You asked me whether it was ever right to use unlawful means, and I gave an answer to an ab- stract question. Q. I asked you whether you in your judgment it was lawful to use unlawful means to redress grievances which existed under a government of laws such as the Govern- ment of the United States or the State of Missouri as it exists to-day ? — A. If you put it that way, I say no. Q. My question implied that. — A. It didn't state it, though. Q. Because this is rather an important question to the American people now. — A. Very, and I believe that corporations are the cause of this Socialistic evil. Socialism is the outgrowth of grievances. When law is powerless the State is powerless to bring corporations to their senses, and a sense of injustice breeds Socialism. Q. Socialism did not originate in a land of corporations? — A. It originated under the arbitrary power under the Czar of Russia and other powers of Europe ; but we have czars in this country, too. Q. We have legislatures also. — A. Well, it is to be questioned. It remains yet to be demonstrated whether legislatures are able to keep the czar under subjection. Q. Do you think they have not the power in this country ? — A. I think they have the power. Q. Do you think it is not better to redress grievances by lawful methods ? — A. Certainly. Q. And bear them for a while ? — A. It is very well to moralize to an individual Q. That is not moralizing; that is a straight proposition. — A. To tell people to bear grievances is moralizing. Q. I do not think so. — A. I think it is. Q. The question is whether it would not be better to bear existing grievances until they can be corrected by electing the proper men to the legislature, in a country where the people, by means of ballots, are the law-makers and governors? — ^A. Tell- ing people to do this and moralizing to them is all very well ; but you can't moralize to the masses. They are led by instincts ; they are led by a sense of independence ; they are led by the American spirit of independence, and if trampled upon it will break out in revolution and anarchy. Q. They are led rather by the passionate appeals of the socialist and communist than by the clergy, who do not recommend such things — is that what you mean to say ? The clergy, as I understand it, do not advise that sort of thing. — A. No ; but with regard to the leaders. The leaders of the communists are the outgrowth of the movement ; the movement does not originate from the leaders. The leader comes from the movement : the leader comes up and takes the opportunity of the hour, but what is the cause of that commotion ? Grievances and injustice and arbitrary power; that is the cause of it. Then the leader comes up and takes his opportunity and car- ries them probably further than they should go. Q. Then the question comes up whether It is not the duty of every citizen, whether a clergyman or not, to endeavor to lead people to redress their grievances by peace- ful remedies and the lawful methods; that is my point. — A. That is what I have done. Though I speak strongly now, I have done it. I have counseled peace. I understood you to lay down a broad statement, and I would not have it said that I would allow a people ever to lie under the submission of slavery while they had hands and arms to use them. I would not like to countenance such a statement. By Governor Curtin: Q. I did not understand you about the boycotting of the road. Do I understand you that thisGonld system of roads procured that boycotting? — A. No; not procured . it, but I said that they recognized, as I understood from a statement in the paper and from others previously, they recognized the boycott placed on it by the Knights of Labor. If they recognized it, I ask you, why did they try and force trains along the road, and why did they raise the question ? Jly point is this, that the strike was pro- 472 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. voked by repeated promises and causing contracts made by corporations -with the Knights of Labor to be broken almost before the ink was dried on the paper. Q. In reference to the boycotting of that road we have had evidence before this committee that this system yielded to that.— A. That is what I said. Q. So as to prevent a strike on the system?— A. So they did ; but why should they yield? Q. So as to prevent a strike on the great system which was under the control of these people, 5,000 miles of railroad, that is the evidence we have taken.— A. But it would appear to me that yielding and then breaking it, making contracts not to re- move engines out of the shops and then removing them, was one of the causes that I stated to have provoked it. -, . , , Q. That road is in the hands of a receiver.— A. I am not acquainted with the case, but in mentioning the causes that led to the strike it occurred to me that was one. The company should treat their men with more dignity and should baye more respect for their word, and not make a contract they did not intend to carry out. When such representative bodies as corporations have no respect for their word and no respect for their contracts it is demoralizing and it leads to strikes. By Governor Stewart : Q. I suppose you do not testify in regard to the matters except from information that you have derived from these employes of the company ; that is, you have no per- sonal knowledge of the violation of contracts or of grievances ? — A. I have a personal knowledge of grievances. Q. What do you call personal knowledge; what they told you ? — A. My observation for years. I have lived in a railroad town for twelve years. Q. You have only testified from information which you say you have received &om the employes ? — A. I have testified to matters attained from information or from em- ployes and also from observation. Q. In the matter of the breaches of contract, for example ? — A. Of course I had no opportunity of knowing that. Q. You derived that from information ? — A. I have no reason to doubt the informa- tion, and therefore I give it. I know it is reliable information. Governor Stbwakt. You believe it, no doubt. By Governor Cuktin : Q. The fact is that corporations and particularly railroad corporations having large powers granted them by the States do sometimes exceed their power. We are looking for information in this respect, and if we find it so we certainly desire it to appear here. There is no' question about that. But at the same time the annoyances are aggravating and they produce 'a combination which produced some violence, as has been proven. We all have our grievances. Did you ever know a man in your con- gregation that had not ? — A. No, sir. Q. I never knew a man that had not. I have had them myself, but other men not having the same grievances I had I could not make a combination. Those men combined to redress grievances. They had a perfect right to leave their work, at any time they pleased. They had a right to leave in a body when they pleased. That was their own business. But as to whether other people should not work, that is an- other question. The law then comes in, the law of protection. I think your theory is correct, the men may have had grievances for many of them say so, and that I sup- pose produced the society ? — A. I think a distinction should be made between tne cause of the strike and the continuance of it. I think those who struck and went out only thought it would be for a few days, and therefore the evils attending it would be small. They did not intend to continue it two months. It was the company that saw the society had made a mistake, and thoy could get public opinion to be brought against it, and they could crush it, that really continued the strike. > By Governor Stbwakt : Q. Mr. Irons stands at th.e head of this particular organized body that ordered the strike T — ^A. So I understand it. Q. He ordered the strike, and I believe it is generally conceded now that it was a mistake. Now, is it fair to charge the responsibility of its continuance on the railroad company if he did make a mistake? Is it not generally recognized that if a man makes a mistake that he ought to take it back ? Does not the same rule apply to an organization ? When Mr. Powderly advised Mr. Irons, or ordered the strike off, if I understand it, was it not Mr. Irons that continued the strike ? How then can you say it is the fault of the railroad company ? — A. I will state this, that so far as I un- derstand this examination is not about the moral grounds of it, who are to blame Q. But you were saying the continuance of the strike was exclusively the fault of the company ? — A. Yes, sir, and I repeat it. I say in investigating a case like this we should look to the intention. The law may not look to the intention of an act. I think this is not a mere legal proceeding. The intention of every one, I suppose, LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 473 was this, that they thought the strike would only last a few days, and therefore they thought the injuTy would not be much. The injury should not be attributed to them, because they did not intend it. The company would not come to terms ; they would not arbitrate ; they would not so much as hear the representative of an organization', when, if they had had a little condescension and met the men, the strike would have been ended after the first week or two. I say still, and repeat it, that the stubborn- ness and the obstinacy, the autocracy, of the company was the cause of the continu- ance of the strike, and therefore they were in part to blame for the evils resulting from the strike. Q. Don't you think when anybody does an act that turns out to be wrong that as soon as discovered the wi:ong ought to be corrected ? — A. They could not then. They had made a mistake, and the withdrawal of it would have been detrimental to thou- sands of men. Q. That was the judgment of Mr. Irons, but not the judgment of Mr. Powderly. He ordered the strike ofl', and the men were willing to go back to work. — A. Mr. Pow- derly ordered the strike off on a false statement made by Gould — misrepresentation or some act of duplicity on Gould's part. Q. I suppose there is a difference of claim about that. — A. And when he found his mistake I suppose he did not insist on the withdrawal of the strike. I believe Mr. Powderly approved of the strike when he found that Gould did not intend to arbi- trate. Q. Mr. Powderly said it was a mistake. — A. In the beginning it was a mistake. By Colonel BuRNBS : Q. We are investigating as to the cause as well as the extent of the trouble between the Missouri Pacific Kailway and its employes in the State of Missouri and other States. I understand you to have intimated that a part of this cause might be found in the legislation of the country and perhaps in the legislation of the States, the system of legislation, Federal and State, in which certain individual parties wielded more power than other individuals, and more power than the people believed in right they ought to have been allowed to wield ; that under this system of legislation monopolies had been created and great powers had been conceded to such corporations ; that those powers overshadowed to a certain extent Federal legislation and State legislation and the judiciary of the country, and that because of this concentration of power over the institutions of the country the public mind became suspicious, became uneasy and restless, and that this was a part of the original cause, perhaps, of the present trouble. Do you wish to be so understood ? — A. I do, decidedly. I believe that equity follows justice, and that there is no equity pursued in railroad corporations where one man gets $35,000 a year out of the earnings and another mau gets 90 cents a day. I believe there is no equity in that, no equal distribution of wages and the labor of men. Capital is the result of labor, and capital should be equitably and justly distributed among labor. I do not believe in equality, in entire equality. All men are not equal, intel- ligently, physically, or morally. I think there should be some equity and j ustice used in the distribution of wages. A case came before mo the other day where a man had a sub-contract, and he got flOOa week, and he was paying his men $1.50 a day, and it was skilled labor, too. Cases like that come before me and it leads me to believe that corporations ought to be compelled by law to treat their employes with justice and equity, for where they can carry the upper hand they do so with a vengeance. Q. In your association with laboring men have you found that this feeling is gen- eral or otherwise ? — A. Yes ; I have read and I have also spoken to a great many on the question, and I find out that there is a widespread feeling of unrest and dissatis- faction arising from the present order of things ; that where these ideas are put in form in an organization like the Knights of Labor it must break out now and then. Strikes are inevitable. That is the way I view it. You might call them necessary evils. Q. Do you believe that any part of the cause of the troubles comes from the belief in the minds of men. that capital gets more than its share of the results of their la- bor ? — A. That is the real cause. The others are mere provocations and mere incidentals. Q. Have you hoard it talked between the men or between yourself and the men that dividends are sought not only upon the capital invested but upon speculative capital called watered stock?— A. Yes ; I have publicly and privately heard it dis- cussed, and the Knights of Labor are very well educated. Q. Do you regard that as constituting any part of the cause of the trouble? — A. Yes; because the officials of the road are many of them nice men and treat their men well. I could not understand how 6,000 men would obey the orders of Mr. Irons and give up their interests when the majority of them were doing very well, and go out ou a strike except for the real fundamental causes, which are the burning grievances and their disrespect for the officers, although they do respect the ojEcers, many of them. The officers in De Soto are good men, held in high esteem by the men, yet these men obey the order because they have no respect for the whole system. They 474 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. consider it rotten, aa corrupt and corrupting. They believe by tbese means and otliers, through the ballot, they will yet purify the couutry of such corruption, and I hope they will. Q. Has the question of the effect of consolidation been discussed or considered among the men ? — A. The effect of consolidation ? <}. Between different lines of railway ?— A. Yes ; all such questions pertaining to railroads and pertaining to the present trouble are discussed. Q. Are the men averse to such consolidation ? — A. Yes, as far as I understand them, because such consolidation generally leads to the injury of the men. A man waa telling me the other day that he went to Texas and found his name on a list in Texas as blacklisted on the whole system or combination. Of course when they turn against any man or any body of men they use their power, an absolute power almost. That relating to the Knights of Labor is, of course, injurious, As to its other bearings I cannot say. I am not a political economist to speak of the material injury of con- solidation. By Governor CURTIN : Q. Have you the name of the man who went and found his name on the black list f — A. Yes, sir; I can give his name. Q. Is he here in this house 1 — A. No, sir. The whole system is so united that they have done everything in their power against the order, and they can do so because of the consolidation. If one road were independent of another, not bound by contracts or anything of that kind to obey the other, a person could go from one road to an- other and be iree. You are excommunicated or exiled when you turn against the company here, and you have to go East, go outside of the Gould system altogether. Q. I would like to have the name of that mp,n ? Is he here or in De Soto t — A. Do you wish it now ? I will give it afterwards. The mere fact that he mentioned it to me would be enough to discharge him. I know the spirit of the railway company. A man cannot speak to a Knight of Labor without being in danger of being dis- charged. I might injure the man by saying it. I am on oath. I will give his name to the committee privately. Mr. BuKNES. Do not do it if you think it will injure the man. — A. I firmly believe it will injure the man. Governor CURTIN. Making a black list and sending it around would be rather bad. By Governor Stewakt : Q. You say that an employ^ of this road cannot speak to a Knight of Labor with- out being discharged ? — A. Without being in danger of being discharged, bo I am in- formed by men in the employ of the railroad company at present. As I said before, a brakeman on a passenger train told me that he was afraid to stand on the platform and speak to the Knights of Labor. " I hid myself the next time I passed." I was ashamed of such a man, Q. Does not that indicate the man is a coward ? — A. What is the cause of the cow- ardice T Q. Probably he was bom a coward. — A. Cowardice and fear arises from some fear generally — arises from some threat, because he knows the company. A conductor spoke favorably of the Knights of Labor, and he was threatened to be discharged; that I have from the conductor, too. Q. What conductor was that ? — A. On the same ground I would decline to give his name, because I know he would be injured. Q. I do not see how we can investigate the subject if you decline to give names f— A. I stand to the statement, the published statement under oath, that Ifirmly believe that any man, not only an employ^ of the company but even out of it, that shows any sympathy with the Knights of Labor is thereby an enemy of the company — considered such. If you want the times or persons I cannot give them, because that would be uncharitable. By Colonel Burnbs : Q. Do you know what proportion of the men at De Soto receive SI. 10 a day f— A. A great many in the shops ; I believe some young men that have been working two or three years receive only 80 cents a day. I could not tell you the percentage of the men. I have never made a close inquiry into the details of the thing, I know that men, especially section-hands, do not get enough to support them decently. Q. Were you in the mob near Duffy's house taking any part whatever with the crowd which surrounded itf — A. No ; it can't be called a mob. I was not therebut I came up afterwards. They were four blocks away, and I saw the commotion and came over and saw the man Nelson was in the crowd and some boys were handling • him rather roughly^ and I saved him, kept the boys away. They were not Knights of Labor. The Knights of Labor disapproved of it. Q. Youwere not^ seeking to do any violence to the man that took refuge in the I never saw him. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 475 Q, Did you state to paities in De Soto that you counseled and considered the use of dynamite under certain conditions permissible f — A. No, sir ; not that I remember. The question was talked of, and I rather counseled prudence. They know that on other matters as I have said before to Goyernor Stewart, as I have made bold to say that when a people are depressed, are fighting for life and all that life holds dear, that any means in their power may be used. They know I hold that view. I was approached on the question and counseled moderation and peace, and said they should refrain from it, and recommended them to pursue moral means. Q. Are you a member of the Law and Order League of De Soto ? — A. No ; I would not be a member of such a burlesque. The whole thing is a burlesque, the whole thing. Q. I am requested to ask you if you will give us the names of the men employed by the company who are fit for the penitentiary ? — A. Well, they might be promoted by the company if I should give their names. Governor Stewart. That is nothing to the committee. The Witness. I am really conscientious in that matter. I really believe the men would be promoted. Q. Never mind ; give us the names. That is the question. — A. I will give them privately, but not publicly. I will give them to the committee, the Congressional committee, but not in the presence of the railroad officials. Governor Stewabt, I think Mr. Kennan would like to know if he has got any men there that ought to go to the penitentiary. Judge Portis. We have the right to know that. The Witness. As I said before I say again, I do not want such men promoted. They might get Mr. Kerrigan's place. By Colonel Burnes : Q. I understood you as expressing the opinion they were fit for the penitentiary. Did you mean by that, that you knew of any crimes they had committed 1 — A. Yes, sir ; I was aware of the crimes some of them had committed, and they were given revolv- ers by the company. I complained of that to the railroad authorities, that they ought to be put off the road. They are of the worst character. I know others whose social standing beyond question is bad, decidedly. They are outlaws ; what we vul- garly call " blacklegs." That class of men got revolvers from the company and were E)yal to the company. Q. Do yon know who it was that threw the pin t — A. The man accnsed of throwing the pin ? Q. Yes. — A. Yes; I know him. He is not a man belonging to the Knights of Labor, I am told. Q. You do not know except you were told so 1 — A. I was told he was not. Q, You do not desire to give the names of the parties, I understand f — A. I will give them to the Congressional committee. The Congressional committee, as I nn- derstand, is a body proper to receive such information, not the public. By Governor Stewart : Q. Yon stated yon complained to the railroad ofSoials of the men ; if so, they have been advised, probably, of their names ? — A. A railroad official — a certain official, I may consider an honest man — I might inform him, but the whole system in its workings and chief officers knows no moral law. Q. Do you apply that to Mr. Kerrigan t — A. No ; I consider him a just and honest man. Q. What do yon mean by chief officials ? — A. I mean that so many of them that govern the road seem to govern it without regard to moral law. Q. Will you name those men f — ^A. No. It is my impression Q. Do you know of any acts of those officials that you can specify as coming within ■ your own knowledge such as you describe t — A. Well, an officer in De Soto boasted that he had put down three strikes already and was going to put down this, and curses and damns every word he says, and showed his muscle and called me vulgar names. He is a prominent railroad official. He employs those men. Q. Have yon any objection to giving his name ? — A. No, sir. Q. Who is he f— A. Mr. Kennan. Q. The superintendent of the division ? — ^A. Yes, sir. The information I have about his cursing and damning me is from the mayor of the city. I think that is reliable. Q. That you hear. He did not curse you to your face T— A. I heard it from others. My information as derived from many creditable witnesses is enough. Q. Well, you have mentioned the acts of that high official. What other high offi- cial 1 — A. Mr. Gould himself. Q. Mr. Gould has nothing to do with the administration of the road, I suppose you know f— A. That is not my view of the matter. I think he has. I think the majority of the men, except such men as Mr. Kerrigan and others, having independence. I think the others are ruled by them. I think they are puppets in his hands. 476 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you think that Mr. Gould has anything to do with the administration, em- ploying men, fixing wages, and the methods of administration on this system of road f — ^A. He has indirectly, in having the employment of such men as Mr. Hoxie, Kennan, and others. Q. All he does is to put some men at the head and tell them to manage the road. You do not suppose he has anything to do with the matters out of which grew the grievannes ? — A. I think he selects them because of similarity of views and of their mode of carrying on railroad management suitable to him. Q. Now, about Mr. Hoxie, is there anything in Mr. Hoxie's method of administra- tion that you would criticise ? — A. I have already criticised his arbitrary power and his obstinacy. Q. Some act of his, not general statements. Do you know of his refusal to act which is a subject of criticism, which is a proper subject of inquiry by the committee? What has Mr. Hoxie done that you know of that would justify the remark you made about the higher officials ? — ^A. I went around to the citizens of the town and got up a citizens' meeting and a committee was appointed and waited on Mr. Hoxie, and he would not hear them. I have that grievance against him. I consider him, as Drnm- moud said, a kind of Czar. Q. When was that ? — ^A. At this meeting. Q. That is since the strike? — A. That is since the strike. Q. I referred to the administration of the road as far as related to the treatment of the men? — A. I don't know anything of that, but I know the whole system, as I said before, is corrupt. Q. I am trying to bring you down to some point which will show us your judgment is well founded? — A. My judgment is founded upon facts. Q. Now, I want you to state some fact which is within your personal knowledge which justifies your statement that the whole system is corrupt, something that you know which you can state that indicates corruption in the management of this roadS — A. The injustice, and tyranny, and refusal to reason with men is corrupt and cor« rupting. The refusal to pay decent wages to men is corrupting, because it is theft ; it is robbery legalized, may be. By Governor Cuktin: Q. You will understand, Father O'Leary, that before the rosolution'was offered to raise the committee I had been informed that there was a black list of names circa- lated throughout the railroads of the southwestern country here, and the first time I have heard of it since is from you this morning. The evidence would be very inju- rious to a railroad corporation if they keep a black list of men, and send it to other roads, and keep them from being employed. I was told it in Washington. Governor Stewakt. Mr. Sibley or some official testified that there had not been any black list kept on the road since Mr. Hoxie had the management of it, and th»t there was no such a thing on the line of the road now. The Witness. I will give that man's name to the committee. Governor Curtin. That would be very well. You see there is this in it: A man might be in the employment of the road as engineer or brakeman and might he talk- ing to a friend without knowing he was a Knight of Labor, and it would be only when he knew he was talking to a Knight of Labor that he would be afraid of being pun- ished. — A. I am certain there is that intimidation ; certain of it. Their purpose is to destroy the Knights of Labor, and their purpose is to make exceptions against thrim every time, to make discriminations against them. Colonel BuKSnES. So far as I am concerned I do not care to investigate the facta as to whether those charges are true or untrue now. This is not the place or time or tribunal to do it. But I want to ask you if this feeling that the management of the system is corrupt, and corrupting, that some of the managers are tyrannical andop- preSsive^ was generally in the minds of the men and was the cause of irritation and dissatisfaction, whether the charges are true or untrue ? — A. The charges Q. Whether the charges against Mr. Gould or Mr. Hoxie or against the general management of the company are true or untrue ; was the belief in the minds of the men generally that the charges were true to an extent sufficient to induce them to become dissatisfied and restless? — A. Yes, sir; the public belief is that Gould is a robber, and should be convicted of robbery and stealing; that he is deceiving. By Governor Stewart : Q. Whom do you speak of? — A. Gould. By Colonel Burites : Q. You are speaking of the common esteem in which he is held by the ment— A. Yes, sir. Q. He is looked on with horror? — A. Yes, sir ; a certain Congressman expressed the common feeling of the country that it would be a benefit to flie country— though it LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST 477 seems a coutradiction of terms — that it would be a l)eiiutit to tbe country if he was strung up to a, lamp-posi Q. Well, that is very improper.— A. Well, I only want to tell you that is the popu- lar feeling. Q. I am speaking of the popular feeling of the employes; how they think about it, how they brood over it, how it attects them in their action. — A. That is one of the great causes of the strike. That sense of justice and right that burns within them when they consider the way in which Gould and men of his class rule and ruin the country. The Knights of Labor are men that give close study to social questions, and are men of wide information. Though they are mechanics, they are educated men, and I believe as an organization it is good, because certainly ignorance is the cause of Socialism and the cause of all the evils that exist in the world in a great measure, and education, therefore, will bring about a better condition of things, and the order of the Knights of Labor is an educational institution, PETER W. WENDELL, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your name and place of residence. — Answer. Peter W.Wendell; 1829 South Tenth street. Q. Your occupation f — A. Blacksmith. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. Just one year. , Q. What wages have you been receiving ? — A. Two dollar^ and sixty cents. Q. Do the men who work with you receive the same wages or less wages ? — ^A. That is what I could not tell. I do not know. I did not inquire into any man's wages as long as I was there, and they never told me. Q. Have you ever received more than $2.60 during the year ? — A. No ; I received less when I first started ; I received $2.50 at first. Q. Then were you raised to 362.60 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you raised above that at any timet — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you promised any higher wages than that ? — ^A. Yes, sir; I was promised 30 cents and only got 10 cents. Mr. Bartlett struck it oflf after the foreman allowed it to me. Q. Did Mr. Bartlett claim that he had no authority to raise your wages ? — A. That is what he said. Q. Yet he raised them 10 cents ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How could he have no authority to raise them and raise them 10 cents ? — A. That is what he claimed. Q. Tour foreman raised yon 30 cents and he would not allow it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You never got the pay ? — A, No, sir. Q. Is there any other matter of grievance that you can think of against the com- pany ? — A. Not that I can think ot. Q. Were you in the late strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Yon went out on the 6th of March ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the cause of your going out 1 — A. Well, as far as I understand, that unskilled labor should have $1.50 a day and the order shall be recognized; Ido not ex- actly know all. Q. You would not have gone out but for the order of District Assembly 101 ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Why did the foreman agree to raise you 30 cents f — A. He changed me from one fire to another. The man at the fire I got was paid $3, and he only allowed me 30 cents, being a new hand. I was satisfied I was doing the work as well as the man did it that was there before ; I am positive of it. Q. The class to which you were promoted was better work ? — A, Yes, sir. Q. You were able to do the work ?— A. Yes, as well as the man that was there before me, if not better. Q. Was any complaint ever made that you did not do the work ? — A. No, not that I know of. Q. Do you think if you had gone out by yourself that you would have received the 30 cents f — A. I do not know, I might have. Q. Have you applied for work since ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; they sent for me last Friday, a man in the shop spoke to me and told me to come, and he says he spoke to Air. Bart- lett and Mr. Bartlett said he would hire any Knights of Labor. Q. You didn't hear Mr. Bartlett say that ?— A. No, but the man told me so, that he said that. He said as much as if I would lea ve the Knights of Labor he would hire me. Q. Did you apply to Mr. Bartlett for the position ? — A. No, sir. 478 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. JOHN HELMER, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your name, age, residence and occupation, — Answer. John Helmer; 1301 South Compton avenue ; painter. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company ? — A. Eight or nine years. , Q. In what department have you been employed ? — A. In firing engines in the yard, firing switch engines. i Q. Specify as briefly as you can any cause of mistreatment that you have had. — ^A., I went to work there last April 6th, a year ago ; they gave me a job in tjie yard paint- ing box cars and I worked, till night, and he told me to come and fire the engine in the paint shop at night, and he only allowed me single time. I was supposed to be entitled to time and a half. Q. Did you make a claim for the time ? — ^A. No ; because I was[afraid of being dis- charged. I had been out ten weeks before thaf. Q. You were restrained from making the claim for fear they would discharge yon f— A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any other cause of grievance ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you quit the service on the 6th of March T — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you engaged in auy act of violence? — ^A. No, sir; not at all. Q. Have you been arrested ? — A. No, sir. J. SHAUGHNESSY, being duly sworn, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific ?— Answer. About two years. Q. In what department ? — A. In the round house, cleaning ash pans. Q. When you were first employed whai were your wages f — ^A. When I first went there I was a wiper and got $1.40. They put me up to §1.60. I was at this work pre- vious to the other strike, and at that time we used to get a day from five to six one Saturday every month. We go to work at half-past six every morning and only get ten hours. We work every Sunday and get no overtime for it. Q. You go to work at half-past six and work till six ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That makes eleven hours and a half? — ^A. That is the time we are there, and we only get ten hour's pay. The others get ten hours' pay and go to work at seven. Q. Did you mention the matter to your foreman T — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did be say? — He said I ought to be thankful I was working. Q. Were you ever required to work at night ? — A. Yes, sir ; they told me they vronld give me the first show at firing, and instead of that they put twenty ahead of me. Last February they put me at work and I worked all day and all night firing for five days and I never got any overtime for it. Q. You got no overtime for working on Sunday ? — A. No ; not at night either. Q. Were you laboring under the understanding that that was contrary to the agree- ment between the company and the governors ? — A. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. So when the call was made by District Assembly 101 you went out on the 6th of March f — A. Yes, I had grievance enough of my own, but it would be no use of my quitting. They would give me my time. Q. You were hopeful in the reconstruction you would get your wrongs redressed! — A. Yes sir. Q. Did you commit any acts of violenqe ? — A. No sir. Q. Are you working now ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At the same work? — A. No, sir. Q. What are you doing? — A. I am working down town here. I applied for my sit- uation and they told me they did not want me. Q. Did they tell you why they did not want you ? — A. No, sir. Q. Whom did you apply to ? — A. Vermillion, my boss. Q. Do you know of any black list of men ? — A. I do not know that I am on it. I have not inquired whether I am on any black list or not. Q. Do you know of any book qv list kept, a black list or objectionable book?— A. No, sir. Q. What wages are you getting now ? — A. One dollar and six'y cents a day. T. B. DUFFY, being duly sworn, testifies as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. State your name, age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. T. B. Dnffy; fiaiflpnnA, fiQfi Arirvlfi H.vfinne ' hln.p.Ufiimi+li TiAlno-r residence, 626 Argyie avenue ; blacksmith helper. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 479 Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific ? — A. About two years and a half. Q. What were your wages iu September, 1884 ? — A. $1.63. Q. What were they after March lH, 1885 t — A. |1.48 a day ; that is, for nine hours. - Q. And was it for nine hours in September, 1884 1 — A. About the same, I believe. Q. Then you were receiving the same wages in 1885 that you received in Septem- ber, 1884, except you did not work as many hours ? — A. We had a crft of 10 per cent, in 1884 or 1885, and then after that they made.an agreement we would get $1.65 a day again. . ^ Q. Did you strike in 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Whereabouts t— A. I was here in the shops. I was not in the strike ; I was in the shop here. I was tbere at the time they made the agreement they would pay us, at the time the strike was in Sedalia. Q. Do you remember of any meeting of the representatives of the company and the men in the machine-shop at which any promise was made in regard to an increase of wages to any class of workmen t — A. Yes, sir ; there was something to that effect sometime ago. Q. Tell us what it was and when it was. — A. I believe it was last September, if I am not mistaken, somewhere around there. Q. What was said ? — A. That they would give us our regular wages and pay us time and a half for overtime, I believe. Q. Was anything said about being friendly to the company and loyal to the com- pany f — A. Yes ; they had a notice to that effept, that all men that would be loyal to the company they would give us our wages again, $1.65 a day. Q. To what did that loyalty refer ?— A. Men that did not go out. Q. Men that did not strike in the March preceding? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you certain that there was a discrimination made against men that went out in March, lh85 ? — A. It looked that way. I noticed everybody that was employed afterwards only got $1.45 a day. Q. Was that so understood with the men ? — A. Yes, sir. J. L. DELAY, being duly sworu, testifies as follows : By Colonel Bubnes : Question. We are examining witnesses with regard to the cause and extent of the trouble existing between tlie Missouri Pacific Railway Company and its employes. I direct your attention to the hospital system in foroe on this system of roads and the manner in which bridge-building men are transported from place to place without extra time for traveling, also to circulars and orders that have been issued from time to time by assemblies in regard to strikes, and generally you may make such state- ment that will give information on the subject under consideration. Governor Stewakt. It seems to me it is not necessary to take up any more time with that hospital matter. We know all there is about it, just as much as if we should examine 100 witnesses. The Witness. I wish to state in regard to the hospital matter. The surgeon testi- fied that the hospital paid the funeral expenses of Marion McGinuess, and I wish to say it was paid by the Knights of Labor at Baring Cross. Governor Stewart. But as far as the general sulgect is concerned it is entirely un- necessary to take any more evidence on that subject. The fact is that men are taxed for it over the whole system, and that it is maintained in a particular way, and men are sent there, and also a good many men do not derive any benefit from it. Those facts already appear. As to the bridge men,, the fact that they are transported long distances and that they are not paid for the time spent in traveling at nights, that fact appears and has not been contradicted. I do not see any propriety in taking the time of the committee in running over the same ground again. Colonel BuENBS. I agree with my colleague in his opinion very largely. I think the witness is intelligent enough to confine his testimony to those points. The Witness. I will first state in regard to the special meeting called in Marshall. It was stated that the meeting was called for the purpose of getting a strike on the Gould southwest system. That meeting was called for the purpose of taking ac ion in regard to a resolution that took this one man or autocratic power away ; that there would be no move taken unless under the jurisdiction of District Assembly 101 ; that they would have a say in it. The cause of the strike is the recognition of the order, that unskilled labor be paid $1.50 a day at least, and carrying out the contract of 1885. The circular that was mentioned, which was asked to be explained by an- other gentleman on the stand, I will explain. That circular was: "Will yon sus- tain your executive board in requesting a recognition of our order, also in requesting for unskilled labor, such as section men, wipers, &c., $1.50 a day, with instructions in regard to recognition of the order?" These instructions were to the effect that the recognition of the order, recognizing us as Knights of Labor — it was not meant as 480 LABOR THOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. that, but to recognize our executive board and treat with them for the men or through them. If they made an agreement, they were not supposed to sign an agreeinent en- tered into between the Knights of Labor and the railroad company. They would say employes or anything. As long as they would treat with the executive commit- tee that was all we meant when we asked recognition. That circular I have read myself, and I ha,ve telegraphed for it, hut whether I will get it in time I do not know; it is rather doubtful. The case of Hall, I do not know whether there was a circular sent out or not, but I know that the Hall case had very little bearing on the strike by any one who attended their assemblies. I was in Little Rock on the 6 th of March, when the strike was ordered, and I went out, and I counseled the men not to use any acts of violence. All the violence used in Little Rock was by Division Superin- tendent Wieden and Clark Hall, both under indictment by the grand jury. The men they had arrested the grand jury found no case against them and discharged them. That is the extent of the violence in Little Rock that I am acquainted vrith. I am not a member of District Assembly XOl executive board. I was called in the board on the 14th of March by Mr. Irons, and went to Sedalia where he was, and on getting there, there was a dispatch sent down to Mr. Hoxie asking him if he would treat with us and settle difficulties, and I will say that if Mr. Hoxie had said he would treat with us the strike would have been ended in twenty-fonr hours, I- am positive. But Mr. Hoxie — I do not recollect the exact substance of the telegram he sent in answer to, us, but it wound up with as much as saying he would not treat with us ; I do not recollect the words. We went from there to Kansas City. We met the others there, and also the governors, and the governoi-s came down'here ; and before they came down here they told me personally — Governor Marmadijke and myself had 4nite a controversy over it, and he admitted that we did not break the agreement of 1885. He also went as far as to say we could not break it. After that I do not suppose it is necessary to go over my actions while I have been in the city, or anything of the kind. When the chief surgeon of the hospital mentioned the fact that on the death of Marion McGinness they had paid the funeral expenses, I will state that he was killed on the Camden branch by an engine turning over on him. He was burned to death — scalded to death — and he laid out there four or five hours on the grate bars, and had no care until the Knights of Labor got there from Little Rook. The company gave him no care. They took him to the house and he died. The railroad company lurnished a coffin, but it was not suitable to trans- port him to his home, which was — I can't exactly remember : I think I have a paper here that will tell. Peoria— Pekin was his home. The railroad company furnished transportation, and that is all they furnished. I have the undertaker's bill here, which is $83.50, the expenses of the gentleman who accompanied the corpse to Peoria, which is $28.39. and also the wreath, which was $4, and the gloves, crape, &c., which was 90 cents. The undertaker's bill includes the carriages, and also the minister's fee, which was f 2. I will submit them in evidence. The hospital fee is taken out, and if a man is hired nothing is said to him when hired. After he is in the employ of the com- pany, if he did not pay the fee he left the employment of the company. They paid the money and had nothing to say about the use of the money, only they were told it went to the use of the hospital. The grievances that existed among the bridge and building men, and which Mr. Peck stated he did receive a telegram, I will state the bridge and huilding men appointed me to represent them in regard to their grievances, and to the best of my ability I did it. I investigated the case, and I was «hown orders, although I could not get them — the late orders were that the different foremen were instructed to transport their men nights and on Sundays if possible ; to never transport them week-days if possible. Also, when a man in bridge and building department was dis- charged, no matter what part of the road it was, he had to go to Little Rock without pay. It was necessary to go to Little Rock to get paid or pack up his spare tools. I telegraphed Mr. Peck, asking him if I could see him in Pacific on Sunday, and he tele- graphed back, he says, "If I am in Pacific on Sunday you can -see me." I think that was the substance of his telegram ; it was to that effect ; but he gave me no answer one way or the other whether he would receive me or not. I sent a telegram if he would not say yes or no, as it was rather expensive to me to travel, and I got no an- swer. The bl^ck list has been mentioned here, and I -will say that I knOw the black list has been in existence within the last year. By Governor Curtin: Q. Give us the names put on the black list. — A. 1 cannot give you the names. I do not know the persons, but I will tell how I know. There was a man who came into the shops at Little Rook, and he wanted a job ; and he seemed to be pretty well recommended ; but Fuller, the general foreman, did not hire him. I was talking to Fuller a short time afterwards, knowing at the time he wanted a man, and askednim if he hired the man. He said, "No, I could not hire him." I asked him why, andhe said, " He is one of the black-listed men." He said, too, right there, that it was a shame the best men in the business are black-listed ; some of the best men are LABOR TROUBLES IX THE .SOUTH AND WEST. ' 481 Wack-listed. I told him I clidn't Ihink it was right to black-list a man. He was the general foreman of the shops at Little Rock. By Governor Stewart : Q. When was that ; give the Hate. — A. I can't give the date ; it was some time in September last ; I am not safe in giving the date. I do not know how near I could give it. It might lie guess work on my part if I gave it. The general cause of the strike, as I understand it, were the circulars that were sent out. Evei^hody had a chance to vote on them. The result of the vote — I do not know the particalars, but I do know there were 3,000 voted yes. I cannot think of anything else, if you only want the main facts. Q. On what proposition was the vote east ; you say 3,000 voted yes ; now what was the precise proposition on which they voted ? — A. I cannot say, only in my assembly. I know all got the same circular — the circular sent out by Division 101, that they will sustain their executive board in requesting that unskilled labor get at least |1.50, meaning by that sectionmen, wipers, &c. Q. My point is this : I amage to property that you have not men- tioned?^ — A. No; I only saw cars — I saw a cajr that was on fire the morning after the shooting, bnt I didn't know who done it, nor nothing of the kind. I don't know- how it got afire. By the Chaibman : Q. When you got up there and saw that assemblage of people, made up of men and women, did they seem to have anything to do with any violence or attempting any violence? — A. No, sir; they just merely seemed that there was at that time a good deal of excitement, of course, in East Saint Louis, and these people seemed to be standing there, more than anything else, juat to waiteh prooeedingis — to watch what was going on. It seemed to be kind of a novelty there to see armed men around East Saint Louis, to the extent that there was, and there was men and women and chil- dren there, and I didn't see no violence offered by any of them at all ; they was just merely, you might say, spectators. Q. Then they fired into a crowd of spectators ? — A. Yes, sir, I wasn't there, , Q. I understand. But that was your judgment when you got there to help carry away the dead and wounded ? — A. I was there after that and helped to carry away two of the persons. I saw Mr. Rickman, helped carry him home, and a man by the name of Jones I helped carry to a drug store. Q. Was he mortally wounded ? — A. No ; I think he is alive yet, with the chances of getting well. i Q. The firing was from revolvers, and not, from rifles? — A. I don't know; I was not there. Q. How long after the firing? Were you near enough to hear the firing ? — A. No, sir. 488 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. How long after tbe firing did you get there?— A. Oh, it was probably five, may be, ten minutes. I run from the house down there. I saw the crowd when I turned the corner from where I lived, and it struck me that something was wrong down there, and I ran down to see. I didn't know what it was, and I got about halfway dowu to the shooting, and met a man, and he said that there hkd been eight or ten people killed down there ; and I went on down further and met another man, and he was pretty badly excited, and he says, "Go, and get your gun; go, and get your gun." And I saya, " What do I want of a gun ? I ain't got no use for a gun." Well, he says, "They have killed everybody down there.',' He was pretty badly excited. I just kept on down to where the shooting was ; when I got down there they was picking up the dead and wounded, and carrying them into the stores, and taking them home. I was pretty near all the parties that was killed, and that died afterwards, and attended their funerals — that is, over in East Saint Louis. The Chairman : Well, I hope there wiU be somebody here who can tell about that. Witness. If you want to know anything about the shooting I couldn't tell you anything about that. Q. Well, we will get witnesses here who can, because that transaction, in justice to the country and this committee, should be explained — about the firing into the crowd. — A. I, could not tell you only what I know. The Chaieman. I know ; you have testified very correctly ; we will see about it in the course of the examination. W. C. BEOWN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by the Chairman). What is your business ? — ^Answer. I am superin- tendent of the Saint Louis division of the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Eodd. Q. And your location ? — A. My headquarters are at Beardstown, 111. Q. Well, now, will you, in your own way, give us an account of what you witnessed at East Saint Louis, and how you h.appened to see it ? — A. Shall I begin at commence- ment of the trouble ? Q. Yes, sir. — ^A. The first intimation of any trouble that I had was a communication from the Knights of Labor, District Assembly No. 101, 1 think it was, stating that the men employed in our yard were members of that organization, and demanding in their behalf an increase of wages. Q. Fix the time f — A. The communication was dated the 13th of March ; I think I have the communication, and to be certain I will refer to it. (Witness refers to paper.) The communication was dated the 13th of March, 1886, and it is District Assembly No. 93, instead of 101. I took the communication and went to East Saint Louis, called our yard men together and asked them if there was any dissatisfaction, if they had any grievance of any kind. They replied that they had not. I then read this communication to them and asked them if they authorized it. They said that they had not, either directly or indirectly ; it was entirely without their knowledge or authority ; that 7 out of 8 men employed there were not Knights of Labor. One man told me that he was a member of the organization of the Knights of Labor, but he knew nothing about this communication. In conversation with our men they said that while they had no request or demands, that if there was a gen- eral increase made by all the roads at East Saint Louis in pay to their yard men, they thought that they were entitled to the same. I told them that that was a fact, and that we would take the matter up and pay as much as the majority of the roads paid there ; that we were paying that at the time, and if there was a gen- eral increase made that our men should share in it. They assured me that theyliad no intention of making any trouble at all, and that that agreement was 'perfectly satisfactory. Some time after that day — I have forgotten now the exact date— our general manager and general superintendent were here. We called our men in and settled the matter of pay. At the time of the first meeting there was one man stated that there was a little dissatisfaction on account of occasionally being called on to do a little work after hours, for which they had not received pay, but stating at the same time that they had made no demand for pay. If the demand had been made they would have been paid for the extra work, and in fixing the new rate of pay we made it on an hour basis, so that there would be pay for every hour that the men worked. On the 25th day of March a committee bearing the credentials of Knights of Labor, and I think coming from Saint Louis, came into our yard and notified our men that a strike had been ordered, which was to take effect at 3 o'clock that after- noon. Our men remonstrated a little, and stated that they were not Knights of Labor and that they had no grievance, but were informed that they would be expected to stop work with the rest, and they did stop work at 3 o'clock on the afternoon of that day. I was at my office in Beardstow^, and was notified by the agent and came to East Saint Louis, ari:iving there after dark on the evening of the 25th. On the morning O'f the 26th we had no yardmen, and the trainmaster, agent, and myself went to work in the yard doing the switching- The traihmaster and agent started for the stock-yards LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 489 - ■witli some stock that had been loaded out on the line, and were stopped at the bridge junction by a committee of the Knights of Labor aud ordered back to the yard. Were informed that they would not be permitted to unload that stock. There was consider- able parleying ensued between the Knights of Labor and the trainmaster and agent, and finally the owners of the stock, who were with the stock, made an appeal to these parties to allow them to unload their stock, that they could not do anything with it ; it would he a dead loss on their hands unless they could get it to the stock-yards and unload. Finally the committee of the Knights of Labor permitted this consignment of stock to go to the yards, but notified the representatives of the road there that we would be allowed to bring in no more stock. On the afternoon of the 26th we got an engine and attempted to start a freight trai u out of our yard ; within ten minutes after the engine came out of the house she was surrounded by a mob of from 100 to 200 men, headed by a man named Bailey, who had the credentials of the Knights of Labor, and read them to our engineer and fireman, and I got up on the engine myself and talked to them some time. The engine was coupled onto a way-car, the brake set tight on the way-car, but there was enough of them so that they shoved that way-oar up enough to take the slack up and pull the pin and throw it away; the pin that was used in coupling the engine onto the way-car and thiowed the pin away, and there was, I think, four switches thrown wrong, and guarded by members of the mob, bo that no one could set them right. After parleying with them in the neighborhood of an hour, I made up my mind tjiat it would provoke a riot to attempt by force to get the train oat, and I ordered the engine back to the house. In conversation with the leaderiof the mob he intimated to me that if apy force was used in attempting to get the train out that there were'parties in the mob that would use gunpowder, and if necessary dynamite. On the following day we got out our switch-engine and attempted to do some work ; she was surrounded by the same mob, with an increase of perhaps 150. I think in that mob there was 250 to 350 men, but it was substantially the same leaders. They surrounded the engine and pulled the pins, set the brakes, and threw switches, preventing any work, and by threats and intimidation drove the engineer and the fireman off the engine. I took charge of the engine as engineer and our trainmaster as fireman, bnt the engine was tam- pered with so that I could not get any water into the boiler, and they crowded on the engine into the cab and all over the engine so thick that it was impossible to handle her at all, and finally I took the engine back to the round-house, and, I would say, afterwards that the engine on the same date, the engine was sent back down into the yard by the round-house foreman just to have her out in case of fire. We had made up our minds that we could ijot do any more work, but we wanted to have the engine out so as to use it in case oif fire, in pulling cars away from any fire that might break out ; and a mob of about T.'i^^came and took the engine to the round- house and were going to kill her, but' the foreman urged them to allow him to put her inside the house, aud promised them that she should not be taken out again without orders from some higher authority than he was. On the following morning I had the engine taken out again, but we did not attempt to do any work with her. She was standing on the track near the engine-house, and a mob of about 75 men, I think, came and killed the engine. On the, 28th of March I attempted to get another freight train out of the yard. We had about 20 cars of important merchandise that we were very anxious to get out. We got an engine down and coupled onto it, aud started, but before the train got outside of the yard it was surrounded by about 200 strikers. A committee of Knights of Labor boarded the engine. The most of them came running from behind, and got onto the last cars in the train. I was on the head car. Our master mechanic and trainmaster were on the engine. They cut the train in two eight-car lengths back from the engine, leaving the portion back from the eighth ear in our yard, and we got out with the engine and eight cars. There were two of this com- mittee that had boarded the engine that were on the eight cars attached to the engine. One was on the engine, and the other was on top of the train with the cars. The one on the engine was attempting to prevent the engineer from handling the engine, and was using all manner of threats, and finally shut tlie throttle off himself. I saw that from the head oar, and jumped down onto the foot-board, and took him by the shoulder and pulled him outside of the cab, and told the engineer to pull out and get away as soon as he could, because I wanted to get away from a mob of about 200 that were behind. This man stepped down onto the ground, and got on the eighth car again. By that time we were running probably 20 to 25 miles an hour, and these two members of the committee would have gone out into the country a few miles, but they succeeded in cutting off one car, the eighth car, and that stopped that oar, and left it on the main track, about a mile and a half or two miles north of East Saint Louis. Every day from that time until, I think, the 5th of April we Succeeded in getting a train out of East Saint Louis. We only succeeded in doing that by swearing in about 30 of our employes as deputy sheriffs, arming them, and guard- ing our yard, keeping the strikers — the mob— out of the yard. On the 3d of April a notice was issued by all the railroads, calling on their employes to return 490 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. to work on the 5th, at 1 o'clocls; p. m. The call reqnired all employes who de- sired to remain in the, service to report for duty. All of onr switchmen except one reported for duty, and on the morning of the 6th,, at 7 o'clock, went to work. They went to work with the understanding that we would withdraw the guard that was protecting our yard for the reason that they thought that they had a right to work^ and if parties came there to intimidate or threaten that they wanted the oom- mittees or parties to have access to them. They were visited almost every hour by ' comnxittees, who used all manner of threats and intimidation. On, I think, Tuesday the 6th or Wednesday the 7th, our men had become tired of the constant visiting of committees and they, without my knowledge, got up a coip- municatiou addressed to the Knights of Labor, stating that they were satisfied with their pay ; had no gWevance; had remained idle then from the 25th of March until that time, and that they were unable to support their families and remain in idleness, and asked the permission of the Knights of Labor io go to work, and informed them that they wanted to go to work, and asked them to refrain from intimidating and sending mobs down into the yard, and requested an answer. They received an answer the same afternoon, stating substantially that they would not be permitted to go to work. They, however, continued at work until Wednesday about 11 o'clock. There was a mob of perhaps 200 or 250 came down through our yard. Our men when they saw them coming went into the yardmaster's oiSce, and it was filled full by this mob. And the mob demanded, as many of them as could get into the office, that the men stop work, and demanded that they state right then whether they would stop or not, and they displayed revolvers and clijbs; one man who did not have a revolver or club in sight picked up a stove-poker. All except one man agreed then that they would stop work. This mob marched down through the yard and attempted to force their way into'thtj freight-house, but were met by about 15 men with drawn revolvers at the freight-house door, and were prevented from going in. Our men held a consultation after this mob left the men, and all decided that it wouldn't be safe to attempt to work any longer, and they all went home. On Thursday, the 8th of April, our deputies on duty at our freight-house were in- formed by a man we had out on watch that a mob of 25 to 100 were coming up the levee with a probability of making an attack on onr deputies, but as they approached the freight-house there was a large number of teams belonging to the Saint Louis Transfer Company just coming off the boats with freight for the different railroads there, and the crowd started down there and commenced reading their papers and making threats to the drivers, trying to drive them back to Saint Louis and stopped the teams again, as they had done several times before. Onr deputy sheriffs, led by H. B. Stone, our general manager, who was acting as a deputy sheriff, to the number of 10, went down on the levee and ordered the crowd to disperse and stopped the men who were threatening the drivers. The leaders refused to move and commenced to mate resistances, when the 10 men drew their revolvers and by using them as clubs and pre- senting them, threatening to shoot, they succeeded in slowly moving the crowd from the transfer tean)s,but they made another stand a short distance back tiom the riy^, and the man in oharg« of our men, who were armed with Winchester rifles, came out and formed the men in line about 300 feet from the mob, and seeing this the leaders fell back and left the levee. This mob on Thursday was the last coUisiou that took place bestween the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy deputies and the mob. On the Monday following, I have forgotten the date now, the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy switch- men returned to work, with the exception of two men, and worked all that week; hot they were visited every night at their homes by committees of Knights of Labor who threatened them; and finally, on Friday night, two of them were waylaid near their homes, and one of them was brutally beaten ; the other one was beaten, hut not so severely, and broke away from his assai\lants and got home. This was on Thursday night. On Friday night the men were visited by committees and threat- ened, unless they stopped work and kept away from the yards entirely, that they would be driven out of the town or killed ; and one of the men was waited on by the m.en from whom he rented his house, who informed him that he had been waited on by a committee of the Knights of Labor, and had been informed unless he notified this man who was working to leave the house that there was danger of his house being burned; and he notified the man who was working to vacate the house. On the same night a committee — about 12 o'clock— visited another of our switchmen, called him out, and notified him that he would have to stop work. On Saturday night, about 11 o'clock, another of our switchmen or his place was surrounded about between 12 and 1 o'clock; he thinks by a party of men; his wife woke him up; he went out, and by discharging his revolver drove them away. He found that there was pieces of pine and other stuff around there that indicated that an attempt was going to be made to set fire to his house as had been threatened. The following Monday morning our men all came to the yard, but notified us that, on account of continued intimidation and threats to which they had been subjected, they could not work any more until the strike was officially called off. I think, sir, that that is all. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTJI AND WEbT. 491 Q. (By Mr. BoR>'ES.; Yoa were not present -when the firing took place, aLd which resulted in the killing of several persons? — ^A. In the Louisville and Nashville yard? Q. Yes, sir. — A. No, sir ; there was something in connection with that that I could state. Q. Anything relating to it that you know, you may state. — A. On Friday morning it was generally nnderstood by all the roads that an attack would probably be made on some of ns during the day. We were advised that a mob of from 300 to 1,000 was gathering down in East Saint Louis, and that some of us might expect an attack. When we beard the firing in the Louisville and Nashville yard the general manager and myself went into the telegraph o£Qce to try and ascertain what it was and whether any help was needed. We succeeded in getting a neighboring yard, but could not get the o£Sce at the LouisvUle and Nashville yard, but we heard from the neighboring ofSce that a collision had taken place between the Louisville ^nd Nashville deputy sherifis and the mob. Mr. Stone, our general manager, requested me to go down as near the scene of the collision as possible, and report to him by wire the condition of things and if any help was needed. I went down to the next yard north of the bridge — the Yandalia — and could -find out nothing there, and started for the Louis- ville and Nashville freight house. Just before I got to the bridge I saw C. R. Barn- hart, superintendent of transportation of the Louisville and Nashville road, and another man running under the bridge and in my direction, and I could hear shooting behind them, but I could not see the parties just at that moment who were shooting, but in a moment I could see parties who were in pursuit of them and shooting at them. I turned as quick as possible, and one of them called to me to get out of there quick, and I turned as quickly as possible and started back for our yard. I was per- haps 150 feet in advance of Mr. Barnhart, and a man named Chesney, a deputy sheriff, was behind Mr. Barnhart. We ran up through the yard, turned on Third street going north ; the shooting was continued behind us, and as I went out on the north, into Third street, I looked back and saw that they were shooting from both sides of the street at Mr. Barnhart, and as I was looking and still running I saw Chesney fall, and in a moment, almost, he was surrounded by a party of men, I knew there was no use in one or two of us trying to go back there to do anything, and kept on going; and Mr. Barnhart collected a number of deputy sheriffs, armed with Winchester rifles, and went back and rescued him. Further than that I don't .know anything about it. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) You testified to a great many things, I observe, that must have come to you from information of others — such as the visit to some of the houses of your employes — that, I suppose, is on information from others ? — A. Yes, sir ; from the parties visited. Q. You spoke also of certain committees of Knights of .Labor and certain men as members of the order ; I understand you to say — to mean thereby — that you speak of them as Knights of Labor because, in some cases, they had credentials of the order, and in general it was upon information or from papers that they carried which in- duced you to call them Knights of Labor ?— A. Yes, sir ; I refer to them as such only where they produced their credentials. Q. As a matter of legal conclusion or legal fact you don't know that any of them were Knights of Labor? A. No, sir; I do not. Q. Have you got that order of District Assembly No. 93 ? — A. Making a demand for an increase in pay ? Q. Yesj sir. — A. Yes, sir j I have it. Q. Will you pl>ease read it and let the secretary take notes of it? ["Eniglvts of Labor, District Assembly ^o. 93, Office of the District Secretary.] " Saint Louis, Mo., March 13, 1886. " W. C. Wilson, Superintendent Chicago, Burlington and Quincy, Beardstown, III.": They evidently have not known the name of the party they were addressing. " Dear Sir : The switchmen of the various railroadsxion verging at East Saint Lonis, all of whom are members of the order of Knights of Labor, have requested their Ex- ecutive Board to ask you to adopt the following scale of wages, which they deem just : "Night foremen, $3; night helpers, $2.75.; day foremen, $2.75; day helpers, $3.60. Also to constitute one foreman and two helpers to each engine a crew, and 10 hours a day's work, with overtime to be paid 30 cents per hour to foremen and helpers. " Please reply by Monday, March 15, at 6 o'clock p. m. "A. C. CAUGHLIN, " Chairman Executive Board. " C. M. Bbkry, " Secretary Executive Board. "District Assembly No. 93, Knights of Labor. " (Address Central Hotel, Eighth and Chestnut.) " 492 LABOR TE0UJ3LES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Is there a seal on that? — A. No, sir; I don't see any. Q. Did you call upon the officials of East Saint Louis to assist you in the matter?— A. Yes, sir; I have a copy of the letter I addressed to the mayor. Q. What assistance did he render you ? — A. He rendered us no assistance what- ever. Q. Did he not encourage you ? — A. No, sir ; I was a member of a committee that were appointed to wait on the mayor and the city council at a special meeting, and they told us that they were entirely powerless to give us any protection, and the city council passed a resolution to that effect. Q. Did they direct the policemen of the city to assist you, or did the policemen assist you?— A. No, sir; they did not. Q. Were they engaged in suppressing lawlessness, so far as you observed ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't see any of them engaged in any such business as that. Q. Did you see them encouraging lawlessness ? — A. No, sir; I didn't see it. Q. Have you stated all the acts 6f violence that occurred in your presence, so far as you remember ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; I think all the principal acts. Q. Where you speak of intimidation against or upon your men, will you state what kind of intimidation you mean — what you mean exactly by Intimidation ? — A. Threats and suggestions of danger. For instance, it was a very common threat to say that "If you run this engine we will make it so damned hot for you that you never can come to East Saint Louis again." And I heard one man say to an engineer who did continue to run his engine, didn't get off, that he would defy him to ever show Lis face in East Saint Louis after this trouble was over if he staid on that engine. That was a very prominent Knight of Labor, one of the committee. Q. You stated that if the other roads advanced the wages of the men that you would do the same. Were the wages advanced by any of the roads at or about the time of this strike or subsequently? — ^A. There were some of the roads that advanced the pay, I think, prior to the strike. Q. The wages you were paying were equal to the wages of other roads in youi judgment? — A. About the same as paid by most of the roads. Q. Do you remember what you were paying for trackmen ? — A. I think $1.25 a day. Q. Do yon know whether the men engaged in building or repairing bridges on your line were allowed overtime for traveling from one job to another? — A. I can't state that, sir. Q. Is there an order on your road requiring road masters, as far as possible, or the superintendents of men engaged in bridge building to transport their men, as far as practicable, during the night and on Sundays? — A. No, sir ; there is no order tonoh- ing that point at all. Q. Have you knowledge of any meeting of railroad officials or representatives in East Saint Louis about this time? — A. About what time, sir? Q. Well, say the month of March — meetings in which Mr. Hoxie was present.- A. In East Saint Louis? Q. Yes. — ^A. No, sir. Q. Were any such meetings held with those officials anywhere, the officials of the roads on the other side and on this side? — A. Yes, sir; there were some meetinga held in March. Q. Do you remember whether Mr. Hoxie was present at any such meetings?— A. I think Mr. Hoxie was present at one or two meetings. Q. Were yon present at all of the meetings ? — A. No, sir ; not all of them. Q. Did any of the strikers claiming to be Knights of Labor tell you why they struck? — A. No, sir; I asked the question of a great many men, prominent Knishts of Labor and switchmen, and never could get anything like a reasonable reply. They didn't seem to know why they struck, except that they were "ordered to strike." Q. I am requested to ask you if all the roads had taken your position in regard to raising wages, what the result would have been ? — A. I don't think it would have had any result at all, sir; I don't think the question of wages had anything to do with the strike whatever, from the fact that the roads that had raised the wages,' one at least, that had given, as I understand it, the full increase demanded by the Knights of Labor, were subjected to just as much inconvenience. Their raen struck at the same time and made just as much trouble as the employes of any other line. Q. I will ask you this question— if, in all your association with these men there, talking with th'em, and seeing them, and trying to keep the peace and keep them from breaking the law, any of them made any complaint with regard to their treat- ment by their respective railroad companies ? — A. Not a word. Q. What is your experience in regard to strikes in East Saint Louis in eeneraH ■ Are they of frequent occurrence, or do they occur at rare intervals? — A.- We had a strike there in October, 1883, and that and the present strike are the only ones that have occurred since I have been connected with Saint Louis lines, about six years. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH A^'D WEST. 493 C. G. "WILSON, being duly STTorn and examined, testified as follows: By the Chairman : Question. State your full name. — Answer. C.G.Wilson. Q. Your age, occupation, and residence. — A. Age yon say ? Q. Yes, sir; and occupation and residence. — A. Thirty-six; agent for the Chicago, BurUngton and Quincy Railroad at East Saint Lonis. Q. Will yoa please just go on and state in your own way what you saw of these troubles in East Saint Louis. Did you witness the same occurrences that have been just testified to ? — A. I have witnessed the same thing. Q. Are they all correct ? — A. That is all correct ; yes, sir. Q. Very well ; now anything you know outside of that testimony you may state. — A. In addition to that I would say the beginning of the strike was on March 25 ; I was on 'change at half-past twelve ; I was informed that there was a committee at East Saint Louis going through the different yards notifying the men to strike. I immediately returned to East Saint Louis to my ofdce and my yardmaster reported to me that the committee- had just left the yard ; that the men had been ordered to strike and he wished to know what to do, and I went right out and saw the men. They told me that they had positive orders to strike, and in their language, "We don't want to strike, Mr. Wilson ; we have nothing to do with this matter at all, but we are obliged to do it." At five minutes before three I was in the yard, and when the signal was given by the blowing of the whistles our "men stopped, stood around the engines and cars a few moments, and reluctantly walked up to me, told me that they hoped I would understand that they had nothing to do with this matter, that they would not join this association, and that I need have no fears as to their loyalty to the company. This, of course, was the day force. I then advised them that they had better go home. They did so, at least they left the yard, and I immediately wired Mr. Brown at Beardstown stating the news to him, and he arrived here at about 7.30 that night. The testimony which he has given I have witnessed in all cases except the time when they forced engine 104 from the way car. That was on Saturday. I would further say we worked our plat- form men, truckers, handling freight in the warehouse the balance of Thursday, and Friday about ten o'clock I stepped over to the elevator and was gone about five or ten minutes, and came hack and saw a crowd in my warehouse. I went right out and found, I should judge, about fifteen or twenty strangers that were congregated on one side of the hftuse, and my laboring men, in the neighl^orhood of twenty, were on the other side. I immediately asked what the trouble was, and my foreman stepped up and said that those strangers had come in there and threatened our men from work. I turn^ around and asked these men what they wanted. They made no reply, and I repected my question and asked them what business they had in our freight-house. They said nothing at all. I then notified them to leave the premises ; that if they • had any business it could be transacted at the office; we could not allow strangers in our house or on our property. They still declined to say anything and walked out of the house. I then went back to the laborers and asked them what the trouble was. They told me that these men had threatened to slug them if they continued to work. I talked for probably fifteen or twenty minutes to them and stated to them that I did not think there was any danger, and asked them to continue to work. They told me they wished to continue to work, and they did so. They continued handling freight for some time after that. In the mean time there was a number of men hanging around outside of the office on the street. I ordered our doors closed so that no strangers could get in, and in the course of two or three hours the men were apparently so alarmed that I sent them home and told them to stay home until I called for them. They did so. They live in Saint Louis, the majority of them. On Saturday we received freight with the help of the other men that I had. I think Saturday afternoon, which would be the 27th, the Transfer Company were stepped by crowds of men on the levee, the teams turned hack and ordered to discontinue hauling freight to or from East Saint Louis, and that, of course, completely shut as up from handling any package or merchan- dise freight. We continued in that position until April 3. Q. Well, that has been descrihed. Anything you saw outside of the testimony you have verified yon may state ; but it is unnecessary to go over all that if you say it is correct. — A. Well, I do not think I can give any additional information. I was with Mr. Brown on every occasion, with the exception of that one day. By Mr. Buenes: Question. Did yon see anything more of the firing or shooting than what has been described ? — Answer. No, sir ; I did not. Q. I will ask you if any of the men, either in your company or any other company, made any complaint to you or toi anybody else in your presence, that they had been mistreated, that they were not paid sufficiently, or that they had any cause of griev- ance against their respective companies T — ^A. No, sir. 494 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. : Q. Did any of them tell yon what the cause of the strike was? — A. They did not, although I have asked a, number of them, switchmen, and they said they were ordered out. Q. What was the disposition and the action of the city ofiScials, the mayor and policemen in East Saint Lquis, with regard to the matter? — A. They were not at all inclined to give any assistance whatever. Q. Did you talk with them or any of them, appeal to them to assist you?— A. Well, that was done by our superintendent, Mr. Brown, -who made formal request on the mayor for assistance. GEORGE W. PARKER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows i Question (by Mr. Buknes). Please tell your name and residence and occupation.— Answer. My name is George W. Parker; my residence is Saint Louis ; my occupation is that of vice president and general manager of the Saint Louis, Alton and Cairo Short Line. That is the division of the road we operate. Q. We are endeavoring to investigate as to the cause and the extent of the strike troubles existing in Southern Illinois, and directing your attention to these two mat- ters, would be obliged if you would mate any statement bearing upon them within your knowledge. — ^A. We had a strike among our employ^ in East Saint Louis on the 25th of March at 3 o'clock p. m., when about 190 of our men went out, including trackmen, shopmen, and yardmen. The strike was inaugurated by the blowing of whistles in all the yards simultaneously. I was then on the west side of the river, and heard the whistles; it was manifestly the result of preconcerted action and agreement. One of our employes, a Enight of Labor, as he stated, had given ns ■warning early in the day that the Knights of Labor had ordered a strike for 3 o'clock. We bent our energies to getting our yards clear of freight, and succeeded in getting out 50 loaded cars just before the strike began, but when all the freight was loaded up that was delivered that day we had nearly or quite as many more cars left over that night which we were unable to move. Outside of our passenger department we were entirely paralyzed. The strikers in large numbers visited our round- house and shops, in connection with others, and intimidated our employes. And the few men wo had left declined to work after the afternoon thac the strike began. A reign of terror and absolute subjection was inaugurated among all the railroad employes, and it is safe to say that it extended to the entire city of East Saint Louis. From the hour the strike was called into existence until the morning of the 1st of April we were unable to do any business in our East Saint Louis yards. The superintendent several times made efforts to move trains, and had to fire his own engines in person, but. the strikers managed in one way or in another to defeat the effort. When the strike began we had some perishable freight at Duijuoin which we made special efibrts to bring to East Saint Louis. On the morning of the 27th we . started to move this freight, but the Knights of Labor at Duquoin, who also had an order there and joined the strike, threw a switch in front of our engine and de- railed it. Recognizing the importance of bringing this freight through, the train crew finally, by making special promises, prevailed upon the Knights to allow the perishable freight to be moved from there. We got the freight into East Saint Lonis that afternoon, when the strikers entered the train, derailed and killed the engine near East Saint Louis yards, and refused to allow us to get out another engine to take the disabled engine 1o the round-house. We had to leave her out in the ditch for several days. The transfer teams being discontinued as a result of the strike, Messrs. Scalaszo & Co., of this city, who owned some of the freight brought in on the train, sent their own teams to East Saint Louis for their bananas, but the strikers refused to let them have the freight and drove the teams back. They made several abortive efforts before they succeeded in getting possession of their fruit. On the morning of April 1 our superintendent, by playing conductor and brakeman himself, and using his roadmaster as brakeman also, got out one train of delayed freight from East Saint Louis and on April 5 got out another train by stealth, and about cleaned our yards of this delayed freight. We had quit receiving freight when the strike was inaugurated. After April 1 we succeeded in bringing in an occasional train of coal by the officials of the road handling the trains, and returned some empty cars. But even this was accomplished under great difficulties, and subjected the men to repeated insults and some acts of violence. On the 27th of March the repre- sentatives of the roads on the east side of the river addressed the following coniswi- nication to the mayor of East Saint Louis : "Saint Louis, Mo., March 27, 1886. "To the honorable mayor and dty council, East Saint Louis, III. : "The undersigned, representatives of fhe various railroads operating in, and ter- minatinfj at, East Saint Lonis, here respectfully represent that a number of the em- tiloyiSs ot the said railroads have agreed and conspired together to go ont ou what is known as a strike, for the purpose of nnlawfnlly, hialiciously, and wickedly hinder- LABOR TEOUliLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 495 iug the business and property of said railroads and the public estate and commerce transported thereon. And also have combined together to prevent said companies fk'om operating said railroads and of the lawful use and management of the same. And have prevented, by threats and notices of danger and other unlawful means, their employes of said railroads from performing their respective duties ; and have enforced and compelled them to quit the service of said companies. All Of which re- sults have been accomplished by the strikers combining together and patrolling and remaining in the yards and upon the premises of said railroads ; by threats of violence and intimidation towards such of the employes of said companies as remained in their employ. In view of the premises and on the applying of the patrons of our respect- ive railroads, we respectfully request that you furnish ample police protection for the yards and premises of said railroad companies, in order that the property we represent may be amply protected and the employes of the respective roads guarded from the violence of the strikers and their evil -disposed presence, and that the^aid railroad companies be thereby enabled to resume their usual trafliic.. And in the event of your being unable to furnish summary and ample protection as to fully in- terdict and keep rioters and other idlers off the premises of our respective railroads, we would further respectfully ask that you so notify the sheriff of said Saint Clair County, Illinois, and ask his co-operation in carrying out the request of this petition. 'i Then follows the signatures of all the railroads in East Saint Louis. A similar document was on the same date sent to the sheriff of Saint Clair County, varying the verbiage of it to adapt it to the request to that official and to solicit his power. As stated by Mr. Brown, (he city council met and considered that proposition, and passed a resolution, as stated in his testimony, to the effect that they were unable to render the protection asked for, and instructed the mayor to so notify us. The sheriff also made answer to our request, as follows : "George W. Parker, Vice-President and General Manager St. Louis, Alton and Trrre Haute Bailroad, and other officials: "Your communication of March 27 has been received and carefully considered. I was already aware of the fact that there was a combination to prevent the moving of freight trains in the city of East Saint Louis, and have been present, in person and by deputies, since the commencement of the strike referred to, to enable 5011 to movo your trains. The freight yards in East Saint Louis are so extensive, and the com- bination to prevent the movement of freight trains so well organized and determined, that I am satisfied that I am unable, with the power in my hands, to enable you at present to resume freight traffic in East Saint Louis. I am further satisfied, from the resistance made to my deputies in East Saint Louis, either by strikers or by lawless persons who have taken advantage of the situation, that any efforts on my part would not enable you to move your freight trains. I am willing to take all necessary steps in my power to assist you in performing the services due from you to the public. "Respectfully, "FRED. ROUPIEQUET, " Sheriff of Saint Clair County." March 29 we sent a committee of five to Springfield to confer with the governor and report all the facts to him, with a view of securing militia protection. This the governor declined then to grant, but sent Adjutant-Geueral Vance to East Saint Louis to observe the drift of affairs. The presence of tJiis official did not deter the strikers, and, just at this point, I would be glad to have the committee summon Adj't-Gen. J. W. Vance, of Springfield, before them as a witness, as he observed the strike all the way throngh after this date. The strikers forcibly stopped the movement of trains in his very presence, and the roads remained practically at a stand-still. We then had a meeting, and March Slst addressed the following telegram to the governor : "East St. Louis, March 31, 1886. " The representatives of all the transportation companies terminating in East Saint Lonis, in meeting assembled, respectfully notify you that they have exhausted all feasible means of resuming traffic on their respective roads, and, as the public de- mands are imperative that commerce be resumed at once, we again appeal to you for prompt action in enforcing obedience to the laws of the State. An immediate reply to this meeting is respectfully and urgently requested. "G. W. PARKER, Chairman." On receipt of this the governor came down in person and madB an appeal to the strikers, advising them of their rights and duties. They exercised the former to the last degree, but ignored the latter. Matters went from bad to worse until April 9, early in the a.fternoon, when the strike culminated in a ci.llision between the mob and the depnty sheriffs in the Louisville and Nashville yards, resulting in several killed and wounded. This brought the militia on the night of that day. During that night incendiaries set fire in three places in the yards of my company and near the 496 LABOR ■ TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. shops, and but for the timely arrival and aid of the militia our shops would have l)een destroyed. We lost twenty-odd freight cars, an oil tank, scale-house, and car scales, and several coaches badly scorched. Damage from |10,000 to $13,000 from ^re, and we estimate from |25,000 to |30,000 in direct line of business. How much in the way of indirect or consequential damages will never be known. As the strike is still on, so fai as threats, violence, and acts of intimidation are concerned, this estimate of dam- age may yet be largely increased. Q. (By Mr. Otjthwaite.) Let me interrupt you. Do you mean now ?— A. I mean now; not at this moment, but in the last two or three days. I can give the acts. As to the origin of the strike, I can only say that it was in the nature of a boycott, the result of the difiSculty existing on the west side of the river, between thp south- west system and the Knights of Labor. In other words the strike on the east side of the river was in sympathy and in aid of that on therwest side. Our men had no com- plaints, so far as I ever heard from them. The yardmen seemed to be the leaders in the strike. I had a personal conference with them and our yardmaster, including I believe, all of his crews, but a few days before the strike on the east side occurred, and then increased the wages of the switchmen to what is known as the Chicago basis. It is very liberal pay, and they seemed to be well pleased with it ; but frankly stated to me that regardless to the question of pay, they would have to obey the caU if a strike was called and they were called out. Most of our men at East Saint Louis are or were Knights of Labor, as they bave personally told me. Among the other method's resorted to by the strikers to cripple our service was the boycotting of out men. They notified our boarding-houses in East Saint Louis not to feed our men who remained at work, and did the same thing in various towns along the road. As a consequence we had to board our men on the west side of the river, or rather run them out as far as Coltersville, nearly 50 miles, to get them boarding. They were refused board at Belleville, even, a place of between 15,000 or 20,000 inhabitants. At this point a mob took possession of our train and severely beat our conductor and laid him up, and also severely beat and maltreated Mr. Hill, a regular deputy sheriff, who tried to arrest the leader of the mob. This heating occurred in taking this leader, or attempting to take him, to jail after he had been arrested. And our con- ductor was summoned by the deputy sheriff to aid in the discharge of that duty. This occurred on the 12th of April. It was estimated that the mob aggregated 150 to 200 men that was engaged in this assault. The citizens of Belleville turned out as a posse after this occurred, and suppressed the mob, and restored peace. We caused to be indicted between 50 and 60 of the leading rioters, who were daily visiting the various yards and shops in East Saint Louis, and intimidating and maltreating the scab employ fe as they derisively called them. But comparatively few of these have been arrested, and with two or three exceptions, those arrested promptly gave bail, and at once renewed their bulldozing practices, usually under the sanction of the police authorities of East Saint Louis. That is, several of them were qualified as special police, and were thereby enabled to carry arms and enter the yards with impunity. Q. (By the Chairman.) I understand this did not come under your personal ob- servation ? — A. No, sir. Q. Nor that affair at Belleville ?— A. No, sir. I am speaking of what I know offi- cially. Q. It would be well to make a little distinction between what you saw and what you heard. — A. 1 am narrating simply the circumstances that came under my notice ofBcially, some of which I know personally, but most of which Q. By hearsay ?— A. By the reports of my officers, and such facts as are stated from that source will be followed up by persons who knew the facts in person. It was notoriously true that the citizens of East Saint Louis largely sympathized with the strikers. The few exceptions to the rule were intimidated into submission and silence. Not a voice, in citizen's meeting or otherwise, was heard in condemnation of the un- lawful practices of the leaders of the strike, and when any laborers were beaten up the rule has been to arrest the party that was beaten and put him in the calaboose, and pay no attention to the party that did the beating. Upon inquiry of a policeman of East Saint Louis, by myself, as to why this was done, the explanation was that they took the party that was beaten and put him in the station in order to protect him from further violence from the men that was beating him ; that they ctfuld not arrest those nien, that was understood, and that it was the best they could do. I be- lieve that I have already stated that we have heard of no grievances from our men, and although I have made frequent inquiries of various ones as to why the strike was extended to the east side of the river, none have been able to explain it, and seemed, without exception, to be very much dissatisfied with it. They wanted to go to work, and were anxious to have the strike called ofi'. I didn't talk to all of our men, hut this was the expression of all of them that I did talk to, or could reach, except one, and when I asked him what they meant by the strike, he said they had no complaint to make on the east side, so far as the Cairo Short Line employes were concerned, and they only struck for recognition. iiABOE TROUBLES IlT THE SOUTH AND WEST. 497 Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Had tliey teen deuiecl recoguition by your man, sir? — A. They never had. It never came np. The question never arose one way or the other. There never having been any request by our employes or any difference between us or any kind. The question had never originated or been brought up between us, any more than their politics or their religion. It was all on the same basis, and no dis- crimination had eyer been made in the employment or management of the men on. account of their belonging to the Knights of Labor or any other order, sect, or society. Q. And you would have no objection to employing a man on that account? — A. I would not up to that time ; I would now. I would say frankly, I would a great deal rather he would not belong, though I have taken back some of our employes that were Knights of Labor, but I must say that I woiild a great deal rather they would not belong. Before that I didn't feel that way about it. Q. (By the Chairman.) Well, that is not the way Mr. Hoxie feels on this matter. Mr. Hoxie says he would only exclude from further employment by his company those who have committed depredations and destroyed property. He says m that letter, as I understand, that the fact that a man was a Knight of Labor would not be an objection to his employment (the Chairman having reference to paper witness was reading from, and addressing his remarks to another member of the committee). The Witness. I will come to that directly in my testimony. The Chairman. That, you understand, is what we understood. We wrote a letter to these gentlemen, representing the Knights of Labor, and Mr. Hoxie responded to that, I think very properly, and quite to their satisfaction, and in justice to the com- mittee, our interposing in that way, and to all parties, that there ought not to be any distinction made where the man has not violated the public peace and committed depre- dations or personal assaults, or destroyed property. — A. We occupied, and I believe all the railroads on the east side, the same position. I said now that in re-employing bur men, where they had committed no act of violence, or their places had not been supplied by the employment of new men, we did not refuse to take any of our men back because they were Knights of Labor, but in answer to the inquiry of the acting Chairman, I stated frankly that I would prefer that our employes did not belong to the Knights of Labor. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) I caught your idea exactly. — A. The chairman evidently did not; for the reason that the Knights of Labor forced them to quit work when they said they were satisfied with their hours, with their pay, and with their terms, and they were therefore under another and a more imperative master than a railroad company ever was, so far as my knowledge goes. And as an indication of the treat- ment of our employ^ in common with others, I want to state that the railroads here have expended in the last few years $21,314 in the advancement of the mental and moral condition and culture of their men. They have built and maintained social reading-rooms on both sides of the river. The contributions for the maintenance of these rooms are paid monthly by the various roads, and the room, especially on the east side of the river, is supplied with all of the requisites necessary for the care of the men during their hours of leisure, such as baths, a fine library, all the current papers of the day, and appertaining to this section is a man in waiting to supply them with paper, writing materials, and innocent games of all kinds. I am glad to say that few of our men have been guilty of acts of violence during the strike. When we got over the first shock of the strike and began to resume business, we, in com- mon with other roads, gave our men the following notice : NOTICE. The undersigned railroads, having terminals in East Saint Louis, are ready to re- employ any of their old men, up to the number necessary to do their work, who will apply before 1 o'clock, Monday afternoon, April .5, 1886. After that houi', all applica- tions will be considered, whether from those previously in service or not. No one will be employed who has committed any unlawful act during the strike, and no new men will be discharged to make places for former employes. Saint Louis, April 3, 1886. That notice was signed by myself and the officials of the other roads, printed in poster form, and distributed among the yards in East Saint Louis, and also inserted in the papers in Saint Louis. Comparatively few responded, although many came to my office and explained the embarrassments which they encountered. They uniformly said they wanted to go to work, but were afraid that their lives or their property would be destroyed, &c. All that I talked to united in the opinion that there was no cause for the strike, and it was ill-advised. I think a majority of the men felt that way about it from the beginning. And as I stated before, there was but one excep- tion to this rule among the men that I talked to. I hazard little in saying that all, or nearly all, feel that way about it now. Before the strike was called off we filled many of the places with new men, and hence we are unable to restore but few of our 3984 CONG -32, 498 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. old employes to their places. I think we have re-employed about 27 per cent., and ■will employ others when we have vacancies, or we can iucreaee our force. Q. Were any of those Knights of Labor? — A. Oh, yes, sir ; as I stated before, we are not discriminating in the re-employment of onr men. We have, in the re- employment of men, adhered strictly to the proposition contained in the notice, which I read a moment since. The acts of gross insult, violence towards men that remained at work and the new men employed, were so numerous that I cannot recall them in detail. During all the period of the strike, and since, these acts of ill-treatment were of almost daily occurrence. Perhaps never in the history of this country were personal liberty and private individual rights so disregarded and the laws so set at naught with impunity. But perhaps the sheriff, Mr. Robiequet, can spe.ik more defi- 'nitely on tbis point. I will state that a great many more strikers would have been indicted but for .the fact that they evidently eluded this hy a preconcerted plan whereby the bulldozing business in a given yard was awarded to strangers, to the officials, and agents of that given road. For instance, the striking employes of other and distant yards were assigned to duty in our yard ; at least only strangers appeared in our yard to iutimid.ite and abuse our men, and they could not be recognized or identified. Q. is that all the evidence you have to sustain that proposition that strangers or men from other yards were assigned to do these unlawful things ? — A. The only evi- dence that I have of their being so assigned was the uuiformity with which this rule was carried out, as the representatives of all the roads will doubtless testify, if you will ask them, on that point. Q. Were there any other facts you wish to state, Mr. Parker? — A. No, sir, I know of no other fact. Q. I will ask you this question, whether there were any of the strikers killed ! I am asking you questions now that I am requested to ask. — A. I can only state froni information on that subject that men were killed that were regarded as strikers oi; those who were mingling in the crowd with the strikers. I ddn't know personally about that, as none of our men were identified as being in that crowd. Q. None of your men? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know personally whether any of the other men who were in that crowd were strikers ?— A. I say I don't know personally. Q. How many persons were killed ? — A. I don't know that definitely ; I think about seven was my understanding. ' Q. Do^you know anything about the circumstances of the case — the facts just prior to the shooting? — A. I do not. Witnesses will be on the stand that were present. Mr. OuTHWAlTE. Of course I don't know what you know ; there are such a multi- tude of witnesses on the same point that we do not wish to lumber up the record with accumulative evidence. The Witness. I was on the east side of the "river at that time and can't tell you definitely about that. Q. Was there a meeting of the officials held prior to that time by the officials of the road with regard to that strike ? — A. Yes, several of them — you mean prior to the shooting? Q. Yes. — A. Several of them. Q. Did that meeting take into consideration the strike on the Southwest system? Did it' consider directly the strike on the Southwest system ? — A. No, sir, not in any Q. W.as not Mr. Hoxie present? — A. He was at one or two meetings. Q. What interest did he represent ?— A. Well, Mr. Hoxfe was there and reported the condition of affairs on his system. There was no official action taken with refer- ence to it. I think "it was a mere matter of information. Mr. Hoxie came to meet the representatives of other roads that were there. Q. At that meeting were any resolutions passed? — A. Several resolutions ; yes, sir. Q. Have they been made public at any time ? — A. Some of them have been pubhshed. Q. Have you any copies of any of them that you have not offered in your state- ment ? — A. I have not that I know of. Q. If you have any of those resolutions we would like to have you submit them to the committee. — A. Yes, sir ; but I don't think I have any of those. Q. Or if you can suggest any of the other officials that have any of them. — A. I think I have not one. I think there was a resolution passed with reference to the strike generally and recognition of the Knights of Labor, or something of that kind. Q. Was the substance of one of those resolutions, at one of the earlier meetings, to this effect, that you gentlemen in the management of those several interests over there would use your influence with Mr. Hoxie to have tho strike adjusted immedi- ately ? — A. I don't remember any such resolution.- We have had a great many meet- ings and passed a great many resolutions, but I don't remember of any resolution to that effect at all. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 499 Q. You do not recollect anything to that effect t — A. No, sir. Q. Were these meetings prior to or snbsequent to March 6, 1886, the day the strike began on the Missonri Paciflo Railway system?-- A. 0, a long time after. I am quite sure there iivere no meetings before that time. _, Dr. WILLIAM TAUSSIG, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Outhwaite). State your first name, your age, and occupation.— Answer. My name is William Taussig ; I am past fiO ; my occupation that of general manager of the Saint Louis Bridge and Tunnel Railroad. Q. Doctor, you are called to testify to the cause and extent of this interferfnce to inter-State commerce resulting from the strike which has taken place, and if you will jnst state the facts that have come under your observation we will be obliged. — A. I have prepared no written statement, but I can state all I have to say in a very few words. The business of the bridge is entirely inter-State. There is not a pound of freight that passes over the bridge that is not either goiug from or is destined to an- other State. Tbe passenger business of the bridge is of the same character, people crossing the bridge either go from Illinois into Missouri or from Missouri into Illinois, and any interference of that traffic is, of course, interference with inter-State traffic. When this strike on the Southwest system commenced, on M;irch 6th, it became a question of very great importance to us whether we would be able to continue to servo 17 lines of railway for whom we act as agents, attending to their interchanges of traffic. Our superintendent, Mr. Dickinson, called upon our men on Saturday morning, which was the 6th of March, and they all declared thiit they had no grievance, and that if they were let alone they would continue in our service. You must understand that our organization Isiu two States. We have one in Saint Louis and one organization in East Saint Louis serving in the same character, but of course assigned to different lines of duty, or rather to difi'erent localities. The men in Saint Lofli.s — trackmen, switch- men, shopmen, &c. — are all on the same pay-roll with the meu in East Saint Lonis, but each one is assigned only to tbe duty at that point. Now, the meu in Saint Louis ou Saturday morning said that they were perfectly satisfied— had no grievance'. We knew they had none, because the bridge pays better wages, and always did, than its neighbors, and had piclvcl their men. We take a pride in having a class of picked men — good men. On the following day I received telegrams from all over the country, and Irom all of our connections, to know whether the bridge men were all right — if we were doing business. I telegraphed them that the men were all right ; that they were doing business; that they were loyal, and that there would be no interruption to oar traffic. At 6 o'clock on the evening of Monday, the 8tli, I had telegraphed to several of the connecting lines east that our men were all right, and we were moving traffic. I told them jnst send your freight on and we will carry it across the bridge. I told them we can't deliver to the Western lines, we can't deliver to the Missouri Pa- cific or the Iron Mountain, because their men are out, but all the local business, the business intended to be unloaded in Saint Louis, we can attend to, because our men hold out. I went home that evening, and I was hardly home before I received a telegram that at 6.30 our men had all gone out. That, of course, left us in a very bad condition, for the reason that, although the, East Saint Lonis men aU staid and remained in service, when we are blocked on one side of the river it does not avail us much whether men on the other side of the river remain at their post or not. This sudden strike on the eveningof the 8th extended only to the yardmen, to the switchmen, and to the trainmen — freight trainmen. We have quite an extensive little shop, where we repair our locomotives, and where we employed at that time about 105 or 106 men. The shopmen assured us that they would remain, if they were permitted to, and they did remain for nearly three weeks, while the sho^jmen of all our neighbors went out. Our own shopmen were all steady. They told ns that they were waited on by committees every day ; that they pleaded with the committees that they were satisfied ; had good wages ; were well treated ; had not very hard work, and that they didn't want to go out. And it was not until the evening of the i'id of March, or the 24th, that also, all of a sudden, they laid down their tools and left. When the strike commenced our yards were full of loaded freight. It was on Mon- ' day evening, and generally on Saturdays and Sundays there is an accumulation of freight, and very little is hauled away, so that we had about 1,000 loaded cars in our yards. In the course of that week these cars were unloaded, but then we had 1,000 einpty cars in our yard . These cars belonged, all of them , to foreign roads — to Eastern lines. They became clamorous for their cars, wanted to have thera back, and then it was that we endeavored to make up trains and send back the empty cars, for two reasons. One reason was that the Eastern lines wanted their rolling stock, and another reason was that we had to make room — to eet out the empties before we could prepare for getting loads. Every inch of track room was occupied with empty cars. It was then that the trouble commenced. Our yards are so situated that they 500 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. are extended about a mile from the mouth of the tnnuel— a mil<; west in diflereut lo- calities — and to get out a train from any of the various yards we have to run over about fourteen switches and cross-overs, an operation that requires very careful run- ning, and cannot be accomplished without great danger, unless every switch and every crossing is well set. Every attempt to move an empty car was frustrated by strikers. Q. How ?— A. Two hundred of them would jumn up atonce, pull every pin, threaten the trainmen, the few we had — ^we had no trainmen at that time. Q. Were you present, and did you see these things? — A. I was present at one time only. Of the others, I was as reliably informed as though I had been present. We had no trainmen. The general freight agent, the local agent, the clerks in the office, were the trainmen. They had to man the traius, and set the brakes, &c., and every attempt that was made to pull a train, why the strikers would jump ou the cars, and set the brakes, and before our men could ran back and open the brakes again, why somebody would run ahead and open a switch in front of an engine. That would stop the whole thing again, and that was the character of^ operations for about three or four days, and then we gave it up. Q. Did you make any effort to employ any men ? — A. Certainly ; yes, sir. At that time, in the early days of the strike, we couldn't get any ; neither money nor love would hire them. But we could have moved empty cars with our clerical force; there was no necessity for trainmen at that time. Our engiueers were all right, and if our men would have been permitted to move those trains there would have been no difficulty so far as the moving of the empties was concerned, and that was all we at- tempted to do at that time. Up to the 23d of March our East Saint Louis men were all loyal. When oa the 8t.h of March our men on this side struck, of course we had no businesss. We had on the other side ahout twenty-six switchmen and about as many helpers and brakemen. We had no business, so we called them together and told them that the only business we had was some switching to be done on the other side, and that: we would require only about ten or twelve of these switchmen — two crews^ We would keep themthere as a nucleus, so as not to discharge all onr force. And we told them they could select their own men, whoever they wanted to remain, or they could elect to have all the men work alternately, every other day, so that each man should earn something. They elected the latter course, and in- that way, up to the 23d of March, the business went on. I mention this incident only to show the .perfectly friendly relations which we had with our men on the other side. On the 23d of March, as perhaps has already been told by other witnesses, the whistle commenced to blow at 3 o'clock in the afternoon and everybody left. We were left in the same condition that all the other lines on the east side were. Q. Now, how long were you left in such a condition that you couldn't transfer ifreight?— A. About four weeks. Q. About how many cai-loads of freight were transferred daily over the bridge!— A. We transfer an average of about 600 loads daily. The average number of all sorts of cars transferred daily is about 1,200, including passenger cars and empties. Q. How were you enabled to resume, by the employment of new men, or by the old men returning to your employ ? — A. Were enabled to resume by force at the com- mencement. Q. Explain the reason, and how. — A. The first train we started, I think, on the 4th; I don't remember exactly the date." It was three or four days before the colli- sion came. In order to prevent the pins from being pulled, as had been done with every train attempted to be moved by other roads, we made the pins fast so that they couldn't pull them, and they had four deputy sheriffs on the locomotive, and took three cars across. One of these was a car of household goods, containing a couple of horses, and the moveables of an emigrant family bound for Texas, which had been lying there for over four weeks. The railroad had to feed the horses, and feed the men, and feed the family, and that was the first car we moved. Subsequently we moved some coal, for at that time nearly all the factories in Saint Louis had to stop running. Q. For want of fuel? — A. For want of fuel. The people came to me, and blamed the bridge for not making an effort, or not using all possible means to supply the city with coal. Coal had risen, as I understand, to as high as 50 cents a bushel, about $40 a ton, and it became necessary to break the coal blockade, and our attention was mainly directed to that. We took across jperhaps two trains a day up to the day when the militia arrived. We had the trains manned by deputy sheriff's ; we had every one of our clerks, yardmaster, assistant ySrdmaster, foremen, the superitendent, in one instance myself, performing the duties of ordinary train crews. There was not a single one of the striking men who ever' appeared on a train up to the time the strike was called off. From the moment the military arrived, we had no difficulty whatever. Q. You were able to resume full operations ?-r-A. We were able to resume opera- ions; of course we labored under the difiicnlty that we did not have as many men LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 501 as we ought to have bad. We had to hire help, had to pay extraordinarily for men to take the risk. The trainmen were stoned, and insulted, and snubbed, and scoffed at, but there was no violence in the face of the military force. On this side of xthe river we had slight difficulties occasionally. The man difficulty was in iinding board for the new men. We sent them to boardinj-houses, aad the boarding-houses were boycotted, and the men sent ns letters — 1 mean the boarding-honse keepers, some of which letters I have, thanking ns for our patronage, but requesting us to take those men away.. They had been informed by the Knights of Labor that they would board these men and keep these men only at the peril of their lives. Q. You mentioned the fact that you were paying higher wages than the other com- pauies here. Can you give me a statement of the wages you were paying? — A. We were paying, at the time the strike broke out, Chicago wages, what are called Chi- cago wages, and this schedule was adopted by the roads before this strike at East Saint Louis broke out. Q. Do you know if any of the men in your employ belonged to any labor organiza- tion ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. Please state what your charges are for transferring freifrht across the river? — A. The charges vary according to the classification of goods. As a general thing our ■charges average IJ cents per 100 pounds, that is, the average result of the traffic of 1885. Q. By result, you don't mean the average profit, of course? — A. Oh, no; I mean the average gross revenue ; the average gross revenue is a little over one cent and a half. It is a little over 1.67 of the entire tonnage carried across the river. The total receipts amounted to that much. Q. Were these almost entirely stopped ? — A. Yes, sir; our loss in gross revenue was over $100,000. Q. During what time ? — A. l>om the 6th of March till the time the strike was «alled off. Q. What is the capital of this company ? — A. The capital stock of the company is $7,000,000. Oh, I beg pardon, I have included some of the bonds; the capital is $5,500,000. Q. One million aud a half of bonds?— A. $5,000,000 of bonds. Q. Is the statement and statistical condition of this company published ? — A. I have published a printed report. If the committee desires it, I will get it. Q. Well, if you can send us a copy, we would like to have it. — A. It gives all the information in respect to the character of the traffic and the results of it. Q. Are there any other facts you desire to state ? — A. I desire to state that in East Saint Louis the bridge controls the ingress and egress of all the roads by a system of •automatic and mechanical switches, which if not operated make it impossible for any movement of trains, including passenger trains, across the bridge. This is a system which we have established at a very heavy cost, over $100,000, and which not only facilitates the operations, but increases the safety of trains beyond anything that possibly may occur that could be foreseen. This system is operated in a tower similar to what perhaps you have seen in Philadelphia on the Pennsylvania road. Q. On Broad street ? — A. At Broad street, yes, sir ; similar to that, only much larger. The man at the tower commands eighty odd switches and some forty odd signals, and without him nothing can move. This necessarily apjilies to passenger trains. Now, in that service we had 4 men who were trained up to that service, who worked in shifts of 8 hours. They received $75 a month. They worked always under cover, in a warm room in winter, and a cool room in summer, and were really a privileged class of men. We relied on these men, and on the same evening the whistle blew these men left their places and went out. Q. What result did that have upon the passenger traffic ? — A. If it had not been for the fact that our superintendent was perfectly familiar with the entire system, and could handle the switches — in fact had taught these men how to handle them — the entire passenger traffic would have been stopped. Nothing could have been •moved across the bridge, and of course not only the passenger traffic but the mails would have been stopped. Our superintendent stayed there night and day for four weeks all alone. He had his bed made up there ; he had his meals brought there ; he couldn't leave there out of the house, except sometimes by night, when he knew that there were two or three honrs when no trains would be moving. Then he could lie down and sleep, or get out of the house. The telegraph operator, who is also in the tower, and without whom, also, nothing cOuld be done, because every train that leaves Saint Louis must be telegraphed, there being three blocks from the mouth of the tunnel, the tunnel operator telegraphs to Main street ; Main street again tele- graphs to East Saint Louis tower, aud vice versa, so that the operator at the tower can set his switch for the incoming or outgoing train, knowing the destination of the train — to what particular track she is going to be switched off — and without that ■operator, of course the switchmen could not know what train was coming. So that ■operator was ordered off by the Knights of Labor. He was a Knight of Labor. I 502 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. saw him and lie said he was very sorry ; he had tried to get them to permit him to remain there. After about three or four hours he came back, and had a written permit, which I saw, by order of the committee, sealed with the seal of the com- ' mittee : "You are permitted to remain as operator in the tower by order of the com- mittee." Now this was very gracious and very liind on the part of the committee, I thought, but it simply showed what their power was. This man felt and knew that by his going away, just as well as if Mr. Wuerpel, the superintendent, had died, or had become iucap'acitated from performing that service, that it would have stopped, because there was nobody in town who could perform that service. It requires the most accurate knowledge of a territory, perhaps within a radius of three-fourths of a mile, to know every approach, every switch of twelve railroads, and all the side- tracks, &c. Q. I am requested to ask you, doctor, if you were present at any of the meetings of the managers — I used that term in a general sense — on the other side?— A. I wiis, on the other side, and on this side ; yes, sir. Q. Bearing directly upon the strike on this Gould system ? — A. No. sir; we met, I as manager of the East Saint Louis side, as my official duties are divided, [ repre- senting the east as well as the west side, and the east side being at that time the most threatening, I of course represented our system as from the east side. Q. Was that before or after they went outon the strike here on March 6 ?— A. After they went out on the strike here. Q. Was any resolution passed to this purport at any of those early meetings, thiit it was the sense of this management that they should attempt to influence Mr. Hoxie to adjust this difficulty as speedily as possible ? — A. I don^t know of any such resolu- tion; m fact I know — I may as well say that I know — that no snch resolution was passed. I know exactly what resolution was passed, to which reference was made. Q. Well, will you state the substance of that? — A. As I understood it, the mana- gers on the east side had been served with a notice signed by Mr. Canghliu — in fact I saw the notice — informing them that after such and such a date such and such wages would be required to be paid to their switchmen and to their trainmen. 1 saw that notice in Colonel Hill's office, of the Vandalia line. He showed it to me. Q. Who was it signed by ? — A. Signed by Caughlin. Q. Who was Caughlin ? — A. I don't know, sir; i thinkheisamember of the execu- tive committee of tine Knights of Labor here. There was another gentleman, Bery, and Caughlin. This notice to the managers was the cause of the meeting being called, in ordor that they should take it into consideration, aud the resolutions passed were to this effect; it xvas referred to a committee of which Mr. Brown, of the Chicago, Burling- ton and Quincy, was chairman, I think, and the committee reported a set of resolu- tions, the purport of which was to this effect : that tbey did not know Mr. Caughlin — in fact, Mr. Hill told me that ho had asked all of his yardmen and switchmen who Mr. Caughlin was, and they didn't know ; they said that they had not authorized any , such notice to be given to them — that the roads did not recognize Mr. Caughlin, or anybody who was foreign to their service ; that they would recognize an i deal with their employes direct. And then they passed a resolution stating the wages they were willing to pay, and those were the wages which the Bridge Company had already been paying, ihe Bridge Company, aud 1 believe, the Chicago and Alton Road, aud which were adopted at that meeting. But the purport of that resolution was this, and nothing else, that they would not deal with Mr. Caughlin, or with any commit- tee of the Knights o*' Labor who were foreign to their service, but wonld deal with their employes. There is one more fact which I would like to bring before the committee, because I be- came "personally cognizant of it. Onr engines at that time were only in the service of passenger trains. We pull over about 80 passenger trains a day across the bridge. Our engines have to be coaled in East Saint Louis. We have a coal-chute there, and every arrangement to coal our engines. On the night when the strike took place in East Saint Louis, our coaling-men were driven out. Our engines at that time had coal enough simply to last them perhaps 24 hours. I found that it was impossible to get coal. I went to see the men, and talked with them myself. I might as well say that 1 went to see the mayor and the city council, and told them if I could not have pro- tection for the United States mail that I would have to call upon the General Govern- ment, with whom we had a contract for the carrying of their mail ; that if the coaling of the engines was prevented, of course that would stop our passenger trains, for we could not pull the trains unless the engines were coaled, and the mayor then told me that he had only four policemen all told, and that he could not give us the protection. I thereupon made up a list five men, five private watchmen, whom I engaged as private watchmen, and asked him to issue commissions to them as civil policemen, which he did. But even'these five watchmen, these men whom we had in yards protecting our freight — our yard in East Saint Louis was full of freight, loaded cars, while the yards in Saint Louis were full of empties — even with those men, and through those endeavors, we could not find anybody to coal the engines for love or LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 603 money. They wore afraid of their lives. They said we can coal the engines, but then when we go away our heads will be beaten in and our families insulted and we will be shot down, and we won't do it. I took men who were employed in the upper roadway service, or night policemen on the carriage roadway, and by a stratagem, at 3 o'elock at night, they would steal up to the coal-chute, and we would have our en- gines set there the evening before, and they would steal up there at 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning and coal the engines; and it was only in that way that we were enabled to can-y on our passenger service. The second night the strikers found that out, and when our men came over there there was a crowd of Knights, or strikers, driving them off. Then we tried the same thing over in Saiut Louis, and we coaled our en- gines here. We did it for three weeks only by stealing a march upon the strikers, and only by this sort of strategy were we enabled to move the passenger trains. One Sunday, during a fearful rain and storm which had been raging all the forenoon, I was down there and I told my men, "This is a good time to coal your engines. Tliese fellows are all under cover; they are all in their houses, or the bar-rooms, or abouv the relay depot, and now is a good time ; go ahead." They went ahead, and I stood by in the tower watching them. The coal-chute is right in front of and within two or three hundred yards of the tower, and they had not been at work ten minutes be- fore fifty strikers came out from all corners ; came out of the Martell House, came out of the Eelay House ; came as if they had grown out of the ground, and drove them off. Q. I will ask you, in this connection, if you can state from your own personal ob- servation what the temper of the East Saint Louis offieials was towards the men committing depredations. Did they attempt to restrain them, or prevent them, or drive them away at the time they were engaged in unlawful acts? — A. No, sir; I did not see a city policeman during all the time 1 was over there, and I was there every day off and on, Q. Did you see anything that looked like conniving at lawless acts on the part of the officials? — A. Well, it looked that way. Q. Any facts ? — A. Nothing of my own knowledge ; nothing but what my superin- tendent and my officers reported to me. There is one matter which Mr. Tansey will be able to testify to better, the intimidation of the teamsters that crossed the bridge.- Q. I am requested to ask you this question : You spoke of 50 strikers springing up at different points and coming in to prevent coaling the engines; how did you know that they were strikers ? — A. Who else but a striker would come up tliere and tell my men to quit work ? Drive them off. Who else ? Q. You draw the inference? — A. Why, it seems to me, the inference draws itself. C. M. STANTON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by General Outhwaitk). State your age and occupation. — Answer. Age, forty-four ; occupation, superintendent of the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad. Q. You know the object of this inquiry, and if you will make a statement briefly of any facts that have come under your observation, I will not ask you the questions directly. — A. Do you want merely a statement of grievances, or a statement of the negotiations with the city council and the sheriff and the governor, and Dhose people, that led up to this condition of things? Q. Well, just state briefly the facts in the case. Have you a written statement there? — A. I have a written statement here, but tl^cre is a great deal of it that has been Already given you, and some that has not. I will use it as a memorandum. Q. It is not necessary to give the whole statement, of course. — ^A. If there is any- thing you want that yon have not already got I can give it. To commence at the beginning: After the strike on the Southwest System the air in East Saint Louis was full of rumors of a strike, a probable strike on the east side ; and coming in, on the 17th of March, on our pay car, I took occasion to question a number of our switchmen as to whether there n as any cause of complaint ; whether they wanted any more ■ wages; and they all volunteered the statement that they were not Knights of Labor. I told them that didn't cut any figure in my estimation, whether they were not. If they were dissatisfied with their wages, or had any disposition to quit the company's service, I would like to know. They said they had not, that they were satisfied, and had no intention of striking. And that continued to be the state of things until 3 o'clock on the afternoon of Thursday, the 25th of March, when, at a given signal, by the blowing of the whistles of the switch engines throughout East Saint Louis, the men all went out, including sixty-five men of the Ohio and Mississippi Eoad. That included our switchmen, shopmen, sectionmeu, &c. That brought about a condition of things for which we were wholly unprepared, and as a necessary consequence we were unable to discharge our duty as common carriers. Q. You were common carriers from the eastern portion of the country to the West? — A. Well, sir, from East Saint Louis ea-st to Cincinnati and Louisville, the Ohio and Mississippi Eoad. 604 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Your road runs from here to Cincinnati, does it not? — A. Cincinnati, Louisville, and Saint Louis are the three principal points on the Ohio and Mississippi Road. Q. la that capacity you bring goods that have been brought from the far East, transporting them to the West? — ^A. Yes, sir; nine-Jenths of our business is inter- state business. This left us on that date in a condition that we couldn't do anytning for the reason that we had no men to do it with except our yardmen and agent, and a few gang bosses and clerlis that remained faithful, and we mide very little attempt to do business on the 25th. On the 26th we had no men except those already men- tioned, and the yard was overrun by a set of men in gangs of from twanty-five to three hundred threatening and driving off any who had any intention of working, and on Saturday, the 27th, we had a state of things there similar to that of the previous day. We were unable to gel new men and not only our yards but those of all the roads with whom we connected were being overrun by these lawless gangs of men. They were exhibiting documents to engineers and to yardmen. They were in all sorts of handwriting, a variety of penmanship that was simply astonishing, all signed by order of the committee, and bearing from one to two impressions of the seal of the Most Noble Order of the Knights of Labor. I have seen them with as many as two on, but never saw due with anybody's signature to it " by order of the committee." On Sunday, the 28th of March, there was no attempt made to do any business in East Saint Louis by any of the railroads, so far as I know. There was an interview arranged between the railroad superintendents and the sheriff after the demands made upon the authorities'of East Saint Louis for protection, and the reply Mr. Parker has read for protection. The same demand was made upon the sheriff, and on Sun- day they had a meeting with him, and wanted a verbal statement, as well as a writ- ten one, from him as to what he would or could do towards affording these railroads the protection to which they were entitled under the law. I have his reply here, if you care to hear it. Q. You have it in writing? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it a type- writer copy? — A. It is a type- writer copy; yes, sir. •Q. Well, that may go in ; that is the same as was read by Mr. Parker ? — A. Yes, sir; as read by Mr. Parker. Q. Go on with your statement. — A. On March 29 we made as much of an effort as we could to resume our switching in the yard by using the yard-master and train- master, and I was on the engine most of the time myself. We were visited every few minutes by some sort of a committee or mob coming alongside of the engine and piling all over it. Q. Now, let me ask you, did you recognize any of those men as employes of your company or employes of any other company ? — A. Oh, yes; I have been around East Saint Louis for twelve years, and I recognized a good many of them. Q. As. employes? — A. As employes of other companies. The man that I collared' and shoved off the engine, who had a Knight of Labor document to read to our en- gineer, is a freight clerk in the Cbicago oflEice. 1 know him very well. I know other men tliat are switchmen ; I know their faces, and I can go right over there and pick them out for you, who had these documents signed " By order of the committee," and were reading them to my engineer and fireman. Q. Can you give the names? — A. I can give the name of that man. I can't give it now, from memory, but I can get it for you. To go back a little, Governor Oglesby arrived at East Saint Louis at hsilf-past 7 Wednesday, March 31, and on the following day, the 1st of April, he made his headquarters at the Martell House, where he re- ceived delegations of all descriptions, and there he accepted an invitation from a committee of the Knights of Labor to address a meeting at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. During the time he was in the Martell House there were a number of acts of violence committed. Engines were climbed onto and men intimidated and driven oft, iud during the time he was making his speech in the public square, within two squares from there, a committee pulled a foreman from an L. &, M. engine, 37, by the name of. Keenan, and beat him up badly — within two squares of where the governor was speaking. About 1 o'clock p. m., Monday, the 29th, a mob came to onrengineThouse, . which is near the relay depot, headed by William Secord, Tom Paine, George Stevens, and Joseph De Ome. Those were the four principal figures in that gang. They all claimed to be Knights of Labor. I can't say personally or positively, of my own knowledge, whether they were "or not, but they claimed to be ; they climbed over our engine ; they took water from the spout of the tank and put the fire out, discon- nected the hose, and opened the blow-off valve, and filled the eugiue, No. .'iB. Mr. Charles Taylor was the engineer, and Mr. James Petty was the fireman. We had a number of witnesses stand by and see it, but of course they couldn't do anythiug with a crowd of one hundred men withthe desperation that they had. Later in the evening, about 5 o'clock, we got that engine into the house, and between that time and 10 p. m. they got it filled up with water again, and built a fire in it, andduringthetemporary absence of Mr. Shehan, our master mechanic, they burst open one of the round-house doors, they killed the engine, put cut the flres, and let LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 505 the -water out of the boiler and tender. The niglit watchman was unable to recognize any of the men who did that on account of the darkness and the threats that were made to him. On Saturday, April 2, we secured the services of one switchman by name of Ed. Kerrigan. We brought him from OTallon. He worked a little dur- ing the day under the protection of the deputies that we had sworn in previous to that time, and was left alone for a few minutes, about 5 or 10 or 10 minutes, and a gang of these strikers called him out of the room, and he very foolishly went out, and they beat him up badly, and he didn't return anymore; he could't, of course. On the eame day there were two strikers, one by the name of F. Stohlkamp, and another that I didn't recognize, came to our round house, where the fireman of engine 70, Mr. Herit, was helping to turn the engine, and told him that he didn't want him to help turn any more engines. If he did, they would do him up ; for him to attend strictly to his business of firing that engine, when it was on the road. I have copies of tele- grams that were sent by the sheriff to Governor Oglesby on the 29th and 30th, if you would like to ha\ e those. The witness then read from the printed statement referred to in evidence, which statement was stipulated to be offered in evidence, and is appended hereto, as follows : Q. Is there anything outsideof that statement, Mr. Stanton, that your attention has not been called to * — A. I have got a little memorandum here ; I will see in a moment. [Referring to a memorandum.] I will say, merely as a matter of information for you, that in 1877 I had occasion to take the present officials of East Saint Louis to Spring- field as boss strikers, and had them sentenced and imprisoned in the United States court — Joyce, Halloran, aud Shea. Q. What positions do they fill now ? — A. Maurice Joyce is mayor, Halloran is chief of police, Shea chairman of the aldermen. I had them all in Springfield. They are under suspended sentence in the United States court now. Q. Do you know whether they are Knights of Labor or not?— A. Oh, no ; that was in 1877. Q. Do you know whether they are Knights of Labor at this time ? — A. I do not know ; I have no means of knowing. Q. In your statement you show the disposition of the police towards the persons who were committing these depredations, do you not ? — A. No, sir ; I think not ; only in a general way. Q. What would you say, from your own observation, was the disposition of the police and civil authorities of East Saint Louis towards the persons who were engaged in these several depredations that have been described, and acts of violence ? — A. Why, they were most certaiuly In thorough and hearty sympathy with the element who are on a strike. There is no difference iu th^ social or local conditions of society in East Saint Louis — none now, different from what there has been for ten years. They are in' thorough and hearty sympathy, and every source of information we have shows that whenever a striker gets into trouble he is at once released, aud whenever one of our men gets in they are always given the full extent of the law. I want to make a little statnemet with regard to two of our men. I had two switchmen, men named James Gray and Louis Anderson, whom I had commissioned as deputy sheriffs, about the 3d of April — Satuiday. On Monday, the 5th of Apri], Walter Scott Anderson and George Bailey, two indicted strikers and Knights of Labor, were released on bail from indictments and commissioned as special policemen for East Sain t Louis. They arrested my two deputy sheriffs at the point of a revolver, took them both down to the city build- ings, where we went and got them out, after they had examined their papers. The reason I say that Mr. Walter Scott Anderson and George Bailey are strikers was the fact that on the 7th of April I had those two gentlemen and Charles Dickson, who were prominent Knights of Labor, in our freight house, and we sat down on a box and talked it all over for an hour. I gave them a good deal of good advice and didn't charge them anything for it ; but we went through the Knights of Labor and sundry subjects pretty thoroughly, so that I feel pretty positive in my statement as to those three gentlemen. Q. Perhaps it '^as because you didn't charge them anything for it that fhey didn't follow your advice. — A. Possibly. The Chairman. Is there any further fact, Mr. Stanton ? — A. I will refer to this memo- randum and tell you in a moment. I will say in a general way that we didn't have in our houses or freight-yards any further intimidation after the 2d of April, for the reason that we had a sufficient force, armed with Winchester rifles and properly commis- sioned, to keep these people off our premises. We employed men that we toot out into the country in the evening and brought in in the morning and kept them isolated from the disorderly element, and for that reason we were comparatively free from these assaults. On the 26th of April the military patrol were emporarily withdrawn as an experiment, aud within an hour there were two came into our yard and attacked and choked a man by the name of James Quinlan, forced him up against a car. He was out in the yard between some lines of cars. They choked him badly and ac- cused him of being a man knowu as Butler, who is a switchman in the yard. They 506 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■were mistaken in the man, and after showing his book anil explaining that be was a yard clerk, they suddenly dropped him and skipped out in the yard. He is an old resident of Saint Loxiis, and yet he didn't recognize them, and^ve supposed they were sent there on that errand from the west side of the river. I didn't personally see the shooting at the Broadway crossing on the Qthinstaut. I got to the west tower of the bridge about the time this man Thompson was shot, perhaps two minutes, after, so that I did not witness the shooting, and I g8t down into pur own yard while this Deputy Cheasly, from the M. and L. road, was lying on the ground. We got a grain door and put him onto it and carried him in and called the doctor. Our deputies were there to prevent any further movement of the mob in that direction, and they turned and went back aud contented themselves with'having kicked this man up about the head and shot in the legs. That is all that I witnessed of that. I didn't see anything more. By the Chairman : Q. Will you leave your written statement with the secretary ? — A. Yes, sir (which is as follows) : On Thursday, March 25, 1886, at about 3 o'clock p. ra., 65 men employed by the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Company, in East Saint Louis, voluntarily abandoned the company's service, without having made any demand or having given any pre- vious notice of their intention to do so; the railroad company being wholly unpre- ' pared for such an emergency were unable to continue the handling of freight or the moving of freight cars, as they were required to do as common carriers. On Friday, March 26, mobs of men numbering from 25 to 300 persons, claiming to be members of and acting in accordance with instructions from a secret society, known as Knights of Labor, invaded the premises and buildings of the Ohio and Mis- sissippi Railroad Company, East Saint Louis, and by threats, intimidation, and force, compelled those of its employes who were attempting to render the company the service for whi?h they were engaged to stop work. These mobs prevented the moving of freight trains by the uncoupling of cars and setting of brakes ; only a limited amount of work could be done by the yard-master working alone. In the afternoon of March 26 several of the officers and agents of the railroad com- panies called on Mayor Joyce, requesting police protection in operating their roada. In the afternoon a committee of five of the railway officers, of which W. C. Brown was chairman, were instructed to call on Mayor Joyce, and demand police protection in operating their several railways, terminating at East Saint Louis. He made an- swer to the comtiiittee that he had no authority to appoint special policemen unless authorized to do so by the city council; said 'he would call the couucil together in special session; the ordinance requiiing twenty-four hours' notice to do this, he called a special session of the council to convene at 5 p. m. Saturday, March 27. The rail- way officers there meeting on March 27, appointed a committee of seven meu, com- posed of W. C. Brown, H. W. Gays, T. W. Burrows, Charles Hamilton, C. F. Bent, H. W. Hubbard, and C. L. Barnhard, to be present at the meeting of the city council aud present the following communication : " Saint Louis, March 27, 1886. " The Honorable Mayoe and City Council. " East Saint Louis, Illinois : "The undersigned representatives of the various railroads operating in and termi- nating at East Saint Louis, would respectfully represent that a number of the em- ployes of said railroads have agreed and conspired together to go out on what is known as a ' strike,' for the purpose of unlawfully and maliciously and wickedly in- juring the business and property of said railroads and the public trade and com- merce transported thereon ; and also have combined together to prevent said compa- nies from operating said railroads and the lawful use and management of the same, and have prevented by threats aud suggestions of danger and other unlawful means, other employes of said railroads from performing their respective duties, and have influenced and compelled them to quit the service of said companies. " These Results have been accomplished by the strikers combining together and pa- trolling and remaining in the yards and upon the premises of said railroads ; by threats of violence and intimidation towards such of the employes of said companies as re- mained in their employ. " In view of the premises aud in behalf of the patrons of our respective railroads, we respectfully request that you furnish ample police protection for the yardp and premises of said railroad companies, in order that the property we represent may be amply protected and the employes of the respective railroads guarded from violence of strikers and other evil-disposed persons, and that the said railroad companies be thereby enabled to resume their usual traffic, and in the event of your beiuf unable to furnish summary and ample protection as above indicateds and keeping rioters LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 507 and other idlers off the premises of our respective railroads, we would further respect- folly ask that you so notify the sheriff of Saint Clair County, Illinois, and ask hi» co-operation in carrying out the requests of this petition. " Very respectfully, yours, " Geo. W. Pakkek, Vice-President, and Gen'l Manager of the Cairo Short Line. "Joseph Hill, General Superintendent Vandalia Line. " J. S. Haeahan, Gen'l Manager L. rf- N. B. B. "T. W. Burrows, Supt. I. 4- St. L. B. B. "H. W. Gays, Supt. E. St, Louis Conn^iiing E. B. "T. M. E. Talcott, Gew'J Manager M. f O. B. B. " Wm. Taussig, Gen'l Man'g'r St. Louis Bridge Company. " C. H. Sharon, Gen'l Supt. I. 4- St. L. B. B. " C. r. Bent, Supt. O. 4 M. B. B. "S. D. Eebves, Supt. C. # A. B. E." — which was done, and, after a full discussion hy the council, the following resolu- tions were passed : "At a meeting of the city council held on the 27th day of March, 1886, the follow- ing motion .was adopted : Moved hy Mr. Hill, seconded hy Mr. Haynes, that the mayor notify the chairman of the committee representing the various railroads that the city was powerless to give them police protection in the running of their trains in and out of the city. "T. A. CANTY, aty Cleric." And a certified copy of the same handed to the committee was their answer to the request of the railway companies for protection. Requests were at once made upon the sheriff at Saint Clair County, and a meeting was arranged with him hy telegraph, to he held at East Saint Louis at 10 o'clock a. m. of Sunday, March 28. On Saturday, March 27, the following demand was made upon the sheriff of Saint Clair County : " Saint Louis, Mo., March 27, 1886. " Mr. Feed. Eopiequet, " Sheriff Saint Clair County, Illinois : " The various railroads terminating at East Saint Louis, Saint Clair County, Illi- nois, would respectfully represent that a numher of the employes of said railroads have agreed and conspired together to go out on what is known as a ' strike,' for the purpose of unlawfully, maliciously, and wickedly injuring the husiness and property of said railroads, and the public trade and commerce thereon ; and also have com- bined together to prevent said railroad companies from operating said railroads and of the lawful use and management of the same ; and have prevented, by threats and suggestions of danger, and other unlawful means, other employes of said railroads from performing their respective duties, and have influenced and compelled them to quit the service of said companies. " Thpse results have been accomplished by the strikers combining together, and patrolling and remaining in the yards and upon the premises of said railroaus; by threats of violence and intimidation towards such of the employes of said companies as remained in their employ. "In view of the premises and in behalf of the patrons of our respective railroads in East Saint Louis, we respectfully request that you furnish ample police protection for the yards and premises of said railroad companies in order that the property we repre- sent may be amply protected and the employes of the respective railroads in East Saint Louis guarded from violence of strikers and other evil-disposed persons, and that the said railroad companies be thereby enabled to assume their usual traffic. " Very respectfully yours." This was sigued by the same officers that signed the appeal to Mayor Joyce given above, to which the sheriff made the following reply : " Saint Louis, March 28, 1836. " George W. Parker, " Vice-President and General Manage':, and, other Bailroad Officials : "Your communication of March 27 has been received and carefully considered. I was already aware of the fact that there was a combination to prevent the moving of freight trains in the city of East Saint Louis, and have been present in person and by deputies since the commencement of the e~rike referred to, to enable yon to move your trains. The freight-yards in East Saint Louis are so extensive, and the combi- 508 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. nation to prevent tlie movement of freight trains so Tvell organized and determined that I am satisfied I am unable with the power in my hands to enable you at present- to resume freight trafBo in East Saint Louis. I am further satisfied from resistance made to my deputies in East Saint Louis, either by the strikers or lawless persons who have taken advantage of the situation, that further efforts on my part would not enable you to move your freight trains. I am willing to take all necessary steps in my power to assist you in performing the services due from you to the public. " Eespectfullv, "FEED. EOPIEQXIET, " Sheriff Saint Clair County, Illinois." On Monday, March 29, the sheriff having sworu in a few deputies, iucluding C. B. Wade, who was in the service of the Indianapolis and Saint Louis Eailroad, this deputy, while attempting to move out a freight train from the freight yards of the Indianapolis and Saint Louis Eailroad, and while himself and the chief deputy, John Raglan, were commanding the mob, in the name of the State of Illinois, to disperse. Deputy Wade was assaulted by the mob and severely injured, whereupon the sheriff sent Governor E. J. Oglesby the following telegram : " Hon. ElCHAED Oglksby, "Governor, Springfield, III.: " One ofmy special deputies, C. P. Wade, who was iiJ the yard of the Indianapolis and Saint Louis Eailroad Company, and endeavoring to facilitate the movement of freight trains, was assaulted and seriouly injured by a mob there assembled. The cries ol the mob were, kill the s — of a b — ; we will allow no scab to work here ; we will allow no 'scabs' to work here. This mob had already been ordered repeatedly by Deputy Sheriff Eagland, in the name of the State of Illinois, to disperse, and had prevented the movement of freight trains of the Indianapolis and Saint Louis Eailroad Company. "FEED. EOPIEQUET, "Sheriff of Saint Clair Countu, Illinois." The mob took forcible possession of freight and switching trains on several of the railways who were attempting to do some work. The unlawful assembly of the mobs and the riotous demonstrations were reported to the sheriff frequently, who openly acknowledged his inability to afford the needed protection and sent the following telegram to Governor Oglesby : " East Saint Louis, III., March 29, 1886. "Gov. EicHARD Oglesby, "Springfield, III. : " There is an unlawful mob assembled in East Saint Louis of fully one thousand men, which refuses to peaceably disperse when commanded by me, as sheriff of Saint Clair County, in the name of the State of Illinois to do so. I had with me my regular deputies and all the specials I could get. I called the posse, but it was of the mob. This mob kills engines, pulls pins, sets brakes, obstructs the track, and prevents the movement of freight trains by these means and by violence and intimidation. My- self and deputies attempted to make arrests, but were prevented by the mob. I and all my combined forces, and all the posse comitatus who would assist, were unable to protect the Vandalia freight train a few minutes ago. I am powerless to protect a single freight engine or freight train which attempts to move, and am unable to dis- perse the unlawful assembly which is interfering with this class of property. I refer the matter to you as governor of the State, and ask your assistance to aid me to en- force the law. "FEED. EOPIEQUET, " Sheriff Saint Clair County, Illinois." The following notice was posted conspicuously on the company's buildings in the city of East Saint Louis : "TRESPASS NOTICE. " Notice is hereby given that tracks and yards on any of these railroads is private property, and all persons not having business with or employed by the company are warned not to walk along its tracks or right of way, or enter its yards, buildings, or premises. Such entry is nereby expressly forbidden. " Trespassers disregarding ttus notice will be prosecuted under section 268 of the crimiualcode. "J. M. DAVIDSON, " Agent of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway." LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 509 Adjutant-General Vance met Sheriff Ropiequet early on Maroli 30, and indicated that his telegrams to Governor Oglesby had not been entirely satisfactory to the gov- ernor, and in order that he might more fuliy understand the following telegram was sent : "GoTernor Oglksby, ' ' Springfield, III. r " Your dispatch was received, i'ou look for me to come to Springfield. My state of health is impaired so much by late vigils that it is out c i the question for me to go far from home. ' I called the posse at East Saint Louis when the emergency occurred. Few persona responded, and few will. There are nine yards here. There are fully fifteen hundred men here determined that no freight train shall move. They respect no authority and seem to hold the State of Illinois in contempt. It is folly to think of moving freight trains here, unless theState sends a strong force. All attempts to do so will result in a failure and bring the authorities into further contempt. En- gines have been killed this morning. The freight blockade is complete, except as to the road in the hands of the United States marshals. The strikers seem to have some respect for the United States, but none for this State. "FEED. ROPIEQUET, " Sheriff Saint Clair County, Illinois." Soon after lioon the Vandalia rofid made an effort to move a freight train, which was prevented by the mob, who pulled coupling pins, set brakes, and by such means, in presence of the adjutant-general, compelled the company to abandon the attempt. The sheriff then sent the following telegram to Governor R. J. Oglesby : "Gov. R. J. Oglbsbt, "Springfield, III. : " liave since sending the last dispatch ascertained that my deputy (Ragland) with his deputies attempted to assist in the movement of a Vandalia train. These men were assaulted by a mob of several hundred men, whom he commanded in the name of the State to disperse peaceably, which was hooted at. The train was disabled and the engine taken to the round-hotase. No freight trains can be moved. As sheriff I am powerless without your aid to protect the freight trains on all or any of the railroads in East Saint Louis. I have asked aid by wire. I ask herein again." The Ohio and Mississippi were unable to do business at all, having no switchmen, and could not obtain any men for the reason that fhe police protection could not be afforded; continued invasion by and threats of Knights of Labor. Gov. R. J. Oglesby arrived in East Saint Louis on the Chicago and Alton train at 7.30 p. m. Wednesday, March 3], and was entertained for the night at the residence of Dr. H. C. Fairbrotlier. On the following day, Friday, April 1, he made his head- quarters at the parlors of the Martell House, in East Saint Louis, where he received railway officials, citizens, delegations of strikers, business men, and city officials from Saint Louis. In the afternoon he addressed an out-door meeting held at the city hall ill East Saint Louis, on invitation from a committee from the Knights of Labor, and under their auspices. Just before or during this meeting a party of Knights of Labor took forcible possession of Louisville and Nashville engine No. 37, within five blocks of the city hall, and dragged the ^reman from the engine. These facts were reported to the governor, as well as similar outrages during the afternoon, but he could only refer the complainants to the sheriff. The governor left for his home at Springfield at 8 o'clock p. m. on the Chicago and Alton train. Anumber of railroad meii and others who had witnessed the riotous demonstrations of the mob since the strike began went to Belleville March 30 and 31, and gave evi- dence before the grand jury, who, in handing in their report on March 31, on adjourn-, meut^ had found indictments against fifty-three persons on several counts, for partici- pation in the various riots in East Saint Louis. Adjutant-General Va^ce met the railway officials socially and informally at the office of G. W. Parker, at 8 o'clock p. m. on March 30. Between 1 and 2 o'clock p. m. of March 29, while engine No. 58 was standing on the water-tank track, opposite the engine-house, with steam up, a mob of fifty or more men, under the leadership of William Seoord, George Stevens, Tom Cane, and Joseph Deomey, suddenly and forcibly took possession of the engine, took water from the tank spout and put out the fire, opened the blow-off cock and let the water out of the boiler, disconnected the hose between the engi,ne and tank, and let the water all out of the latter. Charles Taylor, engineer, and James Petty, fireman, were on the engine. The following officers and employes of the Ohio and Mississippi Rail- road were wii^hin 100 feet of the engine while the mob were killing it : John T. Meteer, H. Francisco, H. D. Hanover, W. MoMahon, John Phillips, James Goff, John Jones, and J. M. Sheer, who recognized the leaders of the mob, whose names are given above. 510 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Between 5 and 6 o'clock the same day, J. M. Sheer got engine 58 into the engine-house and again prepared the engine for service. While absent from the engine-house for a short time, between 10 and 11 o'clock p. m., parties entered 'the engine-house and again killed the engine, by putting out the fire and letting all the water out of the boiler and tender. The watchman, Levy Truckoy, could not recognize any of the party. At 3 o'clock p. m. a committee, consisting of George W. Parker, R. P. Tansey,- C. F. Bent, J. T. Harahan, and T. M. Bates, went to Springfield, and at 8 o'clock p. m., by appointment, called on Governor Oglesby, at the executive mansion, with C. M. Stanton, E. F. Leonard, and Adjutant-General Vance, who were present by invi- tation. J. W. Parker, chairman, made a statement to Governor Oglesby of the condition of affairs in East Saint Louis, laying before him in proper order the demands made by the railroad transportRtion companies on the mayor of East Saint Louis and the sheriff of Saint Clair County and their answers, and urged the Government to afford without delay the required protection. The interview closed at 11 p. m., General Vance and T. M. Bates coming to East Saint Louis by special train, leaving Spring- field at 12 o'clock midnight. Other members of the committee and party returned to East Saint Louis on Tuesday morning, March 30. The railroad companies were unable to obtain men to operate their freight trains in East Saint Louis, by reason of the threatenings of the mob and the acknowledged inability of the sheriff to afford protection. The presence of Adjutant-General Vance in East Saint Louis did not deter the mob from acts of violence and intimidation, such as had characterized them since the 25th instant. A few switch engines were in use, manned by railroad offlcers and agents, who acted as switchmen. This condition of affairs remained practically unchanged until Monday, April 5. A number of railroad officers and others, who had witnessed the criminal acts of the mob, went to Belleville on March 30 and 31, and gave evidence before the grand jury- On Monday, March 29, Sheriff Eopiequet issued his proclamation, calling attention to the statutes of Illinois, and printing in full sections 158, 159, 160, 186, and ISO as ap- plicable to the offenses committed by the Knights of Labor and their associates, which proclamation was posted in many conspicuous places in the city of East Saint Louis. On Thursday, April 1, Henry E. Merit, employed as a fireman on engine No. 70, of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway, was aiding J. M. Sheer iu turning that engine on the turn-table when he was approached by Fred. Stahl, Camp, and another man not known to him (Merit) who ordered him to stop rendering any assistance in turning engines and read to him a notice, signed, " By order of the committee," and purport- ing to be from a Knights of Labor Assembly, requesting him to stop work. On Friday, April 2, Ed. Kerrigan was engaged at O'Fallon to work as a switchman for the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad in East Saint Louis. While waiting for the train on which he was to return to O'Fallon he was called out of the waiting room at Cone Station in East Saint Louis and assaulted by a gang of strikers and badly beaten. On Saturday, April 3, the sheriff of Saint Clair County, conimissioned special depu- ties on application of the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad, the train-master, assistant train-master, yard-master, and several of his foremen clerks. The sheriff visiting the Ohio and Mississippi freight-house on the island for this purpose, and instructing the men so sworn in their duties and powers under the statutes. On Monday, April 5, the Ohio and Mississippi Railway brought in from Flora, Salem, and other stations a number of men to act as deputy sheriffs, who were commissioned by the sheriff and stationed about the company's premises to prevent as far as they might be able the invasion of the company's premises by the mob. The following switchmen were included among the number so deputized, namely, James Grey, E. W. Davis, Jeff. Clarke, and Louis Anderson. In order to get beyond the influence of the mob, they were sent to Lebanon at 11 o'clock p. m. A mob estimated at fifty to seventy-five men gathered about the hotel, a part of which was used for the railroad station and demanded of the proprietor that the men employed by the Ohio and Mis- sissippi as switchmen should leave town. After a time it was thought prudent to take the men away, and with the exception of Anderson and Grey, who escaped from the house, they were sent to Carlisle by special train. Tuesday, April 6, was election day in East Saint Louis. The Ohio and Mississippi Railway made no attempt to do any switching or freight work except such as could be done by the yard-master, train-master, and the foremen clerks. In the freight- houses on the island none of the switchmen returned to duty on account of their ex- perience at Lebanon the previous night. On Wednesday, April 7, James Butler, Thomas Woods, and M. A. Aduddle were added to the force of switchmen. At aijout 11.30 o'clock a. m. a mob numbering at least one hundred persons came in at the east end of the Ohio and Mississippi yards on the island from the north side. They assaulted the switchmen named above, com- manding them to cease work and threatening them with great bodily harm in case LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 511 they refuped or continued to work. The mob then rushed through the freight-houses commanding the laborers to quit work, taking several and pushing them ahead of them, commanding them to leave the building. The sheriff and his deputies, Ragland, and others wore following the mob some distance in the rear but making no arrests. The deputies employed by the Ohio and Mississippi Eailway commanded the mob to halt but they were so numerous and so impetuous that they paid no attention to the command. Gangs hanging about the near drive-ways leading from the levee to the tracks in the Ohio and Mississippi yard intimidating the employes of the Saint Louis Transfer Company, and when they were allowed to do so entering upon the prem- ises of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway and intimidating the men omployaji upon its platform. On Thursday, April 8, the Ohio and Mississippi Railway engaged the services of seven additional men to act as deputy sheriffs and purchased Winchester nfles, arm- ing those already employed who resided at stations along the line of its road, making in all seventeen persons, who were acting as deputies and were stationed about the company's grounds and buildings, in the island yard, at the company's round-house, and at Cone Station. James Butler, J. E. Greene, Joseph Danley, James Grey, and Louis Anderson were in the employ of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway as switch- men, partial protection being afforded them in their work by the deputy sheriffs re- ferred to herein. On Friday, April 9, at 2.45 o'clock p. m., a collision occurred between the mob con- gregated at the Broadway crossing of the Louisville and Nashville Railway, East Saint Louis, and seven deputy sheriffs in the service of that company, in which a large number of shots were exchanged and nine persons killed. Some of the deputies employed by the Louisville and Nashville Railroad, Who were at this time on their way from dinner at Relay depot and without arms, were chased by a part of the mob down Third street north toward the Ohio and Mississippi freight station. One of the party was shot through the calf of his leg when near the Ohio and Mississippi grounds, was afterwards set upon by the mob and badly injured, about the face and neck, was carried into the Ohio and Mississippi freight-house, Dr.'Fairbrother called, his wounds dressed, and he was afterwards sent over to Saint Louis in the ferry. The employes of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway were so much frightened by these occurrences that they were unwilling to continue work. Preparations were made for defending the property by means of deputy sheriffs, expecting that the mob would seek revenge possibly by attacking some other deputies employed in the service of the railway companies. Better counsels evidently prevailed and the mob contented itself with the wo;:k already described, except that at 10 o'clock that night and for some time after that hour, flres were started in two or three different places in the Cairo Short Line yards and also in the Louisville and Nashville yards, by which some thirty cars and oil-houses and a scale-house were destroyed. Certain companies composing Second Brigade of Illinois National Guard were at once ordered to East Saint Louis by the governor and began to arrive in East Saint Louis by 11 o'clock p m., and through their efforts the fires which had been started were prevented from doing greater harm. The superintendents and managers of the various railway companies and transportation companies, haviujg terminals in East Saint Louis, issued and posted in many conspicuous places the following notice : " The undersigned railroads having terminals in East Saint Louis are ready to em- ploy any of their old men up to the number necessary to do their work, who will ap- ply before 1 o'clock p. m., on Monday, April 5, 1886. After that time all applicants will be considered, whether from those previously in their service or not. No one will be employed who has committed any unlawful act during the strike, and no new man will be discharged to make place for the former employes." At a meeting of railway officers held at the office of G. W. Parker, in Saint Louis, Wednesday, March 31, the chairman was instructed to send a telegram to Governor Oglesby, and the following telegram was sent ; Saikt Louis, March 31, 1886. Hon. R. J. Oglesby, Governor: The representatives of all the transportation companies terminating at East Saint Louis, in meeting 'assembled, respectfully notify you that they have exhausted all possible means of resuming traffic on their respective roads, and as the public de- mands are imperative, let commerce be resumed at once. We again apply to you for prompt action in enforcing obedience to the laws of the State. An immediate reply to this meeting is respectfully and urgentlv requested. GEO. W. PARKER. Chairman. 312 LABOR. TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The grand jury, of Saint Clair County, Illinois, returned indictment on Wednesday, March 31, 1886, against fifty-three persons on seven counts, bail being fixed at $1,000 on each count, their names are as follows : Anderson, Walter Scott; Bailey, James ; Bailey, Eugene; Bailey, George; Bailey, Omer; Bailey, Charles; Benson, Charles; Berry, James ; Berry, Dick ; Braznell, Ed. ; Badger, Louis; Connors, Cornellius ; Dixon, Jack; Drisooll, Jack ; Do wling; Patrick ; Deomy, Joseph; Eckert, Charles ; Ensming- er, Chas. ; Flannigan, Pat.; Green, Matt; H.L.Harvey; Harvey, Thomas ; Hookey, Dennis ; Haley, W. ; Hurley, James ; Hayes, Harry ; Hartnet, Wm. ; Hutchinson, Thomas; Haley, Timothy; Knous, Louis; Kane, Thomas; Lisles, James; Lyons, Mike ; McAdams, S. ; Moulle, Charles ; Myers, Eli ; Neuroth, John ; Page, Wm. ; Ryan, Wm. ; Ridgway, Samuel; Stanton, Thomas; Slattery, Ed.; Sullivau, Pat.; Secord, Wm. ; Stevens, George; Tobin,Rich.; Voice, Charles ; Wright, Eugene ; Wright, John N. ; Ward, Charles ; Williams, Jack ; Walsh, Martin; Welsoh, James. The following-named persons have been arrested up to noon, April 27, 1886, all of whom were released ou bail, except Wm. Sanders and Ed. Slattery ; Anderson, Walter Scott ; Bailey, George ; Bailey, Charles ; Berry, Dick ; Bradley, R. S. ; Euright, John; Hickey, Dennis ; Lyle, James; Moulle, Chas. ; Newroth, John; Secord, Will- iam (Shorty) ; Stanton, Thomas ; Sanders, William ; Slattery, Ed. ; Wright, Eugene. At a meeting of railway officers held in the oflice of G. W. Parker, on Thursday, April 1, it was thought wise to secure legal advice on certain questions which were discussed at the meeting. A notice was accordingly sent to the railway attorneys asking them to meet at George W. Parker's office at 10 o'clock a. m., April 2, for con- sultation, which was done, and the following opinion submitted : (1) That the men should be notified in the most available manner by each com- pany, that they are out of the employ of the company from the date upon which they ceased work. (2) That taxes cannot be withheld on account of the strike and must be paid in due force. C3) That there is no liability save municipalities on account of failure of officers to give proper protection nor is there any liability of officers personally or officially ex- cept for malfeasance. (4) That the strike of the employes of a railroad will cot exempt that company for liability for delays of freight already received. But if the delay is the result of force from an irresistible body of men, "a mob," then the company would be exempt. (5) That a renewal of notice to sheriff is not necessary, if the obstructions or resist- ance is continued, but if resistance is withdrawn and then renewed the notice should be renewed. , , On Monday, April 5, Lewis Anderson and James Grey, two switchmen employed by the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad, and who were commissioned as deputy sheriffs on April 3, were arrested by W. S. Anderson and George Bailey, two of the rioters who were indicted by the grand jury, placed under arrest and released on bail, and who were appointed as special policemen by the authorities of East Saint Louis, as soon as they were released. Lewis Anderson and James Grey were released from custody after detention and annoyance ; the intent and purpose of this outrage on the part of the East Saint Louis officials was to bring into contempt the authority of the sheriff in his efforts to preserve the peace. On Thursday, April 8, the sheriff brought to East Saint Louis a posse of 150 men, citizens of Belleville, but did not use them in making any arrests in East Saint Louis, and all returned to Belleville in the evening; on Tuesday, April 13, the Ohio and Mis- sissippi Railroad sent an engine to the National Stock-yards at coal and other freight, with an escort of military ; this was the first trip made by any engine to the yards since March 25, except that the Wabash made one or two trips, being protected by deputy United States marshals. The following persons were employes of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway prior to 3 o'clock p. m., Thursday, March 25, 1886, at which time they abandoned the service : Almon, Peter, freight handler; Bennett, Isaac, machinist; Bennix, A., blacksmith; Brown, Albert, coaler; Butler, Ed., car inspector ; Bennett, Peter, fireman; Clendenin, Henry, wiper; Clendenin, James, coaler ; CuUey, Pat., section man; Canty, Timothy, freight handler; Callahan, Pat., section man; Cooper, E. H., carpenter ;'Chadwiok, J. D., fireman; Dillmore, John, stationary engineer ; Donley, Stephen, coaler; Dowl- ing, Edward, section man ; Duyer, Thomas, freight handler; Dwyer, Edward, freight handler; Darsey, Thomas, freight handler ; Durkin, Thomas, freight handler ; Deems, Samuel, switchman ; Dnluhan, James, car inspector ; Evans, H. S., oiler; Egan,John, section man ; Edwards, Pat., section man ; Fitten, John, freight handler ; Grogan, Walter, wiper; Grogan,' Pat., freight handler ; Glessner, George, assistant yard-mas- ter; Hubert, Vitel, wiper ; Heifron, William, freight handler ; Henry, Robert, switch- man; Hall, Frank, switchman; Kelley, Frank, coaler; Knous, Lewis, switchman; Lyon, C. M., oar repairer; MoGeehan, John, platform laborer; Myers, John, freight handler; Marshall, D. M., switchman; McEntyre, Chas. B., switchman, Michaels, \^^- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 513 iam, switchman ; Moms, John, flagman ; Mantor, Eioh, section man ; MoOnllough, Chas., switchman; Nolan, Ed., freight handler; Nolan, Chris., machinist helper; O'Connor, Jerry, section man ; Parks, JohnW., switchman; Rourk, Mike, car inspect- or; Roe, Rich., machinist; Sherwood, E. J., blacksmith's helper ; Shatley, Louis, engine; Smith, Wal., coaler; Snllivau, M., freight handler; Shaeffer, W., crossing flagman; Seibring, H., foreman car reporter; Stack, J., car repairer; Seibring, F., oiler; Seibring, A., car repairer; Truckey,F., coaler; Welsh, Ed. , car repairer ; Woods, G., freight handler; Tonkers,H.E., switchman. The freight agent of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway and his force of office clerks remained faithful to the company and the following clerks and bosses employed in the freight-houses and freight-yards, namely: Conn, Curtin, delivery clerk; Mike Sheridan, loading clerk; John Grady, Tom Crosby, clerks at Cone; D. Gorman, yard clerk ; E. C. Musgrove, sealer ; A. E. Robinson, delivery clerk ; Fred. Nleman, gang boss ; Jos. Lang, porter. Of the section gangs and yard crews no one remained but the section foreman and yard-master J at tile engine-house all struck except the foreman, his clerk, and the watchman. Levy Trnckey. August Gillis, boiler-maker ; Chris. Nolan, machinist's helper; John Sullivan, boiler washer, Henry Sanders, sand drier, all reported for duty April 5 and 6, and though driven away and frequently threatened, continued to work whenever they could get a chance to do so. All car repairers, including East Saint Louis foreman, Henry Seibring, struck. William Shaeffer and John Morris returned to duty April 5 as flagmen at the Vanda- lia crossing. Both are believed to be Knights of Labor. On Thursday, April 8, the force of switchmen consisted of James Butler, J. E. Green, James Danley, James Grey, and Lewis Anderson. On Monday, April 12, George White was added to this force, and on Tuesday, April 13, Clnreiice Couley and Frank Campbell were added ; all of whom continued until Saturday, tho 17tli instant, when Danley returned to Fana. On Monday, April 9, George Ledbetter and Albert Hower were added to the force. Saint Louis, Mo., May 1, 1886. On Monday, April 26, about 4 o'clock p.m., while the guards were temporarily with- drawn,^two men came upon John Quinlan, near the switch-house in the Omo and Mississippi freight-yard, on the island in East Saint Louis, suddenly seized and choked him, saying, "You are that Butler; we will do you up right now." Quinlan showed them that they were mistaken. After assuring them that his em- ployment was that of a yard clerk, they released him and made their escape before the military or any other assistance could be had. Quinlan, though quite well acquainted in East Saint Louis, could not recognize either of his assailants. To find Butler, an Ohio and Mississippi s^Vitchman, was the object of their visit. At the meeting of railway officers held in the railway men's reading-rooms in East Saint Louis at 11.30 a. m., Tuesday, April 27, a number of attorneys were present by invitation, representing the legal departments of the various railroads. The follow- ing resolution was introduced and passed unanimously : " Beaolved, That the attorneys present formulate an answer to the questions that bfiive been asked, and give such instructions as will enable the roads to act intelli- fently and safely in the protection of their men and their property in East Saint Louis y private watcifimen or deputy sheriffs." The attorneys met at the office of Judge Henry W. Bond, in East Saint Louis, at 3 p.m., and the following opinion was handed to the chairman of the railway officers' meeting on the 28th instant in East Saint Louis as their answer : Saint Louis, Mo., April 27, 1888. Hon. George W. PI^kebk, Chairman Board of Managers, of Bailroads converging at East Saint Lauis : Dear Sir: In order to clearly understand the liability of railroad companies at East Saint Louis, for the acts of deputy sheriffs employed by them to protect the em- ployes and property of the companies, it is necessary to state some general proposi- tions, which are well settled in the law. Railroad companies are always held liable for the wrongful acts of their employes committed within the scope of the employment, so that if a deputy sheriff be em- ployed by a railroad company to protect and defend its employes and property, and such deputy in performing this duty acts illegally, the company employing him wiU be liable for the consequences. In determining whether an act of a deputy sheriff is legal or illegal, it must be remembered that the primary duty of a sheriff and his deputies is to preserve the 3984 CONG 33 514 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. peace, and the protection of peisons and property is only an incident to tbe general discharge of this primary duty. In preserving the peace an officer should not act recklessly and without due regard to human life. He is only permitted to take life when an emergency arises which makes it necessavy to do so, either to protect his own life, that of another, or to main- tain the supremacy of the law. He should not shoot a person caught in the commission of a mere misdemeanor, such as a trespass upon real estate, unless it becomes necessary to do so in order to save life. It is his duty to arrest the offender, hold him in custody, file the proper com- plaint, and then let the law deal with the matter in its regular orderly course. A deputy sheriff, although in the service of a railroad company to protect its em- ployes and property, is still a peace officer, and he should lend his aid to arrest an offender, suppress a riot, and do whatever may be necessary in other ways to maintain the law and preserve the peace, no matter whether the oftehses are being committed on the grounds of the company employing him or anywhere else in Saint Clair County. As an officer of the law he is not deprived of the benefit of the %stlaw of nature- self-preservation. He will always be justified in taking life if he has good reason to believe that it is necessary to do so in order to save himself from bodily harm. When deputies are engaged in protecting the property of railroad companies in East Saint Louis, and a mob, consisting of twelve or more persons, armed with clubs or dangeroQS weapons, or thirty or more persons, armed or unarmed, approach, in a riotous or threatening manner, the deputies, or two or more of them, should go among such persons, or as near as they can safely go, and in the name of the State of Illinois command them to disperse peaceably and immediately, and if they do not obey with- out unnecessary delay, the deputies should compel them to disperse and should arrest all persons refusing so to do. If in attempting to miake any such arrest or to compel the dispersion of such ipob it becomes necessary to take life, the deputies will be jus- tified in so doing. * • It would be impossible for us to enumerate in detail all the other offenses which the strikers and other riotous persons may commit iu East Saint Louis, or to describe specifically in each case the rights, powers, and duties of the deputy sheriffs. The position of a peace officer in that place will at best be one of such grave responsibility that we feel construed to say it will necessarily be a hazardous experiment to place the execution of the law in the hands of inexperienced men, whose conduct, if indis^ creet and hasty, might produce a serious and fatal result. It is evident that the arming with deadly weapons of a large number of untrained men who are under no common capable leadership is likely to work great injury to both public and private interests, and should only be resorted to when all other expe- dients have failed. Jno. T. Dye. Jno. G. Williams O. P. Pricb. S. M. Breckeneidge. G. & 6. A. KOERNBB. B. A. Halbert. C. L. Walker. Henry W. Bond. Percy Werner. At a meeting of railway officers held at the reading-room in East Saint Louis^ on Thursday, April 29, the following resolution was introduced and passed unani- mously : " It is moved and seconded that a cominittee be appointed by the chairman to for- mulate a protest to the governor against any further reduction in the military offi- cers at East Saint Louis, and that that committee report to the meeting to-morrow in order that it may be signed and forwarded to the governor on the same day." The following gentlemen were appointed on the committee : G. W. Parker, William Taussig, T. W. Burrow. This committee drew up the following protest, which was signed and forwarded to Governor Oglesby on Friday, May 1 : East Saint Louis, III, April 30,, 1886. To HU Excellency, the Governor of the State of Illinois : The undersigned railroad companies having their termination in East Saint Louis, regret to learn that the military force whichhas so successfully maintained compar- ative jpeaoe and order, is being gradually reduced, and we are advised that it is the intention of your excellency to still further reduce it witLiu a few days. We conceive it to be our duty tff respectfully protest against thus being again abandoned to mob rule, and to have the transportation interests of the State and LABOR TEOU^LES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 515 country, which we represent, to he again subjected to violence and destruction, and its commerce again brought to a stand-sxill. , The daily reports which have bfcen forwarded to you and which contained a truth- ful statement of the conditions under which each line was enabled to do business, and also the nature of the outrages, which, even under the eye of the military, were daily committed, show conclusively that the lawless disposition of tjfe strikers has in nowise abated, and that, without protection sufficiently ample to uphold order, the roads would have either to cease operations or resort to protecting their property by a hired armed force, with probably the same calamitous results which caused you in the first instance to give us military protection. We beg to submit that the State derives a large revenue from the taxes paid by the Tajlroads, and that, under the laws and the' constitution (the civil authorities being confessedly helpless), the owner of these properties, as well as the communities they serve, have unquestioned right to claim from it the fullest protection for their prop- erty and for the peaceable pursuit of their business. The spirit of mob law and violence is still rampant in East SaintLouis, and is ripe for an outbreak so soon as the restriction now imposed is removed. We have abun- dant evidence of these facts. The properties, yards, tracks, and warehouses in East Saint Louis are so scattered and cover such a wide territory, that a small force of military would be of no avail whatever, and result only in still greater defiance on the part of the strikers, and possibly in fire and bloodshed. We beg most earnestly to state that the situation is as serious to-day as it was on the day when the military arrived, and that if by reason of its diminution or with- drawal, life, property, and the commerce of the country be again endangered the re- sponsibility will have to rest with those who have deprived us of lawful protection to which the law entitles us. April 15, 1886. — Obstructions, placed on the LouisviUe and Nashville track 4 miles south of East Saint Louis, were found by track-walker before any accident occurred. J. J. Clancy, a switcher employed by the Indianapolis and ^aint Louis Eailroad, was assaulted while standing in front of his boarding-house after supper with an engineer named Boon, employed on the Mobile and Ohio Bailroad. Seven men approached, having the appearance of railroad men ; did not expect to be assaulted. One of them turned suddenly and struck him with a billet and then jumped on to and cut him. The engineer was also assaulted. Clancy is not sure that he could recognize any of them. A platform laborer employed by the Cairo Short Line Eailroad was notified last night that he would be in great danger if he continued to work. ApHl 16, 1886. — A coal-heaver employed by the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Bailroad was threatened yesterday j did not return to work to-day. One of the plat- form laborers employed by the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy was visited at his house in Saint Louis and warned not to resume work to-day, and is not working. The switchmen of the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy were visited at their homes in East Saint Louis during the night and ordered not to resume work to-day. They disregarded the warning. A switch-tender in the employ of the IndianapiJis and Saint Louis Eailroad said to his superintendent yesterday that he would like to return to work ; had been waited upon by the committee and considered it unsafe to go to East Saint Louis. April 17, lb86. — An engineer employed by the Cairo Short Line reported to Super- intendent Wilson for work, but said that he had been threatened by a striker named Jack DrisooU, who called him and told him if he went to work they would kill him. A man named Eaton employed by the Cairo Short Line as a car cleaner was assaulted as he left the coach on his arrival at East Saint Louis and so much frightened and bruised as to be unable to work that day. Mr. Woods, an engineer employed by the Indianapolis and Saint Louis, was called up at his house on Saturday night, the 1 7th instant, and told that if he did not cease work at once that they would dispose of him. Mr. Mar- tin, a fireman on the Indianapolis and Saint Louis, was notified by his boardiug-house mistress that she could not board him any longer, as she had been notified by the Knights of Labor not to do so. Gangs of strikers passing along Broadway opposite the Louisville and Nashville freight depot were very abusive to the employ^, but were finally dispersed by the militia. Some one threw a chunk of coal at Train-Master Loomis, of the Louisville and Nashville, while making up a coal train near the round- house. After the train was made up two strikers, named Kirkpatriok and Williams, obtained access to the conductor, William Sandidge, and told him he could work while guarded by the militia, but when they left he would be done up. One of the switch- men of the Louisville and Nashville was visited by strikers and warned that it would be best for him to quit work. During the day Kirkpatriok and Williams made a desperate effort to get through the picket lines to our roundhouse, but they were halted by the sentinel, who raised his gun as though to shoot, which had the effect 516 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUJH AND WEST. of driving them off. George Stevenson, a switching engineer employed by the Mobile and Ohio Railroad, was attacked in a dining-room of Stoeckler's boarding-house on the levee by six strikers, badly beaten up andnotified'thatif he went to work again they would kill him. Mr. Wolfington, employed by the Mobile and Ohio as yard-master, was visited last night and threatened with great bodily harm if he again resumed work in the yard. All boarding-houses in the vicinity of the Mobile and Ohio shop and yard have been boycotted against boarding any men employed by that company April 19, 1886.— Mr. Timlin, M. M., of the Illinois and Saint Louis Railroad, re- ceived a threateniug letter, signed by four names (all supposed to be fictitious), warn- ing him to beware of the future. The secret service of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad report having overheard a conversation between the strikers, in which one said they could get all the arms wanted in East Saint Louis. The men employed on the Mobile and Ohio Railroad, on their platform, were intimidated, so that they did not return to work to-day. April 20, 1886. — C. A. Williams, a switchman formerly employed by the Chicago and Alton Railroad, told Superintendent Reeves to-day that he would give $25 if he could go to work to-day, but was afraid to do so. Several men employed by the Chicago, ^ Burlington and Quinoy as platform laborers were waited upon last night at their homes in Saint Louis by Knights of Labor and urged not to return to work. A brake- man, named Lou Jackson, employed by the Cairo Short Line, while walking along- side of his train in East Saint Louis was assaulted by one Charles Smith, alias Smutty, a striker. The assault was made with brass knuckles, and the wounds of such a nature as to require the services of a surgeon. Smith was formerly in the employ of the Cairo Short-Line Road as a brakeman ; was convicted of robbing a car on which he wa^ employed as a brakeman, and served a term in the penitentiary. J. P. Jack- son, an engineer, switching in the yard of the Cairo Short Line road — to-day a striker named George Hoettling climed onto his engine and told Jackson he would get hurt after the military left. Harry New, a fireman employed on the Cairo Short Line, was stopped on the street by twenty-five or thirty strikers and warned not to resume work, or he would get pounded. Some of the crowd had billets, and tapped New on the head several times, just to let him know how it felt, as they expressed it. At 5.30 p. m. an engineer on the Cairo Short Line discovered a link and pin placed in the frog at the crossing of the Cairo Short Line and Belt Railroads. The forward track of the engine ran onto the obstruction before he could stop the engine. One of the sentinels heard the crowd in front of a saloon near by offering any of their number $10 or $15 to place the obstructions in the crossing frog, as above. Some of the em- ployes of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad, while eating dinner at the relay de- pot, were approached by the strikers, who threatened violence if they did not cease work. An exchange of military companies was made at the Louisville and Nashville depot after 2 o'clock. The men became frightened, and one of their number was taken to brigade headquarters and there received assurance from General Reece that they would be fully protected, and upon this assurance all resumed work. A Louis- ville and Nashville switching engineer went to the stock-yards with thi'ee switchmen. While there they were approached by a gang of strikers, and two of the switchmen induced to abandon their work. Several strikers entered into a conversation with the captain of the company stationed at the Louisville and Nashville round-house. They said to him that it was all right as long as the militia remained, but as soon as they left the fun would begin, and the soldiers would return within twenty-four hours and when they did return they would find something worth returning for. April 21, 1886. — While the engine and crew of the Cairo Short Line road were switching at the Bolt and Iron Works, some one employed in the mill threw stones or pieces of iron at the men employed on tUe engine. A oar was derailed on a street crossing, and in attempting to place it on, the drawbar was pulled out. One of the East Saint Louis policemen arrested our switchman and took him to police headquar- ters and locked him up, taking from him his commission as deputy sheriff. While en rou te to the police headquarters, the officer intimated to the prisoner that the best thing for him to do was to leave town and promise never to return. He was soon after baUed out by Superintendent Wilson. Several of the men employed on the platform of the Indianapolis and Saiiit Louis Railroad were visited at their homes in Saint Louis and warned not to return to work, which warning they obeyed and did not re- turn. A committee of strikers was appointed to watch the relay depot at mealtime and get to the men while taking their meals. They were so closely watched, how- ever, by the railroad officers present and the military that they did not find the op- portunity. They were seen to cross the bridge to Saint Louis, go to their hall pre- sumably to make a report. The militia companies were changed in the Mobile and Ohio Railroad yards to-day, and during the interval of two hours, strikers entered the yards and tried to get the men employed there to quit. April 22, 1886. — Switching engineers on the Chicago and Alton road were notified by their snperintendent to-day that if they did not return to their work by Monday, toe~26th instant, that their places would he filled permanently by other parties. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 517 Several strikers gained access to the platform of the Louisville and Nashville road, and seeirg the yardmaster, began abneing and threatening him. Several shots were fired during the night by and at the sentinel on duty in the Louisville and Nashville yard near Smith's ice-house. One striker gained access to the yard, where some car- penters were employed by the Louisville and NashviUe road were engaged in build- ing a platform. Four of the carpenters stopped work after the strikers' visit, as they were Knights of Labor. One of the strikers entered the Vandalia yard and undertook to drive off the car repairer, but did not succeed. April 23, 1886. — The man who keeps the boarding-car for the Chicago and Alton road was assaulted near the east tower of the bridge on the night of the 22d instant, 8 o'clock p.m., and was insensible for a time. Was carried to his car by two soldiers. Dickson and four other strikers passed through the yards of the Chicago and Alton Railroad to-day, making dire threats against scabs. The platform laborers employed by the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy were waited on at their homes in Saint Lpnis last night by Knights of Labor, and in consequence did not report for duty to-day. Employes in the bolt mill threw a rock through the cab window of a switching engine on the Cairo Short Line road. Three employes of the bolt mill intimidated an oiler in the employ of the Cairo Short Line ; tried to drive him from his work. There is generally a crowd hanging around this place and the saloons in every vicinity. A section man sent by the Illinois and Saint Louis Railroad to make light repairs on the crossing of that line with the Cairo Short Line, was approached by rolling-mill hands and told that he had no right to do that work, and to get away and not come back again. The section man left and declined to do any work until the trouble is over. Two new switchmen employed by the Illinois and Saint Louis Railroad were called on at their boarding place in Belleville ; were called scabs, and requested not to return to work ; said that it was by such men as them that the roads were enabled to run at all. Said that if they would stop work that they would pay a month's board for them in advance and give them money to buy cigars and tobacco. A man em- ployed by the Illinois and Saint Louis as a switchman was waited on at the Everett House, in Saint Louis, by a committee of strikers, and badly frightened. Has not reported for duty to-day. Left for Mattoon on the morning train, gand headed by Scott Anderson. Kerrigan, a switcher hired for the day by the Ohio and Mississippi Railway, while at Cone Station at 5 o'clock p. m., waiting for a train on which to go to his home, was called out of the waiting-room by a gang of strikers and badly beaten by them. A conductor on the Cairo Short Line, who took a train out, was sent to Saint Louis by Superintendent Wilson as a precaution against possible' violence by the mob. Soon after dark a mob of twenty, headed by two East Saint Louis policemen, called at his boarding house and demanded that he be given up. He isopenly threatened with vengance should he return. Mr. Stone, of the Chicago, Burlington and Quiucy, oflfered a substitate for the notice to employfe referred to the reporter yesterday, which was adopted and ordered printed. Saturday,'M, and Sunday,^. — The switching engineers and firemen employed by the Chicago and Alton Railroad returned to their place on Sunday morning, in accordance with the notice received from their superintendent of motive power. The Chicago, Burlington and Quincy report having sent their train conductors home and substituted switchmen from the line of their road, who will remain as long as wanted. Some straw in a box-car standing in a yard of the Cairo Short Line road was set on fire on the night of the 24th instant, was discovered by the soldier on duty as a sentinel who extinguished it; shot at the party supposed to have committed the act. Switchmen employed by the Illinois and Saint Louis road attended a game of base ball on Sun- day at Belleville. They were suddenly surrounded by a mob who demanded that they shonld stop work. In order to get free from them they promised to do so, but did not keep their word in this respect. A switchman employed by the Louisville and Nash- vUle Railroad was intimidated by strikers and refused to go to work. All superin- tendents report that they are only able to secure men for the day's service in the va- rious departments of their respective roads in East' Saint Louis, by reason of the ample military protection, but that they have not yet been able to secure the services of any switchmen for night service, all claiming that they fear the violence of the strikers, who still threaten every one who attempts to work and to whom they can gain access. The inability to perform night switching in the yards cripples the serv- ice, especially of the Bridge Company. On the morning of the 26th instant a gang of strikers with revolvers were in the neghborhood of the National Stock Yards in- timidating the switching crew of the Yandalia road. A detail of soldiers was sent after them as soon after the occurrence was reported as it could be arranged, but the mob immediately dispersed, and none of them were captured. Taeeday, April 27. — The strikers threatened a fireman employed by the Louisville and Nashville Railroad unless he stopped work at once. One of the switchmen em- ployed by the Louisville and Nashville road was waited on by the strikers and told that as soon as the militia were gone they would do him up. Two Knights of Labor entered the island yard of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway at 4 o'clock in the after- • 518 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. noon, and daring the time when sentinels have been withdrawn temporarily, came upon James Qninlan, a yard clerk, whom they -sat upon and choked severely for re- marking you are that Butler. After explaining to them that his duties were that of a yard clerk, they left him, and soon afterwards disappeared among the lines of cars. Butler is the assistant yard-master, and is known as a scab. Quinlan has been for several years in the service of the company, but could not identify either of his assailants. The Vandalia crew, which were threatened by the armed strikers in the stock-yards yesterday, are reported at work. On the morning of the 26th a train going south on the East Saint Louis and Carondelet Railroad, near the Pitts- burg crossing, seven men jumped on the rear portion of the train. They ordered one of our men, Joseph Hays, who was on a coal car, to get off, as he could not work any longer. He replied he would not do it. They then ftireatened to throw him off. He replied that was a question of strength. They then assaulted him. The result waa that he was thrown off into the ditch and considerably bruised. Two other switch- men, J. T. Murrey and C. D. Lennox, were driven off the train at East Saint Caron- delet. Among the mob who jumped on the train was aformer employ^ of the East Saint Louis and Carondelet Railroad, named Dennis Connor, employed as a fireman, and was the only one in the party who could be recognized. Mr. Hays, of the Belt Railway, reports that on Sunday last switches were thrown running in their middle yard, and that two attempts were made to drive off their switching crews by the strikers, who congregate near what is known as the switch. Mr. Hays reports that his engineer, ■Who went to Belleville for the purpose of making complaint against Dickson, the striker, for assault, met with no encouragement from the State's attorney, and conse- quently did not file any affidavit. Council representing several of the railroads were present at the meetings on the 26th and 27th instant, and gave the railway managers mach information concerning their duties and powers in respect to the present strike. Satwt Louis, May 13, 1886. The committee met pursuant to adjournment. R. P. TANSEY, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknbs : Qnestiou. State your name, residence, and occupation. — Answer. My name is R. P. Tansey ; I reside in Saint Louis, and I am manager of the Saint Louis Transfer Company. Q. We are examining with regard to the troubles lately existing between the lines of railway in the States of Illinois and Missouri and their employes, and we wish this morning to confine the examination strictly to those points that tend to es- tablish either one or the other proposition — the cause and the extent of the troubles existing between the railways and their employes in Illinois. We are examining as to Hliuois now. Please confine yourself, as nearly as you can, to those two propositions, giving all the information in your power, if you please f — A. I have no personal knowledge of the troubles existing between the railroads and their employ^. My company is a team transfer company which transfers freight between East Saint Louis and Saint Louis. Q. Then if yon are not aware of any facts in regard to the cause of the troubles, you can tell us what you know in regard to the extent of the troubles ; how it af- fected your business and extended to you.— A, In the month of March the business of the Saint Louis Transfer Company was very important to the city of Saint Louis, and very largly increased by reason of the fact that traffic on the Iron Mountain Rail- road and on the Missouri Pacific system was stopped by the strike. Many of the points reached by those lines were reached by railroads centering at East Saint Louis. Points in the North and Southwest could be reached by the Wabash road from East Saint Louis, the Chicago and Alton and other roads connecting with the Illinois Cen- tral, Cairo Short Line, Mobile and Ohio, to the Southwest, and consequently we were doing a very large business up to the 29th of March. About that time, 1 think, perhaps on that day the so-called strike was declared, and the railroads, our company included, were powerless to do any business for as much as ten days, probably ; absolutely ten days, and only a comparatively small business for some weeks. The men em- ployed by the company that I represented had no grievance against the company and did not strike. They voluntarily published a card to that effect in the news- papers when I was absent from the city, but they were intimidated or persuaded, as I believe intimidated, and they reached a conclusion to give up their work, most of them for as much as ten days, and the result was the traffic was entirely suspended by the use of teams between Saint Louis and East Saint Louis as far as our company .was concerned. We made efforts to resume the traffic, and were met by committees LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 519 nnO mobs more or less large, and were thereby prevented from going on with our woi'k. Q. Your company is engaged, and was at that time, in transporting freight and passengers from Illinois to Missouri and Missouri to Illinois across the river 1 — ^A. Yes, sir ; freight between Missouri and Illinois and passengers to and from the union depot in this city. Q. You were transporting then to Illinois and Missouri ! — A. Yes, sir ; at that time we had very large quaintities of freight on hand, at least one item of 10,000 bales of cotton, representing a valuation of half a million of dollars, awaiting transportation on the 2eth of March. We had between 3,000 and 4,000 bales in hand, having the notes in our safe ready to go for the cotton on that date. That is one item alone that I apeak of. Q. Your concern was interfered with by the striking men who were engaged in at- tempting to intimidate and induce your operatives to quit their work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And leaving you no means of transporting this freight? — A. Yes, sir; absolutely and totally from the 26th of March to the 3d of April. CHARLES H. SHERMAN, being sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. You have heard the examination of Mr. Tansey, and if yon will address yourself to the subjects mentioned to him I will be obliged to you ; first the cause, and second, the extent of the troubles between the railways in East Saint Louie and their employes t — Answer. I have embodied what I wish to say in a written state- ment. , Q. (By Mr. Curtin.) Be kind enough to file that. — A. I will "Resolved, That we say to our employ^ that we will not consider the q^stion of increase of wages unless application for such increase is made direct by our employes to their immediate employers, in which case due consideration will be given to their requests, and proper action will be taken." This resolution was also printed in the Saint Louis pa^iers. From this date (March 16) work continued at East Saint Louis without interrup- tion, and without complaint of any kind being received from our employes, until Thursday, March 25, at 3 o'clock p. m., when at a preconcerted signal, every switch- man in every yard at East Saint Louis quit work; and in two hours afterwards com- menced to threaten, intimidate and do acts of violence to prevent and obstruct the railroads in doing work of any kind. They forced from their engines the engineers and firemen; also drove away from their work all of the shopmen, and laborers of every class employed about the shops and freight platform. We continued the work with our ofScers on that day as long as permitted to do so .by the strikers. On March 26 we made an effort to tSie some cars of stock from our yards to the National ^tock- Yards, but the engine was immediately surrounded by twenty or thirty strikers, who requested and commanded the engineer and fireman to leave their engine. They declined to do so, but were compelled through fear of violence to take the engine back to the roundhouse, and we were unable to do any work that day. On that night a crowd of strikers invaded our roundhouse, drove away the watchman, and killed all the switch engines in and about the house. They also carried off the hose con- nections used between the engines and tanks, and the hose used for filling the tanks and boilers with water. On Saturday and Sunday, March 27 and 28, our engines having been killed and the hose for filling the boilers and tanks having been stolen , we were unable to do any- thing. On Monday, March 29, Superintendent Barnhart, Agent Sample, Yard-master Tay- lor, Engineer Johnson, Fireman Draggon, and myself attempted to do work in the yard, but our switch engine had no sooner started than the engineer and fireman were commanded to stop work. The crowd surrounded the engine and by threaten- ing the fireman succeeded in " persuading " him to quit. Superintendent Barnhart took his place. The mob was steadily increasing. They read an order from the ex- ecutive committee of Ihe Knights of Labor, commanding the engineer to stop work, and finding that this had no effect upon him, they made many threats of personal violence toward him, saying that he had had a rope around his neck once before for working during a strike and that unless ho quit work at once he would have one around his neck again. They further told him that he could not live in East Saint Louis if he persisted in working. Their actions were threatening and violent; and when we attempted to move oars the strikers pulled the pins, uncoupling the cars, and threw the pins and links into a pond beside the track, set the brakes, and inter- fered in every possible way to keep us from doing any work. They finally succeeded in killing the engine. There were at least one hundred strikers congregated about the spot at this time. A few minutes before they killed the engine, or at about the time they commenced to do it, they seized the engineer and choked him very severely, and threatened to do him still greater violence if he still persisted in working. Hav- ing thus^succeeded in stopping our work they proceeded to the Indianapolis and Saint Louis yards. I noticed that a number of these strikers were armed with coupling pins and clubs. On the 30th and Slst of March this company did not do any work on account of not having the necessary police protection to insure its employes against bodily harm and its property from being damaged. On April 5 we opened our freight house for business, and on the 6th we secured some protection, employed a few switchmen, and managed to do some business. From April 1st to the 6th, by using officers and clerks, we did, in the face of threats and in- timidation, whatever work it was possible for us' to do, but were prevented by tlie strikers from doing very much. On the morningof the 7th April about two hundred strikers congregated in our yards and attempted to forcibly enter our freight house, which they were prevented from doing by the deputy sheriffs. On April 8 one hundred and fifty deputy sheriffs came in from Belleville at 11 o'clock, and during the time they remained there the strikers refrained from doing any acts of violence towards our employes or property. On April 9 a large mob, composed of strikers and others, congregated on what is known as the Broadway crossing, at the point where the Louisville and Nashville Railroad crosses that street. By 10 o'clock a. m. an unusually large mob had con- gregated there, and I personally went to see what was the matter, and found the sheriff and his deputy, Mr. Bagland, addressing the crowd and ordering them todis- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 529 perse. They paid no heed to him, and only answered him with jeers, using very blas- phemous and obscene language. Every time that we would attempt to do any switch- ing at that point the mob would grow larger, and it continued to grow until at one time I think there wore not less than two hundred and fifty or three hundred persons present. They stoned our switchmen and station agent, striking them and injuring them. Our superintendent of transportation, Mr. Barnhart, a few minutes before the riot occurred, informs me that revolvers were drawn and pointed at him, but not dis- charged. I will also state that at this same place I saw among the strikers a num- ber of revolvers that had been taken out of their concealment and exposed to view. On this date I remained in the yards directing the work until 1.15 or 1.80 p. m., when I returned to the west side of the river for dinner. During my absence, at about 2.10 p. m., the riot occurred. This riot was brought on by the mob stoningaud firing pistol shots at the deputy sheriffs, as I am informed and believe. Immediately after the riot the governor of Illinois furnished us with adequate pro- tection, since which time we have had no trouble or difflc,ulty at East Saint Louis in doing our business as successfully as we were able to do it before the strike was in- augurated, except when it was necessary for our employes to go beyond the picket lines, or the guards were withdrawn for a few minutes, when they were immediately set upon by the strikers, who threatened them violently, and in some instances as- saulted them. That the committee may have a clear appreciation of our situation, I wish to hero refer to the efforts made by me to secure police protection for our employes and property. On March 26 this compamy individually applied to the mayor of East Saint Louis for police protection. Reply was made that it could not be supplied, as the force then at the command of the city was wholly inadequate. On March 27 the different railroads operating in East Saint Louis made a formal re- quest upon the mayor of that place for protection. The mayor called a special meeting of the board of aldermen, who passed a resolution notifying the railroad companies that the city could not give them any protection. Immediately upon receipt of this information, forma! application was made to the sheriff of Saint Clair County, Illi- nois, for the necessary protection for the railroad property and employes. The sheriff answered, recognizing his duty and expressing his willingness to use all the means in his power to preserve the law and protect property ; but he stated that he was ut- terly unable to cope with the organized resistance against lawful authority then ex- isting in East Saint Louis. He furthermore stated that he had not the means to employ the necessary sheriffs to protect the railroads in their operations ; that during the strike of 1883 he bad furnished deputy sheriffs to the different railroads to protect their property, for which he had not yet bfeen reimbursed by the county. Having thus ascertained that we could not rely upon the mayor or the sheriff for any protection that wasat all adequate, the railroad managers interested held a meeting and resolved to call upon Ihe governor of Illinois and present the situation to him, which was done on March 29. We delayed a little in communicating with the governor on account of the publication of Mr. Powderjy's secret circular, to see what effect it would have upon the strikers ; and finding that it had none, a committee of railroad man- agers, of which I was a member, proceeded to Springfield, and had a conference with the governor, and presented to him the gravity of the situation. The committee then returned to Saint Louis, with the hope that either the State, county, or city would do something to enable us to run our trains and perform our duties to the public as common carriers of freight and passengers. Finding that no protection was forthcoming from the State, county, or city, as a last resort we went to the sheriff again who proposed to us to get competent men and he would swear them in as special deputy sheriffs of Saint Clair County, and put them on duty at our depot and yards in East Saint Louis to guard our property, protect our employes, and enable us to handle our business as a common carrier. Nothing was heard by us from the governor concerning our interview with him, al- though it became more and more manifest that there was an absolute ajid imperative necessity for more adequate protecticm than had at any time been given ns. Adju- tant-General Vance, of Illinois, came to East Saint Louis and remained there, report- ing daily to the governor the situation. Subsequently the governor himself came to East Saint Lous, where he was waited upon by Mayor Francis, of Saint Louis, and a committee of merchants, at which meeting I was present. They made a strong ap- peal to him to furnish the necessary protection, so that the commerce of the country might be started and the business of the railroads resumed. The governor made ;i speech in reply, but did not agree to give the protection requested by Mayor Francia aild the committee of merchants and the railroad companies. After the governor had returned home the condition of affairs at East Saint Louis coutinaed ttf grow worse day by day. Our employes were resisted»eyery where by the strikers and others. No protection to either life or property was afforded, although every effbrt that was reasonable and proper had been made to Induce the authorities to give U8 sufficient protection to enable us to caxry on our business a,nd perform our 3984 CONG — -34 530 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. duties to the public as carriers. The strikers, iideed, seemed to become bolder and more determined, and cases of intimidation and violence, even to the deputy sberiffa themselves, were daily reported to me. Onr engines at different times were utterly disabled by portions of the machinery being 8t(3.en from them. In one case the throttle-levers were stolen froni all the switch engines in our East Saint Louis roundhouse ; and everything possible was done by. the strikers to prevent and retard the operation of our road. On April 4 one of our passenger trains. No. 53, was derailed by a striker turning a switch between the trucks of one of the coaches, resulting in the fireman being nearly killed. This occurred in East Saint Louis yard. Obstructions were also placed on the track. I wish to mention that during the strike the following special cases of violence oc- curred : A fireman who had been at work in our yards was maltreated and beaten up so badly that for a time his life was despaired of. Our yard-master, W. D. Taylor, was threatened many times, and finally the strikers made an attempt to take his life by hanging him, and he wasonly saved by the Mend- ship of a member of the mob, who was one of his employes before the strike. One of our freight-house clerks had been so intimidated and threatened that he deemed it unsafe for himself and family to dwell in East Saint Louis, and proceeded to move his effects to the west side of the river, when the teamsters who were haul- ing the same were interfered with, and threats of violence and boycott were indulged in very freely. Besides these instances of threats and violence, which are merely given by way of illustration, there are many others quite as bad, and in many cases infinitely worse. I append to my statement an extract from a report made to me by Mr. C. R. Barn- hart, our superintendent of transportation. The facts stated by him I know to be true. " On Tuesday, April 13, we again resumed work under the protection of the militia that had arrived in East Saint Louis, and from that time until the present we have transacted our business under military protection. Cases of violence have frequently been committed, threats have been made towards our employes, and were it not for the protection afforded by the mUitia we could not continue our business longer than a few hours. Men who are desirous of working and supporting their families are Erevented by fear from accepting work. A state of (terrorism exists in East Saint lOuis that no one who has not a thorough acquaintance with the elements that com- pose the population of that place can comarehend. " We have endeavored to carry out the purposes for which the company was char- tered, and when this could not be done peaceably, have only, as a last resort, called upon the authorities to protect our property and the lives of those who desire to assist us with their labor in performing our functions as a common carrier. " I would respectfully state that I have been repeatedly fired upon by the strikers ; that my life has been in danger, and that I have been threatened with death for en- deavoring to perform my duties as an employ^ of the Louisville and Nashville Rail- road Company, and that it would be unsafe for me to work in East Saint Louis unless protected by military force. A number of the employes of the company have been beaten and maltreated at the hands of the strikers. These strikers are members of the order known as the Knights of Labor." In conclusion, I will state that every lairful effort was made by this company to se- cure protection to enable it to proceed with the discharge of its ordinary duties, du- ties it owed both to the public and to the owners of the property. In other words, such protection as the State of Illinois assumes to guarantee to every one of its citi- zens. But, instead of receiving protection, it was set upon on every side by force and intimidation, not only by the strikers themselves but by the local law officers at East Saint Louis, the mayor of that city having sworn in as city marshals, or policeinen, sti'ikers who had been indicted by the grand jury of Saint Clair County, Illinois, and ■who were then under bond for acts of violence or intimidation, or both, or who knew that warrants were out for their arrest. The governor of Illinois certainly had ample knowledge of the situation through his adjutant-general, who was constantly on the grounds, and the sheriff of Saint Clair County. Both of these gentlemen I am satisfied faithfully reported the condi- tion of affairs to him. As a proof that the governor was fully cognizant of the con- dition of affairs at East Saint Louis, I will read you one of the many messages sent to him by the sheriff asking for aid to uphold the law. After stating that an unlawful mob, numbering one thousand men, had assembled, who had refused to disperse when commanded by him as sheriff of Saint Clair County so to do, he says: ""I had with me my regular deputies and all the specials that I conld get. I called the posse, but it was of the mob. This mob kills engines, pulls pins, set brakes, obstructs the track, and prevents the movement of freight trains by these means, and by violence and intimidation." He adds: " I am powerless to pro- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 531 tect a single freight which attempts to move, and am unable to disperse the unlawful assembly which is interfering with this class of property. I refer the matter to yon as governor of the State, and ask your assistance to aid me to enforce the law." On account of the peculiar location of the several yards in East Saint Louis, it re- quired a large and well-organized force to give tlie necessary protection to the rail- roads; such a force, however, it was impossible for the sheriff to supply, as the men at his command were untrained, undisciplined, unofficered, and a majority of them in sympathy with the strikers, while the strikers were perfectly familiar with all the yards, were well organized, and knew just where the weak points were, and where they could do the mostidamage in the least possible time. While this unlawful state of affairs existed (which did exist up to the time the militia were sent to East Saint Louis) it was simply impossible to get men to work. There were plenty of men who were willing and anxious to work, but after seeing so many acts of bodily violence to persons who had attempted to work, they refused through fear to do anything until ample protection was provided for them. After the militia came business was at once resumed, and there was no trouble in getting all the men we wanted. With the twenty-two years of railroad experience that I have had, starting as a switchman, and filling various positions up to that which I now hold, I have never seen a strike inaugurated in such a manner as the one in question. The men quit work without a single word of warning to their employers ; no demands were pre- sented or complaints made ; on the other hand, however, our men confessed that they had no grievance, and that they were in no way dissatisfied, yet they quit work, and by mob force prevented any one else ;from working in their places. J. S. LAKE, being duly sworn and examined, t^estified as follows : By Mr. BuRKES : Question. State your name, residence, and occupation. — Answer. My name is J. S. Lake ; I am agent of the Chicago and Alton Railroad at East Saint Louis. Q. Have you heard the testimony of the superintendent t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you confirm that testimony so far as it goes? — A. I can. A few days after the strike was inaugurated on the Missouri Pacific Mr. Bates, our superintendent of transportation, and Mr. Reeves, our division superintendent, came to East Saint Louis and called the yardmen and switchmen together for consultation, and raised their rates of pay to tide Chicago scale, which was |70 a month for firemen of the day engine, $75 per month for the firemen of the night engine, $65 a month for the day helpers, and $70 for the night helpers on the work days of the month ; that was agreed to bo paid and it was dated back to the 1st of March, and they have been paid that from that time to the .time the strike was inaugurated. 1 was so well satisfied that our men would not go out that I didn't, even up to a few minutes before they did quit work, believe that they would. I came over on 'change satisfied that our men were not going to strike, and when I got over here I heard it reported on the board that the men would quit at 3 o'clock, and I hurried back and found it was so. No cause was given to me at all or any reason why they quit any more than that they were ordered out. Q. After this interview, which resulted in giving them the Chicago scale of wages &om the Ist of March, did you hear any of them again complaining against the com- pany and asking for any redress of grievances ? — A. I did not. Q. Are you satisfied that the men would have remained at work if they had not been interfered with by outside parties 1 — A. I am satisfied that if they had not been •called out by order of the men who, I believe, were Knights of Labor— that is my un- derstanding, although I know it only by hearsay — 1 think they would not have gone out, and my idea is, that being called out, or ordered out by them, I think that if they had been offered $5 per day they still would have gone out. Q. In regard to the extent of the trouble, do you know anything as to that ? — A. We were doing a very large and heavy business at the time, and our business dropped right off. We were not able to do anything to amount to anything from that time on. The next day I managed to clean up, as we call it, with the assistance of the clerks, and even they were ordered to stop by those men who came through. I don't know who they were, but they ordered the men to get out. 1 managed, however, to get help enough to clean up what there was there. We didn't do anything more until the 3d of April. On the 3d of April we did some little work. I have got a statement, which was prepared, and which, with your permission, I will leave. It contains about all that 1 can say in regard to the matter. By Mr. Curtin : Q. You verify that as true ? — A. I do ; yes, sir. Q. . You say you raised the wages, or the company did ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that satisfactory on the part of the employes, or did the men ask for more t^ A. The men didn't ask for more, not at the time ; there was no demand made on us. 532 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The strike was inangaratbd and run on the southwest lines, the Gould system, on the 6th of March, and this was on the 10th of March, and no demand whatever had been made on us at the time, to my knowledge. Mr. CURTIN. You can file your statement. (Witness then filed the following statement :) Memoranda of occurrences at East Saint Louis, during the strike, Maroh25, 1886, up to the date hereof, April 29, 1886. March 25, 1886. — At 3 o'clock p. m. all switchmen in the Chicago and Alton Rail- road yards at Venice and East Saint Louis, without exception, also most of the car- repairers and other employes, quit work without any previous notice ; upon question- ing the men as to their actions, they said that they belonged to the Knights of Labor, and had been ordered by their executive committee to stop work ; they expressed themselves as having no grievances, and to be perfectly satisfied with their wages and treatment. Two switch engines were put into the roundhouefe at Venice, while one engine manned by Train-Master Jordan, Tard-Master Bennett, and Station Agent Lake, managed to do the necessary switching work at East Saint Louis for remainder of day after above-mentioned hour. March 26, 1886. — No switchmen or car-repairers, and only ten men belonging in the freight-houses, of the Chicago and Alton Railroad reported for duty ; the only switch engine out was manned by Division Superintendent S. D. Reeve and Yard-Master Bennett. At about 10 o'clock a. m. the ten warehousemen were driven away from t&eir work by a party of strikers, probably fifty in number, led by a man named George Bailey, who had been, prior to the strike, in the employ of this company as yard fore- man ; the lives of the ten men above mentioned were threatened by the strikers ; also the engineer aod fireman, as well as the others in charge of the switching work, were threatened with personal violence if they continued at work in the yard; after considerable parleying, the strikers gave their consent to allow the engineer and yard- master to dispose of the perishable freight and stock, which was done, and further work for the day was stopped. March 27, 1886. — An attempt was made to do switching in the Chicago and Alton yard at East Saint Louis; at about 10 o'clock a. m. a mob of some two hundred strikers entered the yard, surrounded the engine, and after the reading of an order purporting to bo signed by the executive committee of the Knights of Labor, com- pelled the engineer and fireman to leave the engine, after making most violent threats of personal injury, and using various measures of intimidation. Attempts were made to do work by officials of road, when coupling pins were pulled and brakes set by the strikers. The wipers and engine-house men at Venice roundhouse were driven out and compelled to stop work by a gang of strikers numbering about forty. On this date an appeal was made to the n/ayor of East Saint Louis to furnish protection for the transaction of ourusual business ; he expressed himself powerless to do anything, whereupon an appeal was made to the sheriff of Saint Clair County, who also de- clared that he was powerless to give any protection. March 28, 1886. — No attempt was made to do any work in the Chicago and Alton yards on this date. A number of masked men entered roundhouse at Venice and let the water out of five engines. No other depredations committed. March 29, 1886. — Another attempt was made to do the switching in the Chicago and Alton yard, at Ea^t Saint Louis, with one engine ; a mob, estimated as numbering be- tween two and three hundred persons, entered our yard, and by intimidation and threats, our engineer and fireman were compelled to quit work, being pulled from their engine. A committee of railroad officials, appointed by the representatives of the roads centering at East Saint Louis, at a meeting held, for conference, visited the governor of the State of Illinois and asked him to send protection to East Saint Lonia to assist the sheriff. His honor expressed himself to the effect that he was not satis- fied that the sheriff of Saint Clair County had exhausted all means in his power to maintain order, and not until he was fully satisfied that such was the case would he send the militia to East Saint Louis. March 30, 1886. — A repetition of the same efforts to do work in the Chicago and Alton yards was made, and the same threats were made, preventing the suooeBsful operation of work. Governor Oglesby arrived at East Saint Louis, and was in con- ference with the strikers during most of the forenoon, also meeting a delegation of the business men of Saint Louis about noon ; his honor gave the latter no more satis- faction than he had given the committee of railroad officials on the previotis day ; at 2 o'clock p. m. he addressed the strikers at Flanagan's Hall, East Saint Louis, fully fifteen hundred being present. At the same time a party of the strikers attacked a freight train of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad, not more than two blocks from the place where he was addressing the men, killing the engine, driving away the train men, pulling coupling pins, &o. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 533 March 31, 1886. — No obange in situation ; tho usual mob visited Chicago and Alton yard and compelled men to stop ■work. April \, 1886. — The record suDstnntially the same as for the preceding day. April 2, 1886. — The situation unchanged ; engine with a lot of empty cars started from East Saint Louis, and when uoar the Bridge Junction the train was surrounded by a mob of fully one hundred and fifty strikers, wiio compelled the engineer, fireman, and yard-master J;o leave the train ; after considerable trouble, the train was taken to Venice by one of the officials of the road handling the engine. From the 27th of March until this date, April 2, inclusive, there had been no transferring by teams from Saint Louis to East Saint Louis, the drivers and others in charge of teams hav- ing been intimidated by the strikers. April 3, 1886. — No material change in the situation in the yards of the Chicago and Alton Company ; business practically at a stand-stiU. April 4, 1886. Matters continued as on the preceding day ; in the yards of the Chi- cago and Alton Railroad no work could be accomplished. April 5, 1886. — All switch engineers and firemen refused to work, claiming that the threats which had been made rendered it unsafe for them to continue at "work with safety to their persons ; engineers and firemen from the Chicago division were sent to East Saint Louis to handle the engines. April 6, 1886. — The same state of affairs continuing at East Saint Louis with the Chicago and Alton Railroad; no work done, except as performed by outside help brought from other portions of the line. April 7, 1886. — ^At about 11.30 a. m. a mob of some three hundred of the strikers made atour through the freight depot, and, noticing their movements in time, most of the laborers were placed in box cars and taken out of reach of the crowd; after the strikers had marched through the freight-houses and yards they entered the yards of the Ohio and Mississippi Railway, where considerable damage was done by them. April 8, 1886. — The few men in the freight-house of the Chicago and Alton Railroad were waited upon .and asked to stop work by a committee of the strikers, and most of them quit work ; twenty track laborers were brought in from Missouri to handle freight ; also there were brought with them boarding cars, where they could be fed and lodged without being obliged to go outside of our yards. On arrival at East Saint Louis only four of these men would work ; the remainder refused to work on account of the threats made. About 3.30 p. m. a party of one hundred strikers came up the levee for the purpose of making their usual raid through the freight-honses and yards ; these were held in check by the deputy marshals and turned back. April 9, 1886. — Nothing of importance transpired on the Chicago and Alton prem- ises. April 10, 1886. — The militia of the State of Illinois, ordered out by the governor on account of the occurrences in the yards of other companies at East Saint Louis, arrived ■during the night of the 9th of April, and all the railroad interests were placed under the military protection. From that time until the present, April 29, all roads have been working under many disadvantages and have been unable to do the usual amount of business; none of the old employes known to be Knights of Labor have returned to work ; men employed to take the places of the strikers are for the most part, so far as the Chicago and Alton Railroad is concerned, taken out of the city at night to avoid intimidation and threats of personal violence. On the 23d of April Mr. J. W. Blue, keeper of the boarding cars which are being used at East Saint Louis, was as- saulted at the east end of the Saint Louis bridge at 7.45 p. m., while on his way from Saint Louis, being knocked insensible by two strikers. He was cared for by two members of the militia who were on guard near by, and was taken by them to his quarters. • T. W. BURROWS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). State your name and occupation. — Answer. My name is T. W. Burrows ; occupation, superintendent of the Indianapolis and Saint Loais Railway. Q. If you can give us any facts and circumstances bearing on the two questions of the cause and extent of the troubles between your line of railway and any eipploy^s thereof, you will please do so. — A. On the afternoon of March 13 I received .a com- munication, which I presume is intended for my name, although it was spelled wrong, but was addressed to the superintendent of the Indianapolis and Saint Louis Railway, signed by A. C. Caughlin and C. N. Berry, representing themselves to be a committee •of District Assembly No. 93. The communication went on to request that a scale of wages be adopted by the company, which was far in excess of what we were then pay- ing, and they wanted an answer by the Monday following. As soon as I received the letter I went to East Saint Louis and called the switchmen together, and read them the communication, and they said it was not authorized, that they ijnew nothing of it, that they had no grievance against the company, and were satisfied with th^ wages 634 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH ASTD WEST. they were bping paid. We were then paying a uniform rate — I mean, with all the other lines, with one or two exceptions ; the Chipago and Alton were paying more than we were at that time. I talked with the men about the matter, and stated what condi- tion the company was in, what their last report had shown, and the deficit in operat- ing the road, and we had a friendly talk. I asked them, in case a general strike should he Inaugurated, whether they would remain loyal to the company, and they said the feeling was so strong in East Saint Louis that it -n ould be impossibly for them to work there after the strike was over in case they continued to work during the strike, and if a general strike was inaugurated they would be compelled to quit. I said-to them, I would be very sorry if they did as I would be obliged "to fill their places, and I left them with that understanding. I heard nothing more until 3 o'clock March 85 ; there was a general strike at that time in all the yards in East Saint Louis. Our men quit at that hour ; I immediately went to East Saint Louis and commenced to do all the switching that was possible with the men that we could get. We started out a train at 7.45 that evening. I had left the yard,' however, before the train started out, ex- pecting to be interfered with. They got to the Broadway crossing, and there wa« a mob of seventy-five or one hundred meu that surrounded the train, and were stopped at the Louisville and Nashville crossing, and they commenced to pull the pins and in- timidate the men. They took the lantern away from our conductor and threw It into Cahokia Creek, and threw the pins into Cahokia Creek, and commanded the men to back the train into the yard. This train had a car of stock in it. The men were badly Mghtenod, and backed the train into the yard. We had live stock in the ear over night, and the next morning we undertook to get out an engine, and there was a mob that came down to the yard composed of seventy-five or eighty men, and they surrounded the engine and would not permit us to do any work at all. Thesamething continued each day after that until April 1. Meanwhile Governor Oglesby, of Illinois, came to East Saint Lonis and talked with the strikers, as I understood it; they had given him assurances that the trains would be permitted to run without any interfer- ence on their part. On the morning of April 1 we started out our train again ; I got on the locomotive ; we started out all right until we got to the Broadway crossing, ana there were several men who mounted the locomotive there, and they commenced to pile on to the train until, perhaps, there were perhaps twenty-five or thirty men on the locomotive and the cars, and one of them, whom I afterwards learned was Scott An- derson, he had a paper which purported to be a communication from the Knights of Labor, an ofiScial document with a seal ou it, asking the engineer to leave the engine. He was supported by a party of twenty or twenty-five others, ou and about the loco- motive, all of them talking and using persuasion, as they called it, but it looked to me very much like intimidation. There was a great deal of bad talk, and xhey were excited and angry, but they didn't succeed in getting our engineer and fireman to leave the engine, and we wentout with the train. They permitted us to run the train* out and in after the Ist of April until April 9. On the afternoon of April 9 the shoot- ing occurred. I think it was about half-past 2. We had run a freight train out about htSf-past 1, an hour before, and we were not interfered with. At 4.50 we started a .freight train, and got as far as the Broadway crossing, where we were surrounded by this mob. The pins were pulled, and we were commanded to back the train into the yard, which was done. That same night, or the following morning, the militia ap- peared on the scene, and the trains went out without interference from that time, and we have been permitted to operate our trains without any interference as far as we could do so. The men, however, claim that they have been visited at their homes and intimidated at night. About April 1 or 2 there was a mob came down to our yard and went through the freight-house, forced their way past the deputy sheriffs, and succeeded in getting quite a number of our platform men to quit work and go with them. I forgot to say on March 29 that we had a number of employes sworn in as deputy Sheriffs. Previous to March 29, and on March 29, while attempting to do some switching, a large mob of seventy-five or one hundred men came in and surrounded one of our switch engines, and threatened to kill the engine unless it was put in the loundhouse. A deputy sheriff, named C. B. Wade, gave a signal to back up, and some person in the crowd hallooed " kill the son of a bitch," and they immediately made an attack on him, knocked him down, and kicked and beat him very badly, and six or eight deputy sheriffs were unable to protect him. It was said that one of the party was seen there with a knife in his hand, but there was no evidence to show that he was the man who cut him. Q. You spoke of the letter written by Caughlin and Berry, did you see that paper yourself? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember whether the handwriting was the same as the signatures of the two names? — A. I think it was; that is my impression, that it was, but I am not sure as to that. Q. I am requested to ask, was there a seal ou that paper? — A. A. C. Caughlin and C. N. Berry; I imagine it was the same handwriting on both, but I am .not sure. Q. Was it sealed? — A. It was sealed; yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 535 Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) Where is this assembly 93 located ? — A. Well, I do not know ; they wanted me to address them at Eighth and Chestnnt streets, at the Central Hotel. Q. (By Mr. Stewakt.) That is, this committee wanted you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. CuRTUST.) The Central Hotel in this City?— A. Saint Louis; this com- munication showed that it was gotten up on the hektograph or something of the kind ; a general circnlar, I presume, that was addressed to all the representatives of the oraer ; it appeared so to me. In fact, after I had been to East Saint Louis and talked with our men, and they stated it was not authorized by them, I met Colonel Hill representing the Vandalia Line, and he stated that they had received a similar com- munication afterwards, and also men on several othfir lines had. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) Do you remember of any. one presenting you with a paper after Mr. Powderly had ordered the strike off, at any time ? — A. No, sir ; no such paper was presented to me. Miss S. C. CARBOUGH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as 'follows: Question (by Mr. CURTIN). Where do you live t — ^Answer. Pacific, Mo. Q. Are you a married woman? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you see any firing occur at that place ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, go on and state all that you saw, — A. Yes, I saw it ; first you come to the railroad track, then there is a wagon road, and then there is a pavement ; I was stand- ing in the gateway that opens on to the pavement when the firing occurred. Q. The first shot that was fired, you heard? — A. Yes, sir; and I got it through my clothing, and I have got my clothing here to show where the bullet went if yon want to see it with the marks through it. Q. (By Mr. Curtin.) We will waive that; that was the first shot fired?— A. That was the first shot fired. Q. Where were the persons standing who fired it ? — ^A. I cannot swear to that ; the way it was Mrs. McMillan and I started down to the lower crossing, and Mr. McMillan hallooed for me to come back and go to the upper crossin g ; it isn't a crossing, but there are some boards laid there for wagons to go to the gravel-house where they have a sand-house, and I went and started to go back, and I stopped in front of Mrs. McMil- lan's house and took up my apron to gather some gravel in it, and I had two or three handfnlls of gravel in my apron, and then I heard Mrs. McMillan holler to run, that they were going to shoot, and just as I got to the gate I turned around when the word "fii?e" was given, and a bullet came at the same time, and it came through my cloth- ing, and that was the first shot that was fired. Then I went to the mayor of our town about 1^ and from there to Mr. E. M. Peck, and I showed him my apron and clothing and tola him what was done. Q. Was there a large crowd of people there at the time ? — A. Not a very large crowd of people. There were not many people there when the firing was done. Nobody but Mrs. McMillan and I. The Knights of Labor were in session, and their hall ad- joins to the yard of this place where I was. and after they fired a bullet through my clothing I turned back to the wall, and then I saw six Knights of Labor coming out of their gateway, and some were then on the pavement but not across the wagon- road. Q. Did the men fire at you, do yon say ? — A. They must have, forit looked like there was but one, and I got the first bullet through my clothing that was fired. Q. Was there any man between you and the train ? — A. No ; there was no man at •U whatever. Q. The train was stopped, was it ? — A. No, sir ; it was running very slow. Q. Did yon have any conversation with Mr. Peck in regard to it ? — A. Yes, sir ; I went to Mr. Peck right at the time, as soon as ever the train pulled out. I went right to Mr. Peck in the agent's ofBce. Q. And you told him what had occurred ? — A. Yes, sir ; and I showed him my apron ; -fired right through my apron; and then I went to Mr. Hennessey's office, and showed him my apron, and he said he had nothing to do with it, and that he could not help it. Q. Don't you know Mr. Peck was arrested there, or do you know it ? — ^A. There was something said about him being arrested ; there was something said about his carrying concealed weapons. Mr. Peck is here, and he knows whether that be true or not. Q. You don't know who it was that fired the shot, because you say you didn't see the man ? — A. No, sir ; I don't know who fired the shot, but it came from off the train, from Furlong's gang. Q. From men on top of the train ? — A. Yes, sir ; on top of the train. The word for firing and the firing both commenced at the same time. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You say there wasn't anybody there ; no men there? — A. No, sir ; they came after I had got this bullet through my clothing. Q. Wliat were they firing at, if there was nobody there? — A. It- seemed like they were firinguto' us two women, Mrs. McMillan and I, and the children ; I don't know what else they were firing at. 536 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. There was no man in sight?— A. No, sir; I didn't see any man at all until I • turned my back to the wall, after the shooting commenced. Q. Did you see the man fire the gun ?— A. , No, sir ; I could not swear to it. There was two men right on top of the car with pistols leveled down all the time two or three days before, that drawed on all the citizens as well as the striters. Q. Do you live at that place ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. With your parents, or are you engaged in business there ? — A. No, sir ; I keep house for my father. Q. What is your father's employment ?— A. He is a carpenter for Mr. Peck here, in the bridge department. Q. Was he one of the strikers? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Your sympathies are rather with the strikers, are they not ? — A. No, sir ; not a bit ; I came here to swear to the truth and nothing else. , Q. That is not what I asked ?— A. No, sir ; my sympathies are with no side at all. Q. You doif t have any sympathy ? — A. No, sir ; with no side. I came here to tell the truth, and nothing more. Q. I am requested to ask if you threw any stones at the train or at any person on the train ?— A. No, sir ; I didn't throw finy, but I had gathered this gravel to throw, but I had not thrown it. Q. Were there not some stones in the gravel, or rather large-sized pebbles ? — A. No, sir ; it was gravel from the sand of the Merrimac River. Q. What were you throwing gravel for ?— A. Well, I don't know what my motives were for that. Q. Well, nobody else knows if you don't. — A. I just went up there to gather some pebbles. There were no great pebbles — ^little small gravel. Q. What were,you going to throw them at f — ^A. I was going to throw them at the train, but it was' too far away to throw much. Q. What led you to throw it at the train ! Why did you do that ?— A. Well, I don't know what made me do it. I cannot answer that, for I don't know what my ideas were for doing so. Q. If you don't know why you did it I guess that is all that we have to ask. Q. (By Mr. CuKTDf.) Did you do anything towards stopping the train or interfer- ing with the men ? — A. No, sir ; I don't know how I could try to interfere with the men or stop the train. I hijd nothing to do with that. Q. You did not ?— A. No, sir. A. P. WALSH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). State your name, occupation, and residence. — ^An- swer. My name is A. P. Walsh ;' I am secretary and clerk of W. 0. Brown, superintend- ent of the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy, Saint Louis Division, stationed at Beards- town, 111. Q. What do you know about the strike ? — A. Well, Mr. Brown instructed me one day that the Knights of Labor were going to have a meeting in East Saint Louis, and to go there and seewhat was said about the men at work in the yards, or the "scabs," as they were called. I went to that meeting and made a few notes in short-hand, which I will read. Q. Have you those notes with you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. This was a meeting at East Saint Louis? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, read your notes. — A. It was Martin Irons I took. This- was what he said : " Talk to the scabs and go to the houses and talk to their wives and make them quit. Do everything you possibly can to make them go out. Make them stop work and go out, and if they won't go out give them some pills and shit them out'' — is the words that he used. " To hell with the Chinese | to hell with the scabs. We fought and won the Chinese fight, and we will win this fight." Q. Where was this meeting held ? — ^A. I think it was Harrigan's Hall, or some such name, or Harrihan. Q. You went there for the purpose of taking notes of what was said ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you take those notes at that time f — A. Yes, sir. Q. And they are correct ? — A. Yes, sir ; I will swear to that. Q. How many men were there there?— A. There were about— the hall was full; that is all up around the front part was full, and they were sitting up around the gallei^ ; kind of an ante-room there was there. They were sitting up on top of that. Q. How was this advice of Mr. Irons received by the crowd t — A. Well, it was re- ceived with applause ; that is, the applause was frequent, but none of it was very enthusiastic. Q. Did you hear any other orations on that subject ?— A. Yes, sir ; I heard Mr. » Jackson speak and Mr. Secor and Mr. Sweep, or some such name. I didn't under- stand what bis name was when they introduced him. Q. Can you identify the men that spoke there?— A. Yes, sir; I think so. Q. Are any of them present at this time in this room ? [Witness takes a look at the LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 537 spectators present.] A. I see none that I recognize now. I saw Mr. Secor and Mar- tin Irons here when I first came in. Q. What did Mr. Secor say f — A. He made a short speech, and what he said was that — I made a note of it — advising the men to keep quiet while the militia were present, but " as soon as the militia goes" — he made a very significant wink at that. It was something like this f witness illustrates]. Q. He didn't clothe that in language, but in signs f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were there any other addresses or anything else said t — A. Well, Mr. Jackson fipoke about politics and the relations of the Knights of Labor to it ; that they better work in a little politics in order to make them successftil in their legislative efforts, and hef advised the men to watch the detectives and the sheriffs, and one thing and another. Q. What was the date of this meeting? — A. I think it was the 17th of April; it was on Saturday afternoon. Q. Is there anything else you know in relation to this matter, and if there is you may state it ? — ^A. In relation to the strike ? Q.. Yes; what you heard at this meeting.— A. Well, I generally followed — acting under instructions of my superintendent — I wandered around to the headquartersof the Knights of Labor and congregating strikers, and generally heard what they said; about all that they said would be try and force the " scabs " to quit work ; to go out, and they spoke or suggested appointing a committee to watch them at night. I don't know what the committee was for, but I heard they decided at one time to appoint a committee of six to watch some scab ; I was listening to their conversation unknown to them, but I could not obtain the name of the man that they wanted to watch. I heard them state that a committee had watched last night, but were not successful ; that is about all the conversation that I could catch, Q. Did you take this report of what Irons said stenographically T — A. Yes, sir ; I have it on a piece of paper here [paper shown]. Q. That is the original If — ^A. Yes, sir; that is the original that I took. Q. (by Mr. Cuktin.) How did you get into a meeting of the Knights of Labor f Mr. Stewart. Was it a public meeting t — A. I don't know whether it was pubUc or not ; they were Knights of Labor and all called each other brothers. Q. It wasn't a secret meeting ? — ^A. I think not. Q. You could not have got in if it had been f — A. No ; probably not. Q. Did you have any difficulty about getting in ? — A. No, sir ; I worked along and talked with the men ; went right along with them. I was evidently the only one there who had no other interest except my own. That is they were evidently work- ingmen; all of them. Mr. CURTIN. There was nothing significant in the fact that they called each other brothers, was there? — A. No; nothing except it is the custom of members of some orders. Q. But that is usual ? — A. Yes; they talked favorable of the Knights of Labor and about winning the fight, &o. Q. You have no proof that they were Knights of Labor other than what you heard what they said ? — ^A. No ; nothing only that and the fact that the speakers at least all had flights of Labor badges on, or pins. Q. Something like this [exhibiting pin taken from a Knight of Labor] T — A. Yes, sir; little round pins something like that ; I can't see it exactly. Q. They can get them at any store anywhere, can't they t — A. I don't know. Mr. PORTIS. Mr. Peck, who testified yesterday, was to furnish a statement. Here it is. Mr. Stewart. We don't want it put in unless it is verified by oath. What is it T Judge FORTIS. It is a statement of some of the transactions at Pacific, concerning which he didn't have a memorandum yesterday. Mr. Stewart. We will examine it. E. M. SMITH, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). Mr. Smith, you are a colonel, I believe f — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Where is your residence ? — A. Greenup, 111.' Q. State what relation you had to this strike. — A. Well, sir, I was ordered to East Saint Louis by Governor Oglesby to take command of a military force there at the time of the riot. Q. Well, now, will you give this committee the result of your observations there f — A. Yes, sir. Q. As to the character of the strike and the extent of it, and the temper of the striking men. — A. On the 9th of April I received a dispatch at my home stating that a military force had been ordered to East Saint Louis, and that I should proceed there immediately on the first train to take command of them ; that there had been soma 538 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. rioting and some bloodshed; that pa;rtie8 had been shot by deputy marshals, &o. Colonel Hill ran an engine to our place ' at Effingham,' and I got on the train with three companies of mv regiment, of the Eighth Illinois, and when I came to East feaint Louis I arrived there between 12 and 1 o'clock. We came very rapid.y, and when we arrived there I asied for instructions, and was told they were setting cars on fire and that I should take Sheriff Eopiqnet and go down to the tracks and put out the fires and do the very best I could under the circumstances. I left a compa,ny to guard the relay depot, and took two other companies and went down the tracks, and while going down the tracks discovered the fact that some of the companies of my regiment had preceded me. I found one of them guarding the roundhouse and also one guarding houses that were on fire to keep others from being set on tre. I went down there and took my men and shifted the trains apart the best I could to keep the other cars from catching afire, and I discovered that they were still setting the cars on fire ahead of me, just about as fast as I could put the fire out, and I went on down quite a distance on the Cairo Short Line, and I discovered the fact that there was quite a crowd there, and that men were runningHiver the tracks backwards and forwards, and that the fire kept preceding me, and so I ordered my battahons to load their guns and gave them their order that if they found any man setting fire to a car to shoot him. I did not believe the citizens of East Saint Louis, Knights of Labor, or anybody else believed in incendiarism. I thought there was a set of men there that were going to burn down the town of East Saint Louis and I wanted to see some of them ; that I wanted to stop it if I could; and I deployed the men down the road the best I could. I hadn't but a few men at that time, but I deployed along at intervals, with instructions to guard those trains and whereverthey were able to separate those cars that had not been set on fire from those that had not yet caught, to do so^ then I went back up the track onto the Cairo Short Line ; I went back upon the track onto the Cairo Short Line, and there we fired up a dead engine, and we went back to the relay depot, and then Colonel Culver and myself went down and opened the switches and took the train apart, separated it from the burning cars and saved what we could. All that happened at night during a dense storm ; it rained all the time, and of course I had very little time to make close observations, but I could observe a little of the temper of the people, however, but they did not at that time do anything more than, when we were going down the track, call us " Pretty birds ; you would make nice ornaments for mantle pieces," and things of that kind, but of course we didn't , pay any attention to that. The next morning, when we threw out our pickets at difierent points to protect the property, I discovered an antipathy existing against everybody that wanted to work, or tried to work, and also a very strong antipa- thy against the militia. I found the civil authorities perfectly powerless to en- force the law. In fact the sheriff said he couldn't find any deputies that would un- dertake to do a thing, and that it was no use to arrest a man ; that if you undertook to arrest a man and take him before a justice of the peace or the mayor, or any other executive officer, they would just turn him loose ; or, if charges were preferred against him they would get out a warrant and turn him loose on straw bail. Of course, such a state of affairs as that seemed hardly possible, but the longer we staid the more I became thoroughly convinced that it was true, and at the same time I could not get the sheriff to issue an order setting forth or specifying the different articles of our statute under which these men could be arrested for intimidation or anything else, but finally I did succeed in getting an order of that kind, which specified the men who were intimidating, firing cars, or obstructing the track, or throwing switches, or any- thing of the kind, which, under the statute, they could be arrested for and tried. Un- der these orders we made several arrests, and several parties were arrested and taken to Belleville and gave bail. I don't think agreat many men were arrested ; if there were did not know of it, and it was a demonstrated fact that the civil authorities in East Saint Louis were powerless to enforce the law. Looking at it from a military stand- point I think DOW that the best thing Governor Oglesby could do is to declare military law and relieve the municipal authorities from any responsibility whatever and place the town in the bands of a receiver. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) A military receiver ? — A. Put the town in the hands of a civil receiver and let the military authorities do the police duty until this trouble is straightened out. Q. Then, you say, there was a general state of lawlessness ? — A. Yes, found it every- where ; not in one place alone ; inside the corporate limits, wherever we went it seemed as though the children from two years old and up all had the same sentiments exactly about the matter. Q. Well, what were their sentiments in reference to the moving of trains and the resumption of the regular business of {ransportation ? — A. Theywere willingto goto work provided that all these men could go to work ; that is, all the old men could go to work. There were a great many men who said they didn't think they had cause to strike where that state of things existed, yet at the same time they had been ordered out, and would stay out as long as the order was enforced, but they were willing to LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 53^ go to work any time they could go to work, but what they wanted was to have all the men to go to work. They said it was their fight for life or death, and that if they didn't win this time that capital would crush them ; that it had got them down, and. that they thought they had a right to go out and stay out until the thing was settled. Q. They said, as I understand, that they went out because somebody had ordered them outV — A. Because somebody had ordered them out. There were three or four parties working in these yards with whom I was well acquainted ; boys that were raised in our town, and I had a chance to talk with them. They were all officers of the Knights of Labor at East Saint Louis, but they were over there working in the yards, and I talked with them a number of times, and they said that they were or- dered out, and that they had gone out, and were going to stay out until the thing was settled. They would come to me every day and would want to know what I knew about the likelihood of a settlement of the troubles. They said they were getting out of money. One or two of them were men of families. I told them I knew noth- ing more about it than they, that I was sent there to do my duty by protecting pri- vate property. Q. Did it occur to any of them that this thing was the result of their own volun- tary acts? — ^A. They all said that they all went out voluntarily; that the lodge or- dered them oat and that they went out to stay out, and didn't dare to go to work nntil they were ordered ; meantime the troubles had obliged the raUroad company to employ a good many other meu, who they called " scabs." They employed every- body that they could. Q. What is the present condition of things over there, colonel! — A. It hasn't changed a particle, _ Q. Do you think if the military were withdrawn from there at this time that the civil authorities would be strong enough to control matters? — A. Not five minutes. Q. You think the same condition of outrage and lawlessness would result again, do you ? — A. I think so. I think the ground work is all laid for it to commence at any time when the militia is withdrawn. I do not see that the militia being there has stopped intimidation in the matter at all, anything more than it has given the em- ployer protection for the tinje being, so that the men coold run their trains and re- sume traffic under that jurisdiction, but I am confident that if the troops were taken away from there there would be trouble. It might not be as serious a trouble as it was in the first place, but I think it would naturally drift into that course. Q. (By Mr. Curtin.) Have you communicated to the governor year impressions in that respect ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is your force over there new? — A. About one hundred men now; two companies. Q. Only two companies ? — A. That is all. Q. Yon must make things rather lively with two companies? — A. Particularly so at the present time. I am not in command now, but a part of my regiment is there under my major, Major McDonald. Q. What efforts did the civil authorities make there, the mayor, &c., and the mag- istrates ; what effort did they make, really, to control this matter f — A. Well, before we came there I, do not know; since I came, none — apparently none. I said to Sheriff Bopiequet yesterday that it was a little singular that Saint Clair County, containing a population of 60,000 people, one thousandth part of all the population in this Govern- ment, in a city of 15,000 people, that it was not possible for the authorities to enforce, inside the city limits of East Suint Louis, its laws and ordinances. He says, " Colonel Smith, I am perfectly powerless." It seems a little remarkable, but, nevertheless^ that is exactly what he said to me ; that he was powerless, and that it was no use to deputize men. Q. Did you suggest to the governor that this community ought to be put in the hands of a receiver ?— A. Not just exactly in those words, but, then, it was pretty near that strong. I found, while making the rounds of the city in a military capacity, that there were a great many meu that were imposing on the Knights of Labor by claiming that they were Knights of Labor, that I don't believe were, and I believe that they were imposing upon them to get their drinks, to get their grub, or anything else that they could get out of East Saint Louis. I found that class of men over there whom I do not believe belonged, as I said, to the Knights of Labor ; and I found a great many men that belonged to the Knights of Labor that have treated me very gentlemanly and apparently friendly. Of course, in a military capacity, I knew nobody ; I did not conside^r anybody was my friend at all ; I could not think of it in that way. Q. (By Mr. CuKTiN. ) What kind of arms did these men have f — A. Which, the troops that 1 have ? Q. Yes. — A. Breech-loading Springfield rifles , the same pattern and equipped th» same as the Kegnlar Army. Our equipments are the same, complete. Mr. Stewakt. That is a very good sort of gun. .",-10 I LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Mr. CuRTiN. Makes a man dangerous beMnd Bueli a gun. Have you ever been in the military service ?— A. I served three years in the regular service during the war. Q. What regiment »— A. The Eighty-fifth Indiana. Mr. Stewart. That warms the governor's heart toward you. Q. (By Mr. Curtin. ) I am requested to put this question : Do the scabs go to work— the men who are called scabs— dare they go to work ?— A. I suppose, although, of course, I am not acquainted with them ; all I know about railroad matters they told me; they say they have so many new men, and that is all I know about that. Q. You said that men dare not go to work unless they were protected ; could not ihe scabs go to work without any protection ?— A. Why, I suppose they have been doing it with the new men, but the railroad men— I suppose they make that distinc- tion between them— I am acquainted with a good many men at our end of the line, ■of the Indianapolis road, who are not Knights of Labor, but the railroad men, the brakemen, &c., on the Vandalia Line dare not run to East Saint Louis to work at the present time, at least, they say they will not risk it. Q. I am requested to ask yoa if the sheriff did not have the contempt of the people from the fact that he was drunk ?— A. Well, sir, I can't tell you about that, for I wasn't here at any time before the night of the firing. Q. Do you think he drinks from what you have seen of him ? — A. I should judge the gentleman took his tea. I am honest about the thing. Q. He was a very inefficient man, wasn't he ?— A. Looking at him from a military point of view he was, and I do not look at him in any other way. If he had been an officer of mine 1 would have had his resignation in an hour, as quick as it could have been written out. I wouldn't fool with him at all. I couldn't keep that kind of men in my regiment, and wouldn't have him fooling around where I was at all. Q. Were the men sworn in by the marshal on duty when you went there! — A. Which men have jou reference to, the deputies ? Q. The deputies, yes ? — A. I don't know whether they had been sworn in that night or not, or anything about it. The sherifl: started down the road with me to show me where the fire was, but before he had gone a great ways he said he was sick, and I told him that I thought he was, and probably a rest might do him good. I then took full charge and from that on didn't see him until the next day about noon. I didnqt know where he lived and I had the entire responsibility on my shoulders. It was a very lincomfortable position, in fact, because the instructions of the governor to me were that I was to act entirely under the instructions of Sheriff Eopiquet, and in his absence it left me in a very embarrassing position, so much so that I did not know sometimes how to act or what to do, but I done what I thought was best. But as to being under his control or under his direction since I have been here in East Saint Louis in a military capacity, I don't think I was for a minute. Q. (By Mr. Stewart. ) It would have been still more embarrassing, perhaps, if he had staid there. — A. I expect it was a good thing that he went back. Probably ■Saved a good deal of property and trouble. Q. Well, under the condition of things that you describe as existing there, could any sheriff control that mob ? — A. Well, I don't know. I think not unless he would have had deputies, more from other parts of the county, and probably been armed by the direction of the governor. If arms had been placed in their hands — such arms as we have, of course whenever they are fired off it means death and destruction — the probabilities are that he could have controlled it to some extent, perhaps entirely, with a, sufficient number of deputies, say one hundred men, armed in good shape. But for deputies to be drawn into line with nothing but 22-caliber pistols in their pockets, and with their store clothes on, they don't look very formidable, and I don't think they would have had much to do in controlling the mob. I think they were more of a laughing stock than deputies. Q. The point is whether the condition of things such as you found there was be- yond the control of the civil authorities, whether a man took tea or didn't take it? — A. Well, I should think it was a condition of things when I arrived there, and, in fact, at times since I have been there, that if the militia had not been there it would have been impossible for the civil authorities to have done anything under the cir- cumstances, because I do not believe there are any peace officers of the town bat what are in full sympathy with this movement, and it is perfectly apparent that I have not found any yet but what are in full sympathy, and I think they were decid- ly against the enforcement of the law, or any man that had anything to do with it for fear of something, I don't know what. It seemed as though they had placed themselves in the hands of these men in such a manner that they could not get them- selves out of danger, simply physically, mentally, and every other way, financially in the hands of these men, and in such a condition that they were afraid to act. That is the way it looked to me. Q. Did you attend any public meeting of the strikers there at any time?— A. Yes, fiirj I did. q. Where?— A. At Flanagan's Hall. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 541 Q. Was that the same meeting that this young man mentioned that took the sten- ographic notes t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you hear Mr. Martin lions discourse on that occasion ? — A. I did, sir. Q. What did he say f — A. He said some pretty pointed things about the matter. Q. Well, repeat what he said as near as you remember it. — A. As near as I can * recollect the matter he said he wished the committee to see these men. I don't think he meant scabs. I think he meant probably the men who had belonged to the order. He said to wait upon these men and persuade them to quit work, andif they were iiien of families to see their families, and if single men offer to pay their board or some- thing of the kind, or some compensation to keep them from starving ; and he said, if that don't persuade them to quit, if married men to wait on their femilies, and talk to them about it ; and he said if that don't persuade them to quit to give them pills ; he said, " You know what kind of pills I mean." Q. Did he use any vulgar language that you recollect ? — A. Well, I forget whether he put any adjectives in the wind-up or not. It seems to my mind he did. Probably he might have been profane about the matter. Q. How were these observations by Mr. Irons received by the audience ? — A. They were received with a degree of applause that indicated to me tbfi probabilities were that they would carry out the instructions. Q. As far as you know they attempted to do it ? — A. Yes ; I know it was not safe for a man to get out beyond the jurisdiction of his tome or the jurisdiction of the militia, and if he went up Broadway and opened his mouth in sujch a way as to indi- cate that he wasn't in sympathy with the Knights of Labor, or that he had gone to work contrary to their orders, the probability is that he would have got injured. Q. Martin Irons was rendering what aid he'could to preserve the peace iu that way, was he ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. By advising them to acts of violence, if necessary, to carry out his purposes. Did you hear any remarks from any other man at that meeting ? — A. Yes, sir ; one or two others, but they were all conciliatory. Q. Conciliatory ? — A . That is that they were advised to stand up for their rights and plead that their cause was just, as it was a fight of labor against capital, and such remarks as that. Q. Was there anything said about local grievances on that occasion? — A. I believe not; I do not recollect. Ibelievethere was one remark made by someone. Of course I did not know the speakers, but I believe there was a remark made to this extent, that Mr. Irons was as good authority in this matter as Mr. Powderly from the simple fact thatin Mr. Irons's district his claims to run his own business were all right as long as he didn't call upon Mr. Powderly for help. That he did not consider the time had come when he should step outside of his district to ask aseistance of Mr. Powderly, the manager of the order, because as long as Irons was able to run the business it was none of Mr. Powderly's business until he called upon Mr. Powderly for assistance ; that he was absolute in the matter. Q. Was that after Mr. Powderly called the strike off ? — A. Oh, no; that was before. Q. (By Mr. CuRTlN.) In your judgment, colonel, did or did not the shooting which occurred on the morning of your arrival tend to irritate the people ? — A. Oh, 1 sup- pose so; well, it must have been so. Of course I have no means of knowing the amount of the excitement in the city before I arrived there, but judging from the fact of these people being shot in the street it would excite them ; it would excite anybody ; there is no question about that. Q. Is it your opinion that but for the conservative action of the Knights of Labor they would have burned the station-houses and the railroad offices ? — A. Yes, sir. I have an incident in that connection. I think when we got to the round-house Colonel Culver told me that one of the Knights of Labor took the key, which was of a pecul- iar kind, and unlocked the door to let him inside of the house to get a car in there to keep it from being burned. He said the man said that he knew it was contrary to orders, yet at the same time he took the responsibility to furnish the key, and gave him directions about some matters that would tend to the preservation of the property. He did that simply from~the fact of being an employ^ of the road; that he didn't want to see the property burned, and that he did not believe it was the intention of the men of the order to destroy the property ; that they wanted to preserve property, so that when the strike became settled they could go back to work without having any damage done to the property. He said he would rather take the responsibility to do that, although he knew if it was known to the order he would probably be very severely 'dealt with for ihe matter. Q. I will ask you this question : Did or did not that shooting create such an excite- ment among the people there that but for the disposition of the Knights of Labor they would have burned the rolling-stock as well as the station-houses ? — A. Well, I can't answer that question, because I don't know. It seems to me as if the men that were down the road that night, from the remarks they made and the insinuations they threw out, I should judge that the men who were running around until 7 o'clock in 542 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the wiiy they were, and ■with a diBposition to conduct themselves as they did, that they were liable to set fire to some^ing, and they intimated very strongly to me that they were Knights of Laibor, yet at the same time I did not see anybody set fire to a car and I hope that — I know in fact there is good men, of course, that belongs to the ^ order, and that there are men that wouldn't set fire to nothing, but at the same time undoubtedly there was men connected with the fire that night that did tire those cars. In fact if they didn't do it, they aided and abetted in the matter in such a way that it was done. Q. Do you now know that the executive board of the Knights of Labor did inter- fere to prevent the destruction of the cars or incendiarism or violence ? — A. If they did^ it was before I arrived there. It might have been done, although when I arrived therOj the chief of the fire department, I forget his name now, came to me and said that they had cut his hose all to pieces, and in fact had threatened to throw him into the Mississippi Eiver, I believe was his expression, and he came to me and wanted to know if I would furnish protection to him, and I told him I would in case there was any more fire, and he said he would like to have me do so, and I told him that in case of a fire and a telegram was sent to him, and he came over here with his engines that I would give him a detail of men to guard his hose the whole length of it to protect it, and he said that he would want to have that done, and that he wouldn't come unless he was assured that he could have that protection. H. W. GAYS, being duly sworn and examined, testifies as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewakt). State your name and occupation. — Answer. My name is H. W. Gays ; I am general employ^ of the Wiggins Ferry interest on the Belt road, on the east side of the river. Q. What do you know about this strike ? — A. My knowledge extends to the effect that it has had on our business ; probably it would be better for me to start with a brief explanation of our car transfer business, which is between East Saint Louis and Saint Louis. We have different landings on the Saint Louis side of the river and de pend on the Missouri Pacific, Iron Mountain, and the Wabash to place these cars on our boats, and from there we take them on different switches to the commercial points in the city. About the 7th of March we had notice from the Pacific and the Iron Mount- ain that they could not handle our business on this side, owing to the strike. About the 13th or 14th of March I had intimation from some of our switchmen that they were hardly satisfied with the pay that they were getting. This was on the Belt road on the east side of the river. I told them that I would be there next day and ■see them and find out what the troubles were if they had any. Being a strictly local •concern our business on the east side was to interchange cars as between the different roads on the east side of the river and between our transfer company and these Toads — strictly local ; that being the case I felt that we should meet this question fairly and squarely, and not let the matter of a few dollars in the increase of a man's pay interfere with the general business of a community ; to see that it did not suffer ■on account of strikes. The following day I met my switchmen in a body and I asked them if they had any grievances at all. They said they not in the sense of a griev- ance, but that they wanted to have more pay if they could get it. After ascertain- ing from them what their ideas of pay were, and getting it stated thoroughly and fairly and squarely, just what they wanted, I then asked them a question. "That if these wages that you ask for are granted you, will you work regardleas of the strike ?" and the unanimous reply was that they would. I then told them that from ■the 14th day of March, I think it was, either the 13th or 14th, the 14th I think that -this took place, that I would increase the switchmen's pay to $3.50 a, day for day helpers, and $2.75 a day for day foremen, and $2.75 for night helpers, and $3 a day for the night foreman, which was entirely satisfactory to the men. On the 25th day of March 1 was in East Saint Louis, and about 2 o'clock in the afternoon — it would probably be well for me to state before getting to the 25th of March, that on my return from Saint Louis, after I had been to see our men as to whether they had a grievaflce that I had a communication, signed by, I think the name is Caughlin and Berry, al- though I would not be certain, practically stating that our men on the east side wanted an increase of pay, Jind setting forth the basis, which were about what I had agreed to give the men. This was written on thin paper, by either a stenographic pen or something of the kind, and stamped with the seal of Knights of Labor, so that when I got back, on the. second or third day I 'addressed these gentlemen a note, practically saying that the wages of our men were so and so, and that I was not aware of any grievances that they had at all. Well, then, on the 25th day of March, about quarter to 3 o'clock, one of our men came to me and told me that he heard that they were going out at 3 o'clock. I told him I thought he was mistaken ; that our men were satisfied, but that we would wait and see. But when 3 o'clock came the men leftthe en- fines practically where they were standing and the engineers took them totheround- ouse and put them up. We attempted then to keep one engine, by working the yard- LABOE TEOUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST, 543 master and the assistant yard-mastbrs. A little later in the day a second committee called on this yard-master and his two assistants and told them that they must not ■work, that they would not allow it, and the two assistant yard-masters they then -quit work. Well, then, for the next few days, three or four days after that, we were completely tied up. We could not get an engine to or from our roundhouse to do any work at all. Probably the third day after the '25tb of March we received a oommuni- ■cation from the receivers or rather from the agents of the receivers of the Wabash road, asking us to transfer their business from east to west, to the divisions of their road which were then in the hands of a receiver, and they insisted upon our perform- ing our duties as carriers, saying that the United States marshal would take charge ■of the operation of the engines. That was in reply to my stating that we oonld not work, so that from that day on we worked under the full protection of the United States marshal with one engine. We were forced to get our engineers out, yon may «ay by stealth, until finally the engineers themselves and their families had been waited on by different committes, to the effect that they must not work; that if they valued their lives, they must quit work. Then we had nine engineers in our employ and we worked them around on this one engine until it got to be al question of having no more engineers to work finally. We got the one man to stay as long as he was pro- tected by the United States marshal, but he would found to be on that en^ne, and on the i6th of April, I think it was, they had an election in East Saint Louis, and the day before that a man named Dickson, who had been on this committee waiting on the engineers and employes, he called a second time to see the engineer of that engine ; in fact three or four times ; he was informed by a United States marshal that he could not go there ; he then produced a civil marshal's badge of the city of East Saint Louis, and then demanded to go as an of&cer of the city of East Saint Louis to see that engineer on the engine, and the United States marshal would not allow him to do so, and he then went away to take legal advice as he said. His efforts were in the direction of getting to that engineer and fireman, practically to drive them away. Well, in the mean time we had been endeavoring, with all the railroads in common at East Saint Louis, to get the civil authorities to discharge their duties in the premises. We were willing to perform our part, provided they performed theirs, -and there was a call made on the mayor of the city, at which the counsel were present, or rather a called meeting with the object of having proper police protection. At that meeting Mr. Bailey, George Bailey, who was very efficient as a committeeman in intimidating the employes, was present, and he stated that he had authority for ■doing as he did, and he produced a certificate stamped by the Knights of Labor au- thorizing him as a committeeman to visit the different yards in order to get the men to quit work. Then about that time, or rather about the 9th of April it was, the military came, and after they got there we were enabled by very hard work ourselves, among the other men who were ndt in the habit of running the switch engines at all, I mean myself and the general yard-master and that class of men, we got out a second engine and finally a third engine, and finally a fourth engine, and got what you might term a regular force of switchman, and we went along in that way until the 5th day of May, when the strike was declared off ; that left us amongst our own em- ployes, that is, the old ones, all the switchmen and engineer and firemen ; we had none of them at that time ;' they were all new men, but since then we have taken back a large share of our old switchmen and the new engineers and the firemen and the switchmen have been driven off by what seems to be a concert of action on the part of the Knights of Labor, on the other side of the river, of intimidating these men, that if it is a matter of competent engineers, their full crews of switchmen are driven ■off in that way ; so that to-day we have left, I think two, I think of what is termed new switchmen, and one engineer. Now our wagon ferry interests have suffered largely from the fact of what you might term the floating committee, or a roving committee that would wait on the wagons as they were coming to and going from the ferry-boats, practically stating to them that if they kept on driving it would be the worse for them. I saw a number of instances of that kind myself; and the effect wag to thoroughly intimidate the teamsters between the east and west side of the river. Q. (By Mr. Stewart). I am requested to ask you if the Knights of Labor had any- thing to do with the city election on the 6th of April ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is my un- -derstanding. Q. That is, did they have a ticket ? — ^A. The election was for councUmen, and there was Knights of Labor men and other oouncilmen. Q. You say that they have driven off some of the new employes, engineers and switchman, that you put on there by intimidation since the strike was declared off ? — A. Yes, sir ; yesterday the last one, sir. Q. That habit of intimidation is still going on f — A. Yes, sir ; it was up to yesterday. Q. Do you know the plan that is adopted to effect this intimidation ? — A. Well, 8ir,.in vie^ of the fact that we have had some eight or ten cases that have come up since the strike' was declared off, I should say they ^1 point to one direction. The actual knocking down and dragging out is done bj strangers. They will come to a man at 544 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WESt. work and ask his name, and if they are satisfied he is the man, then the trouble he- gins right there. They are asked if they will quit work. If they say no, they most have work, then they receive bodily haim, which has been the case with our em- ployes so far, that is, four of them or five ; so that these men say to us they have got to quit, because they can't fifford to take their lives in their own hands just now. Q. You say that since the strike, this intimidation, so far as the personnel of it is concerned, has been by strangers ?— A. That is what our men report, that they are entire strangers to them. Q. How do you interpret that ?— A. Well, sir ; I have no real knowledge, but there is but one conclusion to come to, sir, and that is the united labor on the east side of the river are determined to drive out the new men, and that in order to do this, knowing that it might be bad for the individuals themselves, they seek other modes of doing it. Q.-Well, the fact, you say, exists of a concerted effort on the part of some men to drive out the new men?— A. It must be because— I don't see how one man will be as- sailed three different times, because one of our switchmen has received a beating three different times, and he came to me the day before he quit, to be sworn as a deputy sheriff, saying that he wanted permission to carry a revolver, which under the existing circumstances, and not knowing the man thoroughly myself, I did not feel that it would be right to comply with his request, because such things lead to more trouble. Q. (By Mr. Curtin.) Is it youropinion that swearing in the men as deputies and putting them in a position with the right to hold arms, did not cause a great deal of dissatisfaction f — A. I don't know as I quite understand your question, sir— the deputy sheriffs, sir. Q. Yes. — A. The civil authorities, if placed in the position they were ? Q. Yes. — A. Was it the cause of the trouble? Q. Well, didn't it help or continue to foment this trouble, strangers coming there f— A. Well, the trouble is there, sir. That is the only recourse we had. Now, if the citizens of East Saint Louis, as citizens, had complied with the requests of the deputy sheriffs of East Saint Louis, witliout resorting to the use of arms, the trouble would have been ended, sir. Q. It was the deputy sheriffs that used the arms ? — A. Well, that I don't know ; I was not present, sir. I really know nothing definite on that point. They were armed, there is no doubt about that, at that time, but I was not present, and I can't say as to the facts in regard to that matter. . I was in the vicinity, that is, I was in East Saint Louis, but not at the place where the shooting occurred. JOHN RAGLAND, being sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stjbwaht). State your name and residence. — Answer. My name is John Ragland ; I reside in Belleville, 111. Q. What connection did you have with the disturbance at East Saint Louis? — A. Well, sir, I have had up to the day of that shooting considerable business. I was deputy sheriff; regular deputy sheriff of Saint Clair County. Q. And you were called there in your official capacity ? — A. Yes, sir; I was called there by the sheriff in my official capacity. Q. To preserve the peace ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What condition of things did you find when you went there? — A. Well, when! Q. In the first place ; what day was it you went there ? — A. If I remember correctly, the men went out there on the 26th of March ; on Thursday, the 26th of March, or Fri- day. I reported at the Short Line yards to Mr. Parker, and at that time I believe they had no intention of making a move ; they had no one ; they were attempting to move a train off, but they didn't require my services, and so I went from there to what is known as the Pittsburg Dike, the termination of the Illinois and Saint Loais Railroad, and in the evening, I think it was, that same Friday evening, while we were at din- ner, there was quite a crowd came, twelve to fifteen, I suppose, and run the engine that had been at work switching the coal cars back and forth into the roundhouse, and a request came to the carpenter shop requesting the men at wort in the carpenter shop to quit. I did not see them moving this engine, but I found them at the car- penter sliop, and they were at that time requesting the men to quit work, and one of the spokesmen said, he didn't make any threats, that he didn't intend to use any force, "but if you dowork,"he said, "why, it will be worse for you," or words to that efl'ect. 1 spoke to him and told him that was a spirit of intimidarion, and that could not be allowed, and at that the crowd laughed. They staid tliere probably ten minutes afterwards, and then they left. Now, I am not certain whether it was on that day, but at any rate the agent or officers of the receiver took out the engine and went to work again. And I think it was the same evening a crowd numbering, men and boys altogether, I suppose, in the neighborhood of seventy-five, came there, and they read some kind of a circular to the engineer requesting everybody to quit work. They LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 545 didn't use any violence towards the employes, but the moment the train was got ont a number of section pins were drawn, links were drawn and thrown to one side, aodl the result was the men quit work at that time; and the engine was allowed to go- back to Belleville. They didn'tattemptto kill theenginewhile I was there. IcaHed. upon them as an officer, as a deputy sheriff, and told them what my office was, and: requested them to disperse, but they didn't pay any attention to it, and didn't dis- perse until after they had gained their point. The engine was in charge of the superintendent and the master mechanic, I believe, and it was returned to Bell- ville; that was the last service I did in that part of the city. I was down there,- afterwards on one or two occasions to see how the thingswere, but the next day- I met a still larger crowd, I think, in the Louisville and Nashville yard and; requested — commanded and requested — them to disperse. Under our laws you are re- quired to request a crowd to disperse, and so I j^equested and then commanded them., as an officer of the State of Illinois to disperse, which they never paid any attentioos, to at all. On the second day, for the third time, I did that, and then they sent words to me to give them something fresh ; that they bad had that the day before, andthey- didn't care to hear that any more ; that they had had as much of that as they wanted.. Now, the sheriff, I can't recall the day, but I suppose it is immaterijll, the sheriff and* myself and all his regular deputies except one, and quite a number of .special depu- ties whom he bad sworn in, with the assistance of the officers, personally attempted to take a coal train out, but we were prevented by the accumulation of a tremendous crowd of men and boys who jumped on the train in every direction and pulled tha- pins, and did all that they could to obstruct the passage of the train. Q. (By Mr. Stewaet.) Did you talk with any of these men? — A. Yes, sir; I hav&- talked with quite a number of them. Q. Could you get at their purpose and the intent of what they proposed to do ; . and, if so, what did they say about it ? — A. As far as their purpose in striking, I sup- pose that is what you wish if Q. No, what their purpose was after they struck, what they intended to do ? — ^A. Their purpose was to prevent the traius, if possible, from running until their demands - had been complied with. Q. What demands ? — A. Well, I understood from some of them that they were strik- ing for the recognition of the Knights of Labor, and from others that they were strik'r ing (from the men there) for higher wages. Q. Who f— A. That they were. Q. Well, who were striking for higher wages? — A. The railroad men. Q. Do you know what class of labor they represented ? — A. I suppose they wer» mostly switchmen ; I didn't ask whether they were brakemen or switchmen. They claimed to be railroad men, but to what class or order they belonged to I am not ac- quainted with those men personally, and don't know what branch of the bnsiaess they were employed in. Q. Did they show any disposition to yield to the civil authorities at anytimewhila- you were there, from your observation ? — A. No, sir. Q. They defied it? — A. Yes, sir; that is, the railroad men themselves didn't use vio- lence towards us. Q. I understand that. — A. But what they accomplished was by overpowering, nom-- bers. Q. Did you see violence used at any point or any place or time ? — A. No, not individu- ally I did not. There was one of the sheriffs, one of the special deputies, who claim* he was knocked down, and another Q. You did not see that ? — A. No. Q. Then you need not say anything about it. — ^A. No, that did not come under my eye. Q. Did you have any conference or hear any expression of opinion from the city authorities or any of them ? — A. Well, I talked with one of the members of the city council, who was himself a railroad employ^. Q. Was he a striker ? — A. No, sir ; he wasn't. Q. Well, what did he say ? — A. Well, he regretted it as a false move on the part o^ ■the men over there ; th.it is the way he seemed to look at it. Q. Well, I mean with regard to the preservation of good order ; did the city au- thorities or the local authorities manifest any disposition to aid you in your efforts^ to preserve the peace ? — A. No, sir; not at all. Q. Did you make any arrests while you were there ? — A. I made one arrest ; I arrested a party by the name of Bailey ; under an indictment on a warrant. Q. What lor ; what v/as the charge ?— A. Well, for interfering with the operationa- Of the various roads. Q. Was this man afterwards made a policeman by the city authorities? — ^A. I, don't kno^ whether he was or not. The sheriff will know more about that than I do j. I can't say whether he was or was not. 3984 CONG 35 546 ^ LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. GEORGE WISSINGER, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewakt). Where do yoi; live ? — Answer. Brooklyn, III. Q. What is your employment ?— A. Switchman. Q. Where ?— A. On the Chicago and Alton Railway. Q. Where are you employed ? — A. Here at East Saint Louis : I was w^orking before the strike, Q. Did you strike ? — A. I quit when they all quit. Q. Why did you quit ?— A. Well, I didn't want to work ; I didn't want to be called a "scab." Q. That don't give any reason exactly ; why did you quit ; was you ordered to quit? — A. Yes, sir; not personally. Q. Who ordered you to quit ? — A. Some switchmen ; some of our own boys. Q. Well, was there any order to quit from your body ; are you a Knight of Labor f — A. I was directed to quit by a switchman. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Well, I was. Q. Were you aware that there was an order from the Knights of Labor to quit J — A. No, not direct from them, only through some of the switchmen. Q. Well, what switchmen f — A. Some of our own boys. Q. Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, did you quit when you were requested to ? — A. I quit when I was re- quested to. Q. Do you know the cause of the dissatisfaoton with your employers t — A. No, sir. Q. Your wages were satisfactory f — A. Yes, sir. Q. And everything satisfactory 1 — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of any cause of dissatisfaction that existed there amongthe switch- men? — A. I do not, on the Chicago and Alton road. Q. That is what I am talking about, your road ; you are on the Chicago and Alton ? — A. Yes, sir. JOHN CLAEK, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stbwakt). State your name and residence. — Answer. My name is John Clark ; I reside at Venice, and am in the employ of the Chicago and Alton. Q. Where? — A. At Venice; I work at Venice, at the Venice yard ; kind of round- about work ; East Saint Louis too, a little bit. Q. Are you now in the employ of the road ? — A. I have quit ; I have got a sore hand just now, but my job is there whenever I want to go to work. . Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. No, sir ; my hand I got hurt a few days before the strike. Q. Well, that is fortunate for you. [Laughter.] So that you were out by the act 'of Providence? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And what do you know about the strike ? — A. Well, I really don't know much; I could not take much interest in it just then no way ; my hand was hurting pretty bad. Q. Well, do you know of any cause of dissatisfaction there among the men on that road ? — A. I don't know of any right there where we were working. Q. What was your business ? — A. Switchman. Q. (By Governor Cuktin.) How was your hand injured; how was it hurt?— A. Coupling the engine on to a car. Q. When you were in the employment of the company T — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you receive any thing from, the company on account of that injury ? — A. Mr. Beede told me I could have half time. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You didn't complain of that, did you?— A. Oh, I didn't make no complaint, no, sir. Q. (By Mr. CtJKTiN. ) Well, was it any grievance on your part that you got injured ■jvhile in the proper discharge of your duty at this work ? — ^A. It was dangerous kind of work ; the link of the car had entered the draw head and while I was trying to get it out the car striking something hounded back and caught my hand, Q. You say yon were told you could get half pay ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you received it? — A. No, sir ; not yet. Q. Do you expect to get it ! — A. Well, yes, I think I will. Q. How often do they pay you ?— A. Once a month. Q. Has pay day passed since you were hurt ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you did not receive your pay? — A. I received what 1 worked for, . Q. But you didn't receive the half-pay ? — A. No, sir. Q. For the time you suffered that injury ? — A. No, sir. Mr, S. D. EEEDB, was asked to step forward. Question. (By Mr. Stewart.) Mr. Eeede there seems to be some question in regard to this man's getting half pay; what have you to say in regard to it? — Answer. I told him some days ago that if he would give me the numbei of days that he would LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 547 •be disabled that he could have his pay up to that time. His injury is more serious than I thought. If he is in need of full pay he will get full pay. We are settling ■with our men, and propose to settle -with them satisfactorily. I told him that if he ■would tell me the number of days he would be off that I would give him the money -any time, and that was perfectly satisfactory. Mr. T. J. HARAHAN was requested to come forward. Qflestion (by Mr. Stb'WART). I will ask you Mr. Harahan, whether, at any time be- fore this shooting affray in East Saint Louis by the deputy sheriffs, you observed any -of the strikers armed with pistols? — A. I did. Q. At East .Saint Louis?— A. I did. Q. (By Mr. Cuetin.) When? — A. on the day of the shooting and several days pre- vious. Q. Do you refer now to the day on which so many persons were killed ? — A. I refer for the first time, to the day in which the riot took place, and then several days pre- vious to that, I saw fire arms in their possession. Mr. Cdrtin. I waut you to be definite as to the time yon saw them armed. Mr. Ste'wart. He says on that day and several days previous. Witness. On that day and several days previous, yes, sir. Q Do yon know of any of the strikers being shot on that day ? — A. I don't know «f any person that was shot. Q. (By Mr. Cuktin.) Have you heard that there were any of the strikers shot? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Shot on that day ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have. R. M. PECK, recalled, testified as follows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). I believe you have been sworn? — ^Answer. Yes, sir; ■on Monday. Q. The statement that has been handed in by you, did you make that statement yourself? — A. I did, sir; yes, sir. Q. What do you say as to its truth ? — A. Well, I desire to submit it as a part of my testimony. Q. You say the statement embraced in that paper is true? — A. Yes, sir; true as «tated in the paper. [The Hiseonri Pacific Railway Company, office Superintendent of Bridges and Baildings.] Pacific, Mo., April 24, 1866. Memorandum of damage done to water alalion, north of Deniaon and Texarkana, eince t$ Maroh 6. MISSOURI PACITIO MAIN LINE. Pacific water station, March 25 : Water let out of three W by 24 tanks ; pump-house broken into and head of water cylinder taken off; discharge pipe difconnected and eundry tools carried off. Hiawatha water station, March 21: Elbows and pipe leading to ronnd-house were broken; wind-mill disconnected and parts broken. Padonia, water station, March 21: Water let out of tank ; pump shaft broken and portion carried off. Wolf Creek water station, March 21 : Water let out of tank and parts of power broken. Marmaton water station, L. & S. Div., March 29: Water let out of tank and horse- power broken. ' MISSOURI KANSAS AND TEXAS MAIN LINE. Lamine water station, March 28 : Pump disconnected, thereby temporarily disabl- ing it. Little Drywood water station, March 27 : Pump house broken into and pump dis- abled by taking and carrying off cylinder head, oil cups, cut-off levers, &o. Hepler water station, Maroh 27: Water let out of tank and outlet valve taken «nt. Neosho River water station, March 28: Pump house broken into and pump dis- abled by carrying off injector, steam valve, damaging steam gauge, &c. Chantite water station, Neosho section, March, 27 : Water let out of tank and valve fltolen from pump. Galesburg water station, Neosho section, March 30 : Water let out of tank and valves stolen from pump. 548 LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. SAINT LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN AND SOUTHERN MAIN LINE. Texarkana water station, April 1 : Dam cut and portion of water let out. ' OTHER DAMAGES. A number of fires occurred during the strike, which were evidently the work of in- cendiarism, and if not by strikers by those who sympathized with them. Notable among these was the depot at Batesville, loss $2,0.'i0. Many fires at different bridges occurred, and were detected by special bridge watch- men that were placed along the line after the breaking out of the strike at a large expense ; these watchmen were employed immediately after one or two of the first fires that occurred on the Iron Mountain Boad, and which were known to have been caused by incendiarism. March'23 at thd Ai'kansas Eiver bridge, on Kansas and Texas Road, there was fifty- one new floor beams that had been framed and lying at north «nd of bridge, ready tO' be put in the bridge, burned; loss here amounted to $402.53; the aggregate losses on this account amounted to about |5,000 ; we had at work in the bridge department on the 6th of March five hundred and eighteen men, of which number but one hundred and forty-four struck. The above facts came to me by ofBcial report ; I know them to be true, as I was called upon to furnish various amounts of material for repairs of bridges, and casting* and other parts for pumps. These troubles must have been caused by the strikers, as they were very unusual occurrences, and hardly ever occur in time of peace. HERMAN FRIESLEBEN, sworn and examined, testified aS foUows : Question (by Mr. Stewart). State where you live.^Answer I live at Pacific. Q. What is your occupation?— A. I am a carpenter. Q. Were you there at the time of the strike t — A. Yes sir. Q. I suppose you are called in reference to your occupation to state what took place there. State what you saw.— -A. Well, I just was up in town, it was about Sinner time — I don't know exactly what time it was — when I met our foreman, and I went down the track, and I heard the train coming, and I thought I could get to- the crossing before, but I did not ; it was too quick for me, and I had to wait between a coal box on one side, where the engine gets its coals, and I waited there for the train to pass by, and it was about 6 yards, I believe, away from the crossing, and I was standing there looking up at the men on the cars, and then they commenced shooting. I didn't Icnow, it was the second or third car before the caboose, and a man whom I know well by his face, but I don't know his name, he aimed at me, and when I looked and saw his pistol, I thought he was ready to shoot, and I dodged myself • down, and the ball went right above my head in the coal box, right where I was- standing ; may be five or six balls were fired at me, and struck the box and plank in the coal box. Q. Did you get out of that place as soon as you could ? — A. As soon as the train passed and the caboose passed I went across the track. Q. Do you know this man that shot at you ? — A. I don't know him by name, but I know him his by face. Q. Did you make any complaint against him to have him arrested? — A. I told thfr sheriff about it, and J said that is the same man that shot me, and the sheriff didn't give me no answer. Q. You didn't go to a magistrate and make complaint? Yon ought to do that when you get back, if yon can ca ch him. — A. Well, I don't know the law of this country. Q. Well, what else did you observe on the engine ? — A. Well, I seen, when the train was passing, a conple of men. Q. On the same train ? — A. On the same train, yes, sir ; when the same train passed down the same street where I lived they put a couple of men there to watch the- switch, and a couple of other men came along, and they had both of them revolvert in their hands, and they pulled them on these men. and these men held up their hands and they hallooed at them "Got tam don't shoot ; we belong to the sheriff." Q. Did they shoot ?t-A. No, they didn't shoot at them men. Q. Was there anything else yon observed ? — A. Not as I can recollect. Q. (By Mr. CURTIN.) What is your business ? — A. Carpenter. Q. Were you doing anything to cause them to shoot ? — A. No, I was standing with my hands in my poclcets. Q. Had yon been doing anything to molest the passage of the train or interfere with it ? — A. Not at all, because about a month ago I got knocked down from a tree, and had my back very nearly broken and a hole in my head, and I was pretty neat not able to do anything. Q. And you didn't want another hole in your head ? — A. No. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 649 Q. Can you state positively now -where the firing commenced from the train, or what part of the train ? — A. Yes, «r ; right there ; I don't think more than five or six cars from the end of the train, the man commenced shooting. The first couple of shots they shot in the air, and then they turned their pistols at a man, some man who came out of a hrick house on the other side of the street ; I could see this, and as soon as the man came out they commenced shooting with both hands with pistols at the map down on the ground. Q. They didn't hurt him, did they ?— A. No, not al)le to do it. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) They don't seem to have been very good marksmen ? — A. They hit a woman. Q. Yes, they got pretty close to the woman? — A. Yes, they got pretty close to the •woman. I didn't have my six-shooter, but I never missed with it yet. I am not a Enight of Labor, and I never have worked on a railroad, but I was always able to bold a pistol. At this point a recess was taken of a half an hour. " i Thursday, May 15, 1886—1 p. m. FEED. EOPIEQUET, being dnly sworn and examined, testifies as follows: Question (by Col. Buenes.) Mr. Sheriff, state yonrname, age, residence, and occupa- tion. — Answer. My name is Fred. Eopiequet ; my age is fifty-one, nearly ; sherifi:' of St. Clair County, Illinois. Q. Where do you reside ? — A. I reside in Belleville, Illinois. Q. We are investigating, as a committee of the House of Representatives of the United States, the cause and extent of the troubles between the railway companies and their employes in the State of Illinois ; if you know anything of the cause of any troubles on the railroads in East St. Louis, between the railroads and their men, you will please proceed and state wliat you know ? — A. Well, the only thing that I know of, any cause was, that I ever heard of, that they were going to help their brethren on this side in their strike ; I never heard anybody say anything else. Q. That they struck in order to help their brethren on this side of the river ? — A. I have not heard of any complaints. I was there when the strike commenced ; there seemed to be pretty good feeling between the men and the companies. I didn't hear of any bad feeling existing between them before. I was down there about a month before on other business, before the strike commenced, every dav. Q. Do you know anything of an order having been issued by the Knights of Labor, District Assembly 93, ordering the men to desist from woiking? — A. I don't know of anything of the kind, except t£at I heard the strike would commence at precisely & Ctsrtain hour, 3 o'clock. Q. And it did commence ? — A. 1 heard that while I was down there, but I didn't^ know of any order, or by whom it was given. Q. Were you presents when there were any disturbances going on between the men and the railroad men, and the citizens?— A. Yes, sir; I was present several times. Well, they would go into the yard, trying to get now men out, sometimes in very large numbers, two hundred and three hundred at a time; they would interfere with the running of trains by uncoupling them, by trying to get off the engineers. We never could run a train for several .days. They would throw pius and rocks at us, and everything else that they could get hold of, at those that were to protect these trains. Q. Was that" the condition of all the lines over there ? — A. That was the condition of all the lines that I know of, excepting the Wabash. They had a deputy marshal, six marshals. I never came into that yard because they had a big force there, and they seemed to go along without trouble. I was in all the yards from time to time ; I could noc be everywhere, but I had men in all the yards, nearly. Q. Do you know what the extent of the loss of life was ? — A. Well, as -far as I know there was about eight men that were killed and died of their wounds ; I am not sure of that, though, whether it was seven or eight'; that was at the shooting on the Louis- ville and Nashville Railroad by some of my special deputies there. Q. Were you present?— A. I was not present ; Iwas within two blocks of it at the time, taking bail bonds of a person that' I arrested under indictment, Thomas Staun- ton. I was there, though, right after the shooting. But before the shooting I was down at that very place three times. Nine o'clock in the morning that mob was con- gregated at this very point. I commanded them to disperse more than a hundred, times by my deputies. Q. Informed them that you were the sheriff of the county? — A. They knew it; I toldthemiuthenameof the State of Illinois, in the name of the law, to disperse. They ■aaid they had heard that for the last two weeks; long enough ; Ihey were tird of it. 560 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 1 Bhould go home ; I had nothing to do around there. This was a public highway and they were entitled to be on that public highway. tit ni t i. ■ ^ x Q. Did you know the men who were leaders in these acts? — A. Well, I tried to ex- plain to some of the leading men there; there was Mr. Canda, T. J. Cauda, I tried to explain the matter to him, that I had a perfect right to disperse a crowd anyhow, whether it was a public highway or not. He didn't seem to think so, nor did the policeman that was 1here; I didn't know his name. Though I could not tell that policeman's name, I could have found it out if I had thought of it, but after three efforts to disperse that crowd I went right back to my place where I kept my office and telegraphed for militia, the second time; that was about. two hours and a half before the shooting, at about 10.50 I sent a dispatch to Springfield that I wasn't able to disperse the mob ; I got a dispatch from the h. & N. Railroad Company to go down there as they were threatening their men, and that is what brought us down the last time. Q. Had youmadeaeall upon the citizens of thecounty?— A. I had made a call; Ihad men down there who were knocked down in that same yard and who were maltreated ; one had bis jaw broken, and I had made an effort to procure some men down there to help me disperse the crowds, but only one man, and that was that Canda, made a kind of an effort to help me ; I had called on the mayor in the morning of the strike, to let the police oflicers act in concert with me ; he said he hadnone, he had only a few men and those were resigning as fast as they could, so as not to be drawn into this trouble. Afterwards I had a posse of 130 men in East Saint Louis, without arms except a few revolvers, under a promise of Adjutant-General Vance that I would get arms from Springfield, but they didn't arrive, as the Governor telegraphed me that he didn't feel safe In supplying undisciplined force with arms, and he would rather send the- militia, which I thought from the beginning was the right way. Q. State personally what acts of violence you were a witness to ? — A. Well, now a» to acts of violence, I saw men go into all the yards and private property and go through all the warehouses, irrespective of what they would say, and drive out the men or tried to take them out that were working ; that was an everyday occurence. I have heard of a great many, but I was not present at a great many. People were knocked down. I wasn't present, but I seen a great many of them. Q. You think you saw them go into all the yardf ? — A. I saw them going through all the yards. Q. You felt the power of the county wasn't sufidcient to restrain this violence? — A, I did feel so. Q: And telegraphed to the governor for assistance ? — A. I did. Q. Did that assistance come prior to the fight that happened there ? — A. No, it did not; he said he wasn't present at Springfield, and that he received the dispatch only at 3.40 in the afternoon, that is at the same time he received my dispatch about the killing. But that evening the first company came in and I took them right down to- the Louisville and Nashville Railroad yards, where they were burning up cars ; I saw a fire started there and I took that company dowji there ; I went down myself and saw one car burning, and I thought perhaps we could save the building there, and tookj the company down there ; before we got half through there, why the yards of the Cairo Short Line commenced burning, say they are about 300 yards; there was a fire started clear down to the Illinois and Saint Louis Railroad and coal company's yards. I was down there until 4 o'clock with three companies of militia that night, but we could not save that and there was a loss of property there. Q. So the result of the first company of militia down there seemed to appease the- wrath of the mob ? — A. No, that was in the evening when they arrived, and the others arrived late at night. I took one company down about 11 o'clock. Colonel Schaffer, of Chicago was down there at the time, and he did a great deal down there to help , extinguish those fires with his men. There has been a great many indicted for these offenses. Q. What orders did you give your special deputies when they were sworn in ?— A. The special deputies were sworn in to execute certain paragraphs of the law ; the riot act and the criminal part of the railroad act. The orders werejiot to use their arms unless in case of utter necessity ; we have never used ours in one instance. It is al- ways a bad thing to use arms, but the militia had to use them several times in the night. As far as I know there are three wounded men in East Saint Louis suffering from it. Q. Yon did not witness that shooting at the bridge? — A. I did not; I was about two blocks away from there ; I didn't see it. I heard it immediately and went down, but it was over in a very short time. Q. IIow many deputies did Jon arm, and how were they armed? — A. All my dej)U- ties ; there was only those in those yards that had their rifles; these special deputie* in these yards. My deputies were only armed with pistols — with revolvers ; that is all the arms we carried. Q These deputies in the Louisville and Nashville yards were special deputies, were LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 551 'hey ? — A. They were special deputies just for certain purposes to guard those j ar^s. I could not supply these men deputies enough. These yards are about 3 miles long on both sides, and open on both sides. Q. Did you supply some arms then without men ? — A. I didn't supply any arms ; no arms at all, not one. Q. Do you know how they were supplied f — A. I do not ; I didn't supply any on© with arms. ' Q. Did you see any violence by men whom you knew to be strikers? — A. Oh, yes j I seen that surely. Q. Do you remember their names ? — A. Well, yes ; I suppose I could remember some of their names ; there was one man by the name of Haley that I recollect ; and there la a man by the name of Harvey that I recollect ; there is in all sixty-three in- dicted for the act ; taken in there during that session of the grand jury. Q. Have any of them been tried yet ? — A. They will be tried next week — no, on the 21st their trial was set. Q. Do yon know who was breaking into the cars or setting them on fire ? — A. I do not, Q. What is the condition over there now with reference to the public peace and quiet? — A. Well, the condition is rather a quiet one, but you will — but the threats are made every day that there will be no quiet until every so-called " scab " is gone; they will not rest ; they say that. Q. What do you understand is meant by the term " scab " ? — A. " Scab," as I under- stand it, is a man that takes the place of another one that strikes ; they call him a scab. They called me a scab, too, although I didn't work. Q. (By Mr. Stewart.) You have said you telegraphed to the governor of Illinois on the day of the riot? — A. On the day of the shooting. Q. If I understood you, you had telegraphed him for troops before that ? — A. Yes, sir ; I had. Q. When ? — A, I think it was a week before that, about. Q. And he didn't respond? — A. He did not respond ; he told me to try to keep the peace, and it was going along pretty well ; for two or three days we had trouble, but we could run trains in and out by being on them ; by being on the engines and on the cars, but after that they made an onslaught the day before to show by numbers what they could do, and they started in to the number of three or four or five hundred. Well, it ended up with five hundred, I guess, at the time they reached the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy yards ; there were fully five hundred men going through the yards in spite of all I could do ; they said they were only a committee to ask them to stop; I told them that the committee was rather large to be called a committee ; that I thought three or four men would do, and tried to keep them back off the trestles, but I couldn't do it ; just overrun me there ; they called it a committee, though. Q. Are there troops there now ? — A. Well, there is one company there and one will be here before long, another one ; there will be two companies. Q. Remaining on duty there ? — A. Remaining on duty — have been for the last sev- eral days. Q. You have not felt it safe to relieve them ? — A. Why, the balance were relieved some time ago; we have not had but two companies there; while I don't think there is any danger as to— if there is a few uniformed disciplined men there. You know they have a better show. Q. Could yon name the number of fires that were started in the Cairo Short Lino yard ? — A. Well, there was one, two, three, there was three different fires in the Cairo Short Line in three different places and one in the Illinois and Saint Louis and one in the Louisville and Nashville. Q. What was the distance, probably, between the fires ? — A. Well, I suppose the dis- tance between two of the fires was very small, that Is down near the Cairo Short Lifie shops and below in their lumber yard, where they kept their timber for building cars ; these were very near together, and besides which the Illinois and Saint Louis is only a very little distance from there again, but in another direction, in a northerly direc- tion ; then the other one was higher up towards the Illinois and Saint Louis- yards near the so-called frog shops, and the Louisville and Nashville was, say, 300 yards west of that first fire on the dike. Q. What threats have you heard made with regard to the peace since the strike? — A. Oh, I have not heard a great many threats, except as against the men that worked there ; just as I say they want to get the scabs out ; they wont rest, they say. I have not heard any other threats against any company or against Q. The threat is against the scabs ? — A. Yes, sir ; more against the scabs than any- thing else that I have heard. I am with these outstanding men every day and I get along pretty well with them myself, and I have no trouble with them ; if I find one that I know I have got an indictment against I arrest them peaceably ; they are all going along, no trouble about it. There is no hard feeling, every one, except as to these men that are working in the yards in their places. ^52 LABOR TROUBLES HT THE SOUTH AND WEST Q. These troops would be withdrawn at your request at any time, I suppose, to the :governor ? — A.-' I suppose they would, unless some objections from- others were made. Q. You have not felt it entirely safe to withdraw them *— A. I don't feel entirely «afe; I thought the same scenes would occur again. E. F. PAGETTE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: Question (by Colonel Burnbs). Do you remember a conference that wna held in De SSoto between the Knights of Labor and the locomotive engineers and firemen upon •a certain occasion ? — Answer. I dp, sir. Q. Were you present ? — A. I was, sir. Q. State what occurred and what wa? said, as briefly as you can. — A. The confer- ence was held, as I understood it, at the invitation of the engineers and firemen. "We met at the De Soto HotelTor the purpose of conferring, and for the purpose of ascertaining as near as possible to what extent those two organizations sympathized ■with the Knights of Labor in the matter of the strike then on hand. We met there rfor that purpose, and it devolved upon me to state the grievances ; that seemed to be ■one question upon which this organization were somewhat in the dark; they didn't -mnderstand what grievance we had for striking, and one of the first demands was that -we should state our grievance, and I did so to the best of my ability. There were then .-speeches by quite a number of the fenights of Labor, after which they were followed i*y members of both the other organizations in speeches, and we left there with the tunderstanding that, while it would be impossible for those organizations to give us jany active, direct aid in the strike, that we had their sympathy entirely, and that whatever they could do to assist us, without violating their contract with the com- pany, would be done. It has been stated here that Mr. Park testified there that we "intended to win the strike by fair means if possible, and by foul means if necessary. I desire to state that no such statement was made by any of the Knights of Labor at ."that conference. Q. Did you hear all that passed at that conference ? — A. I did, sir. Q. Was Mr. Laughlin, the mayor, iu the conference? — A. Mr. Laughlin was there, ITbut he isn't the mayor. Q. Or the master workman, I mean? — A. Yes, sir; he was there. ' Q. Did he make any such statement ? — A. No, sir ; he did not. 1 Q. You would have heard it if he had made it, would you ? — A. I should have heard dt, sir. Q. Well, do you know whether it was unsafe at any time in De Soto to refuse to join the Kuights of Labor ? — A. I know that there never was any such state of nflfairs in De Soto, and it seems to me that any man coming before this committee with such 41 statement as that must either have a very poor opinion of the gentlemen before whom he was testifying, or else that he was rattled; there never has been a time in De Soto when it was not perfectly safe for any man who desired to keep out of that ■organization, and there has never been a time when there was not applications for .membership that could not get into the organization. We have qnite a list of mem- bers whose applications have been acted upon, and who have been rejected, who are juow aicting in the Law and Order League, and there never has beeu to my knowledge, ■ ;and I know that I express the sentiment of the organization, any effort made hy us .as an organization to influence, unduly influence, any man to become a member of tbat organization. 'Q. Do you know anything about the boycotts that were authorized in De Soto ? — A. "There never was but one boycott legally authorized by the organization, and that was -aiever prosecuted. ^ ^5- That was what? — A. And that was never carried into effect. Our assembly "d id declare a bovcott upon a certain butcher there, but it was never carried into effect. "The man went right along with his business, aryi it is a well-known fact that a groat «Dany members of the organization never ceased to deal with him. It was in fact a ■dead letter from the start. Q. The boycott was authorized by the assembly, was it ? — A. Yes, sir ; the assembly voted to cease dealing with that man, but of course it was a majority vote, but it .TV'as not a unanimous vote, and it was never carried into effect. Q. Well, what was the sentiment of your people with regard to the observance and ■maintenance of law? — A. Well, sir, I have never heard any member of our organization :advocate any violation of law; I have never heard anybody instructed by any of our -otlicials to violate any law ; I have repeatedly beard the assembly caution to bo care- -ful not to do that thing, and having right iu our midst a great many of the represerit- -ative people of that community, if such things had beeu talked of and advocated in our assembly the fact would have come to the public long ago and half of us would have beeu in jail, and all those who indulged in any such recommendations. The sen-' timent of the people in De' Solo at the time the strike was ordered was almost anani- mously with us. We had large public meetings ; on one occasion the citizens ot the jdace were invited to meet at our hall for the purpose of expressing their sentiments LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 553 in an untrammeled vray with regard to the strike, its justification, the effect it was having, &o., and there was a large attendance of what we call citizens. They have drawn a line between those men engaged in business and the shopmen, whom I sup- pose must be aliens. All the ministers of the city were there. That is, churches who had no ministers were represented by deacons, and they all gave us every assurance that we had their entire sympathy ; that they believed we were justified, after they heard a stateme^nt of our grievances, and advised us to stick to the fight ; of course ■they never advised us to break any law and we — none of our oflBcials ever did, either. Q. Did you witness the pursuit of that man who took refuge in Mr. Duffy's house? — A. No, sir ; I did not ; I arrived in sight of the tumult just at the time it was all over, but I was not close enongh to recognize any one in it. I was at the post-office at the time my attention was called to it ; it was at the time that the excitement was about ■over. Q. Were you in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company f — A. Up to the 4th day of January I was. ' Q. You quit the service at that time! — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what department were you serving ? — A. I was foreman of the mill at Do Soto. Q. Yon may state if you know the cause of this strike at De Soto. — A. Well, sir, to the best of my knowledge and belief the strike was provoked by a persistent violation of a contract or an agreement entered into between the management of the system of railroads known as the Gould southwest systeih and the employes of thai; system. This agreement was entered into on last March a year ago, and the continual and per- sistent violation of that agreement, in connection with the manifest determination of the management not to listen to our remonstrances, not to recognize us in any shape ■or form, led to this strike ; it was the violation of that agreement that iled to this strike, sir. Q. Do you think the strike would have taken place if the order of District Assembly 101 had not been issued ? — A. It was necessary that the order should come through the proper channels, sir, in order that there might be concerted action over the system. District Assembly 10> isn't the master of the order of the district. It is simply the servant ; every individual member of the order on the southwest system had an op- portunity to express his approval or disapproval of that movement before it was en- tered upon. Q. Well, had they the right to disobey' the order after it was made ? — A. The order could not be made until it had been authorized by a vote of the locals ; the district assembly had no authority to declare a strike without first submitting the proposi- tion to a vote of the locals as to whether or not they would sustain the committee in such action. Q. Suppose a man voted against sustaiiiing the order of District Assembly 101 ? — A. Of course, we are bound to be governed by a majority vote in all cases. Q. So that the minority has to yield and obey ? — A. That is the understanding in Sill such organizations, I believe, that all things are submitted to a vote ; that the ma- jority rules ; yes, sir ; but in this cate in our own assembly there was only, I believe, «ix negative votes, and according to their own representations at the present time they had no right to vote at that time. You will bear in mind, gentlemen, that we made earnest and repeated efforts to get our grievances, so called, before the officials ■of this road, and that we failed, and that instead of there being a disposition on the part of the management to let up on that thing, and finally got enough of it, the longer it went the worse it was, and we saw very plainly that inside of another six months they would have the employes of the system back exactly where they were at the time that agreement was entered into through the negotiation of the governors of the two States with the labor commissioners of the three States. That agreement ■was the result of a strike, which strike was the result of one of the most notorious ■starvation cuts that ever wages in the West received, and this agreement was the re- sult of that strike ; the strike was settled upon; the busis of this agreement, and as long as that agreement was lived up to and complied with there was no trouble on the southwest system, and there never would have been ; it was simply a violation, and the manifest determination to make a nullity of that agreement to do away with it, and not to recognize it, as has been stated in some instances where the matter was forced on certain officials. Q. How many instances of your personal knowledge are there where the company refused to carry out that contract of March 15? — A. What do I understand you to mean by "personal;" where I was personally cognizant of the fact? Q. Yes, sir ; where you were personally cognizant of the fact, not merely hearsay, butof yourownknowledge?— A. You wouldnot allow me to use the knowledge I have received as chairman of a committee or anything of that sort. Q. Any communication made to you by parties making grievances, of course, would he proper for you to state. — A. Well, sir, I would state on the 9th of January, at the time of the meeting of the first association of District 101, in this city, I was appointed 554 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. chairman of a committee ou resolutions, and there was a great number of resolutiops, and they were all in the nature of grievances ; there were grievances submitted to that assembly from the bridge men. Q. How many of them? — A (continuing). Whose headquarters were at Littler Eock. I don't remember the exact number of men employed, but the entire bridgo department Q. Well, one moment ; we want to get at the numbers. How many individual persons made com plaint to you who were in the bridge service ? — A. Well, the resolutions Q. I am not speaking of resolutions ; I am speaking of individuals who ma,de per- sonal grievances or complaints to yon as chairman of this grievance committee. — A. The grievances were not submitted personally ; they came, as I was going to- say Q. In writing? — A. They had to come through the local assemblies to the 'district assembly ; they were submitted by the aggrieved to tlieir locals. Q. Then it was the resolution of'the local assen)blies that came to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you did not see any grievances that came directly to you from the men? — A. No, sir ; the names of the men, of course, would not be attached to this document, except they .happened to be the officers of the local — the proper officers for signing such and attaching the seal. Q. You may state, in order to come to the important part of this investigation, how- many individual complaints were presented eithi r to yourself as chairman of the- grievance committee by individual persons, or to the order by individual perbous ? — A. To the order? Mr. Stewart. Do you speak from your own personal knowledge? — ^A. Oh, of ro.y own personal knowledge. Why, I could not say. I know of a great many, but I didn't see them, or I didn't hear the parties prefer them. I know of a great many, but, of course, all I could say as to my personal knowledge would be what I did or suffered myself. Q. How many'individnal men have at any time spoken in your presence to the effect that they were dissatisfied, who were in the employ of the bridge department ? — A. I should say, as the representative of Local Assembly 3623, I have never kept an acr count of the number, but I believe I would be safe in saying — I should say from twenty to twenty-five iu our town. Q. Who were engaged in bridge building and repairing department alone? — A. Who were engaged in the shops there at De Soto ; the bridge men have never had occasion to appeal to me at all individually. They have no connection with me, or I with them. Q. Do any other such appeals occur to your mind now ? — A. There was great com- plaint iu the roundhouses with reference to the failure of the company to allow time- and a half for overtime. Q. Well, were those individual cases that came to you from the men personally ? — A. These now are the cases; Ihavejustspoken of those cases, and the casesof one or two- blacksmiths' helpers, who had been mistreated, and three or four roadmen, common laborers, who claimed that their wages had not been restored to what they were prior to the strike, in accordance with the provisions of that agreement, and when we brought this matter to the officials they claimed then that the agreement did not cover the^ roadmen, but simply the shopmen, whereas we understood, and we supposed that every disinterested person would understand, that that agreement included all thos& persons who were on a strike at that time, that they had not simply made a com- promise with the shopmen. Q. Are you familiar with the contract of March 15, 1885 ? — A. Well, I have read th* contract several times, yes, sir ; I know some of the provisions ; I have not committed the thing to memory ; it is bulky. I know the nature of the provisions of it. Q. Did you ever present any of these grievances to a proper officer of the company for consideration ? — A. No, sir ; I never occupied the position upon which devolved that duty ; we had a district executive board, whose duty it was to take charge ot that matter, and we put all their grievances, the grievances of the entire system, in the hands of that executive board last January for the purpose of laying them before the oflSoials and having the matter adjusted, and we had no doubt at that time that there would be a peaceful settlement all around, and that there would be no difficulty about it, and the committee could not gain au audience with Mr. Hoxie; I believe they did see Mr. Kerrigan, but they were referred by him to Mr. Hoxie. Q. Well, you are speaking now frota hearsay and what you understand, which, or course, we would like to hear if we had time, but time is very precious to us just now. I would ask you, therefore, if in any instance, with all the knowledge that you have of the grievances the men had, and the wrongs done them, you spoke to any general offi- cer of the company or auybody in authority who had the power to redress these griev- ances, with regard to them ? — A. No, sir ; I never did ; I was never — I never occupied any position in the order that would Q. Do you know anybody in the order that did do it, of your own knowledge? — A.- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. SSS^ No; I never ■was present at any snch time; of course I have'a knowledge of the fact that OUT committee did what it was instructed to do ; we received their report. Q. Did you take any part in stopping the trains at De Soto? — A. I have not, sir. Q. Were you in any invasions of roundhouses and machine shops that are spokea of by some of the other witnesses ? — A. I have not been, sir; I never crossed the tract hut once in all that strike, and that was to get my tool chest out rfay before yesterday. Q. Were there any acts of violence that you witnessed? — A. I have witnessed noth- ing of the kind, sir. Q. Do you know of any personal knowledge of the boycotting of a car of hogs? — A. Yes, sir; there was some little diflSculty over a car-load of hogs; that was prior to the strike, I believe, however. Q. Well, was that authorized by any one in authority? — A. That wasn't, to my knowledge; I didn't see — I never saw an order and had nothing to do with it; I un- derstood that there had been a boycott levied upon the rolling stock of the Texas and Pacific and that this car-load of hogs came through — it was the first and last I believa that came through De Soto while that pended ; while the boycott was pending. Q. Do you know why that boycott was ordered? — A. I presume, sir, that that boy- cott was the result of the difficufy with a man by the name of Hall, of Marshall, Tex., who had been discharged from the service of the company for attending the district assembly. Q. Had there been any boycott against the Texas and Pacific road until after the discharge of Hall? — A. Not that I know of, sir. Q. Then this boycott was ordered because the hogs were in the cars of the Texas and Pacific road? — A. Yes, sir; that is my understanding of it; I have had official announcements to that effect. Q. (By Mr. Stewart. ) You have stated in a general way that the roads violated this contract of March 15, 1885 ; in what respect ?^A. Well, in—! — j have one per- sonal instance ; they cut my wages |10 a month without any notice whatever. That was in direct violation of one of the positive terms of the agreement ; they refused to pay time and a half for overtime in some instances Q, How did they out your wages? — A. They just reduced the salary pertaining to- the position I filled $10 a month. Q. What time?— A. What time? Q. Yes. — A. Well, I was not aware of the cut being made until just prior to pay- day of October, 1885. Q. What were yon in, the carpenter shop ? — A. 1 was in the milling department^ wood working machinery. Q. Well, that is one instance ; now, what else ? — A. In the case of the bridge men, who were required to work overtime in a great many instances, and who were not paid time and a half for it. Q. Well, now, were they required to work over-time ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Or wasn't it a question whether it was work or whether they were being trans- ported ? — A. There were a great many instancies in which it was work ; there is no question about it; they were actually at work. Q. Well, we have not heard of that before from the bridge men. Are you testify- ing now from your personal knowledge ? — A. No, sir ; I have no personal knowledge of anything that transpired in Kansas or Arkansas ; I am testifying now from my personal knowledge that I have derived from my custodianship of grievances that have been submitted to the assembly. Q. Now, you say bridge men are not paid for overtime ; in what other respect have they violated the contract ? — A. In the case of the common laborers on the road. Q. Were they not included in the contract ? — ^A. They claim that now, but we claim that there is nothing in the contract to show that. Q. Well, you are mistaken, because we have seen the contract ; the contract is plaia enough ; it don't apply to them at all. — A. Well, I am am not a lawyer, I admit. Q. Well, it wouldn't be necessary to be a lawyer to read the contract. — A. I cer- tainly understood at the time that all the men engaged in the strike were included in that settlement. Q. The track men were not strikers. — A. They were all on a strike, sir. Q. That isn't our testimony ; I don't know what the fact was. I am merely telling you what has appeared in the testimony ; there has been nothing contradictory in ref- erence to that. The strike was the strike of the shop men ; if we are mistaken we- shall like to be corrected on that subject. — A. I have certainly been under the im- pression for over a year that it was a general strike. Q. I don't know but what you are right ; I am only telling you what has appeared so far before this committee, that it was not a general strike, but only the shop men. — A. Of course the grievances applied directly to the shop men when they struck, but it never got as far as our town. We were never on a strike there, and all, of course, that we know about the proportions that strike assumed below was what we coula. get by the passengers and the public prints, and I was certainly led to suppose that. 556 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. that was a general strike in the southern terminus, and from Little Eock down, and also from the fact that there was day laborers on the road came up immediately when they found that their wages had not been restored to what they were prior to the cut, and claimed that they had been foully dealt with in not having their wages restored as well as the shop^neu, so that they considered that they were included in that con- tract as w^ll as the shop men. Q. Do yoii know anything about the contraict of the 25th of May, 1885? There was another contract made afterwards. — ^A. Well, I remember the contract ; I don't re- -member the nature of it, I never saw it ; I have heard of it. Q. Well, then, if you never saw that, how are you able to state precisely what the contract provides for T — A. I am not speaking of that at all, sir. Q. I know ; but that became part of the contract. — A. Well, I am only speaking positively of that portion of the contract that I have seen, that bore date March 15. Q. You never saw that part dated May S5, and you don't know whether the rail- road company observed thal^ modified contract or not, do you ? If you never saw it, of course, you can't tell anything about it. — A. I don't know a thing about that. I supposed if there had been any such thing in that contract as an abridgment of the former contract, or altering it in any way, shape, or form, that my attention should have been called to it. 1 supposed thijt this subsequent contract might either have ieen with reference to something that was not provided for in that, or that it is speci- fying some further utterances or something of that sort. Q. Did you ever hear ^ny reference made in your debates about the contract of Ma,y ? — A. I may have heard some such reference, but I can't call it to mind at the present time, sir. Q. (by Col. BuENES). I will ask you if you have ever seen a copy of that circu- lar (Mr. Hoxie's cil-cular, of March 25)? — A. Yes, sir; I recognize that now as the letter appended to the contract as I have It. But the document itself had slipped my memory for the time being, but I recognize this now as Mr. HojSe's letter indors- ing or accepting the contract, but this was simply appended to the contract at the time I saw it. Q. (by the Chairman). You are speaking now of the contract of the 25th of May ?— A. That paper bears date May 25, but my impression, as I said before, is that the con- tract bears date March 15. Q. (by Mr. Stewart). That is a contract, between the governors and the railroad really? — A. Yes, sir; that is the contract drafted by the governors, I believe, and this [indicating] was Mr. Hoxie's acceptance. Mr. BuENES. I will read this so as to have it to go upon the record: Saint Louis, May 25, 1885. To all Superintendents : This confirms my message to you of even date. Mr. Fitzsimmons and a committee were here last week conferring on some questions of which I will more fully advise you by letter, and I have this morning telegraphed Mr. Fitzsimmons as follows : According to promise made you on Saturday, I advise that we will strictly enforce ^ihe provisions of the circular of first vice-president, dated March 15, 1885. In the shops, and wherever it may be practicable, we will reduce the hours of work instead of reducing the force, whenever the necessity arises ; that whenever anf' em- ploy6 believes that he has been unjustly discharged he may make a statement of his case in writing to the superintendent of the road on which he has worked, who will promptly investigate and reinstate him, if wrongfully discharged. It is believed that the interests of the company and the employes are identical, and the management earnestly desire the hearty co-operation of all employes in the efl- <3ient and economical administration of the properties under its charge, to the end that the fullest development of its capabilities may be brought about, and work may be given to all, under conditions in every way satisfactory. H. M. HOXIE, Third Vice-President. J. R. SEREIN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows: , By Mr. Buknes: Question. State your name, place of residence, and occupation.— Answer. My name is J. R. Serrin ; residence, De Soto, Mo., business real estate and insurance. Q. I am requested to ask you, by a representative of the order, if Cramer was ex- elled from th£ order, and, if so, for what cause.— A. Yes, sir; he was expelled from the order. Q. What was the cause of his expulsion ?— A. Well, tha.t was a little mixed : as I junderstand it, it was for taking off his coat in the hall, because some one made' some LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 557 disrespectful remark to him and called liim — well, I don't like to use tlie language — if I must and he -would -whip any one of them that would come out on the floor. Q. He was not expelled, then, for refusing to take part in the strike? — A. Well, I could not say if he was, sir, because I was not there at the time that question was up, but I know there was something said that they would vote for his expulsion ou ac- count of speaking that way. Q. Was there a charge against him that he had refused to strike?— A. No, sir; I I never heard any charge against him of that kind. i Q. Was any boycott ordered against him by any citizens of De Soto of the assem- bly f — A. I don't know positively that there was, but I understand there was one or- dered against the butcher that Mr. Pagette spoke of here on the stand. There was claimed to be one ordered against Mr. Kathburn and his restaurant also, which h\» wife kept, and there was a troupe there, and Mr. Eathburu met me going past the- store and says he " I understand you folks have boycotted my store and also my res- taurant, my wife's," and asked me if I knew any! hing about it, and I said, "I haven't heard anything of it," and he said "Will you inquire into it?" audi told him I would, and l,went to the officers of the lodge and asked if there was anything of the kindi had been done, and they said nothing of the kind, and I was appointed on a commit- tee to see about it, and we went to Mr. Eathburn and laid the ii.atter before him aud asked Mr. Eathburn if he would go with us to hunt up the manager of the troupe, and we found him, and he denied emphatically that any one had done so. He said the reason he left the restaurant was simply that their lodging rooms was in one part of the town and their restaurant or eating room was in another part. Q. Do you know that any of the citizens of De Soto were threatened with the boy- cott if they did not join the order? — A. No,' sir. Q. Were any of the citizens invited to meet with you as Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. I came home. I had been over at New Orleans and got home just on the- day, in fact the very morning of the strike, and prior to that I know nothing about it. All my testimony will be confined to since that time. Q. (Last question repeated.)— A. Yes, sir. Then immediately when the strike was commenced the hall was thrown open, and Ineetings held — open meetings — every af- ternoon, and the citizens were invited to attend those meetings, and counsel and ad- vise with the assembly. There was several very large meetings held, in fact so mucb so that the h9,ll would not contain them, and many went away without being able to- get admittance. Those meetings were attended by all classes, as Mr. Pagette said> One afternoon was set aside for one class of citizens, and one for auother. This time he refers to, the ministers of the Gospel of every denomination were present, with the- exception of one, whose minister was not there, and, as Mr. Pagette stated, they told the boys that they were glad that they were doing so well, and keeping such good order, and some words to that effect. Q. Do you know whether N. O. Brien and French are now members of the Knights of Labor? — A. They are, sir; that is, they have never received any discharge in any local. Q. Have they ever been expelled ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have property and fonts in De Soto depreciated since the strike ? — A. I think not, sir. I represent quite a number of houses, some twelve or fifteen. Mine are all full and at the usual rents, except one ; that is a house that is outside of the town that I am holding more on account of the land conn ected with it than rents. I could rent the house any time. Those range all the way from $6 to $20 a month. I have- not an empty house at the present time, nor have I had during the strike. No, I will take part of that back. There was one left empty a little betbre, and laid empty for about three weeks, perhaps, after the strike commenced. Q. Do you know of any shopmen who were not Knights of Labor leaving the shops- on the 6th of March last ? — A. I do, sir ; many of them. Q. Do you know whether they were compelled to leave or left on their own ac- cord 1 — ^A. They told me that they were not compelled to leave ; that they came out of their own accord. DANIEL PAEKS, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Colonel BuKNES : Question. State your name, place of residence, age, and occupation. — ^A. My name is Daniel Parks, and my residence is De Soto ; my occupation is carpenter. Q. Were you one of the committee that had a conference with t£e locomotive en- gineers and firemen in De Soto ? — A. I am, sir. Q. Were you present through the entire conference ? — A. I was. Q. Did you hear all that was said in that conference ? — A. I did. Q. Did you hear the last brakeman or anybody else say that they intended to win by fair means, and if not, by foul, if necessary ? — A. I did not. *Q. If such observation would have been made would you have heard it? — A^ E -would, most assuredly. -558 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOU^H AND WEST. Q. Have you authorized or sanctioned or taken part in any of the lawlessness that lias heen alleged in De Soto ? — A. I have not, sir ; 1 never have crossed the company's tracks or entered the shops since the day of the strike. Q. Did you command any of the strikers to use acts of violence, or did you know of any of the officials of the order directing any such violence ? — A. I did not, sir. Q. What was your advice to the men ?— A. My advice to the men was, the day that we walked but of the shop, to practice sobriety and be good and peaceful citizens ; in •every instance to steer clear of all saloons and conduct themselves on principles of ■good order and conduct. Q. Was there any time when it was iinsafe to travel the streets of De Soto during -the strike?— A. Not to my knowledge, sir ; I never saw a time when I thought so. I travelled the streets of De Soto in the evening and during the day; I never carried any weapons of defense since the strike arose, and never saw any occasion for any iiiich thing. Q. Did you witness the pursuit of that man who ran into Mrs. Duffy's house f — ^A. I did not, sir ; I was at my house when that took place. Q. Did you see any acts of violence in breaking into the machine-shops and round- liouses? — A. I did not. Q. Have any of the Knights of Labor been arrested and tried for offenses in De Soto against the law t — A. There have been three, if I recollect rightly, possibly, no more ; •there have been three though that I recollect of, sir, who have been arrested and tried. fQ. What wag the result of the trials ?— A . They were discharged. Q. By whom were they tried, and what court? — A. The first trial was tried before Mayor Gough, of De Soto, or a justice at De Soto ; I am not sure now whether it was Mayor Gough or whether it was another justice, and then we had a victory before Justice Williams. Q. The mayor is a member of the Knights of Labor, is he not? — A. Well, sir, you ■will pardon me if X do. not mention names ; we have taken obligations with reference 4o that matter. If you should ask me, I should answer Q. All right, sir; it has been shown by the testimony, I think, that the mayor is a member of the order. Was Squire Williams also a member of the order? — ^A. You will have to excuse me. Q. You decline to answer that?— A. You will have to excuse me, sir; I have con- scientious reasons for making that objection. CHARLES LAUGHLIN, sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burstes : Question. State your name, age, residence, and occupation. — Answer. My name is Charles Laughlin; my age is thirty-two years ; occupation, boiler-maker; I reside in De Soto, Jefferson County, Missouri. Q. How long have you been in the employment. of the railroad company there? — A. I have been in the employ of this railroad comp-iny for about two years. Q. In what department? — A. I worked in the blacksmith department, Parsons, Kana. ; I worked in the blacksmith department in Saint Louis, Mo., and in the boiler and blacksmith department at De Soto, Mo. Q. Were you present at a meeting of a committee with the engineers and firemen in De Soto ? — A. I was, sir. Q. Were you present throughout the entire conference? — A. I was, sir. Q. Did you hear all that was said ? — A. I did, sir. Q. Do you remember all that you said ? — A. Well, I don't exactly remember all that I said. I know I didn't say anything wrong. Q. Did you say that the strikers intended to win this fight, by fair means If possi- ble, and if necessary by foul means? — A. No, sir; I never did. I see by the paper that that was attributed to Mr. Parks, not to me. Q. Was Mr. Parks present ? — A. Mr. Parks just testified here, sir. Q. I mean was he present at that meeting? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you certain that he didn't say it upon that occasion ? — A. I am positively eure. Q. Did you hear any one say it ?— A. No, sir ;. I did not, because I don't think it was necessary to use foul meaos to win this strike. Q. Did you ask Mr. Cramer or any one else to stop trains or help you stop trains?— A. No, sir ; I did not. I sent for Mr. Cramer — we were then watching the company's property — and asked him if he wasn't willing to do duty with the balance of the boys in watching the company's property, and he got angry at beingasked to do duty. You will pardon me if I make use of the language that he did. He said that he was •damned if he was going to watch anybody's property, and was not going to wreck any trains, and wasn't going to do anything. Nobody had asked him to wrecktrains. Q. Did you tell Cramer he could never work any more in the shop ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't. That was beyond my power to tell him whether he should work in the shop or not. I didn't claim to be running the Iron Mountain. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH* AND WEST. 559 Q. Did Superintendent Kenan or any other official of the road confer with you about "the grievances of the men 1 — A. Mr. Kenan and I never had any conversation that related to grievances. Mr. Fleming made use of the assertion. He said; " You men have DO grievances with the Iron Mountain"; and I says, "Mr. Fleming, I am not here to talk about grievances with you to-day." I says, " I don't want you to under- stand that I believe we have no grievances, from the fact that I know we have in the shops at De Soto." "Well," he says, "I suppose when you and I have to talk about grievances we can do it in a peaceful manner." I says, " I don't see no reason why we can't do it in that manner"; ajid that was all that was said in relation to griev- ances. Q. What position did Mr. Fleming hold? — A. He is the superintendent of the Iron J>Iountain, I believe. Q. Did you ever threaten to boycott the grain dealers if they sold corn for the hogs in i;hat boycotted car ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't ; that would be folly from the fact that there was lots of corn and farmers around there to get corn from if that was done. My im- pression was at the time that those grain dealers were present when Mr. Edmond drove •those hogs out of the pasture' and they formed an idea that if they would sell to the irailroad company corn for the hogs that there might be such a thing possible as us boycotting them. There was never nothing said to them that I know of. Q. Have you any cause of grievances or complaints against this company for mis- treatment of yourself ? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. State them. — A. I have been working in the boiler shop for |2 a day, driving Tivets, &c. Though men have been getting from $2.65 to $3, I only received $2. I asked my foreman about that, and he recommended an advance of 25 cents a day. Whether that ever reached the company or not I don't know ; it was put In the office to my knowledge at De Soto. I then spokje to Mr. Harris myself about the matter, .and he told me he could not do anything for me. I asked him if I could not get to Mr. Fleming ; he said he thought it was no use, as he didn't think Mr. Fleming would ■do anything. There was also two other cases in the boiler shop that I know of. One young man Has been working there four years for boiler-maker's work, and he is pro- nounced a first-class boiler worker and is receiving only $2 a day ; and another in- stance of the same kind Q. State what yon think the cause of this strike was. — A. I think the cause of this strike was the violation of the contract of 1884, and also to raise the pay of the sec- tion men to $1.50, and the recognition of the order. Q. While you were watching the property of the company did yon, or any others ■with you, prevent the injuring of engines, cars, &c. ? — A. I prevented at one time the coal chutes from being burned down there ; there was a man came down there -with two barrels of coal oil ; two of my men drove him from under them, and he went north then. Q. Who was that man t — A. He was some man from Saint Louis, here ; I don't know who the man was ; I brought him to the marshal down there, and a gentleman that works for Klausman's Brewing Company, in De Soto, identified him ; he was a Crerman, and said he was peddling coal oil, and I toJd the mayor and the marshal the best thing They could do was to drive him out of town ; they gent two men with hita till they got him out of town. Q. (By Mr. Stewart. ) He asked you about the disabling of the engines in the round- Jiouse ? — A. I don't know nothing about that. Q. Whether you were on guard at that time ? — A. I was on guard at the time ; I •didn't see it. Q. He asked you A. No ; I was not on guard at the time. Q. There was a time you spoke of when you were watching the property and asked some one to assist you during the time you were watching the property of the com- pany; did you protect any of the men who attempted to injure engines? — ^A. There was nothing done at the time that my men had charge of the company's property. Q. You took no part in injuring engines, did yoa? — A. No, sir; I took no part at all. Q. Did you take any part in intimidating men from working for the company? — ^A. ISo, sir; I did not; on the contrary, I discountenanced all acts of violence. Mr. Kel- ■ley showed me an anonymous letter written him, and 1 told him if he could possibly find the man that did that, I would have him expelled from the order. Q. Did you attempt to give any protection to men who wanted to work and were prevented from working by others? — A. It was not in my power to give them any protection, from the simple fact that the railroad company after that ordered our men away from there ; they put a lot of deputy sheriffs there that were very anxious at any and all times to excite the Knights of Labor and get them to do acts of violence if possible ; I cautioned my men several times against that. Q. Prior to that time, when you were watching the property, did you offer any pro- tection to the men who wanted to work ? — A. I protected the company's property at the time that I had charge of it, sir; to the best of my ability. 660 LABOE TUOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you encovirage men to continue -work or did you discourage tliom t — A. 1 ■would rather discourajje a man to continue work. Q. You discouraged him? — A. Yes, sir; in that ease; I would use no intimidation though, not by any means, because I think those things can all be done honorably. J. B. DEEL, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Colonel Burnes : Question. Are you the master workman of the lodge down there ? — Answer. Tea, sir ; I am. Q. You have stated your residence and occupation have you ? — A. I am a resident of De Soto, a blacksmith by trade ; worked on the Iron Mountain Eailroad for about two years; two years last January. Q. When did yoii quit the service of the company ? — A. On the 6th of March last. Q. Were you appointed to guard the company's property ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom? — A. By a committee appointed by the assembly to look after the things. Q. What were your instructions by the committee ?— A. My instructions was, sir,. I was a sergeant of a certain number of men, and my instructions were to prevent all lawlessness, acts of violence, or injury to the company's property by all means pos- sible. Q. Did you execute those orders ? — A. I did to the best of my ability. Q. You never helped destroy property ? — A. 1 never helped destroy property, or saw property destroyed in any shape or manner. Q. Was there any property destroyed or injured ? — A. Not while we were watching, the proi)erty ; not a thing. Q. Why did you quit watching ? — A. Well, the company forced the deputy sheriffs- on there and we hauled our men off. 1 didn't wish to have any trouble with the dep- uties ; they were under the law of the State and we were not, and of course we wanted no trouble with them and we left when they were put on. Q. What were the names of the gentlemen who constituted the committee authoriz- ing you to watch the property ? — A. Eodgerson, Laugblin, our master workman, and Parks, I think. Q. Yon don't know who destroyed any property do you ? — A. No, sir; I neyer saw any destroyed ; there was none destroyed I know while we were watching the prop- erty; not one thing. Q. Well, state if there were any instructions givfen by the assembly or any of its- members to the men to destroy property or to protect it? — A. There was no instruc- tions given to destroy property. I know I was a constant attendant at almost every meeting that I could' possibly ajitend, and the instructions were always from the men that spoke in the assembly to forbear from any act of violence whatever, or any injury to the company's property.or act of lawlessness, and also to abstain by all means from intoxicating liquor, and I believe this was done ; we never had a drunken man on the street. JOSEPH EODGEESON, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Burnes : Question. What is your age, place of residence, and occupation ? — Answer. I am a pattern-maker, and live in De Soto. Q. How long were you in the employment of the railroad company at De Soto ?— A. Six years. Q. In what department t — A. Pattern-maker. Q. Were you with the committee of the Knights of Labor that met a committee of the United Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen ? — A. I was, sir. Q. At that conference between the committee of the Knights of Labor and the loco- motive engineers and firemen, was there anything said by any one with regard to suc- cess by fair means or foul, if necessary ? — A. The object of that meeting of Knights of Labor going over to meet the engineers and firemen was to have their sympathy as far as we could. Q. We understand that. — A. But so far as obtaining the means by any lawlessness that was entirely left out altogether ; there was no thought or idea ever entertained of any such thing, and it is a slander; I take it myself as a slander upon me as one of that committee, that a statement like that could have been made; I feel grieved by it. Q. You are certain you would have heard any such statement if it bB.d been made ? — A. I am positive, sir ; and I would deny the fact if it cost me my liife, I would ; be- cause no such thing as that never passed no man's lips ; and more than that, it never was the intention of any of the Knights of Labor to take any such means as that. It- is a lie on the face of it. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 561 Q. Are you confideBt yon heaid everything that was said hy Laughlin 1 — A. The ronio was a small room ; I never could have passed hy it ; every one in the room could hear what was said ; there was no mistake about thab whatever. Q. Do yon know of any violence done by any of the members of the order in De Soto f — A. None, sir ; I am not aware of it at all. Q. You witnessed the chasing of this man to Mr. Duffy's house ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know the cause of the trouble down there; the cause of the strike ? — A. The cause of the trouble was through general grievances that had been from time to time stated, which I suppose you are well aware of. If I might stretch myself there a little, I would say that I am opposed to strikes ; I don't believe in them at all ; but this strike, it was brought on, and I went into it, and I took — as far as my conscience would let me — I took an honorable stand all through, with the intention that I would work honorably for the benefit of the men and for the protection of the company, and I defy any man, I don't care who he is, that can lay a charge to me of any indefinite or any immoral act or any act of oppression that was done. There was a charge, I see, laid to me as being one of the set that is accused of saying that Cramer could not work in the shops anymore. I said in the shops that day when Cramer was brought in before our master ; he came in a little out of temper and he used improper language, what I considered improper language, and he got, as time passed on, worked up to somewhat of a feeling, and for the first time that I spoke, he was just about to rush through the door, and I says, "Hold on, Cramer; don't go away vexed; there isno one here as have asked you to do any harm, and no one intends to ask you to do any harm;" and he just passed through the door, and with the words, as far as I can re- member, that he knew his qwn business, and was going to attend to it. But outside of that I don't know that there was anything at all improper done. I stretch myself a good deal, and I believe there is a ^eat number of the people of the town of De Soto will indorse the words, that I was doing aU that ever I could do for the protection of property all through ; I own property there myself, and it is to my interest to be care- ful to avoid all wild recklessness. Q. Has the railroad company ever violated its contract with you t — A. Not with me personally. Mr. DEEL, recalled, testified as follows : By Mr. Buenes : Question. We will recall you a moment, and ask you if you have any persoual grievance. — Answer. Yes, sir; I have. I worked atone time for the Bridge Com- pany, and in the month of February I had worked thirteen days, when I had a letter wrote me stating they wished me to go home ; there was trouble at home. Q. Was that last February f — ^A. No, sir ; it was before that ; that was some time ago. Q. We cannot speak of anything so remote as that. —;^. It was only a small matter of five days' pay; that is all, sir, that I could not get no account of, and couldn't get; but that was one of our grievances — that no man can get redress of the company singly — and we wished to act in a body to force the company to recognize those rights. Mr. B0KNES. That was all settled by the agreement of March, 1885. Mr. EODGEESON was then recalled. By the CHAiEMAif : Question. You say you own property in De Soto ? — Answer, I do. Q. What effect has the result of the strike had on the value of property there f — A.' Well, as far as I am concerned, really it has not affected me at all, only Q. I mean to say about the value of the property ? — A. The value of the property, as a general thing, I don't know Q. Has it not Mfeoted it ? — ^A. It doesn't affect it at the present time. Q. I see in l^he newspapers that the company talk of moving the shops from there. Would that affect the town any ? It has been in evidence here that they pay |47,000 a month there. Would the withdrawal of that have any effect upon the vilue of property ? — A. If they was to remove the shops it would have a big effect ; I will say it would crush De Soto down flat if they did any such thing as withdrawing the shops. Q. I only speak of that because I saw it in the newspaper that they are moving them now. — A. Well, that thing has been held before me that the shops would be moved, and I had better sell my property for fear the shops would be moved, but I hold my property at just as much to-day as ever since I owned it. Q. Then it had no effect on the property value at all ? — A. No, sir. Q. Or the trade of the town ? — A. Well, the trade has been affected. MAURICE JOYCE, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows The Witness. Mr. Chairman, I have a written reply that I wish to submit; a writ- ten statement that I wish to submit to you, to yonr secretary, to be recorded, in regard 562 LABOR TR3UBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. to testimony tUat was given here yesterday by Superintendent Stanton, the aaper- jntendent of the Ohio and Mississippi Division. The Chairman. You desire to contradict that testimony ? The Witness. Yes, sir. Q. The testimany to which you refer is Mr. Stanton's testimony f — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By, the Chairman.) You swear that statement of yours is true t — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buknbs.) What steps did you take for the preservation of the peace and the maintenance of law in East Saint Louis during the time of the troubles alluded to ? — A. I have a statement here, Mr. Bumes, -which I shall submit to you, if you will he kind enough to read it. There is a portion of the communication which I received from the railroad, which is not at all necessary to read. Q. (By the Chairman.) Hadn't you better swear what you did ; wouldrft it be bet- Tfcer to give your evidence and have it taken down — what steps did you take to sup- press what seemed to be almost an insurrection there ? — A. Inasmuch aa I had no money, inasmuch as the city government had no money, no fnnds to pay for deputy marshals, I called a special meeting of the city council, to take place in twenty-four hours thereafter, as the charter of the city dictates. The council met, passed a reso- lution, which is embodied in this report, saying that East Saint Louis government was powerless to give railroads the police protection that they needed to enable them to run their trains to and from East Saint Louis; and inasmuch as we had not but fif- teen policemen, and had about fourteen or fifteen roads to protect, Mr. Chairman, the council passed the resolution, and the resolution was submitted to a conference of superintendents of the roads that were present in the city council which met at the time and previous to the passage of it. The fact of the matter is, the resolution was written by Major Halbert, at Belleville, attorney for all the roads, I believe; he said so, anyhow ; and the resolution was submitted by him to the various super- intendents, and the council passed it then and there, saying they could not give any protection, and called on the sheriff of the county. The sheriff was on hand waiting for the resolution to pass the council, and he took control of the city government then and there, and has control of it ever since. East Saint Louis, with fifteen men, could not possibly give fifteen railroads, terminating in East Saint Louis, the police protec- tion that tliey demanded. I find that Saint Louis, with a most excellent police force of 500 men, could not give even one road, the Missouri Pacific, the protection that they needed to operate their line. Q. When that witness swore that you were convicted and taken to Springfield, is there some other man of yoxir name that he might have mistaken for you? — ^A. Well, I don't know that there is any other name there, none at all. Q. Were you ever tried ? — A. No, sir ; never ; I never worked a minute for a cor- poration in my life ; never was taken there on that matter. I had the misfortune to be down sick at the time and under the care of Dr. Thomas O'Eeilly, ot Saint Louis here. No, sir; such is not the case; there is not a word of truth in it, let it emanate from whom it will. I will stand by the report that I submit to these gentleman, and if he has sworn to his report I will see whether he will stand to it. Q. (By the Chairman.) Well, you say you were powerless to do anything?— A. Yes, sir; and we told these corporations so. Q. What efforts did you make to persuade them not to act with violen ce f — A. What, §irt Q. What effort did you make to persuade the men who seemed to be in a passion and violent and disturbing the peace not to do so? — A. I had no control of them, sir. Q. Did you try to control them ? — A. Not at all ; I could not ; they were mostly strangers to me; I could not. Why the people who employed them could not even persuade them to retain their employment. • Q. But you were clothed with authority ? — A. I could not control them ; I had no power ; I presume there is between two and three thousand men over there, all rail- road men. Q. Well, that is a square contradiction [referring to contradiction of Mr. Stan- • ton's testimony] ?— A. Yes, sir; it is. Q. And I think, Mr. Mayor, you were perfectly right in coming here. — A. Yes, sir; it is a malicious falsehood on the part of Mr. Stanton. Q. It rested on you, and you are perfectly right in coming here I think ; in justice to yourself you were right in coming here. — A It is a malicions falsehood, Mr. Chair- man, and there is a population of about 15,000 in East Saint Louis that will testify to it. Q. (By Mr. Burnes.) Mr. Mayor, I notice one of these papers is a commnnication to you from the representatives of the several railroads terminating at East Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And also a paper which you have preferred as a statement to be submitted to the committee ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you if this statement and everything therein is true to the best of LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 563 your knowledge and belief ?— A. Yes, sir ; I will swear to it. [Witness holds np his hand.] Q. This letter of the representatives of the railioad was delivered to you, was it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Yon have no objection to our filing these papers as a part of your evidence in the matter? — A. No, sir; I wish that to be, and if you notice in the last page that was the fact that East Saint Lonis is entirely powerless to give them the protection that they demanded, and they wished me to call on the State authorities, and the best I could do was to call a meeting of the council and get the council to declare the same and call on the sheriff in order to give them the protection that they de- manded. Q. Did you during the whole of those troubles manifest any sympathy or indulge in any act of co-operation with law breakers or men engaged in violence ?— A. No, sir. Q. Yon were honestly endeavoring to uphold the authorities of the city and State f — A. By aU means; yes, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) I am requested to ask you if you were present when the firing occurred when so many people were killed f — A. No, sir ; I was quite a distance from there. Q. And you know nothing about it? — A. Not exactly; I was on my way from the Relay Depot; I went down to the Relay Depot to see Sheriff Eopiequet, and met him at the Relay and requested him then and there to summons about 200 men, not leas than 200 hundred men, and swear them in, and he told me — I told him that I wanted about 200 deputies sworn in so as to enable us to give the protection to East Saint Louis merchants that would enable them to transact business by wagons, because they had taken out licenses in East Saint Louis, and I wished them to have protec- tion for their licenses, so that they could transact business there, and the sheriff told me then and there that he would be damned if he would; he sail I that he asked the governor for arms the day previous, and the governor refused them, and I told the sheriff he didn't ask for those in his own name. A Post-Dispatch reporter was pres- ent at the time I told him he didn't ask for them in his own name ; if he did, the gov- ernor would comply with his wishes, and he said he would not do it. I requested him to telegraph again, and he said he would be damned if he would do anything of the kind; he had only 15 men, and he didn't propose to put the men on the street with- out arms in their possession, and I was on my way down to Cahokie street when I heard the shooting at the bridge. Q. When was your municipal election ? — ^A. The tirst week in April. Q. Was it on Tuesday ? — A. Tuesday. Q. This strike occurred over there at what time ? — A. I really don't know about what time. Q. The 25th?— A. The 25th of March, Mr. Halloran tells me. Q. When the strike occurred were there several tickets running for city ofBces, in the field, that had been nominated and were in the field for the city offices? — A. Well, there are no politics in East Saint Lonis at all. Q. Were there different candidates running for the different offices ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who were running for mayor ? — A. No person ; no mayor to be elected, sir. Q. Were there councilmen to be elected ? — A. Yes, sir ; one from e.ich ward. Q. City marshal was to be elected ? — A. No, sir ; he is appointed. Q. What other city officers besides the councilmen? — A. Only an alderman from each ward. Q. An alderman from each ward? — A. Four aldermen to be elected. Q. Did the fact that four aldermen were to be elected affect the action of any mem- ber of the council with regard to the resolutions submitted by the representatives of the railroad companies ?— A. Wellj I could not speak for others, but I think not; the council did its duty. Q. Were any of the councilmen then sitting as such candidates for re-election? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many of them ? — A. Let me see ; two, I believe. Q. And how many were to be elected ? — ^A. Four. Q. How were parties divided, if you had any partyism in it ? — A. No, sir ; there is no partyism in East Saint Louis ; none at all, only when it comes to a national ticket. Q. I don't mean national politics, but I mean were you divided on any local issues ?— A. Yes; there is a difference of opinion. Q. Was there anything involved in the campaign in regard to law and order ? — A. No, sir. Q. That was not an issue ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was there a distinctive ticket in the field as a Knight of Labor ticket ? — ^A. Well, there was one candidate run, supposed to be a Enight of Labor. 564 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. I don't mean that ; Ki ights of Labor Lave a right to run for office. But were they running as Knights of Labor candidates ?— A. Well, I don't think they had that at the head of the ticket ; I didn't see that; I didn't notice it on it ak all. Q. Were there two candidates or more in each ward? — A. Only two. Q. There were two candidates then in each ward t — A. Yes, sir. Q. How would you divide them, or distinguish between them as a voter ? — A. Well, it is in views that they represented concerning the city government, not on any touch- ing this strike. Q. You think the question of the strike had nothing to do with that election. — A. No, sir ; no question pertaining to the strike. Q. You think that did not influence the election ? — A. No, sir ; not at all. Q. The strike occurred on the 25th of March, and the election was on the first Tues- day in April? — A. That cut no figure at all; that wasn't considered. Q. Were not the people greatly excited with regard to the strike? — A. Well, yea; the business people especially. They didn't wish it at all ; they didn't wish for it ; didn't want it ; it was very injurious to the town ; especially to the business people. Q. What was the date of the shooting or killing there of eight or ten people?— A. The 9th of April ; I think so. Q. That was very shortly after the election ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Don't you think that the election had some influence in exciting the people to violence? — A. No, sir; not at all. Q. Do I understand you, Mr. Mayor, as saying that the question of the strike, and of the protection of railroad property against the reported violence had nothing what- ever to do in the election of candidates? — A. None at all, sir, that I know of; that I am aware of. Q. The representatives of the railroad company you stated went before the council f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they insist upon some definite and positive action being taken with regard to the suppression of the strike ? — A. Oh, they wished it, and it was my wish and the ■wish of the council to comply with their wishes and declared the same so as to enable them to apply to the sheriff of the county ; a man who could give them more and bet- ter protection than ■ East Saint Louis could. When that letter was first submitted to me I called a special meeting of the council, which must occur fully twenty-four hours after notice is once given, and I complied with their wishes instantly and had notices issued for a meeting. Q. Did you understand, Mr. Mayor, that in your action there you gave entire satis- faction to the railroad companies represented before yon ? — A. Well, to be honest, why 1 think I did. Q. Did you observe or did they say anything that indicated dissatisfaction with your action ? — A. No, sir ; not at the time, they could not ; they knew very well that I was powerless ; we had only six men for night duty and four for day duty ; the bal- ance of the men were sick. The governor went down ; I had an interview with the governor, and he wanted me to put on specials ; I told him I had no money ; well, he eaid, " Put them on anyhow ; " says I, " If I put them on the railroad companies will abuse me ; who am I going to deputize that are not Knights of Labor in East Saint Louis; the railroads don't want them;" " Oh, damn them," says he, "Put them on any how," so I put on a few then, approaching election day, and I found when I did put them on the railroads they grumbled, and as soon as they did I rescinded the order and withdrew their commissions, because I didn't put on specials, and I told them I had none to put on unless they were Knights of Labor strikers, and the railroads didn't want them, and he says, " Damn them, put them on anyhow," and I told the governor I hadn't the money to pay them with. Q. (By the Chairman. ) You did not understand that the language of the governor was profanity ? Of course the governor would not do that. — A. Well, he is very deci- sive. I am giving you the words verbatim. Q. Did you observe at any time that any of the deputies whom you put on, and who were Knights of Labor, were unfaithful or disloyal to the laws f — ^A. They were only a few days around the election, and the following day — the following day there was an order issued calling to the men — I understand that one of them exhibited his commission in the yard and wanted to take an advantage of it, and they were called pn in the following day, and I issued an order to the marshal to take them all up. Q. Why did you do that ? — A. Well, because they transgressed upon the railroad's property. I understood one of them did so in one of the yards, and I gave orders to the city marshal then and there to call them in and take the commissions away from them. Q. Did you hear that of more than one of the special men ? — A. That is all, sir ; one. Q. Just one ? — A. Just one was reported to me, and as soon as he was reported I gave him orders to go and have the commissions taken away from him and from all the others ; and I have a copy-book to show the same. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 565 Q. (By the Chairman.) Had you any trouble with the firing?— A. Not much, sir; I am a member of the grand jury in Saint Clair County, and I don't wish to dwell on that subject now. The Chairman. That is very proper. Q. (By Mr. Burkes.) Do you remember the date when you appointed these special policemen t — A. No, sir ; I don't remember the day now. Q. Do you remember whether you appointed them the day of the election or the day before the election ? — A. Oh, no, sir ; a few days previous to that, to preserve the peace. Q. Did you discharge them before the election or after the election? — A. After the election, sir; the following day. Q. They must have been appointed, then, the day before the election t — A. Yes, sir; a few days before the election. Q. I understood you to say they were only on one or two days. — A. One day after the election ; the following day they all gave up their commissions, on the 7th or 8th; the election occurred on the 6th. Q. (By the Chairman.) I desire to ask you if you know of a meeting that some of the Knights of Labor held; do you know of that meeting 1 — A. I don't know, Mr. Chairman ; I don't belong to' them ; I know nothing about their order. To Congressional Committee : Gentlemen : In to-day's issue of the Republican, a newspaper published in the city of Saint Louis, Mo., in the report of the testimony given before your committee, a witness, C. M. Staunton, the division superintendent of the Ohio .and Mississippi Railroad, after having been duly sworn, stated as follows : " CM. Staunton, division superintendent of the Ohio and Mississippi, presented a history of the strike in a written statement. Part of this he read, and he was then told by the committee to cease the reading, and furnish them a copy of the evidence. " To Mr. Outhwaite : The authorities in East Saint Louis were in hearty accord and sympathy with the strikers. In 1877 I had the pleasure of taking three of these officials, their strikers, to Springfield, to be sentenced by the United States court there. These men were Maurice Joyce, mayor ; Chief of Police Halloran, and Alder- man Shea. " The committee adjourned at C o'clock, to meet again this morning at 9.30, when the East Saint Louis testimony will be completed, and the Knights of Labor will resume." This testimony of the said C. H. Stanton, division superintendent of the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad, in so far as it relates to the undersigned, is an unqualified and raaliclons falsehood. He states : " That in 1877, I had the pleasure of taking three of these officials, their strikers, to Springfield, to be sentenced by the United States court there. These men are Maurice Joyce, mayor; Halloran, city marshal; and Shea, alderman." Not one word of this sentence is true. I cannot understand how any sane man, with any claim to be considered a gentleman, could, without any sem- blance of truth, go so far as to commit absolute perjury, with a view of casting asper- sions upon the character of men to whom he is a perfect stranger. The undersigned had no connection, directly or indirectly, with the strike in 1877 ; never were taken to Springfield, 111., by Mr. Staunton, or any person, for any offense connected with said strike. We ask your committee to place this written refutation of this falsehood upon the official records of your committee, to the end that we, who are innocent, shall not be charged with offenses of which we are not guilty. I am, gentlemen, very respectfully, MAURICE JOYCE, Mayor of Mast Saint Louis, III. " To Mr. Outhwaite. The strike was a boycott, resulting from the troubles of the Knights of Labor with the Southwestern system. "Dr. William Taussig, general superintendent of the Bridge and Tunnel Company, gave the facts concerning the strike among his men, which had come under his own notice. " To Mr. Outhwaite : The East Saint Louis officials gave us no assistance in prevent- ing violence by the strikers. Indeed, their actions indicated connivance." Gentlemen of the Congressional committee : Inasmuch as Dr. Taussig, the general manager of the Saint Louis Bridge Company, has in his testimony before your honor- able committee seen fit to animadvert upon the conduct of the municipal authorities of East Saint Louis during the present strike, I, as the executive officer of said city, beg leave to call your attention to the foUowihg facts: March 27, 1886, 1 received the following communication, which is hereto filed as an exhibit, marked A. 566 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Exhibit "A." Saixt Louis, Mo., March 27, 1886. To the Hon. Mayor and City Council, East Saint Louis, III. : The undersigned representatives of the various railroads operating in and termi- nating at East Saint Louis -would respectfully represent that a number of the em- ployes of the said railroads have agreed and conspired together to go out on what in known as a " strike" for the purpose of unlawfully, maliciously, and wickedly injur- ing the business and property of said railroads and tlie public trade and comnieree transported thereon, and also have combined together to prevent said comp.anies from operating said railroads, and of the lawful use and management of the same, and have prevented, by threats and suggestions of danger and other tinlawful meiins, other employes of said railroads from performing their respective duties, and have influenced and compelled them to quit the service of said companies. These results have been accomplished by the strikers combining tofrether and pa- trolling and remaining in the yards and upon the premises of said railroads, by threats of violence and intimidation towards such of the employes of said companies as remain in their employ. In view of the premises, and in behalf of the patrons of our respective railroads, we respectfully request that you furnish ample police protection for the yards and premises of said railroad companies in order that the property we represent may bo amply protected and the employes of the respective railroads guarded from violence of strikers and other evil-disposed persons, and that the said railroad companies be thereby enabled to resume their usual traffic ; and in the event of yonr being unable to famish summary and ample protection as above indicated and keeping rioters and other idlers oflf the premises of our respective railroads, we would further respect- folly ask that you so notify the sheriff of Saint Clair County, Illinois, and ask his co-operation in carrying out the request of this petition. Very respectfully, yours, GEO. W. PARKER, rice- President and General Manager Cairo Short Line. JOS. HILL. General Superintendent Vandalia Line. J. HARAIIAN, General Manager Louisville and 2^ashrille Itailroad. T. W. BURROWS, Superintendent Indianapolis and Saint Louis Haibcay. H. W. GAYS, Svperintendent East Saint Louis Consolidated Baihiay. Thereupon I, as the executive officer of the city of East Saint Louis, in compliance ■with the request in said letter contained, issued a call for a special meeting of the city conncil of said city, as follows : "To the memhera of the city council of the city of East Saint Louis : "Gentlkmen: You are hereby respectfully notified and requested to attend a spe- cial meeting of the city council of the city of East Saint Louis, to be held in the coun- cil chamber in the City Hall, on Saturday, March 27, 1886, at 5 o'clock p. m., for the following purposes, to wit : to take sneh action as may be deemed right and proper to secure protection to life and property in the city. "MAURICE JOYCE, "Mayor." In obedience to such request the conncil convened in special session March 27, 1886, and the following communication thereupon read to them. (See Exhibit A.) Whereupon the following message was read to them by the mayor : " Gentlemen of the City Council: Having laid before yon the several commu- nications from the Chicago and Alton Eailro.ad Company, the Lonisville and Nash- ville Railroad Company, the Mobile and Ohio Railroad Company, Chicago, Burling- ton and Quinoy Railroad Company, Vandalia, Torre Haute and Indianapolis Railroad Company, Saint Louis, Alton, and Terre Haute Railroad Company, Saint Louis and Cairo Short Line Railroad Company, Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Company, and the East Saint Louis Connecting Railroad Company, I beg to recommend that the council take no affirmative action upon the same. I am not advised that there has been any breach of the peace in the city on account of anything mentioned in any of the communications I have given you, and in my opinion the municipal authorities are not charged with the duty of putting .any one into possession of property. The LABOK TROUBLKS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 567 State laws offer ample protection to the companies 'who make these complaints, and if the danger is as great as reported, any force which the city might nse would bfr entirely inadequate and would merely serve to increase the threatened difBoulties. " Respectfully submitted. "MAURICE JOYCE, "Mayor."' Thereupon, upon motion of Mr. Hill, one of the aldermen, seconded by Mr. Haines, it was moved and seconded "That the mayor notify the chairmen representing the various railroads that the city is powerless to give them police protection adequate to enable them to run their trains in and out of the city." On motion, the council adjourned. T. A. CANTY, City Clerk. At the meeting of the city council held on that date there were present representa- tives from all the various railroads terminating in East Saint Louis. In addition to- that they were represented by Mayor Halbert, the attorney (special) of all the vari- ous railroads. He wrote the resolution heretofore quoted, stating the^ inability of the city to afford adequate protection to railway property. This was done after full con- sultation with the representatives of the various roads terminating in our city, who all agreed that the city had not sufficient police to afford them the aid desired. They stated that they relied entirely upon the State authorities. It is well known to those familiar with the situation of affairs in our city that by reason of our being the terminus of some fifteen railroads that we are not in a posi- tion to afford that protection necessary to move and operate railways that other cities- more favorably situated could afford. Saint Louis, with its fine police force, numbering over five hundred, was unable to- successfully afford one line of railway, viz, the Missouri Pacific Railroad, the neces- sary protection to operate its road. Then how can any man reiieot upon our little city, whose police force only numbers fifteen men, for its failure to afford protection to fifteen lines of railroad ? ^ The people of East Saint Louis are a peaceful and law-abiding community, re- specting the rights of property and the liberty of the citizen, and I, as its executive officer, do not intend to calmly set by and hear it slandered by men and corporations who do not pay their taxes. I do not care to enter into any discussion about the strike, because I do not know anything about it, but this I do know, that the officers- of our city have done their duty. Our city is continually called upon by corporations to afford them aid and assistance, yet they, or some of them, notably the Saint Louis Bridge- and Tunnel Company, leased by Jay Gould, will not pay one cent of their taxes with- out litigation. That corporation owes the city over |50,000, yet its general manager. Dr. Wm. Taussig, whom you have heard before you as a witness, has the audacity to criticise the city authorities for lack of support. I do not think it is necessary to- enter into a discussion about the right or duty of municipal authorities to enter upon the business of forcibly operating a railway. Governments are not established for any such purpose. Corporations, through their representatives, are swift to criticise the constitnted authorities for any supposed lack of jjrotection, yet it is familiar his- tory to all who care to read that corporate aggression is one of the great issues of the- day. They defy all law when their rights are questioned. MAURICE JOYCE, Mayor. JOHN HALLORAN, being duly sworn and examined, testified as follows : By Mr. Buknes : Question, You reside in East Saint Louis f — Answer. Yes, sir. Q, You are the chief of police ? — A. Yes, sir, Q, If you will proceed and make any statement that you desire to make, we will, take it. — A. All I have got to say, Mr. Chairman, in regard to Mr. Stanton's testi- mony yesterday, he has implicated my name in that, and it is false ; he has never had' the pleasure of taking me to Springfield or any other place or any other man. I was never connected with the strike directly or indirectly in my life. Q. (By the Chairman.) 1877 he said?— A. Either in 1877 or 1886 or at any other time. Q. Have you any knowledge or information leading to the possible method that could have actuated a man in making a statement with regard to yourself and the mayor so monstrous as this seems to be, and yet so baseless ? — A. No, sir ; I have not. Q. Did you ever buxe any difficillty with him? — A. With whom? Q. With the gentleman who made the statement. — A. I don't know if I saw him, sir. I never saw him or spoke to him to know him in my life, and I am living in ■ East Saint Louis thirty years. I have heard tell of him and that is about all. 568 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What steps did you take as chief of police to preserve order and peace ? — A. I done all in my power to keep the peace and protect life and property as far as I was able. Q. Yourforce, I suppose, was very limited T — A. Yes, sir. Q. Four or five policemen would not stand much show. — A. About 12 men for day and night : some of them had been sick at the time t Q. Was it your desire and wish there to maintain the law and enforce order ? — A, All the time, sir; yes, sir. Q. W^re yon taken to Springfield in 1877 for any purpose or by anybody?— A. Never in my life, or any other place by anybody. Q. Did you go to Springfield in 1877 ?— A. No, sir. Q. Do you know whether Mayor Joyce was taken for any purpose to Springfield?— A. I have reason to believe that he was not, sir, nor at that time ; I was only twice in Springfield in my life. Q. Have you reason to believe that Mayor Joyce was taken there at any time on a criminal charge f — A. No, sir ; the best of my belief is that he was never there on business of that kind. Q. (By Mr. Bcknes.) Are there any other citizens of East Saint Louis who desire to give testimony on this subject ? The Mayor (to whom the question was addressed). I don't think so ; I don't know of any. The Witness. Alderman Shea was not at home to-day or I guess he would have been sworn. Q. (By Mr. Buenes.) Where is Alderman Shea? — A. He wasn't home to-day. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) In justice to Alderman Shea I ask you if you have any reason to believe that he was ever taken to Springfield at any time ? — A. Well, sir, in fact, I know he was not; I am positive of that myself. Q. Are you satisfied, Mr, Mayor, as to Alderman Shea's never having been taken to Springfield? The Mayor. I don't know, sir ; I didn't know at the time ; I am only speaking of myself. At this point an adjournment was had until 9. 30 to-morrow morning. APPENDIX. Inquest held at the coroner's office of the City of Saint Lome, on the 13t ? — A. No, sir. Q. You say there were about twenty-five or thirty in the crowd ? — A. Twenty-five or thirty including the truck hands. Q. Were they all armed ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Were the truck men armed? — A. I think there were about seven of our deputies off at dinner at the time when this row came up and their guns were in the depot. In the excitement, when the mob came running down the platform, a number of these truck hands took up these extra guns, and tbey might have taken up some extra re- volvers, and in that way several of the truck hands were armed. They picked the guns up for protection, so as to get across the bridge. Q. When they were at work in East Saint Louis they were not armed, were they J— A. No, sir ; not that I know of; none oi the truck hands were armed that I know of. Q. After these shots were fired by the party or the crowd that you were with, yoa say you saw this man stoop down behind the lamp-post. Did he throw his hand to his person or give any evidence that he was shot ? — ^A. I couldn't see ; no, sir ; he didn't ; he looked exactly like he was hiding. Q. You couldn't see on account of his being in the off-ehoot? — A. I could see his body by peeping over the bridge in this way [indicating], which I did; I had drawa my gun iiown to return the fire, but when he got in that position I thought that he had emptied his pistol and I threw my gun up and didn't fire at all; his left side was about in that position [indicating]. Q. Stooping down ? — A. Stooping down behind the lamp-post, and me being in that direction [indicating] I could see this part of him [indicating], his left hand being out towards me, and I started oft' on a run again and left him in that position. He did not fall ; he got down there just like he was hiding. Q. You say that he fired three shots ? — A. Yes, sir ; I am positive that he fired three shots. Q. You know nothing at all about where the man who was shot was picked up, do you ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. You had already gone away, across the bridge ? — A. Yes, sir ; the last I saw of the man who did the snooting was when he was right on that little set-off on the bridge, and I think it was the first set-off this side of the east end of the bridge. Q. On the north side of the east end? — A. No, sir ; it was on the south side. Q. On the south side of the east end of the bridge? — A. On the south side of the bridge : going over that way this man would be on your right. Q. Well, that would be the south side — the south side of the east end ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How far was this man from where you say the party who was called the mayor was?— A. Well, the last I saw of the man they called the mayor was when he was about twenty steps from this little set-off where the man is supposed to have been shot, on the left hand, next to the center of the bridge. He was nearly in the center of the bridge. Q. Well, at the time this shootingVas being done by this man from behind that post, where was the mayor? — A. Well, just where I say. Q. He was in the middle of the bridge f — A. He was to the left of the man who did the shooting, about twenty yards. Q. Twenty yards or twenty feet ? — A. Well, I say twenty yards. Q. Thatissixtjrfeet?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And he was in the center of the bridge ? — ^A. Very nearly the center ; a little to the right hand on the south side of the bridge. By a Juror : Q. You stated first that you had your back to your party when the first shot was fired, did you not ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is right, Q. Was the mayor in front of you then ? — A. No, sir. Q. Where was he — back of you, too ? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 573 Q. Then both of those parties were to the back of you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How could you see to your back ?— A. I couldn't see. Q. But you stated that you did see. — A. I turned around. Q. You turned around after the first shot was fired ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you saw the man fire twice more ? — A. Yes, sir ; I didn't see the first shot fired ; I saw him shoot twice after I turned around. Q. I would like to ask this question : What was the cause of this mob following you on the bridge ? — A. Well, sir ; I have no idea, that would be only an opinion for me any way ; I can only give an opinion as to that. MAGGIE THOMPSON, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Direct examination by Di. S. L. Nidblet, coroner: Qaestion. What is your name? — Answer. Maggie Thompson. Q. Where do you reside? — A. 4021 California Avenue. Q. Were you acquainted with the deceased in the morgue ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he your husband ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was his age? — A. Thirty-three years of age. Q. Where was he bom f — A. Well, I don't really know ; I think he was bom ia Scotland, but his brother can tell yon that ; he was bom in Illinois. Q. What was his business t — A. He was a shoemaker. Q. Where was he at work ? — A. He was employed at the House of Refuge nntilfonr weeks ago ; he was there for about two months, and before that he came from Cin- cinnati. Q. Well, where was he at work at the time he was killed? — A. He was not working. Q. He had not been working for how long ? — A. For about four weeks. Q. Hadn't been working for four weeks? — A. Well, about that time. Q. You say he was employed at the House of Refuge? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity ? — A. He was cutting there. Q. He cut out the work for the parties who were working there ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When did you last see him aUve, madam ? — A. Friday morning. Q. On last Prida^ morning T— A. Yes, sir ; 6 o'clock, exactly. Q- At your house ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He got up and left then, did he? — A. Yes, sir; he went with the intention of working over in East Saint Louis. Q. Wnere was he going to work ? — A. All that he said to me was that he was prom- ised a job over there, and I said " Well, what time will you be home, Charlie ? " and he said " If I get a job I won't be home before 7 ; if I should not get it I will be home between 3 and 4 o'clock." Q. What job was he talking about — A. It was lifting of some kind. Q. Well, did he get that job, or when did he say that he got that job ? — A. He didn't say, but I sujjposed it was on Thursday. Q. Was he in the habit of going over to East Saint Louis ? — A. No, sir ; he was not in the habit of going there. Q. How often had he been there, or did he tell yon ? — A. He never was there, I don't think. Q. He never was there? — ^A. No, sir. Q. How did he get this job if he never was there? — A. I mean before. Q. Oh, you mean before ? — ^A. Yes, sir; I didn't understand that he was over there l)efore. Q. Did he go out daily? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he tell you where he had been? — A. No, sir. Q. And he never told you that he had been in East Saint Louis before Thursday ? — A. No, sir ; he had never told me. Q. Did yon ask him where he had been ? — A. Thursday ? Q. No, sir; when he would come home at night? — A. I always did; Thursday even- ing when he came home I was in bed ; I had been sick on Thursday and he attended to me, and sat up until about 12 o'clock that night, because I was not very well. Q. At what time did he usually come home ? — A. He generally came home in the afternoons, about 2, 3, or 4 o'clock. Q. Did he tell you where he expected to work when at East Saint Louis? — A. No, sir ; he did not say. Q. And he left at 6 o'clock in the morning ? — A. Yes, sir ; it was just about six, as near as I can come to it, because he said that he had to make it in about half an hour. Q. And he told you that he had been over in East Saint Louis only the day before, that that was the first time? — A. He didn't say that he was there ; he just told me that he had a job there; I said to him, "Did you take it from the paper, Charlie?" and he said, " No." So he didn't say, because I was too sick to ask him, and in the morning I was haxdly able to get out of bed when he was leaving. i)Y4 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And he left at 6 o'clock ?— A. Yes, air. Q. Yon never saw him alive after that ?— A. Yes, sir ; I was with him five minutes in the hospital. Q. Which hospital, the city hospital ?— A. I guess so. I am a stranger here, and I don't know just where they took me that night. Q. What time was that that you saw him m the hospital ? — A. Well, I don't know. It was almost dark when I got back, and I staid there about five minutes. I was so excited that I couldn't tell what time I went there. Q. What day of the week was it that you saw him there ?— A. In the hospital t Q. Yes, sir. — A. It was Friday. Q. Friday ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What time did you say it was — was it dark?— A. No, sir; it was dark when I got home — about dark, and it took me about an hour to get back. I must have started about 5 o'clock, I should think, but I couldn't say that positively. Q. In what condition did you find him in the hospital ? — A. Well, I thought he was dying. Q. Did you have a conversation with him ? — A. No, sir. Q. He was not able to talk ? — A. He knew me and asked me how the baby was, and said, "I have been shot;" and I said, "Very bad;" and he said "Yes; come to-morrow." That is all he said, and the nurse said to me, " You had better go, be- cause he is so weak and has had morphine, and it will excite him," and I couldn't talk any more to him, and so I went away. Q. That is all the conversation that you had with him f — A. That is all ; but I can fully account for about Wednesday. Q. Well, what about Wednesday, madam? — A. Well, I understood that somebody said that he led a riot on Wednesday. Q. That what? — A. That he was the leader of some mob on Wednesday. Q. I know nothing about that? — ^A. Well, somebody said so. Q. Where was he Wednesday ? — ^A. Why, he was home until 10 o'clock. Q. Until 10 o'clock in the morning? — A. Yes, sir; he was cutting some patterns for some factory in the city. Q. Where did he go after 10 o'clock ? — A. He left the house and went to this factory. Q. What factory? — A. Well, I don't know ; Mr. Hart knows about it. I don't know where it was because I am a stranger here. Q. Was it a factory in this city ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long was he gone to the factory ? — A. Well, I don't know how long he staid there, but he took an oil painting from our house to Dunn's pawn-office. That was on the seventh. When he was going I asked him what time he would be back, and he said he would try and be back by 12 or at 12 o'clock. At 12 o'clock I was watching the cars, but he didn't come, so the little girls at the second door and I were walkiug up and down on the pavement with the baby, and about 2 or half past 2 o'clock he came along with some packages, and I said to him, " Why, Charlie, couldn't you come before ? " and he said " No ; because I had so far to walk with the picture, and besides that I have walked all the way on the ties." Q. Walked what way?— A. On the railroad track, I believe he meant. Q. What railroad track? — A. Well, I expect it goes up that way; I don't know [indicating]. Q. Did he say where those ties were ? — A. Well, they must have been somewhere on Broadway ; he didn't say ; I don't know, because I had only lived there that length of time. Q. He didn't say where those ties were? — A. No, sir; but I imagined they were on Broadway or some place there. Q. Why do yon imagine that? — A. Because he stopped in the grocery on Broadway, and stopped in a butcher shop, and he said that he came that way, because he wanted to stop in the grocery, because he had bread tickets for that place ; I had given them to him in the morning when he was going. Q. Wasit bread tickets that you had purchased? — A. Yes.sir; and on his way home he stopped into Mr. Sander's, on Broadway and I don't know what other street ; it is away out on Broadway, and he bought some more things and came right home; it was about 2 o'clock and a little after. Q. He didn't go out any more that day? — ^A. No, sir; he went down in the cellar and chopped kindling until about 5 or 5.30 o'clock. There was a gentleman in the cellar with him, a gentleman who works at the House of Refuge. He was coming home at night and stopped in to see him. Q. Was he armed— your husband ? — A. No, sir ; he was not. He had a knife in his pocket that he cut shoes with. Q. Did he have any pistol of his own? — A. No, sir; he did not. He has not had any pistol since he came to Saint Louis. Q. Then you never knew of his being over in East Saint Louis until Friday morn- ing? — A. No, sir ; I never knew about it before. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 575 Q. He told you that he was going over there that morning, as I understand ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you hury his remains I — ^A. That is his brother [indicating], and I think he will take charge of him. I am in no circumstances to do so. Q. Did he tell you the night heibre that he was going to work the next day in East Saint Louis f — A. Yes, sir ; it was about 11 o'clock in the night. I had been sick and he was waiting on me, and he said, "Well, Maggies, I must have a little sleep before morning, because I must start very early." Q. What time did he come home Thursday ? — A. About supper time ; about 5 or 6 o'clock. WILLIAM LUSTER, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Direct examination by Dr. S. L. Nidelet, coroner. Question. What is your name ? — Answer. William Luster. Q. Where do you live ? — A. In Nashville, Tenn. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am a railroad man, sir. Q. In what capacity ?— A. Well, I have been conductor for a while, and have been braking for a while, and have worked in the yard for a while. Q. Are you in the employ of the Nashville Railroad Company ? — A. Of the Louis- ville and Nashville road? Q. Yes, sir. — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity? — A. I was coupler in the yard here in East Saint Louis for that company. i Q. Were you a coupler on last Friflay t — A. Yes, sir; I was coupling at the time. Q. Did you recognize the remains of this man in the morgue ? — A. Well, I wasn't close enough to the man who did the shooting on the bridge to recognize who it was ; I couldn't tell his face or anything of that kind, but I can describe the size of the man and the clothes he wore, Q. Describe him. — A. He was a tall man ; a very tall, slim man, and he was dressed in black. Q. Did he have any whiskers about his face?— A. I don't think that he had any whiskers. Q. Did he have a mustache? — A. Yes, sir ; I think he had a mustache. Q. Is that as near a descriiJtion as you can give of him? — A. That is as near as I can come. Q. How far were you from the man who did the shooting? — A. I was about 50 yards from him ; I was the closest one to the man. Q. One hundred and fifty feet? — A. One hundred and fifty yards — about £0 yards I mean ; I will change that. Q. That is 150 feet.— A, Yes, sir. Q. State to the jury what occurred on that day — what day was it ? — A. It was last Friday. Q. When this man was shot ? — A. I don't know whether this man was shot last Friday or not, sir. Q. Well, it was last Friday they were shooting on the east end of the Saint Louis bridge, was it not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you present on that occasion? — A. Yes, sir; I was one of the deputy sherifls. Q. One of the deputy sheriffs? — A. Yes, sir; I am one of the deputy sheriff's. Q. Have you any papers to show that you were a deputy sheriff? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Where are they ? — A. They are in my pocket. Q. Let us look at them. . (Witness produces paper and shows same to the coroner.) Q. Did you see what occuiTed on last Krldaywhen the shooting occurred on the east end of the Saint Lonls bridge ? — A. On the east end ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. Yes, sir ; we were all Q. (Interrupting.) Who is "we?" — A. Myself, Mr. Hewlett — I can't call all their names. Q. How many were there there ? — A. There were nine of us. Q. And that constituted the whole crowd that you call "we ?"— A. I don't say the whole crowd, because there were freight men and truckmen ; there were nine of us deputies together. Q. Together with the balance of this crowd ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then when you say " we " I understand that you mean the whole crowd ? — A. I don't mean that there were but nine in the whole crowd altogether. Q. No, I understand that ; there were nine deputies, and all these truckmen and so on?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And I understand that that is the crowd? — A. Yes, sir; but understand that these truckmen and these freight men didn't have anythiifg to do with our deputy af- fair. 576 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. No ; but -we ■will get at that by and by. Go on with your statement. — ^A. Well, ■we were all coming across the Saint Louis bridge with the intention of giving our- sel^v^es np over on this end of the bridge. Q. Give yourselves up for what purpose ? — A. To get proper protection from that mob that was over in East Saint Louis ; that is what we came across the bridge for. Mayor Joyce was also following us and insisting on us to turn and go back. Q. Mayor Joyce was following you ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You knew Mayor Joyce ? — A. Yes, sir ; I knew him ; I was not personally ac- quainted with him, but I knew the man they said was Mayor Joyce. Q. Had you ever seen him before that occasion ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then you knew the man whom they said was Mayor Joyce ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You were all going over for the purpose of giving yourselves up on this side of the bridge T Why did you intend to give yourselves up I — ^A. We were not intend- ing to give ourselves up ; we just came over here to seek protection from the mob that was over the other side of the bridge, knowing that there were more of them than us. Q. The mob was pursuing you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. On what account f — A. Well, I couldn't say ; because we were working there in the yard, I suppose ; it was those strikers, if you want to know. Q. Then the mob were pursuing you ? — A. Yes, sir ; and Mr. Joyce — the man whom they said was Mr. Joyce— rinsisted on us returning back to East Saint Louis, and we told him we couldn't go. Q. Where was Joyce ? — A. He was on the east end of the bridge. Q. About what part of the bridge? — A. Eight in front of the oflSce. Q. You mean the ticket-office? — ^A. Yes, sir; the ticket-office. Q. On the bridge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, go ahead with your statement. — A. And we all came across the bridge until we got up to that first little offset ; I suppose we were 50 yards this side, and I turned around to see if any of our men were left, and I saw Mr. Joyce hand the man dressed in black a pistol, and this man dressed in black stepped behind the lamp-post and fired two shots ; I supposed that he was firing directly at me on account of me being the hindmost man — it looked that way to me. Then I saw this man dressed in black fall after he had emptied his pistol at us ; I don't know who fired at him. Q. How many shots did he fire ? — A. I don't know ; there were two shots to my rec- ollection and it seemed as though he was firing those two shots at me. Q. Were there any shots returned from your party before these two shots were fired ? — ^A. I don't know, sir ; the excitement was so great and I was so excited that I don't know. Q. Were there any shots returned from your party ? — A. I think there was one. Q. Do you know who shot that ? — A. No, sir, I do not ; because I was the hindmost man and watching this man behind the lamp-post who had a pistol and was firing at us ; I was watching him very closely and I was not watching any of our crowd at all. Q. When you heard this shot fired from behind you, didn't yon turn ? — A. I turned before the man shot ; I say Mayor Joyce give this man in black his pistol and I saw this man go behind the lamp-post and fire two cracks at me — it seemed as if he was firing at me. Q. When you heard the shot returned by your party didn't you turn around to see who fired it? — A. No, sir, I did not ; I turned around and came on. Q. You say that you could not recognize this man at all who fired those two shots at you? — A. How is that ? Q. You cannot recognize the man to whom you saw Mayor Joyce haiid his pistol and who stepped behind the lamp-post and fired two shots at you, as the man whom you saw in the morgue ? — ^A. Couldn't recognize this man who fired as the one in the morgue. Q. Yes, sir? — A. No, sir ; but then I can describe the man. Q. But I say you don't recognize this man in the morgue as being that man? — A. I wasn't close enough to tell the features of the man ; if I had been closer I probably could have got his features and his color. Q. You say this man whom they represented as Mayor Joyce tried to arrest you ?— A. He insisted on iis turning and going back to the Louisville and Nashville yards in East Saint Louis, and demanded that we consider ourselves under arrest. Q. Why ? — A. For protecting ourselves in East Saint Louis from the mob. Q. Had there been any shooting of any kind over in East Saint Louis that he wanted to arrest you for? — A. I guess you have heard of that, haven't you ? Q. I know nothing ; Iwant to draw out everything right here ; answer the question; had there been any shooting done ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was for that reason that he wanted to arrest you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had he told any of you who he was ?— A. He said that he was the mayor of East Saint Louis. Q. He said he was the mayor of East Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST 677 Q. Was he alone at the time f — A. No, sir. . Q. How many people were with bimf — A. There were two or three other men with him. , Q. Did they seem to he officers f — A. I couldn't say, sir. Q. You couldn't say ? — A. No, sir. Q. Where did you first see this man whom they said was Mayor Joyce of East Saint Louis ? — A. I saw him on the east end of the bridge, in ftont of the ticket office. Q. Well, was that after you had passed the office, or was he there when yon came upf — A. We stopped at the office. Q. You did? — A. Yes, sir; we all stopped at the office, and Mayor Joyce came up and said, " I demand you all to be under arrest." Q. How long after you had all 8topped4here f — A. AVoll, we staid at the east end of the bridge at least forty-five minutes. Q. Before he came up? — A. We were there and he came a short time after we did; we were there at least forty-five raiuutea arguing with Mayor Joyce as to whether we would consent to go back to East St. Louis or not, and we told him that we didn't feel disposed to go back and face the mob unless he would give us ample protection, and we told him he could not do it, he being alone. Q. When this man fired at what you called the crowd, or you, as one of the crowds was that after you had started on over to the west side of the bridge? — A. Sir ? Q. Was that after you had started over to the west side of the bridge ? — A. We had left the ticket office and Mr. Joyce and |the crowd was a little distance east ; we saw that the mob was coming on us and ptirsuing us pretty close and we came on, not paying ~any attention to Mayor Joyce, and when Mayor Joyce and this man got to the oifset we were about fifty yards from them, and the mayor then handed this man in dark his pistol ; I was looking at him and saw the whole transaction, and the man dressed in black cracked two shots at us and then fell behind the lamp-post ; he stood there and emptied his pistol and fell, and I said, " He has emptied his pistol and fell there for a sham," and no one made any reply to me. Q. At the time this man shot those two shots, what position, what relative posi- tion did Mayor Joyce occupy to this man? — A. Mayor Joyce,, when he handed the pistol to the men, turned and walked to the east end of the bridge. Q. Walked hack?— A. Yes, sir. Q. How far, about, did he walk hack ? — A. He was walking all the time this man was doing his shooting. Q. Witli his back to the men ? — A. With his back to the men, yes, sir. Q. He was walking about what part of the bridge — the center of the bridge t — A. No, sir ; he was on the right side of the bridge going east. Q. Well, when this man fired the shots did you hear any shot returned from your party ? — A. Did I hear any shot returned ? Q. Yes, sir ?— A. I did. Q. Was it behind you, or was it west of you, or was it immediately by the side of you ? — ^A. I heard a shot, but I don't know where it was from or who fired it ; I heard the shot after this man had stood there and emptied his chambers, and when this shot was fired the man fell ; I don't know who it was or where the shot came from, but it was fired a short time after this man had emptied his chambers at us. Q. Did the shot seem to he fired from a Winchester or a pistol ? — A. Well, sir, I am not posted enough in fire-arms to tell which is a Winchester and which is a pistol by the report. Q. 1 thought you could tell from the report ? — A. I never handled a Winchester or a pistol either ; I have not handled them enough to know the difierence in them., Q. After those two shots were fired and this man dropped, as it were, you went on over the bridge, did you? — A. There were more than two shots fired by this man. Q. Did you say you saw two shots ? — A, I saw and heard two shots fired. Q. Well, then, that is all you know ; you only know of two shots being fired ? — A. 1 know that he fired more than two shots; he fifed two that 1 saw, and then I turned and walked in the crowd and he still keep shooting. Q. Did you turn your head to see that he still kept shooting ? — A. Yes, sir ; but I saw him, though, when he fell ; I was looking at him when he fell ; I don't know whether this man in the morgue is the man who fell or not. Q. Well, this man who was dressed in black, did he fall afterthisshot wasreturaed from your crowd ? — A. There was no shot returned from my crowd that I know of; I can't say whether the shot was returned from my crowd or not, but I heard acothershot fired shortly after this man had emptied his pistol. Q. But you said it was fired west of you? — A. No, sir ; I did not ; I beg your par- don. ' Q. Where was this shot fired, then ? — A. I don't know where it was fired ; I heard another shot, but I couldn't say in what direction it came from. Q. Then yo4 don't know whether it came from your crowd or not T — A. No, sir. Q. Did it sound as though it came from your crowd ? — A. Yes, sir ; but I can't say positively though that it did. 578 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did the sound of the shot that was returned sound as if it came from your party or not f — A. I couldn't say whether it did or not. Q. Well, was there anybody else on the bridge west of you, immediately near your crowd, except your crowd ? — A. Was there anybody else ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. I wasn't taking any notice of who was on the bridge, because I was excited myself, being pursued by a mob, and I didn't pay any attention to anybody, except the crowd I was with. Q. Then you heard the shots which came from that man who was on the bridge, and that you say was shooting at you or the crowd? — A. Sir? Q. You beard and saw the shots which were fired by this man who was behind the post, and which shots were fired towards you and the crowd ? — ^A. Yes, sir, I saw that. Q. Very well. Now, you heard those shots ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you say you heard a shot in response to those shots ? — A. I did. Q. Well, was the shot towards the East Saint Louis side or did it come from to- wards the Saint Louis side? — A. I don't know, sir, where the shot came from; I can- not tell. Q. Did you see any other shot fired by the party who was with Mayor Joyce, ex- cept by this man behind the post? — ^A. Any other party ? Q. Yes, sir. — ^A. No, sir. Q. You say there were about how many men in your party besides the nine depu- ties ? — A. I didn't say how many there were ; I said that there were nine of the dep- uties besides the truckmen and the freight men ; I don't know how many there were of them. Q. Well, about ? — A. Well, sir, I don't feel disposed to make any guess, for I might guess wrong, and might guess right. Q. Well, there was several others besides the nine deputies? — A. Yes, sir; I sup- pose if you are a judge you know what it takes to run a freight house. Q. Were any of them armed? — A. No, sir; none of the freight men were aimed, but the deputies were there for the purpose of protecting these men ; that is what we were there for. Q. You saw none of those freight men armed ? — A. No, sir ; there were none of them armed. v Q. None of them picked up guns as they crossed over? — A. No, sir; I don't think they did. Q. How long had you been at work or been employed in the East Saint Louis yards (before this trouble occurred ?— A. How long had I been there ? Q. Yea, sir. — A. I carae there the 5th day of April. Q. The 5th of April ? — A. Yes, sir, and was sworn in on the 6th. Q. You came from Nashville there? — A. Yes, sir; I came from NashviUe, Tenn., -and was transferred by Maj. Jim Geddes. ' Q. When were you sworn in as deputy sheriff ? — A. I just said, sir, that I was sworn An on the 6th. By a Juror : Q. I understood that you were employed by the LouisvUle and Nashville Railroad ^Company as a switchman ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you also acted as deputy marshal at the same time ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You were acting as both ? — A. Yes, sir ; I was acting as both. Q. I believe you have stated that you didn't know the cause of your running over ■on this side to seek protection ? — ^A. I cannot understand you. Q. You stated, didn't yon, that you didn't know the actual cause that caused you 4o come over here seeking protection ? — ^A. No, sir; I said that we were pursued by the strikers in East Saint Louis, and that we came over here for protection. Q. Why did they pursue you? — A. Because we were protecting ourselves; they wanted us to quit work. Q. You done some shooting, didn't you? — A. Yes, sir; and they done some too. Q. You done some yourself too, didn't you ? — ^A. Yes, sir. JOHNvHAGUE, being duly sworn, testified as follows: Direct examination by Dr. S. L. Nidejlet, coroner: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. I reside in Chicago. Q. Were you employed as deputy sheriff in East Saint Louis? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When were you sworn in as deputy sheriff? — A. On the 6th day of April, sir. Q. What is your business — your occupation generally ? — A. Well, generally, I am a stone mason by trade. Q. Where were you sworn in as deputy sheriff? — A. Just down here in the yard. Q. In East Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think it is East Saint Louis. Q. In East Saint Louis ?— A. I don't know whether it is East Saint Louis or not, I am sure. 1 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 679 Q. Well, that is Saint Louis, and on the other side of the river is East Saint Louis. W^as it in East Saint Louis or Saint Louis T — A. Well, it was in East Saint Louis, then. Q. Did you come on from Chicago with the understanding that you were to bo «worn in as deputy sheriff? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you come from Chicago with that understanding? — A. No, sir. Q. How did you come to come to East Saint Louis ? — A. I was down South this winter. Q. You were down South ? — A. Yes, sir ; through the cold weather, and I came from there to Evansville. Q. How did you come, then, to East Saint Louis? — A. They sent me up from Evans- ville to East Saint Louis. Q. You were sent ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom t — A. I am sure I forget his name ; it was the man in the railway office at Evansville. Q. Then you were deputy sheriff on last Friday, were you ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you on the east end of the Saint Louis bridge at the time the shooting was ■done? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And which resulted in the death of a man ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, state to the jury what occurred on that occasion ? — A. Well, I was there when the shooting commenced, and I heard a shot go off ; I am sure I cannot tell where it came from. Q. Where were you at the time you heard the shot ? — A. I was standing down at the bridge. Q. Whereabouts on the bridge ; were you with this crowd of deputy sheriffs who were crossing over from East Saint Louis to Saint Louis ? — ^A. Yes, fix. Q. You were crossing over from East Saint Louis to Saint Louis? — A. Yes, sir; crossing on the bridge. Q. Coming over the Saint Louis bridge? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, state where you were and what occurred; make your own statement and I will question you afterwards. — A. We were coming over the bridge from the ware- house Q. (Interruptinf!;.) When yon say " we" do you mean the deputy sheriffs and the •crowd with them ?^-A. Yes, sir ; we came over the bridge from East Saint Louis, and there was some men who stopped us at the foot of the bridge. Q. Where ?— A. At the foot of the bridge. Q. In front of the ticket office ?^-A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, who was this man that stopped you ? — A. I am sure I cannot tell you ; I don't know their names. Q. How many men stopped you ? — ^A. I am sure I cannot tell you ; I didn't count them. ' Q. Were they there on the bridge at the time you came over, or did they come up afterwards f-^A. They were there when we came up. Q. They were there when you came over ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And when you got to the ticket-office you were stopped by these men on the bridge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many men stopped you ? — ^A. I am sure I don't know how many were there ; I can't tell yon. There was a lady there in the office at the left-hand aide with a child and package, and she called me in and said that she wanted to get away, and I told her that she had better stop inside or go right straight over the bridge and leave her package there. Q. Well, what occurred when they stopped you ? — A. When they stopped us the stout man told me to stop, and I stopped. I did not resist stopping, and I went in- side and talked with the lady Inside, and then came out again, and I believe I saw this stout man catch Mr. Hewlett. Q. Saw who ? — A. Saw the stout man on the bridge take Tiold of Hewlett. Q. Who is Hewlett ? — A. He is one of the deputy sheriffs. Q. Well, go on. — ^A. And Hewlett told him to let him go, and he told Hewlett that he couldn't cross over that bridge ; he said that he could protect us, and Hewlett told him that he couldn't ; that he was not able to protect us from all of that mob. Q. Hewlett told him that he was not able to protect you from that mob ? — A. Yes, fiir. And from that I started over the bridge with two rifles ; somebody dropped his rifle there, and picked it up and walked along right over the bridge. Q. With two rifles?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Winchester rifles ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, did you see any shooting or hear any shooting on the bridge ? — ^A. When we got along right over the bridge there was some one fired a revolver off and I be- lieve the revolver was fired three_ times from the pier, down on the left-hand comer, and then I heard the rifles fired but I don't know who fired them. Q. How many rifles did yon hear fired ? — ^A. I am sure I can't tell you that. Q. Two or three ? — ^A. I suppose there was that many. 580 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Yon didn't see -who fired them? — ^A. No, sir; I didn't see anything at all ahont it; I kept going alone to get out of the road. Q. Were they fired from the crowd ? — ^A. They must have heen because I don't know that there was any more rifles there. Q. Well, how many were there in your crowd ? — A. I am sure I can't tell you how many were in the crowd ; but there is nine in it now. Q. Nine deputy sheriffs in a very large crowd of other men? — ^A. No, sir; it wasn't such a large crowd of other men ; there were teams passing along the road. Q. Did you have anybody else with you except the nine deputy sheriffs? — A I don't think there was, sir. Q. Were there no truckmen with you ? — ^A. I cannot tell you that for I don't know those truckmen. Q. Then you were very much excited and can't tell? — ^A. No, sir; I can't tell be- cause I wanted to get out of the road ; of course it was the best way to not shoot if you could avoid it, and I thought I could get the rifles along with me and get out of the road. Q. You say it was rifles that were fired back ; are you sure it was rifles and not pistols? — ^A. I can't tell the difference between a rifle and'a pistol. I don't know whether it was pistols or rifles for I didn't turn to look back. Q. You say that there was some shooting done from this little offset on the left hand side of the bridge ? — A. Coming this way — yes, sir ; from the left pier. Q. Who was doing that shooting ? — A. I can't tell you that. Q. Was it any of the deputy sheriffs ? — A. No, sir; it was not the deputy sheriffs; the deputy sheriffs were farther up. Q. Did you turn to see who was doing the shooting ? — A. I turned around to loot, but I suppose I must have been two or three hnndred yards farther away. Q. And you cannot identify the person who was doing the shooting? — ^A. No, sir; I cannot. Q. Could you see the man who was doing the shooting ? — A. I could see soine man stoop behind the little pier in the corner, but I couldn't tell who he was. Q. Butyousawthatmandoingsome shooting, whoever he was ? — A. Yes, sir; he was shooting there. Q. Did you see him when he fell ? — A. No, sir ; I did not ; I think there were three shots went off from his pistol. Q. Who was this stout man who stopped you and wanted to arrest you ? Do yon know? — A. No, sir. Q. Didn't he state who he was ?— A. Well, I didn't hear what he said. Q. You say that you were being followed by a mob from East Saint Louis ?— A. Yes, sir ; they were following up the road, down behind the wagons. Q. Was this mob armed ? — ^A. I am sure I cannot tell you that, sir. Q. Well, why was the mob pursuing you? What were you trying to cross the bridge for ? — ^A. We were trying to cross the bridge to seek protection from the mob. Q. What was the cause of the mob pursuing you ? — A. Well, I suppose they fol- lowed us up on account of the case on the other side of the river. Q. Some shooting had occurred on the other side of the river ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see what this man was shooting with who was doing the shooting?— A. No, sir ; I was too far away to identify him as to what ho was shooting with. Q. 'This large man who was trying to arrest you ; did he have any person with him or was he alone ? — A. Oh, there was two or three more men around there ; I think there was some policemen around there, but I am not sure ; I cannot tell who was there and how many were there ; it is hard for me to say. Q. You say you were sworn in as deputy sheriff? — A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom ? — A. I am sure I don't know his name. Q. Have you the papers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Let me look at them ? (Producing papers and showing same to coroner.) Q. When you crossed the bridge whom did you surrender to; the police on this side t — A. Yes, sir ; we went and gave ourselves up at the police station. Q. You say that you didn't see this man who was doing the shooting fall ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. You never turned back after, you started over the bridge ? — A. No, sir, I never turned back. Q. Are yon sure that there was only nine men at the time you started from the other side ? — A. I cannot tell how many there were there. Q. You are not positive that there was not more than nine, are you ? — ^A. No, sir ; I am not ; there were more than nine, but I don't know how many came over the bridge ; there was some of them getting their dinner. Q. Were there only nine came over the bridge ?—^A. I am sure I cannot tell yon that ; there was nine in the police station. Q. Some of them skedaddled ?— A. Yes, sir; suppose they did. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 581 Q. Did you carry two rifles T — A. Yes, sir. Q. You had two rifles all the way over the bridge t— A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you aware that one of yonr deputies went to a certain stable in this city, changed his clothes, and left his deputy badge and reyolver there ? — A. No, sir. CHARLES KINSLER, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Direct ezamination by Dr. S. L. NrDEi.ET, coroner: Question. What is your name f— Answer. Charles Kinsler. Q. Where do you live f — A. In Saint Louis. Q. What number f— A. I live 1908 North 14th street. Q. What is your business ?— A. I am a miner. Q. Were you acting in the capacity of a deputy sheriff over in East Saint Louis T — A. Yes, sir. Q. When were you sworn in in that capacity ? — A. Sir t Q. When were you sworn in in that capacity?— A. I think it was the 5th of April ; I have my papers here. [Producing papers.] Q. You were sworn in by Sheriff Robiequett ? — A. Yes, sir ; ashort heavy-set man, with a gray beard. Q. Were you ou the east end of Saint Louis bridge on Friday evening when the shooting occurred there, which resulted in the death of a man ? — A. I was on a trestle, yes, sir — do you mean in East Saint Louis ? Q. Yes, sir; on the east end of the bridge ? — A., Yes, sir; I was on a trestle there ; I was pretty near the last man on the trestle tliere. Q. I mean the Saint Louis bridge ? — ^A. The Saint Louis bridge f Q. Yes, sir ? — A. Yes, sir; I was there too. Q. State to the jury all you know regarding the shootjng there? — A. Well, we came over the bridge with the intention — we didn't want to hurt anybody or kill any- body and we wanted to get across the bridge as fast as we could to give ourselves up, and when we came up there to the ticket ofSce Q. (Interrupting). On the east end of the bridge f — A. Yes, sir. When we came up there some of the men said, " Wait, all the men ain't up ; let us wait for them." Wo waited and the men came ; that was some of the hands that worked in the warehouse ; we waited until they got there, and here was a great big heavy-set man and another tall slim man ; he came rushing Q. (Interrupting. ) Who came rushing ? — A. This big fellow — those two taU men ; this heavy-set fellow I think was the mayor on the other side, from what they said, and this other tall fellow had kind of side whiskers on, and this heavy-set man said, " I want the leader of this crowd ; I am going to kill him ; " he ran nji to this man Hewlett then. Q. Is Hewlett one of the deputy sheriffs? — A. Yes, sir; he ran up to Hewlett and eaid, " I want the head leader of this crowd ; I am going to kill him ;" and he said, " I want you all to come back ;" and Hewlitt said, " We are willing to go back ; we are all willing to go back if you will go back and get the deputy sheriffs and the rest of the sheriffs and keep the crowd back; we are all willing to go back; we are not go- ing to run away," and we were not going to run away. At that time when he made the first^rab Q. (Interrnpting) When who made the first grab ? — A. This tall man, that man sit- ting over there [indicating Mayor Joyce] of East Saint Louis. Q. Go ahead. — A. He made a grab for Hewlett and grabbed the rifle away from one of the truck-hands ; Joyce had a revolver in one band while he grabbed at Hew- lett, and Hewlett stepped back, and as he done that the mayor raised up his rifle with ioth hands, and one of our men pulled it away from him as he was just pulling it ■down to shoot ; he took it away and then Joyce pulled a pistol out of his pocket, and Hewlett said to him, "Don't draw any pistol; you are liable to be killed; we don't want to hurt anybody ; we are willing to go back ; we ain't going to run away, but are going to give ourselves up, " and Joyce put his pistol back again, and at that some ether fellows came rushing up. Q. From which side ? — A. They were on the left-hand side, going over. Q. Some other persons came rushing up from what direction ? — A. From East Saint Louis, coming over toward Saint Louis, and at that Mr. Hewlett got loose and Joyce caught Mr. Frank — I forget his name now — this tall fellow ; he is a well-dressed man but I have forgotton his last name. Q. Laird? — A. Yes, sir; he caught hold of Laird there and choked him and Laird got away and we all run then. Then I turned around and the mayor handed this tall man with side whiskers a pistol and he came up to the first cut in on the bridge. Q. You mean that the man that the pistol was handed to came up to the first cut ■on the bridge ? — ^A. Yes, sir, he trotted up ; we were running, and he trotted up ,and got behind the lamp-post and fired ; me and Mr. Hewlett was pretty close to him ; we were about the last men : when the man fired the first shot I heard it, 'and 1 582 LABOE TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. turned around and saw the smoke and fire, and I stepped over on the side.of the bridge and returned the fire ; the man fired three times. Q. Yon say you stepped over where T — A. I stepped right over on the side of that post, and he had a pistol up and was firing the third shot when I fired. Q. You fired with your rifle ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, did you see the man fall ? — ^A, No, sir ; I did not see him fall. Mr. Hewlett reached over the baluster and aimed — ^reached away over — but did not fire. After this man fired the third shot another one of our party fired ; I am almost sure that another one of our party fired, but I don't know who it-was. Then after that we went along the bridge and didn't hear any more firing. There was a policeman right there and Mr. Hewlett said to him, " We want to give ourselves up to you for you to protect us," and the policeman said, "AH right." The policeman was on the Saint Louis side, and we went down to the station with him. ^ Q. Did you see this body in the morgue ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did yon ever see that man before f— A. Well, I might have seen him before, bat- do you mean before the day the shooting started ? Q. No, sir ; I mean on the day of the shooting. — ^A. Yes, sir ; I saw him there with the mayor. Q. Is that the man whom you recognized as the tall man f — A. Yes, sir. Q. With side whiskers and mustache ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is the man to whom the mayor handed his pistol t — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is the man who stepped up and done the shooting! — A. Yes, sir; he stepped behind the lamp-post and done the shooting. Q. You recognize him positively as that man ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. After the return of the fire upon this man who was doing the shooting, did he stoop down behind the lamp-post ? — A. Well, he was kind of stooping when he was jiring. Q. Ho was sort of stooping when he was firing ? — A. Yes, sir ; after the first shot I turned and saw the smoke there and he fired again, and, I made one step over towards the other side of the bridge and then I turned and fired. Q. How was this tall man dressed ? — A. He was dressed in kind of dark clothes. Q. What sort of a hat did he have on ?— A. I couldn't really say what sort of a hat be had on ; I didn't take that much notice. Q. Did he come up with this man when you called Major Joyce ? — A. Well, I couldn't say whether he came right with him or not, but when the tussel started there he walked over towards the mayor and tried to help him. Q. And you positively identified this body in the morgue as the tall man whom you have described ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. As having fired the shots ? — A. Yes, sir; as the man I am almost sure took the pistol from the mayor's hands and ran up to the lamp-post ; we were not very far from him. Q. Did you notice this man fall af-ter the return of the shots? — ^A. No, sir; I did not notice him fall. After I fired he fired the third shot, and he was no more than about firing that third shot when I fired and I turned the other way and went. Q. Then you did not notice the effect of your shot ?— A. No, sir; I did not see him fall. ) Q. Did you look back to see if he was still standing after the shot warred ?— A. No, sir; I did not. Q. Then you don't know whether he fell at once or not ? — A. Sir? Q. You don't know whether he fell at once or not after you fired the shots I— A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. You say there was another shot in addition to yours that was fired t — A. Yes, sir ; I am almost sure of it — well, I don't say that I am almost sure of it, but there was a little difference in my firing and the other firing ; it niight have been his shot, I don't know, but he was just firing the third shot when I fired ; I heard the other shot fired that I just spoke about, but of course I didn't see anybody shooting, and I couldn't swear to it ; I didn't see anybody do any shooting, but I heard the firing. Q. Then you didn't notice the effect of your shot at all ? — A. No, sir ; I did not see him fall. Q. You say that as soon as you fired the shot you turned and ran ? — A. Yes, sb— well, I .didn't just run, I walked fast ; I didn't run. Q. Did you notice anybody else in the crowd except the deputy sheriffs who were armed? — A. Well, there was some of the truck-men who picked some of the rifles up, but we waited at the ticket office until those truck hands passed. Q. How many, about, were there of those truck hands and employes who came over the bridge with you ? — A. Well, I couldn't really tell. Q. Ten or fifteen ? — A. Well, I don't know — somewhere about ten, I think ; I am not certain, though. Q. This lar^e, stout man ; did ho say who he was when he attempted to arrest yoa all ?— A. No, sir ; ho didn't say anything ; he only said, "I want the head leader of LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 583 this gang ; I want you : you will not go across the bridge alive ; I will kill every son of a bitch of you " ; he didn't say who he was, but I heard one man say afterwards that he was Mayor Joyce — I think that is the namcj if I am not mistaken. Q. You identify that large man who sat there upon the chair [indicating] as the man who caught'hold of Hewlett ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. This man who came in and sat on the chair there t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see the other man who came into the room here with him, just inow? — A. Yes, sir ; he came there too. Q. Was he dressed in uniform t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Ho was an of&cer, was he not f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he take any hand in the matter? — ^A. Sir. Q. Did he take any hand in the matter f — A. Well, not that I saw. Q. Where was this man who did the shooting at the time the pistol was handed to him T — A. Where was he standing ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. He was standing kind of on the side of the bridge — not right in the middle of the bridge. Q. Standing rather on the south side of the bridge? — A. Well, he was kind of standing more south than north. Q. How far was he from this little place where he did the shooting at the time the pistol was handed to him? — A. How far? Q. Yes, sir. — A. I can't really say how far, hut he had a little running to do until he got there. Q. Then as soon as this large man handed him the pistol he ran ? — A. He ran up into the first cut ; there are some seats there if I am not mistaken, and he got right be- hind a lamp-post there. Q. And where did this large man go ; did he go with him ? — A. No, sir ; he didn't follow him ; I don't know where he went to afterwards, but he didn't follow him, though. Q. How far were yon from this largo man when he handed this tall man the pis- tol? — A. I guess we were about as far as from here to about — not quite half a block. Q. Not quite half a hlock? — A. I don't think it was. Q. You distinctly saw this large man hand this tall slim man, who did the shoot- ing, a pistol ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You can't be mistaken about that ?— A. No, sir ; I cannot be mistaken. Q. Now, at the time yousaw this man whose body is in the morgne,how close were you to him when you saw him on the bridge, before the shooting? — ^A. How close? Q. Yes, sir? — A. Well, I was about somewhere around forty or fifty feet, I guess. Q. You were close enough to him so as to be positive as to his identiti' ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You cannot be mistaken about that ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did this man who did the shooting attempt to arrest anybody ? — A. Well, I don't know whether he attempted to arrest anybody or not but he kept on trying to help the mayor. Q. In what way ? — A. In trying to catch hold of some of our men. Q. Did he catch hold of anybody ? — A. Sir I y . Did he catch hold of anyhody ? — A. If I am not mistaken he caught hold of this — what is his name ? Q. Laird? — A. Yes, sir; Laird. Q. Did you hear him make any remark ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't hear him say a word ; he might have said something but I didn't hear it ; I was watching the mayor and Hewett more than anything else. ■ Q. You say that yon heard but two shots fired from your party in return to those shots which this man fired, who was killed? — ^A. Well, as I said before I couldn't just swear to who fired It, hut I heard another shot ; it kind of sounded to me like it was itom our party, but I couldn't swear to it because I didn't see the smoke or party who aimed. By a JuKOK : Q. Yon say that he fired two shots before you retaliated back ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You shot hack? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. After you shot back he shot the third time ?— A. No, sir ; he about fired the third shot when I fired ; I had aimed when he was just about to shoot, and he fired from his pistol and I saw the smoke, and then I fired. Q. You shot up in the air, I suppose, or down in the river ; you didn't aim at the man behind the lamp-post — or did you shoot at the lamp-post ? — A. Well, I guess I shot at him ; I shot in self-defense. ' . Q. When you first saw the mayor how many men did he h.ave in company with him ?— A. With him ? Q. Yes, sir?— A. Well, that is a thing I couldn't really say, as to how many he had with him. 584 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Was there more than this one man ? — A. This man came •with him, and there was some more. Q. And this man laying at the morgue you recognize as the man who had a pistol handed to him by the mayor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the mayor ask him to assist in arresting you ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't hear that. Q. Your name is Kinsler? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were yon the leader of the gang that day, as they call it?— A. No, sir; I was not the leader. Q. You are the one they style the cowboy, are yon not ? — A. Well, yes — I don't know how that came up ; of course that is not in this matter. MORRIS JOYCE, being duly sworu, testified as follows : Direct examination by Dr. S. L. Nidelbt, coroner: Question. What is your name ? — Answer. Morris Joyce. Q. Are you a resident of East Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember the shooting which occurred upon the east end of the Saint Louis bridge on Friday evening last? — A. Well, I didn't see it, althongh being there I heard the shots, and that is all I know about it. Q. You were not present at the time of the shooting ? — A. I was there in the meUe, demanding the surrender of those assassins, but they wouldn't adhere to my command, and 1 tried to hold them until some person would come to my assistance, so as to send them over here to Saint Louis and have them arrested ; that was my object in scufling with them there. I wanted to hold them long enough to send over here and have them arrested. Q. Be kind enough to state to the jury your recollection of the affair on the east end of the Saint Louis bridge on Friday last.— A. Well, the scuffle with me i^ of no value. You merely want to know something about the death of this man, I suppose. Q. I would like to know exactly how you came there, and so on. Just relate the whole circumstances to the jury. — ^A. Being informed by people over in East Saint Louis that these assassins had made their escape, and were on the bridge, with a de- termined determination to make their escape to Saint Louis, I put out after them on a dead run. They had almost half a mile the start of me, but still I caught up with them at the ticket office. I was jaded from running, and when I got there I was al- most powerless ; a child conld throw me over. I was out of breath, because I am under the impression that it is very nearly a mile of a run that I made, and being troubled with bronchitis, I felt tolerably well exhausted when I got up there and commanded those parties to surrender to me. I told them to surrender to me; that I was the mayor of East Saint Louis, and intended to arrest them then and there and hold them, and they told me that I couldn't give them the protection that they de- manded. I assured them that I could an^ that I would. I knew that I would because the populace was with me ; of course the deputies did not heed what I said, and when I saw that they would not, why, I caught two of them and held one in each hand. I was alone there to the best of my knowledge, and finally we had a rough and tumble scuffle there, during which I held on to them tolerably well ; I had a big scuffle with them and had to run around them, and in the mean time held those parties to keep them from shooting me. What occurred with the parties behind my back I cannot state ; I only watched those in front of me when they had their guns pointed at me and were trying to shoot me ; I moved around and kept out of their way at all times and in the mean time held on to one person in each hand, and I don't see how I was able to perform the feat I did ; I would take hold of one with the left hand and move him around like as if he was a straw and held him between the fellow, who stood behind him and was pointing his gun at me, I didn't see any- thing else ; I was a little annoyed and excited and trying to watch the man, and I dared not look to the right or left ; I only watched their guns, and I tried to steer aloof of their shots ; I couldn't see what transpired at my right, or even at my left: I had to keep steadily watching in front of me. About the deceased out here in the morgue, I know nothing. Q. You don't remember when he came up ? — A. No, sir ; I dou't know anything about him ; I don't know the man at all, or anything concerning him ; I didn't see him shot and don't remember anything about him. Q. Do you remember at any time during this scuffle of your getting in possession of a rifle? — A. No, sir; I was never in possession of a rifle for the simple reason that I would not let loose of my hold. I saw a statement from those assassins to that effect, and also to the effect that I gave that man — the deceased — a revolver or pistol. Gentle- men of the jury, I never carried a revolver, or pistol, or gun, or anything of the kind in my life. Q. You were not armed on that occasion ? — A. No, sir ; I use these arms that the Lord endowed me with. I have a tolerably warm temperament, and if I got into trouble 1 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 585 laiglit be apt to use arms if I carried' them, and therefore I don't carry them. If I had arms I most likely -would use them — I don't know whether I would or not, but perhaps I would, and it would be hard for them and perhaps hard for me, too. Q. You were not armed at all on that day ? — A. No, sir ; never in my life did I carry a revolver. Q. And you don't remember of having seen the deceased? — A. I might have seen him, but I don't know it ; I might have seen him, but I don't know the man or any- thing about him. Q. Do you remember of any of your officers coming to your assistance after you be- gan ? — A. Yes, sir ; there was a man with me who is with me here no w ; he was with me at all times, and of course he will give you his statement ; he hadn't had hold of any of those men ; it was only me that had hold of them, and I held one in each hand and demanded their surrender, and they were determined not to surrender and beat me over the arm ; I don't know what became of my hat ; I know I was bareheaded there. There is what we call a guard over on the bridge, dividing the railway from the foot road, and I could see a man there, because I turned my eye around a little ; it took about half a second to look behind me ; I was afraid to look behind me because I had to watch those in front of me at all times ; he stood on that guard when the other men interrupted him and stopped him from shooting me; he leveled that gnu of his and attempted to hit me in the head with it, and if he had struck me in the head most likely he would have out me in two. Q. Did you recognize the man? — A. No, sir ; it missed my head and struck me on the shoulder and paralyzed me, and that caused me to break my hold ; they beat me on the arms all around ; I don't hesitate a moment showing you where 1 hey beat me [witness here bares his arm to the shoulder and shows the jurya very large black and blue wound, which he alleged to have been received at the hands of some one or more of the deputy sheriffs J ; all that I wanted was to hold these assassins until they could be arrested on this side of the river, and if I had not made the attempt to do so they would have made their escape, as some of the others escaped and they are not known now and never will be ; I didn't like to see our people shot down in cold blood. Q. This pursuit by yourself of the deputy sheriffs was in consequence of some shoot- ing that they had done, was it not ? — A. Yes, sir ; they beat me and paralyzed my arm seemingly and I let loose my hold; I saw that one of the deputies wanted to get in a position to shoot me, and there was a coal team passing at the time and I jumped for the wagon tongue and got on the other side so as to have the load between him and me ; I believe that he would have shot me if it hadn't been for that. Q. That was one of the deputies? — A. Yes, sir; the fellow that had the gun. Q. This attempted arrest of these men on your part was in consequence of their having shot some citizens over in East Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir ; as I passed do^7n I saw those citizens lying dead in the streets. Q. Well, at the time you were attempting to arrest them was the crowd in .pursuit of them — ^how far was the crowd behind you ? — A. No, sir; there was no crowd after them at all, only people came up as spectators. It didn't matter how many there were of the crowd, however ; if I had the deputy sheriffs in my posession I knew that r would take them to Belleville safely if they surrendered ; of course I am filing no charge against them ; you exacted the proceeding from me and I gave it to you ; they have enough charges against them. Q. Then you were not armed that day ? — A. No, sir. Q. On that occasion do you remember of a man firing several shots from a iiistol into the deputy sheriffs ? — A. I don't know, sir ; I was a little embarrassed and was tolerably well tattered and torn — neck-tie, garments, and everything torn by these parties, and I had to get to the other side of the coal team ; there were any amount of teams there and I hid myself by putting the coal team betweei) them and me. Q. You don't remember of having heard any shots fired upon the bridge ? — A. I heard some shots fired but I didn't see them ; they were fired on .the south side, I be- lieve, and I got to the north side as soon as my hold broke loose. Q. Did you have any parley at that time with these deputy sheriffs on tbe bridge ? — ^A. I requested them tb surrender to me peaceably and that I would see them pro- tected, but they determined not to do so ; they were wild and under the influence of liquor — I know they must have been ; they were as wild as I have ever seen Indians in the Western country ; they had fully a half mile the start of me ; I saw a statement of theirs to the effect that I was drunk ; they had fully a half mile the start of me, and before they had covered the other half mile I was up to them, so you must know how drunk I was. That is a statement I saw made by one of those assassins. Now, I sometimes take a drink, and sometimes go two years without touching any, and it happened that that was one of the times that I did not drink. I never was drunk in my life but once, and that was a great many years ago. I can assure you, gentlemen, that I was no more drunk than you are now, and I presume you are not, as I had noth- ing in me to bo drunt on. They had killed our people, and I was a little annoyed at it, and I wanted to stop their flight. 586 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you see this man after he was shot, or were you still A. (Interrupting.) I passed on one side of the bridge, and I think I saw somebody in the hands of others, but I never stopped to look ; I wanted to get home, change my garments, and clean up a little ; I was worn out from excitement. Q. You were not aware then that anybody had been shot on that occasion ? — ^A. I know nothing about it ; I heard the shots, but I didn't see any person drop, and I know nothing abont the shooting ; I don't know whether the man was near me or half a mile away from me. By a Juror : Q. You passed on the streets, seeing these people laying dead, andyou were flying to put these parties under arrest who done the shooting f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And when you got there these men were about how far ? — A. Well, it was not quite a mile when I caught up to them from where they did the shooting. Q. Then when you caught np with them you had to watch them very carefully to keep them from sifiooting you f — ^A. Yes, sir. JOHN DOWD, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Direct examination by Dr. S. L. Nidbiet, coroner: Question. What is your name T — Answer. John Dowd. Q. Where do you reside ? — A. In East Saint Lonis. Q. Are you a member of the police force there f — A. Yes, sir ; I am one of the licensed inspectors. Q. Then you are not a member of the police department T — A. I am at the same time, but it is my business to attend to the licenses. I have the same privilege and power as the balance. Q. Were you on the east end of the Saint Louis bridge on last Frida y evening when the mayor attempted to arrest some deputy sheriffs who were fleeing from-East Saint Louis t — A. I was, sir. Q. Please relate to the jury what you saw on that occasion. — A. Do you mean the Eahokia bridge or the big bridge affair ? Q; I mean the East Saint Louis bridge. I have nothing in the world to do with anything except the East Saint Louis bridge affair. — A. Well, I believe it was about one or two o'clock at the time that me and the bridge watchman were talking to- gether. Q. At the ticket office ? — A. No, sir; but just at the incline where the teams go down and come up. We heard the shooting, and I ran down towards East Saint Louis and the shooting was being kept up. I didn't go far up the old dike tow.-^rds that saloon where they kept the fishing-poles before I met the mayor coming ag.iinst me. This was after the other shooting, and I asked the mayor where he was going, and he said that he was going to have all of these deputy sheriffs arrested. I saw those deputies turn into the L. and N. depot, and the ma.yor followed them in and I waited out- side until he came out, and then me and him started np again towards East Saint Louis, and we got an account that these men were going over the river. I started after them, and the mayor with me — I believe I was ahead of him — andwe got up to the approach of the ticket office, and there we caught them and demanded them to halt and come right square back to East Saint Louis and that we would see what was in this matter. Well, they declined to do so ; they said they would be mobbed if they did. I noticed the East Saint Louis city clerk there, and the mayor authorized the city clerk to go and clear the streets in order to get them clear while we were taking these men up ; they agreed to go with us at first. Finally they wouldn't have it and started around % circle, and they mayor caught one first in one hand and then another in another hand. Then all the deputies presented their guns, and one big tall man with a white handkerchief around his neck washeld by Mr. Joyce, especially, and also a little man with a black short coat on ; the big man pulled away, and as he did so he hauled up with the barrel of his gun and let the mayor have it on his shoulder ; I think he meant to hit him on the head, but I believe he struck him on the shoulder ; I was in the middle of them myself and was in for making peace, and I tried to coax them along, but they wouldn't have it. There was one big tall man in the crowd, and he was pointing his gun at Mr. Joyce, and I caught the barrel of it ; he was facing west, but whether it went oft' while I had hold of it I do not know. The tall black man was the first to fire, then the little man fired and then the big red fel- low fired, and so we all commenced to hunt our holes then. There were a few wagons passing and we jumped behind the wagons and held the teams there until they fired all they wanted to. I then followed them up to Saint Louis, and they were stopped at the end of the bridge. Q. At the time this firing was done you say that three of them fired ; how far away were they from you and the mayor f — A. They were as near to me .is any of these gentlemen [indicating]. LABOE TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 587 Q. Did they fire in tlie air? — A. No, sir; they didn't fire iu the air ; I couldn't tell you -what they fired at, for I was so excited ; I was watching the guns and was watch- ing nothing else. Q. Did they level their guns and seem to fire at anybody ? — A. They did level their guns and kept them turning all the time and motioning at everything and everybody. Q. And when they left you and the mayor and began going over the river, did you hear any shots subsequently ? — ^A. Yes, sir; there was a shower of them ; we had to hide alongside of the teams and hold the teams until they got through shooting at us — ^not only us but everything on the bridge, teams and all; that was pretty near the center of the bridge. Q. Are you acquainted with' this man whom you saw dead in the morgue ? — A. No, sir ; I never saw him in my life to my recollection. Q. You didn't see him at the time this trouble was going on on the bridge f— A. No, sir ; ihere were very few of them there except the bridge officials. Q. Did you see Mayor Joyce at any time with a gun or pistol in his hand ? — A. No, sir; he didn't have any pistol. Q. He had no pistol? — ^A. No, sir; nor I had none myself; it was a good thing for them that we didn't have one. Q. Then you didn't see Mayor Joyce hand the pistol to anybody ? — A. No, sir; he didn't have any ; he didn't speak to anybody but those deputies ; he didn't know any- body but those deputies. Q. Do you remember of seeing anybody at the first offset on the south side of the bridge shooting at these deputies as they weiit over? — A. No, sir. Q. You didn't see anybody there ? — A. No, sir. Q. You saw nobody shooting at them at all f — A. No, sir ; I don't think there was anybody shooting at them. Q. Did you see this dead man on the bridge on that day ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't, for 1 followed those men-up. Q. You are not aware then that anybody had been shot? — A. No, sir; there is a saloon-keeper over there by the name of Donigan ; he was on the bridge at the time. Q. Then you saw nobody shooting at the crowd? — A. No, sir; there didn't any- body shoot at that crowd. Q. Did you say the crowd returned the fire ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The crowd did the firing at the center of the bridge ? — A. Yes, sir ; nobody did the firing but them, and they satisfied themselves at it. Q. They fired quite a number of shots ? — A. Yes, sir ; I picked up some of the balls on the bridge, and have them ; here is one. [Producing ball.] Q. Who did they appear to be firing at iu the center of the bridge? — A. Everybody and anybody ; I don't think it was anybody in particular. Q. You say at the time the mayor tried to arrest several of them, and had hold of them, that there were three shots fired ? — A. When the first man he, collared got loose he hanled up with his gun and leveled it to the ground ; then another man came right over with his gun and was going to shoot him, and I caught hold of the barrel and told him not to do it ; then he turned west and shot ; then the big brown man shot, and then the little man shot, and then everybody shot. Q. In what direction did they shoot ; did they seem to be shooting at anybody in particular ? — A. I don't know whether they were shooting at anybody in particular or not, for there was nobody that I could see in the road, except these bridge men, and five or six deputies who cluimed that they were not a party to this crowd. Q. And you don't remember on that day to have seen this man who was killed, and who is now in the morgue ? — A. No, sir ; I didn't come back to see ; I just heard that there was one man killed when I came over here. By a JuKOK : Q. How many shots were fired in all ? — A. I couldn't tell you. Q. Was there more than three fired ? — A. Yes, sir ; fifty or sixty shots fired. Q. On the bridge ? — A. Yes, sir ; on the bridge ; I picked up some of the cartridge ^ells, too, and gave them away. Q. Yon stated that you saw this big red man level his gun andiire? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know who he was firing at ? — A. I don't know, anybody and everybody, even the teams ; we held the teams, but the teams crossed the bridge in spite of us ; . we couldn't hold them still. WILLIAM F. LAIED, being duly sworn, testified as follows : Direct examination by Dr. S. L. Nidelt, coroner : Question. What is your name ? — ^Answer. William P. Laird. Q. Where do yon reside ? — ^A. Here in Saint Louis for the past winter. Q. Whereabouts iu Saint Louis ? — A. I room at 308 South Fourth street. Q. What is your occupation ? — ^A. I h.ave been a ciious-bill poster. 688 LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You are at present commissioned as deputy sheriflf in East Saint Loifls 1 — A. Yes, sir; and special assistant to Hewlett on the Louisville and Nashville, and I waste- fore this trouble came up ; I quit the show business to go with him. Q. What capacity were you acting there? — ^A. I was acting as special deputy over there on the other side. Q. When were you sworn in as deputy sheriff f— A. On the 5th day of April. Q. Where were you living at the time that you sworn in as deputy sheriff ?— A. I was rooming over here. Q. Do you remember the shooting which occurred on the east end of the Saint Louis bridge on Friday evening last f — ^A. Yes^ sir. Q. Were you present at the time? — ^A. I was. Q. Were you one of the deputies who were making their way over on the bridge to this side t — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. State to the jury what yon saw of the occurrence on the Saint Louis bridge ; I want nothing else except which occurred on the Saint Louis bridge. — ^A. Well, as we got away and started across this way, this man — I will say iirst that I think I recog- nize the man in the morgue as the man who stood behind the lamp-post there and fired three shots from a revolver given him by a man that had big whiskers and a large man whom I afterwards learned was the mayor of East Saint Louis ; I saw this man, now in the morsrue, squat down, but I don't know whether he fell down or whether he was hiding there; I supposed at the time that he was trying to l>ide be- hind the railing and the lamp-post ; that was the first lamp-post this si On opening the abdominal cavity I found the ball had passed directly inwards and backwards through the ilium, shattering it completely, and lodged under the skin on the right natis, from whence it must have been abstracted, as'the incision at that point would indicate. There was also an incision made some two inches anteriorly to this cut, which I presume was made by the attending surgeon for the purposes necessary. There was also an accumulation of blood in the surrounding tissues, the result of severing the internal circumflex iliac artery, and no sign of peritonitis. Cause of death, hemorrhage and shock. JAMES C. NIDELET, M. D. Sworn and subscribed before me this 10th day of April, 1886. S. L. NIDELET, M. D., Coroner, Exhibit A. — Statement of cars handled in Atchison yard for the year ending April 1, 1886.' 1885. Apr. May. June. July. Ang. Sept. Oct. Kov. Deo. 1886. Jan. Feb. Mm. Total. Seceived from — East ■West North Forwarded — East West North Beceived from connecting lines Delivered to con- necting lines . . . Total 3,767 2,597 2,153 4,397 2,466 1,959 826 915 3,729 2,015 1,794 3,480 2,150 1 r- 3,843 2,653 1,919 4,020 2,543 1,975 929 2,325 1,538 3,650 2,168 1,1 718 818 3,239 2,594 1,687 2,i 1,620 871 719 4,749 2,760 1,714 •4,471 2,830 1,703 913 S36 4,489 2,804 2,f-- 5,057 2,810 1,711 1,824 1,140 6,171 2,873 l.i 5,222 3,076 ,1,873 887 6, 586 3,403 1,990 6,188 3,493 2,: 1,009 2,922 697 1,175 2, ,565 1,147 1,122 394 411 4,366 1,818 48,058 2,870 902] 28,493 2,100 . 598 21,423 4,978 2,359 2,073 680 19, 080 16, 399 18, 878 16, 149 16, 624 20, 076 22, 29g 21, 979 2S, 943 10,433 1, 5651 49, 262 1,002 28,41» 740 20,523 222 174 20, 084 7, 081 9,484 9,362 215, 024 * Also 58 locomotives and 596 freiaht-cars. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 599 Comparative statement of cars Tiandled in Atchison yard in March, 1885, and March, 1886. March, 1885. March, 1886. Decrease. Eeoeived ftom— East.. 5,330 2,627 2,428 4,735 3,224 2,719 763 660 1,818 902 698 1,665 1,062 740 222 174 3,512 1,725 West Iforth 1 830 Forwariecl— 3 170 West North • 2, 162 1,079 Eeoeived from coDQeoting lines'.-^ 641 486 Total 22,486 7,081 ! 15. im."; Exhibit B. -Statement showing average number of employh per month from October 1, 1885, to May 1, 1886. 1885. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feh. Mar. Apr. Average. Transportation department Fuel department Station agents, clerks, and operators Laborers and porterp, iteight and ticket offices Yard-masteis and switchmen . .' Train-masters and despatchers Passenger conductors '2 Passenger brakemen and porters Freight conductors I Freight brakemen Emploj-^a superintendent's office Machinery department. Superintendent's motive power and cars Machinists Engineers and firemen Wipers and hostlers "Watchmen Laborers -- Other employfis Car department Carpenters and painters Car repairers Laborers i Maintenance of way, Eoad-masters and laborers on permanent way. Conductors, foremen, and laborers, work trains. Other employes 503 29 434 30 .310 23 1 254 23 149 16 1 100 5 15 83 36 36 4J 9 16i 18 4 30 91 29 1 19 30 8 25 19 25 4 5 204 288 18 1 i Total . 1,106 1,042 Exhibit C. f Secret circular. The Journal's cowardly attack upon business men. Driven to the wall. They send an anonymous circular to the business men of Kansas City and vicinity.] An anonymous secret circular h.is been sent out in tlie interest of tbe rat Journal to the business men cf tbe city. It is as fallows : To business men, purchasers of merchandise, citizens of Kansas Cily and vicinity. Ton are all presumed to be interested in the gro-n'tli of the city, its representative institutions, and yon know, or ought to know, that you do well when others do well ; that you cannot flourish at the unjust expense of others ; nor do you believe that 600 LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND .WEST. others should flonrish at your expense by catering to your enemies, submitting, or appearing to submit, to a class demand, founded upon a principle of " rule or ruin," _ avowedly for tbe extirpation of all who have manhood enough to resist their domi- nance. You are aware that a boycott has fortoouth? been declared, by utterly irresponsible elements, against the Journal and all who advertise in it or subscribe to it. The sanctity of your homes has been invaded by the apostles of secret leagues ; your busi- ness threatened ; your personal liberty has been sought to be curtailed by an irrespon- sible set of men, who only abstain from violence from fear of law, boasting that they could thus prosecute an infriugemeut on your natural and moral rights, provided they did not go so far as to place themselves ameuable to the terrors of criminal law. None but those with criminal intent bound their acts by the limits of the law. Hon- orable, moral men are governed by considerations of right, fairness, and justice, not by fear of the law. The latter is for the restraint of would-be criminaJs, and only those having criminal intent have occasion to sc[uare their conduct by such restrain- ing law. Do you want to range yourselves with these and abet their schemes? Do you know that by accepting and acting upon the demands of this class yoa be- come an active agent in their hands to abridge the rights of your neighbor in busi- ness? Do you wish to be known as abetting an infamous crusade against any class of busi- ness in Kansas City and take the consequences ? . ! Do you know that he who lends his influences to such purposes, subversive of the rights and fair fame of his neighbor, destructive of rightful business freedom, there- by proclaims himself an enemy of all the business interests of this city ? Do you know that when you have thus become an ally to the boycott you cease to have a partnership in the general interest of the city's business, cease to have any right to expect the trade of any but your allies, the boyootters? , Do you know that every workingman who, from that very cause, declines to place his labor and his manhood at the dictation of sundry organizations is black-listed by these organized usurpers? Usurpers of others' rights in every sense, their manhood, their independence. Do yon know that these unorganized wage-workers outnumber the organized four- fold, and not one of them, to be true to himself, can or does stand in with the boy- cotters, hence with you ? Do you know that many are desirous of having the names of all firms who so far forget themselves as to boycott their fellow business men, in order that they may give their trade to men of principle — men who refuse to be made partners in an association for the destruction of their neighbors' business? Such is the fact. These names will be given, and the boycotters will thus be boy- cotted. Many responsible persons have asked, that such a list be prepared, in order that they may shun, and, by their influence, they may induce others to shun, the enemies of our city's trade. Such retaliation is in perfect accord with every element of human nature, in accord with nature's first law — to which all statute laws are subordinate. First, examine The Boycotter's list of advertisers. All these are assistant boycot- ters — helping in the destruction of some part of your business men. You will find a long list of readymade clothing dealers, as follows : Houghton «fe Herrick, Sixth and Main streets. C. D. Axman, Golden Eagle Clothing House. W. W. Morgan & Co., 1009 and 1011 Main street. H. Ganz & Brother, 905 Main street. Great Eastern Bankrupt Clothing Company, 17 West Fifth street. Kahn & Schloss, corner Missouri avenue and Main street. Remember, all those deal in goods made by the cheapest of cheap labor. All the above have advertised themselves, "hence the public know where they stand. Do you want to aid the boycott? Then trade with them. Watch the Boycotter each week, copy all names. Call on any of your friends who may be boycotted, and make up your list from their reports. Meet organized wrong by organized right. See that the boycott is made to operate as the two-edged sword that it is ; use it effectively, but only in retaliation, to let panderers to a bad principle see how it re- acts. Act upon the motto, "An injury to one is the concern of all," so far as it applies to this guerrilla warfare upon your fellow business men. See that your barber, baker, and all whom you patronize are free from the reprehen- sible practices of discrimination against men pursuing honorably an honorable busi- ness, and if he will not reform, give him his own medicine. LEX TALIONIS. Compare the above with the two letters on another page, emanating from the Journal. LABOR TROUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. 601 Exhibit D. Kansas City, Mo., February 22, 1886. To the joliolesale husinesa finhs of Kansas City : Gentlemen: We desire to call your attention to the existing diffleiilty iDetween the Kansas City Journal and the Knights of Labor, the cause being a strict boycott by the Journal for three years past against the Typographical Union and Knights of Labor. The Jourual Company cannot but admit that they have never at any time until this boycott against them was inst itnted, in September last, had trouble of any kind with the International Typographical Union. The trouble had was with indi- viduals who did not at the time of trouble belong to the union, and who acted indi- vidually, and without the knowledge of the International Typographical Union. Hence the Journal Compahy could not consistently refuse union men employment. They do refuse employment to those who have never done aught detrimental to the interest of the Journal Company, and as an order organized for the protection of our piembers, we declare their action in this matter unjust and unmanly, and consider ourselves justified in the action we have taken in boy cotfing that paper until it ceases to discriminate against Typographical Union men and Knights of Labor. Having thus briefly stated these facts we wish to say : You will take notice that there is now, and will continue to be, until the Journal Company comes to terms with the District Executive Board of the Knights of Labor, a boycott against that paper and all of its advertisers. We have no desire to iojure any man but the one who has wronged US, yet those who stand between us and our enemy cannot blame us if they receive the full measure of the blow intended for the Journal after having been fairly warned to stand aside. We earnestly request all wholesale merchants to withdraw their pat- ronage from that paper until a^ settlement of this diflSculty is reached. A list of all names of wholesale firms whose adver'jsemeut appears in their columns after March 1, 1886, will be sent with an order of boycott to over five hundred and twenty local assemblies of the Knights of Labor, and recommended to over two hundred local trades anions, to boycott any merchant in their city or town purchasing goods of any firm on the list sent. These assemblies and trades unions are located in all pros- perous towns and cities in the States of Kansas, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, aiid Texas. Several hundred merchants in these States are members of our order, conseqaently you will see that the boycott would prove disastrous in that ter- ritory to a boycotted firm here. We wish to avoid this if possible, and sincerely hope the necessity of this act may be averted. The assemblies named are boycotting the Journal as a paper, and having reduced its circulation more tlian one-half, its influence as an advertising medium is gone iu consequence of the antagonism against it. We trust this win receive fair consideration at your hands, and that you will accede to our request. Very respectfully, [SEAi.] District Assembly No. 107, Knights of Labor. Exhibit E. ouK cause of action. As stated in the first n umber of The Boyootter, onr cause of complaint against the Journal is based alone on the refusal of the managers of that paper to allow members of the Typographical Union, whether Knights of Labor or not, to work in that office. In assuming this position the Journal has arrayed itself against every labor organi- zation in the city, by denying to them the same privileges of organization for mutual protection which it claims — by being itself connected with one of the greatest monopo- listic corporations of the world — to belong fco capital. We do not dispute the Joarnal's right to employ whom it pleases. We insist, however, that we, as an organization of workingmen, depending upon our day's earnings for the sustenance of ourselves and families, have an equal right to combine in wiuiholding and inducing others to withhold their patronage fi:om that paper and those who continue to patronize it, until the justice of our demands are recognized and union printers and Knights of Labor employed in that office. 602 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Exhibit P. , [The Misaonri Pacific Eailway Company, leased and operated lines, and Texas Pacific Railway Com- pany.— Circular.] Office of First Vice-Pbbsident, Saint Lovis, March 15, 1885. The following suggestions have been presented to the undersigned as a solution of the difficulties at present impeding the operation of these railroads : " To Capt. B. S. Sayes, First Vice-Fresident and Chief Executive Officer of The Missouri Pacific Bailway Company and associated roads : "Whereas on account of the strike among certain of the employes of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company in the States of Missouri and Kansas, resulting in the stop- page and cessation of all freight traffic over said company's lines in said States, to the great detriment of the business interests and rights of the people of said States, and the continuance of which endangers the public peace and the safety of the company's plopertv; and, " Whereas the undersigned, representing the two States named above respectively, anxious to restore harmonious relations between the said company and its said em- ployes, and to restore to the public the unobstructed use of said lines of railroad, do recommend and request said company to restore to its striking employes in Missouri and Kansas the same wages paid them in September, 1884, including one and one-half price for extra time worked; and to restore all said striking employes to their several employments without prejudice to them on account of said strike. . " Believing that the foregoing will constitute a just and fair settlement, we recom- mend their acceptance by the striking employes, as well as by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. "Dated Saint Louis, Mo., March 15, 1885. " John A. Martin, Governor of Kansas. I "John S. Marmadukb, Governor of Missouri. "L. L. Turner, Almerin Gillett, Jambs Humphrey, Railroad Commissioners of Kansas. " Geo. C. Pratt, James Harding, W. G. Downing, Railroad Com- missioners of Missouri. "B. G. Boone, Attorney-General of Missouri. "J. C. Jamison, Adjutant-General. " Oscar Kochtitzkt, Commissioner of Labor Statistics and Inspec- tion." With a desire to concur with the recommendations expressed above by State offi- cials, and to open the usual avenues of commerce, and with a spirit of amity and harmony towards the employes of these companies: Thi^ is to give notice that the rates of wages and terms above specified will go into effect on Monday morning, March 16th inst., and be in effect from and after that date. Hereafter said rates will not be changed except after thirty days' notice thereof, given in the usual way. E. S. HAYES, First Vice-President. Office of Third Vice-President, Saint Louis, Mo.,, March 15, 1885. Heads of departments to which the above applies will act in accordance with the pioyisions of the above circular. H. M. HOXIE, Third Vice-President. Exhibit G. No. 802 Pine Street, Room 4, Saint Louis, May 22, 1885. H. M. HoxiE : Dear Sir : We, the undersigned general committee, representing the employes of the Missouri Pacific, leased and operated lines, and the Texas and Pacific Railroad, now in supreme council, respectfully present to you for your approbation the following : (1) That it would be to the interests of both the company and its employes not to order or allow any reduction in either wages or force, substituting therefor a reduc- tion in hours worked, should the management find it necessary to reduce operating expenses. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 603 , (2) That September, 1884, rate of wages be paid for same class of wort, wKether done by same man or another. (3) That all engines and car works be done as mnch as possible on the same road and division to which it belongs, so as to furnish work for the forces now employed at the various points. (4) That no man in any position or department be discharged nntU after charges are preferred against him by his superior of&cers, and such charges be investigaited , by another o£Scor of the local grievance committee and one other chosen by him. ' (5) That when charges are so preferred the man may be suspended (pending the investigation), and if charges are sustained his discharge to date from the time ol his suspension, but if charges are not sustained he shall be reinstated. (6) That the manager on behalf of the conjpany and this committee on behalf of the employes pledge ourselves to mutually work for the best interests of these lines of roads, believing as we do that all our interests are mutual, and that it is neceajary at all times that the company should earn more than running expenses, so as la be able to pay a fair remuneration for services rendered. Sincerely hoping this may meet your approbation, we remain in session untO six o'clock this p. m., at which time we demand a positive answer. J. W. FITZSIMMONS, Chaimum. N. M. LOVIN, WM. QUAELES, ROBERT HANSOM, D. G. JOHNSON. Exhibit H. Saint Louis, May 25, 1885. To all superintendents : > This confirms my message to you of even date. "Mr. Fitzsimmons and a committee were here last week, conferring on some ques- tions of which 1 will more fully advise you by letter, and I have, this morning, tele- graphed Mr. Fitzsimmons as follows: " ' According to promise made you on Saturday, I advise that we will strictly en- force the provisions of the circular of first vice-president, dated March 15, 1885. " 'In the shops, and wherever it may be practicable, we wiU. reduce the hours of work instead of reducing the force, whenever the necessity arises ; that whenever any employ^ believes that he has been unjustly discharged he may make a statement of his case in writing to the superintendent of the road on which he has worked, who will promptly investigate and reinstate him, if wrongfully discharged. " 'It is believed that the interests of the company and the employes are identical, and the management earnestly desire the hearty co-operation of all employes in the efficient and economical administration of the properties under its charge, to the end that the fullest development of its capabilities may be brought about, and work may be given to all, under conditions in every way satisfactory. "•H. M. HOXIE, \ " ' Third rice-President.' "Ton will, therefore, see that no reduction in force in the shops is made, and will consult with me before making any reduction in the hours of work, and I also advise that you make no change in the men's wages, or class men's wages, without first get- ting permission from this office. "H. M. HOXIE." To which I have just received the following from J. W. Fitzsimmons, chairman of the grievance committee: "SbDaija, May 25, 1885. " H. M. HoxiB, Saint Louis, Mo. : I "Yours of even date received. We thank you for favors shown, and hope there will be no more use for us as a grievance committee. We believe that all are satis- fied with your message, which we will cause to be printed and posted in each shop on the system. "Very respectfully, " The Committee, "J. W. FIZSIMMONS, » "Chairman." 604 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ' Saint Louis, May 25, 1885, To Superintendents : I also inclose herewith for your information copy of the letter of grievances as pre- sented to me Jjy the grievance committee, by J. W. Fitzsimmons, chairmaa, to which the foregoing is an answer. • „„„^„ ^ ^ . H. M. HOXIE, Third Vice-President, HBEBIlSr, CUMMING, VAN DTNE, HAGEE, FaGAN, Exhibit I. — The Missouri Paoifio Railway Company— leased and operated lin^s. [Statement of average daily wages paid.] B. & B. Mach. Car. Total. Stations. Total Misaonri Pacific Eailway : February, 1886 ., September, 1884 Saint Lonis, Iron MoTintaiii and Southern : February, 1886 September, 1884 Missouri, Kansas and Texas Bailway : February, 1886 September, 1884 .-... International and G-reat Iforthern Eailway February, 1886 ,. September, 1884 C.B.tr. P. Eailway: February, 1886 September, 1884 February, 1886. 1.'. September, 1884 $193 1 85 1 95 1 88 1 81 1 83 2 24 2 21 2 02 2 04 $1 98 1 93 1 93 1 91 2 09 2 06 2 11 2 10 2 08 1 94 $2 06 2 01 2 07 1 98 $1 99 1 94 1 94 1 90 2 02 1 98 2 16 2 14 2 07 1 96 $180 1 79 1 80 1 79 • 1 75 1 84 1 97 1 98 1 63 1 67 $191 1 87 1 87 185 1 90 1 92 2 07 2 07 1 83 1 82 1 99 1 95 2 02 1 98 2 01 I 97 *1 81 1 82 1 92 1 90 * Agents' salaries based on commissions on tickets ; February, 1886, sales 25 per cent, less than Sep- tember, 1884, sales. ExHtBiT J. — Comparaiive statement of average wages paid iy the Wabash, Saint Lotds and Pacific Bailway, Texas and Saint Louis Eailway, Illinois and Saint Louis Bailway, Sates- ville and Brinkley Railroad, Arkansas Valley Boute, Gape Girardeau and Southwestern Bailway, Saint Louis, Alion and Terre Saute,Bailroad,Vandalia lAne, Kansas City, Saint Joseph and Council Bluffs Railroad, Chicago and Alton Bailroad, and average wages paid by the Missouri Pacific- Bailway Company, leas'ed and operated lines, for the follow- ing classes of labor : 1 Rate per day, other roads. Eate per day, Missouri Paciflo. Increase. Decrease. Bridge-wnd hnUding department $2 62 2 00 1 75 1 40 1 00 2 65 3 00 2 10 2 50 2 50 3 15 2 00 2 00 1 95 1 40 95 $3 25 2 25 $0 63 25 - 1 40 1 51 2 68 2 00 2 40 2 35 2 35 3 05 2 10 2 10 2 10 1 69 1 41 51 3 Pump repairers $1 00 Tinsmiths - 30 W Masons 15 Transportation department. ' 10 10 10 15 29 46 TTard switchmen Flagmen and crossing watchmen LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 605 Exhibit J. — Comparative statements of average wages paid ly the Wahash, Saint Loui» and Pacifie liailway, ^c. — Continued. Bate per day, other roads. Kate per day, Miasouri Pacific. Increase. Decrease. Loctmiotive and car department. Stationary engineers and firemen Laborers Foremen and gang bosses Machinists Machinists' helpers Machinists' apprentices Blacksmiths Blacksmith helpers : Blacksmith apprentices Boiler-makers Boiler-makei-s' helpers Boiler-makers' apprentices Brass molders Bra.ssmolder helpers , Brass molder apprentices Iron moldei's Iron molders' helpers Iron molders' apprentices Tinners , Tinner helpers Tinner apprentices .^ Coppersmiths ... -./... Coppersmith helpers Coppersmith apprentices Carpenters Carpenter helpers Carpenter apprentices ./. Hostlers Dispatchers i "Wipers .' Coal heavers , Painters } Painter helpers , Painter apprentices ^ Car inspeotors Car cleaners — Trnck repairers Cabinet-makers Upholsterers TJpholsterers' helpers Upholsterers' apprentices Pattern-makers Pattern-makers' apprentices Callers Section foremen . Section laborers . Jioad department. $1 80 1 15 3 05 2 40 1 65 1 05 2 75 1 60 1 05 2 65 1 65 1 00 2 75 1 45 2 40 1 65 1 05 2 20 1 25 1 10 2 85 2 50 1 60 1 10 1 80 2 10 1 75 1 30 2 00 1 35 1 10 2 00 1 75 1 95 2 75 2 00 1 10 2 85 47 50 1 15 $3 35 1 50 3 23 2 62 1 65 1 42 2 65 1 67 1 12 2 65 1 70 1 47 3 00 1 50 85 2 62 1 75 1 12 2 75 1 75 1 25 2 75 1 75 1 00 2 50 2 95 1 65 1 42 2 62 1 75 1 00 2 50 1 75 2 00 2 85 2 72 1 15 65 2 65 55 1 50 52 50 1 25 $1 65 35 18 5 00 10 $0 10 10 'io Thia statement is based on figures taken from February pay-rolls, 1886. Exhibit K — Summary of lu^iness perfoiined from March 29 to April 28, 1886, inclusive, as compared with the same period dwring the year 1885. Tear. Trains moved. Tear. Loads moved. 1885 . ... 7,843 7,746 1885 124, 888 1886 -- 1886 126,230 • 97 1,343 • 606 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Exhibit L. — Statement ahowmg the number of men employed In/ the Missouri Pacific Bail- xoay Company, at Sedalia, on March 6, 1S86. Clerks and train dispatchers Gondactois Engineers Baggagemen, brakemen, porters, and callers Firemen Number. 25 70 95 184 95 Car department Motive power £oad department Yard masters and switchmen. Total Nnmbar, 158 32 37 925 Exhibit M. — Statement of total force in shops on March 6, 1886. Machinery department: Car department. Saint Louis 278 277 92 237 Sedalia 158 40 Otner points .. 40 20O 102 144 131 258 128 17 Atchison.... 52 Palestine 90 Denison. ....|..... 58 De Soto 137 39 Total 1,610 868 Exhibit N. — Statement of pay-rolls from April, 1885, to February, 1886, inclusive. Months. 1885. April May Jane JdIj Angnst September Ootober ISovember December 1886. Jannary Febmary ....... Missonri Pacific Kailway. $226, 227, 237, 223, 231, 216, 635 10 323 34 676 74 694 6ti 199 61 664 06 278 17 978 36 775 59 203, 982 46 195, 357 30 Saint Louis, Iron Moun- tain and Southern Ballway. $181, 961 37 182, 799 62 176, 148 47 177, 771 91 189, 066 79 187, 572 10 190, 618 54 187, 061 75 184,313 86 177, 909 58 172,828 81 Missouri, Kansas and Texas Bailway. $191, 687 98 193, 439 44 204, 392 48 198, 474 74 214, 274 62 214, 709 04 219,085 18 219, 750 93 196, 697 29 183, 692 25 173, 564 64 Interna. tional and Great Northern Bailroad. $93, 649 44 97, 941 61 102, 300 68 97, 132 58 106, 092 57 108, 883 79 120,017 37 123, 499 96 117,617 52 113, 251 86 102,033 90 Chicago, Burlington and nnion Pacific Bailroad. $55, 162 17 55, 607 82 66, 254 29 54, 585 01 57, 105 23 58,627 25 68,756 77 57, 451 26 51,656 00 52, 189 20 44,202 95 TotaL $749,096 06 757, 111 83 766, 772 66 751, 658 90 797, 738 82 804, 456 24 826,756 03 821,742 26 767, 060 26 731,028 35 687,987 60 Average monthly pay-iolls from April, 1885, to February, 1886, inolnsive, aay U months.. $769, 219 00 NoTl.— The above flgnres do not include the generU offige rolls. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 607 ExbxbitP.— Arreitaaocount of striJce, March, 1886. CaQBO. t o ^' 1 i 1 Bi'eaoli of peace &o - 40 38 18 1 "'hi' 4 3 38 2 96 92 Kemoving rails 4 Assaolt to kill .^ 1 4 1 8 32 28 1 Wrecking trains j^ - g 32 Assaalt and battery 2 1 1 4 2 3 10 2 2 33 3 3 Violating Iqjnuotion 6 16 2 Killiiie enerines 1 3 Trospaasmg .. 7 21 16 2 7 21 Attempt to kill , 18 Criminal libel j 2 6 11 6 11 191 40 66 63 360 Exhibit Q. March 3, 1886—12 o'clock, noon. Martin Irons, , Chairman Executive Committee K. of L., Marshall, Tex.: I am extremely anxious to bring about a settlement of the railway trouble in Texas, and at the earliest opportunity will exert my influence in the utmost to bring about this settlement. The Texas and Pacific Railroad being in the hands of a receiver, any action on my part just now would be regarded as an intrusion and be resented as offensive. W. KERRIGAN. Exhibit R. State of Missouri, City of Saint Louis, ss. The State of Missouri, to the sheriff of the city of Saint Louis, greeting : We command you to summon : J. J. McGarry, M. H. Palmer, Patrick J. Nolan, John B. Williams, P. Hemlich, Terman Maher, A. Taylor, Charles Hackman, S. Col- lins, John Hoffman, J. Buch, F. Frazer, N. 8. Windley, M. Kiley, Thomas Smith, James Carey, J. Hughes, M. Pollard, P. Murdoch, J. Collins, B. Tree, J. McTighe, M. Morris, A. Miller, W. McDermott, P. Fiedler, Charles Reismaoher, W. Alexander, C. Palmqnist, F. Lansberg, B. Mueller, A. Larkin, A. H. Gehan, J. Cass, J. Lastafra, N. N. Cook, J. Kettby, 0. C, Fischer, T. Metteraman, H. Walther, O. Harronn , F. H. Setzer, H. J. Williams, J. Creissen, I. J. Johansen, F. Breen, J. Him- shausen, I. H Nolan, A. Meltz, J. Finnigan, H. H. Williamson, W. Benson, F. Soiith, O. Barton, J. Bums, C. Creed, J. H. R. Thornton, Jos. Nutt, A. F. Krentzer, A. Miller, W. Lonergan, A. M. Meyer, J. Kreutzer, James Scanlan, J. Sagel, J. Crane, E. L. Bouchard, Joe Bouchard, P. Frazer, W. T. Tredway, W. Schild, J. Murphy, J. Motherway, H. Bushell, J. Zimmerly, E. Wilbert, Thos. Hewitt, James Alexander, W. F. Teller, A. Thickett, J. B. Borracque, E. Arterburn, H. C. Taylor, Geo. Tucker, D. Brannigan, F. O. Hultman, E. Christy, T. Breitenburger, A. VanWormer, C. A. Burdick. E. Schrader, J. Eincaid, P. Sack, A. Whitley, C. E. Lasher, F. Haslup, E. Simmonds, C. Weber, John Kasper, L. Wonahan,R. Hogan,L. Spring, E. Harris, A. Weatherby, A. Darroche, P. Heimlich, C. F. Brothers, 6. Hulbert, J. Quinlan, W. Strief, H. Stange, James Mitohel,jr.,A. Bosch, F. A. Thomas, P. Wendell, A. Sohl, P. Galvin, Ed. Bickelhaught, G. Ehlen, A. J. Sherb, W. McGee, John Neeley, W. Knight, T. Riley, B. Lawler, E. Stewart, John Hogan, D. M. Kerr, John Low, M. Glenn, T. Huiskes, J. Bruce, E. Costello. Joe Stadt- miller, D. Neeley, T. Barton, A. J. Bell, John Vaughau, O.Evans, T. B. Duffy, W. Rob- erts, L. Kennedy, H. Burns, Geo. Meyers, W. Brown, H. Farrell, W. McAdams, W. Nick- o08 , LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. els, Thos. Mercer, C. Hnlbert, C. Hopkins, J. E. Murray, G. Wesser, J. Green, G. Grace, J. Donnelley, S,.Allbright,Jas. Carter, G. Galvin,Jaa. Durphy, T. Masher, M. HaTriug- ton, G. Riley, J. Wiokham, C. Killen, John Canton, D. Galvin, W. Berry, G. BucMey, W. McKenna, John Barrett, W. Shea,W. Lacey, J. E. Killen, J. Corcoran, T. Burns, M. Brennan, M. Gates, J. Callahan, W. Wilson, H. Kahn, T. O'Brien, G. Wilson, J. Wasmnth, A. Chapman, J. Doyle, B. Nelson, L. P. Newport, J. Burke, T. Falvey, H. Lesmeister, H. Barmann, C. Bouck, J. Burk, J. Kennedy, W. Gilbert, J. Hop- kins, sr., A. Zeigler, P. Bouck, J. Hiser.H. Read, W Gannon, J. Cravens, A. Gil- bert, John Deininger, George Arrowsmith, J. Steinrauff, A. "VYilson, W. Meyer, C. J. Fisher, J. Riley, Jb'. Meyers, J. S. Gannon, J. Everett, M. Clements, J. Neeley, C. Kelly, L. Hanlon, A. Veass, P. Brown, G. Kollmeier, J. Chippendale, J. Minder- man, T. Gates, J. McCloskey, T. Bain, J. Fitzsimuions, J. Weber, H. McFarland, J. Stall, H. Dalilbruger, H. Meyers, W. Hawkins, F. Felownes, J. Shaugh- nessy, F. Shelly, G. Geahrman, J.' Dyas, H. Rattler, George Ruse, H. Kitzinger, Ben Olliger, Ben Drisser, J. Burohner, C. Hallbauer, J. KroU, John Worheide, Jacob Myers, Joe Joquin, H. Hallbauer, Geo. Ottman, J. Harvey, Patrick Lynch, Patrick Riley, H. Shoemaker, William Fuller, James Lewis, A. Taylor, F. Brunning, E. Hogan, C. Birk, M. R. Fay, A. Boardman, M. Kerwin, H. Kasper, J. Bruce, P. Boiler, James Kane, H. Sparling, Dan Barton, W. L. Lewis, Fred Feisler, Otto ^Shoeuky, Chas. Skinner, Aug. Langenohl, Jacob Johnson, E. Moritz, A. Nord, A. Mod- eching, J. Kanath, F. Fitzler, John Zimmerly, Fred Zimmerly, Jacob Zimmerly, J. Cain, J. Hoffman, A. Buedkamp, Richard Walsh, Ernest Mueller, Jas. Mihn, J. Man- gan, John Eies, Joe Skinner, J. Sienner, J. Heulle, J. Kreitmann, M. H. Hermer, John Pavers, P. L. Fen wick, L. Rayott, J. B. Williams, C. W. Knott, A. Waters, S. H. Lindsay, E. H. Carr, J. W. Van Wormer, B. Fligh, C. Mason, M. Hyatt, F. Soldenlio- gen,F. ri;eimuth, sr., Jas. Hughes, M. Hambleton, Wm. Pyatt, G. Chapman, Henry Dahn, Thos. Knox, P. McEnnauy, J. McGrane, C. Reichman, J. Vien, J. Corroll, W. McNamee, P. McGrane, W. Huey, J. Mastin, E. W. Barton, G. Hazenfatz, B. Mc- Court, Thos. Walsh, S. Mastin, R. Wallace, John Smith, C. Harney, William Wilson, William Shea, D. Hazenfatz, A. Strabbler, W. Eiley, J. W. Jamison, Patrick Kane, sr., William Mercer, William Helmer, E. Watson, J. L. Tendick, O. Schell, E. What- ton, T. Eeynolds, J. W. Mercer, L. H. Campbell, F. J. Meislang, S. Bushell, F. W. Helmer, A. Falbert, W. Sante, J. B. C. Sterrett, Charles Fuohs, H. Woodworth, G. Chapman, D. Washburne, L.. Stautt, W. Freimuth, John Helmer, H. Knipe, John Hopkins, jr., J. Sivener, jr., H. Dierhon, W. D. H. Ball, Ed. Noll, F. Peabody, W. Stewart, F. Phillips, W. Phillips, John Eyne, Chris. Mueller, H. A. Eotipeter, J. Bowman, S. E. Hamilton, Jacob Piatt, Jerry Corbitt, Jas. Corbitt, M. Noonan, 0. Jones, T. Parnell, J. Moran, W. Heanessy, J. Bradley, F. O. Brooks, J. Mouton, David Walsh, PatEyan,W. Hammersmith, C. Wilson, H. Kinderman, J. Kunchner, er., C. Tobin, F. Joesching, J. Mitchell, P. Bassnian, T. Miller, I. Stocke, J. J. McCurry, J. Kundson, jr., V. Bresnahan, C. Ladendorf, J. Lynch, F. Schweik- hardt, M. Wennely, J. Kuhnel, T. Cantillon, T. Farreher, E. Douber, N. Humm, T. Hogan, John Carroll, J. Booth, H. Bruelheide, Leo Strahl, G. Neilsou, C. Ander- son, T. Hennessy, C.Klein, O.Saunders, L. Words, P. Hoerr, P. Meisiuger, F. Covell, M. Collins, J. O'Gara, P. Jackson, W. McGinn, F. Pickett, J. Noonan, A. Larson, W. Baumeyer, P. Gorman, J. Hawkins, T.Besley,W.Sommer8,M. Little, H. Chapman, M. Kieman, J. Walthers, E. Murphy, P.Kane, J.Kane, J. Leahey, J.Lynn, F. Stinger, P. Bradley, M. Furlong, P. Dunn, M. Travis, M. Downey, P. Hart, J. Eussell, M. MuUaly, J. Kelaher, John Travis, P. Morrison, J. Deola, J. Al. Lee, M. Stroebel, W. Dimmell, P. W. Linhorse, Geo. Schneider, A. Svanborn, James Muirhead, W. Steltemeier, Joe Izatt, M. Iseman to appear before the judges of our circuit court, on the first day of the next term thereof, to be held in the city of Saint Louis, at the court-house in said city, on the first Monday of April next, then and there to answer the complaint of the Mis- souri Pacific Eaiilway Company as set forth in the annexed petition: and have you then and there this writ. Witness, Charles F. Vogel, clerk of our said circuit court, with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the city of Saint Louis, this 13th day of March, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and eighty-six. [ST5AL OF CIRCUIT COURT.] CHARLES F. VOGEL, Clerh. Plaintiff states that it is a railroad corporation, duly organized under the laws of the States of , for the purpose of carrying on and transacting a general railroad business in the transportation of passengers and freight over its lines of railroads in the States of , ana elsewhere; that it is the owner in possession and entitled to the exclusive use of its said lines of railway in this and other States, aggregating many miles in length, and extending from the Mississippi Eiver into and thiougu county of to the western boundary of said State of Missouri, at Kansas Ci^, and there connecting with numerous other railroads, and having branches and lines connecting with its main line at various other points in said State, and extending through the same to and through other States and Territories, and connecting with LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 609 other roads leading to the Pacific coast, to divers points throughout the United States and the Republic of Mexico, and is the owner of, and has nofr iu its possession and ready for immediate use within the said county of , a large number of locomo- tives, cars, switch engines, and all other appliances necessary and proper for running and operating its said railroads, and for the transportation of freight and passengers over the same, the transaction of its business generally, and for the proper discharge of its duties to the public as a common carrier. Plaintiff further states that the eastern terminus of its said lines of railroad is in the city of Saint Louis, State of Missouri, where it connects with many lines of rail- road going to various cities and other places north and east of said city of Saint Louis, to and from which, when its business is not interrupted, its trains are con- stantly moving. Plaintiff further states that the defendants, most of whom were formerly employes of the plaintiff, are citizens or residents of the said county of ; that on March 6, 1886, said employes, defendants herein, as plaintiff is informed and believes, and so charges, in obedience to a peremptory order from an organization known as the Knights of Labor, of which said order they are members, without proper or reasona- ble notice to plaintiff, and without any cause, in a body, abruptly, simultaneously, and wrongfully abandoned the service of plaintiff, and arbitrarily and without au- thority or right, and without the consent and against the wishes of plaintiff, at- tempted to assume custody and control of plaintiff's said yards, locomotives, switch, engines, cars, tracks, machine-shops, and round-houses in said county of , and themselves refused to perform any work or labor for plaintiff, or to permit any one else to do so, except with special permission from them, thus unlawfally and wrong- fully stopping within the said county of all work in the shops and yards of plaintiff, and also the handling of freight, and the movement of trains for the trans- portation thereof by plaintiff, and also stopping the plaintiff's passenger trains, ex- cept such as they specially permitted to run, thereby greatly interfering with and obstructing plaintiff's business as a common carrier over all of its said lines of rail- road, to the irreparable damage and injury of the plaintiff. Plaintiff further states that it is informed and believes, and so charges, that the said organization, known as the " Knights of Labor of North America," is a secret so- ciety with branches and sub-organizations known as district assemblies and lodges ; that the members of said organizations are composed of railroad employ(Ss and other persons. Plaintiff is not advised as to all the purposes and objects of said organiza- tions, hut is informed and believes, and so charges, that one of the avowed purxjoses of said organizations is to control the action of their members as to when, how, and upon what terms, they shall enter into the service of this plaintiff, and when, and under what circumstances, they shall abandon such service, and also as to the mode and manner iu which they shall attempt to compel the acquiescence of this plaintiff in any demands they may choose to make. Plaintiff further states that it is informed and believes, and so charges, that one of the said organizations of the " Knights of Labor of North America" known as District Assembly No. 101, is located in the said city of Saint Louis, of which J. J. McGarry is a general officer and judge advocate, and M. H. Palmer is grand worthy foreman ; that another and inferior or- ganization of said Knights of Labor, known as the " Assembly, Lodge No. ," is located in said county of , of which said lodge is chair- man, and said constitute the executive committee of said lodge, and all of the defendants herein are members of said lodge and said district assembly, and subject to the orders of the officers and executive committees thereof. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and so charges, that in pursuance of the secret obligations assumed by each and all of the members of said organizatioas, including the defendants herein, and of the regulations prescribed for their government, they are required to yield implicit and unquestioning obedience to any and all orders or requests made, given or communicated to them by said officers, executive committee or either of them, directly or indirectly, verbally or in writing, relating to the em- ployment or service of themselves or others by or in conne(^on with this plaintiff. And plaintiff further states that it is informed and believes, and so charges, that the members of said organizations located in the said county of , including the defendants herein, have held frequent meetings, prior and subsequent to said iSlarch 6, 1886, for the purpose of unlawfully conspiring and combining together, and that they had so unlawfully combined and conspired together, to dictate to this plaintiff whom it should, and whom it should not employ, to perform the various services necessary for the transactions of its said business. That said defendants, by said unlawful combination and conspiracy, have taken, and are still taking, an unlawful advantage of their position and power to control the actions and business of this plaintiff, and to wrongfully and unlawfully oppress and destroy its business and property, and to intimidate and deter by threats and force other persons from entering into the service of plaintiff. Plaintiff charges on information and belief that before and after the defendants herein abandoned its service as hereinbefore stated, the members of said Assem- 3084 CONG 39 610 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. biy Lodge, No. , and District AssemWy, No. 101, inolnding the defendants herein, unlawfully and wrongfully combined, confederated, and conspired together to prevent this plaintiff from running its trains, using its shops., operating its switch engines, and from transporting freight and passengers thereon from its depots in the said county of and elsewhere over ita said lines of road, and also to prevent by intimidation, threats, and force, this plaintiff from retaining or securing the seryioea of such other men, for the purpose of performing its necessary work in its said shops and yards and operating its trains, as are not members of the Knights of Labor afore- said, and that the officers and executive committee of said District Assembly No. 101, and the officers and executive committee of said Assembly Lodge, No. in pursuance of the resolution and determination of their respective bodies, have themselves entered, and by their orders and directions have caused the other defendants herein to enter upon the premises and right of way of this plaintiff in said county of , for the purpose of ordering, directing, and requesting, and by in- timidation, threats, and force causing such of plaintiff's employes as are still in the service of plaintiff, and who are willing to continue in its service, to abandon their employment, and to refuse to render such services as they have engaged to ren- der t6 this plaintiff, and to persuade and intimidate by threats and force such others as are willing, if unmolested and not interfered with by the defendants, to work for this plaintiff and to handle the freight offered for transportation, and operate and manage the trains of this plaintiff, and thereby enable it to discharge its duty to the public as a common carrier, to abandon plaintiff's service; and all said defendants, including said officers and members of said executive committees, have, as ordered, directed, and requested, as aforesaid, and in pursuance of the said unlawful confed- eration, combination, and conspiracy, repeatedly, wrongfully, and unlawfully, and against the orders and protests of this plaintiff, entered upon the premises and right of way of this plaintiff in said county of , and have by demand, direction, so- licitation, intimidation, threats, and force, deterred and prevented the servants of this plaintiff from rendering it any_ service in its said shops and yards, and in the operation and management of its switch engines and trains, and In the conduct of its business and the discharge of its duties to the public as a common carrier, and they are now hourly continuing to so trespass upon plaintiff's said premises and right of way, and to so interfere with its servants and business, to the irreparable injury and damage of the plaintiff and to the great detriment of the community at large. And the plaintiff on information and belief further charges that the said defendants have, in pursuance of the orders, directions, and requests of said officers and com- mittee, and in pursuance of the said combination and conspiracy aforesaid, repeatedly, unlawfully, and wrongfully, and against the orders and protests of this plaintiff, en- tered upon the premises and right of way of this plaintiff in said county of ;■, and injured, disabled, and killed its engines and cars, so as to entirely prevent this plaintiff from lawfully and peacefully pursuing its said business as a common carrier as aforesaid, and the said defendants have threatened, and are still threatening to, and will continue and repeat the said several trespasses and interferences with the employes and said property of plaintiff hereinbefore set out, so as to entirely and in- definitely prevent this plaintiff from running its trains and transacting its business as a common carrier, unless restrained by the orders of this court ; and plaintiff avers that without the aid of this court it is utterly powerless to prevent said unlawful and wrongful trespasses and interferen ces with its said employls and property, and is now and will be utterly unable to transact its business and to discharge its duties to the public as required by law. Plaintiff further states that it is informed and believes, and so charges, that for each of the said several trespasses upon its said premises and right of way, and interfer- ences with its said employes and property, done and threatened by the defendants to the injury of this plaintiff, this plaintiff is entitled to maintain an action at law, but to avail itself of such right would occasion a great multiplicity of suits, amounting to many hundreds each and every day, and this plaintiff states as a further reason for not instituting such actkins at law that it is informed and believes, and so charges, that said defendants are wholly irresponsible in damages adequate to the great loss and injury they cause, and threaten to cause daily to this plaintiff, so that actions at law would be wholly unavailing to afford adequate redress to this plaintiff for the said loss and injuries. > And plaintiff further states that it has, at various points on its lines of road, in the State of Missouri and elsewhere, including said county of , a large number of freight-trains composed of cars loaded with costly and perishable goods, wares, and merchandise, which it is under contract to deliver to the consignees thereof in the State of Missouri and elsewhere, ■within a reasonable time from the receipt of the same, which said freight this plaintiff has been unable to deliver by reason of the said wrongful and unlawful conduct of the defendants herein, and if the threatened interference of these defendants with the business of this plaintiff and its efforts to procure employes and to retain tliose now in its service is carried into execution, this plaintiff will be wholly unable to perform its said contracts to deliver said freights LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 611 to the irreparable injury and damage of this plaintiff and to the great damage to the consignees thereof. Wherefore,, inasmuch as this plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law hy an action for damages, for the said several grievances, and which said damages are litewise incapable of being accurately computed or adequately recompensed in an action at law, and in order to avert a threatened irreparable damage and injury to itself and to its property and business, and to prevent the consummation of grievous, irrepar- able wrongs and injuries, and to prevent a multiplicity of suits, this plaintiff prays that this honorable court will, on the final hearing of this case, grant its writ of injunction, perpetually enjoining and restraining the said defendants, and each and, all of them, from entering upon its said premises and right of way, and from com- mitting any of the said trespasses, acts, and things threatened as aforesaid. And this plaintiff further prays this honorable court that in the mean time, and pending this litigation, a temporary injunction or restraining order be issued, forbidding and com- manding said defendants and each of them from committing any of the said several acts, trespasses, and things complained of, and threaten to be repeated as hereinbefore set forth, until the further orders of this court, and the plaintiff prays for such other and further relief as in equity and good conscience it may be entitled to, on the facta herein stated. And plaintiff will ever pray, &c. State op I, County of ■ I on oath state that I am the ■ ■ of the Missouri Pacific Sailway Company, plaintiff in the foregoing petition ; that I have read the said peti- tion, and know the contents thereof, and that the matter and things stated as facts are true, and the matters and things stated upon information and belief I believe to be true. ExniBiT S. — T/ie Missom-i Pacific Sailway Company, leased and operated lines.' [Comparative statement of average wages paid by the Wabash, Saint Lonis and Pacifio Bailway, Texas and Saint Lonis Bailway, Illinois and Saint Lonis Hailway, BatesTille and Brinldey Bailroad, Ar- kansas Valley Boate, Cape Girardeau and Southwestern Bailway, Saint Lonis, Alton and Terre Hante Bailroad, Yahdalia Line, Kansas City, Saint Joseph and Conncil Bluffs Bailroad, Chicago and Alton Bailroad, and average wages paid by the Missouri Pacific Bailway Company, leased and operated lines, for the following classes of labor.] Bate per day, other roads. Bate per Hissoun Pacific. Increase. Decrease. Bridge and inilding department. Foremen Carpenters Carpenters' assistants and apprentices Watchmen Pumpers Pump-repairers Plasterers Tinsmiths — . Painters Alasons ." Tramportation depa/rtment Yard foremen , Switch gangs- Yard brakemen Yard switchmen Switch tenders Plagmcn and crossing watchmen Lociymotive and car department. Stationary engineers and firemen Laborers Foremen and gang bosses Machinists Machinists' helpers Machinists' apprentices Blacksmiths ' Blacksmith's helpers Blacksmith's apprentices Boiler makers $2 62 2 00 175 140 1 00 2 65 3 00 2 10 2 50 2 60 3 15 2 00 2 00 1 95 1 40 95 180 1 15 3 05 2 40 1 65 1 05 2 75 1 50 1 05 2 65 $3 25 2 25 1 40 1 61 2 68 2 00 2 40 2 35 2 35 3 05 2 10 2 10 2 10 1 69 141 3 35 1 50 3 23 2 62 1 65 142 2 65 1 67 1 12 2 65 1 55 35 18 22 37 $1 00 15 15 10 10 612 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND AVEST. Exhibit S. — The Missouri Paeifio Eailway Company, leased and operated Zincs— Cont'd. Bate per day, oiher loads. Bate per day, Missonrl Faoi&c. Increase. 'Secreaae. Locomotive and car departTiient— Continued. Boiler makers* helpers Boiler makers' apprentices. . . Brass molders Brass molders' helpers Brass molders' apprentices. .. Iron moulders ,Iron molders' helpers Iron molders' apprentices Tinners Tinner's helpers Tinnei's apprentices Coppersmiths Coppersmith's helpers ■ Coppersmith's apprentices. . . Carpenters Carpenter helpers Carpenter apprentices Hostlers Dispatchers , "Wipers : Coal heavers Painters Painter's helpers Painter's apprentices Car inspectors Car cleaners Truck repairers , Cahinet makers Upholsterers Upholsterer's helpers Upholsterer's apprentices . . . Pattern makersT Pattern maker's helpers Pattern maker's ax)prentlces. Callers , Eoad department. Section foremen . Section laborers . $1 70 1 47 3 00 1 50 85 2 85 2 62 175 1 12 2 75 1 75 125 2 75 1 75 1 00 2 50 2 95 1 65 1 42 2 62 1 75 1 00 2 50 1 75 2 00 2 85 2 72 1 15 65 2 55 47 50 1 15 55 1 50 52 50 1 25 $0 05 47 25 60 5 00 10 $0 10 10 'io This etatemeut is based on figures taken from February (1886) pay-roUs of tLe al)07e-nained roads. Exhibit T. — Circular. The following resolution was adopted by District Assembly No. 101 at its annual session in Saint Louis, January 9, 1886 : "In view of the fact that a great many of our members are out of employment, and believing as wo do that the hours of labor should be reduced as soon as possible to eight hours : "Therefore, This District Assembly, iu executive session, declare that, no Knight of Labor (roadmen excepted) , being a member of any local assembly attached to this District Assembly, be allowed to work more than 10 hours in each 24 hours, unless considered to be absolutely necessary by the local executive board, and that this District Assembly declare that no work bo considered a necessity except the prompt movement of the United States mails. "Per order of District Assembly No. 101." [SEAL.] This circular I took off of bulletin board in Parsons round-house about April 15, 1886. T. W. NEWELL, ilf. M., M. K. 4- T. Hij. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 613 Exhibit U. No. 1. March 22, 1886. To engineers and firemen : Boys, ■we warn you not to rnn a train out of Atchison. (It is -witii regret we tell you, as we call you brothers.) If you do your life will be forfeit. Boys, we want to throw off the yoke of serfdom and be freemen like yourselves. Do not deny to us what, at one lime,' you prayed for. (Served on P. H. Bums at Atchison.) No. 2. [Notice to the travoliiig public issued by.D. A. 17, 03, and 101, served on Engineer Cavanagli at AtcM- ' son.) To the traveling pullio : In the interests of humanity and those who may become the innocent victims of corporate cupidity, we beg leave to state the following facts as pertaining to the sys- tem of railroads now affected by the great strike in the Southwest : The withdrawal of nearly the entire force of skilled and experienced mechanics and trackmen from the service of the company at a time of the year when the frost is coming out of the ground, and when every tie and rail on the road needs attention and which renders a large force of trackmen imperatively necessary to keep the track in order, the absence of such force is dangerous to travel. Engines must needs be overhauled after every trip or it becomes dangerous to use them, and skilled men are needed to perform the work. Switches and bridges must be handled with skill or danger results. The bungling work of unskilled men may cost life and limb, and we feel it a duty to warn the traveling public against the condition of the Missouri Faciiic, Iron Moun- tain, and Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railways, who are running with one-fourth of their necessary force, and those they have are a class who can never get emplojlnent save when good and experienced men are on a strike. Executive Boards, D. A. 17, 93, and 101. No. 3. (Notice served on Haivey Fate, Maccli 9, James Boss, Maroli 12, M. Eageley, Marcb 13, witli seal of Future Great Assembly attached.] You are requested not to take out your engines. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, [seal.] No. 4. [Notice fierred on Engineer Jackson, with seal of future Great Assembly attached.] To whom it may concern: Yon are hereby ordered to allow all mail trains to run. By order of executive committee : P. J. NOLAN, Cliairman. ' No. 5. [Notice from Kansas City executive board, K. of L., with seal of Uriah S. Stevens Assembly No. 3966 attached, served on J. Speck by L. J. Keys.] Headqtjaktees Local Executive Boakd, K. of L. To tlie B. of L. E. . Deak Sir : On behalf of the toilers of the earth, and for the sake of our wives and children who are dependent upon us for their daily bread, and in the name of justice we appeal to your honor as a gentleman and a brother workman to step down off of your engine and not take it out during the present trouble. • Yonrs, fraternally, [L. S.] By request of local executive board, K. of L. No. C. [Circular to Iho switchmen of tho C. B., U. P. and Mo. Pac. yaids, at Atchison, served on switchmen by Charles Beading.] Atciiisox, Kans., April 13, 1886. To the switchmen of C. B., U. P., and Mo. P. yards, at Atchison ; Brothers : Yon are all aware of the existing troubles, and we as friends and brothers ask von iu tho name of our families and onr little children fo cease work 614 LABOR TBOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. and join us in our effort to gain our point. Every man that comes out will Lelp so much, When one comes out he should use his influence to keeip any one from taking his place. And to come to a general understanding you should appoint a time to meet and try and agree to come out all together. By request of committee. P. S. — We would suggest that the hour of 6 o'clock p. m., April 13, 1886, for a meet- ing at the Santa F4 switch-house, 10th street. No. 7. (Notice with seal of local assemMy attached, to employes of C. B.,'TJ. P. and Mo. Pac. Eys., to qiiit work tintil further notice, signed by J. H. Cooper.] Headquaktebs Executive Board, K. of L. Acliiaon, April 9, 18a6. , All Enights of Labor employed on the Central Branch and Missouri Pacific Rail- ways are hereby notified to quit work nntil further notice. By order general executive board and district 101. J. H. COOPER, [i,. 6.] Chmrman. Attest : Local Executive Committee. J. E. RUTLEDGE, M. W. No. 8. [The Trades-Union Extra, the end.] Saint Louis, March 31, 12.40. General executive board orders all men to work pending arbitration. MARTIN IRONS, J. H. COOPER. No. 9. [Circular No. 2.1 Atchison, March 9, 1886. All Knights of Labor and others are requested to leave the works, tracks, and build- ings of the company. J. H. COOPER, JOHN MAYNE, C. W. WALKEM, Executive Committee. No. 10. Letter from R. H. Emerson, April 18, with anonymous notice to J. R. Van Boutam, saying that "if yon do not quit work, you will suffer a loss that will do you great harm ; if you want to save your property, go out and stay out." Van Boutam was at that time working as gang boss laborer, C. B. shops at Atchison. On same night, about 2 o'clock, a large rock was thrown through his bed-room window. No damage done, as he had moved his bed into a back room. No. 11. Sanctuary of Local Assembly, K. op L., No. 2952. * Atcliiaon, Kans., March 13,1886. Dear Sir : The executive board desire me to convey to you their wish that you cease to iire up freight engines. Should this be done, we have reason to believe it would help other employEx:. AUen, Girard B 112 Anderson, W.S , 146 Anderson, Eotert 159 Armstrong, John 22G Allen, F. A 233 Antes, J. F 244 Anerswald, Dr 330 Beach, J. W 126 Bent, A. S 154 Bnrke, John 176 Bell, H. C -■ 200 Blackman, A. G 227 Bnrke, John 295 Bohrens, John 297 Blair, Hon. J. L 306 Boss, A. D 319 Bossinger, S. C .• 320 Bnrlingame, E.P 327 Baitlett, L 394 Bums, E , 445 Barrett, James 448 Beny, Eichard M 480 Brown, W. C 488 Burrows, D. W 533 Burnett, GcorgeW 595 Campbell, General A. B 117 Crowell, Maj. John M 147 Compton, James 151,173 Christie, A. N 153 Chase, B.K 155 Cooper, J. H 168 Cable, E. E 191 Conover, John... 196 CahiU, James 203 Clarke, J. P 207 Cosgrove, Patricio 231 Carpenter, Mr 282 Conroy, Ed 283 Cook, F. M 282 Clark, H 290 Cady, A. H 293 Clark, J. D.... 304 CIark,H.G 400 Clark, John 430 Cramer, Joseph ' 412 Coon, John P 464 Carbangh, Miss S. C 535 Daggan, Dewitt, J. B 175,178 Dalby, J.W 201 Drake, F. B 203 Dalby, (road-master) 237 Deutch, Louis 242 Dalby, J.N 243 3984 LAB 40 Page, Duffy, Mrs. John 315 Dehle, H. J 322 Dehle, J. B iseo Danforth, A. H 323 Dickenson, A. W 391 Decker, Henry P 419 Doyle, John 461 Duffy, T. B 478 Delay, J. L 479 Dowd, John 586 Dorsett, Walter B 595 Dean, Dr. D.V 597 Eiscman, Benjamin 106 Emerson, K. H 136 Ells, F. G 211 Eckel, David 234 EUiot, M. K 521 Exhibits 598 Francis, Mayor David E 101 Fox, J. C 127 Fagan.W. AV 128,174 Fulton, J. C 140 Fowler, J. 11 198 Fritz, Frederick 218 Flanders, J. B 264 Frey, J. J 267 Fifer, William 294 French, John 417 Fredericks, E. A 484 Fricsleben, Herman 548 Gould, Jay.. 28 Gardner, T.M 161 Gerz. Eobert 219 Gentrv, Major 238 Grow, Daniel 266 Griggs, E 324 Guels, H 457 Gays, H. W 542 Grier, Davids 95 Hill, Jerome C 93> Hopkins, A. L 72 Haddock, E. E 125 Harni, A.J 120 Hunter, Stephen 163 Hemner, James 153 Hammerslaugh, Louis 181 Hndsou, Frank 194 Hoff, J.E 208 Harrod, Otho 224 Harbough, H. A 232 Hinsdale, Ira 241 Hamilton, William 289, 290 Holden, Benjamin 294 Holcraft, Ftank 297 621 622 INDEX. * fage. Hatfield, C.H 297 Hodge, John 392 Harris, W.H 410 Hoxie, H.M 410 Hartly, D.H 450 HaT"kin8, William 1 4G0 Haynes, W.H 466 Helmer, Jolm 478 Hamilton, Charles 521 Harahan, J.T 526,547 Halloram, John 567 Hewlitt, TlaomasG 570 Hague, John 578 Irvin, Samuel 263 Johnson, Henry 215 Johnson, Charles 222 Jameson, General J. C 298 Joyce, J.F 421 Joyce, Maurice 561,584 Jones, Samuel S 592 Kelso,Major .\. 139 Kipper, Louis 148 King, Samuel C 130 Kinsler, Charles , 581 Kable.E.A.... 191 Kerner.A a84 Kotchtitzky, Maj. O , 300 Kerrigan, William 331 Kendall, John B 402 Keona, T. M 403 Kelly, Louis 427 Karl.N.H 432 Knowlton, J.D 452 Kensler, Charles 581 Labnor, Deeter 216 Leary,Mike 232 Lyons, W.B 265 Lake,G.S 531 Laughlin, Charles 558 Lnster, William 575 Laird, William F 587 McDowell, William O 9-88 McMillen, William 108 Mudget, WiUiam P 124 Mann, James A 183 Moore, Jolm W 192 Meado, John 217 Monogham, Michael 224 Merry, James 236 Morney,A.P 244 Mm8,J.W 274 Mason, W.H 274 Murrel.H.J 275 Mobert 286 Monsott, Oscar 287 McClain, John.... 296 Miles, H.H 321 Murphy, James 443 McGee,H.H 446 McFarland.W 444 McAdams, W 444 Marlin, Stewart 589 Nave, J. M 180 Nevil, B .: 293 Nevil, Frank 29C Nelson, Benjamin 462 Nealy, John W •. 462 Neidelet, Dr. J.C 596 Paije, O'Brien, Nick 415 O'Brien, Patrick 220 O'Toole, Michael 225 Outten, Dr. W. B....: 309 O'Leary, Eev. Father C. F. , 468 Powderly, T.V 1-25,87 Pecket, Thomas H 199 Parker, M.L 229 Parmelee, J. G ' 246 Parks, Major 216 Peck, E.M 387 Portis, Hon. T.J 433 Palmer, M.H 434 Parker, George W 494 Pagett, E.F 552 Parks, Daniel 557 Rainwater, Maj. C.C... 113 Bedding, Charles 159 Robertson, M 179 Rogers, M.J 206 Russell, Morris 221 Rockwell, William F 2.J8 Rockwell, R 272 Roberts, M 423 Reed, M.J 466 Reeves, S.D 524-546 Ropiequerett, Fred 549 Ragland, John 544 Rodgerson, Joseph 560 Simmons, Edward. C 89 Swift, William H 94 Sherman, H 164 Sherman, T.J 167 Shultz, F.W 180 Swayne,J.W 182 Sneddin, James 182 Spaulding, A 197 Shea, J.M 209 Soheider, Charles 218 Sanburn, Ephriam 226 Stevens, E.W 233 Smith, D.H 245 Sibley, Col. E.K 246,297 Sykes, H.M 319 Stall, Henry G 386 Stilwell, Frank 402 Slanson.M 429 Shaughnessey, J 476 Stanton, CM 503 Smith, R.M 537 Serrin, J. R 556 Sherman, Charles H 519 Stanard, Edwin O 100 Turner, Frederick 78,88 Taylor, S.M 157 Taylor, John 190 Tenney, Dr. A.P 190 Tutt, Frank 206 Tilbury, John S85 Tonsig, Dr. WiUiam 499 Tonsey, R.P 518 Thompson, Maggie 573 Testimony taken at — Washington-.., 1 Saint Louis 89 Testimony taken by Curtin sub- committee at — Atchison 118 INDEX. 623 Paga.^ Tostimouy taken by Curtin sub- committeo at — Kansas City 178 Sedalia 238 SaintLouis 298 Vandegrift 143 Willis, T.F 180 Watson, George B 199 Wilkorson.B.G 240 Weller, S.P 2C3 Page. Wagoner, PliiUp 286 Wren, Timothy 289 Wendell, Peter W 477 Wilson, C.G 493 Wissinger, George.. 54() Walsh, A. F 536 WiUiams, J.F • 591 Williams, Eugene F 91 Yates, L.R 162 Zimmeriy, Jacob 447 49th (Jongeess, \ HOUSE OP EBPEESENTATIVBS. ( Ebpoet 2d Session. J 1 No. 4174. INVESTIGATION LABOK TKOUBLES MISSOURI, ARKANSAS, KANSAS, TEXAS, AND ILLINOIS. IN TWO PARTS. PART 3. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1887. SUB-COMMITTEE. HOIST. ^W. H. OR^II^, Chairman. TESTIMONY TAKEX BT SUB-COMMITTEE IN KANSAS, TEXAS, AND ARKANSAS. Parsons, Kans., Monday, May 3. The subcommittee, composed of Messrs. W. H. Crain, J. Outhwaitbe, A. X. Parker, and J. Bnchanan, proceeded to take testimony at the opera house, Parsons, Kana. (Mr. Buchanan not present until near the close of the afternoon session).. ALPHA O. BEOWN sworn and examined, By the Chairman : Question. How long have you resided in this city f — Answer. About thirteen years. Q. Do you hold any official position? If so, whatT — ^A. I am mayor of the city. Q. How long have you occupied that position ? — A. One year this last month. Q. Are you engaged in any business ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you give your attention exclusively to your official liusiness?— A. Yes, sir; and attending to my own little business. Q. We have come here to ascertain, if possible, by investigation the cause of the late troubles on the Southwestern System, and I would like you to state all pertinent facts that you know in relation to this subject. — ^A. The first I knew of the strike the whistle blew about ten o'clock on the 6th of March. I walked down the city and found every man had quit work, and a committee appointed by the Knights of Labor took charge of the shops, and continued to hold possession for about two weeks. The first day after the strike all freight trains, and all kinds of business in the depart- ments, except passenger trains, were stopped. Instructions had been given that no trains would be allowed except passenger trains. When we found that it was going to be a serious matter, we sent to the governor of the State to know what to do. He sent the adjutant-general here, who found that there had been no disturbance ; every- thing had been quiet ; there were no riots ; and he went home for he could do noth- ing because there was nothing to do. The company had made one or two attempts to send out trains, but there hadbeenno violence, only moral suasion. The engineers and firemen were requested to step down off their engines, and they would get down and off. The adjutant-general went home, and I think about two weeks after that we found that we could not do anything ourselves with it, and we called a meeting of the citizens to see if we could not use moral persuasion in order to satisfy those peo- ple that they were doing wrong in not allowing freight trains to run. Very nearly two hundred of our citizens surrounded a train, about a hundred on each side, and we tried to force our way through without arms. We were satisfied if they commenced shooting among the crowd, there would be serious damage done. They were, armed and ready for any emergency. We could not move them. They gathered en masse — I should judge two thousand strong — in front of the engine, and were composed of men, women, and children. Q. How long was that after the 6th of March ? — A. That was, I think, about the last of March. Wo could not possibly move the train ; they moved their women and children in front of the engine, and not only fhat, but the women gathered rotten eggs and threw them at our citizens to drive them away. The result was we could not do anything. Afterwards we sent to the governor again for assistance. The governor sent the adjutant-general again. He came, and went into their hall and talked with them. They told him they would not molest the engines, and that they would let the trains go out. Before he came the second time they had ditched a train^-I do not say they did, but somebody did — three miles south of here — ditched a passenger train, and the adjutant-general got them to let an engine go out and clear up that wreck, and also to let the freight trains go as they agreed to. Before the engine went out to clear up the wreck, the company got a freight train ready to go out, and they disabled the engine before it got out of the yard, right before the adju- tant-general's eyes. He made a speech to them, and they got another engine ready, 3984 LAB 3 1 l LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. and they disabled it. He then telegraphed for troops, and went away himself, and in twenty-fonr hours we had 350 men here to guard the city. After the troops came here there was no more damage done to the company's property. The men have been threatening citizens and intimidating them in one way or another. Q. When you speak of "them" to whom do yon refer? — A. To strikers, the people that have been on the strike. , Q. After the troops arrived here did the business of the road go on as it had been going on before? — A. Yes, sir ; from the very first day after the arrival of the troops. Q. Is the road doing as much business now as it did before the strike ? — A. I think- it is. At this season they do really more bnsiness than at the time the strike first com- menced. Q. How many men left work here, Mr. Brown ? — A. Something over 200 men. Q. How many are employed now ? — A. A little over 100. The damage was not altogether in the number of men leaving work in the shops, understand. There were several hundred men thrown out of ernployment besides the shopmen. Q. Were they Knights of Labor ? — A. Some of them were Knights of Labor. There are two assemblies of Knights of Labor. Q. What do you mean by being thrown out of employment ? — A. Trade was de- moralized, and it prevented improvements that would have gone on but for the strike. Q. You mean, if I understand you correctly, that one of the effects was that men who were disconnected with the strike were thrown out of employment because brisi- ness was stopped to such an extent that their employers could not keep them em- ployed ?— A. That is the fact, sir ; clerks were discharged ; and there were men that were making arrangements to put up buildings that put them off, and of course the business was demoralized. Q. What was the general effect upon the improvement of the town? — A. Well, sir, it was very demoralizing. There would probably have been improvements made in the ^ town to the amount of two or three hundred thousand dollars, where there is not a dollar, and there is not a day's worlc for carpenters to do. Q. What was the general effect on business? — A. Merchants did not do anything scarcely; they could get very little to do. The freight that had been ordered for the spring trade had been tied up in the cars that were side-tracked. There were freight cars lying in the yard that they were not allowed to unload. They were hot allowed to use the switch eugines and switch cars to the depot so as to unload them. Q. Have you auy approximate idea of the gross amount of damage done to the town? — A. It bus cost us a great deal. I have told the city clerk to figure out the extra amount of expense to the people. Q. I was speaking more particularly of the business of the town, and not the ex- pense to till' municipal government. What is the estimated amount of damage ?— A. That is vei y difficult to tell. There is not a firm in town that has doue anything like the business it would have done if this strike had not occurred. They could not ship anything; they could not get any material to manufacture. Q. Do you know anything a,bout the cause of the strike here ? — A. The only cause I have ever, heard for it was iu the beginnipg of the strike, and that it was the dis- charge of a man named Hall in Texas. That was the cause given by the people striking. Q. Are you able to say that the damage you spoke of, the killing of engines and ditching of trains and all that, was done by the Knights of Labor? — ^A. Well, sir, I think we have sufficient proof in our courts to satisfy any one that the Knights of Labor have done damage by killing engines. Several have been arrested and put under bonds for that. Q. I am speakinjj of your own personal knowledge ? — ^A. I was down there and saw members of the Knights of Labor surrounding the engines. Q. Do you know whether others were engaged in these acts of violence besides Knights of Labor ? — A. I do not know that there were others outside of the Knights of Labor. Q. Is this a railroad center ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many roads concentrate hefe ?— A. Three ; Missouri Pacific, Fort Scott and Gulf, and Missouri, Texas and Pacific. Q. Does this strike affect all of them?— A. The Missouri Pacific were entirely closed, and the Fort Scott and Gnlf closed one day. Q. What does your town depend upon for its business ?— A. The Missouri Pacific railroad business; the trainmen and the shopmen, and also on the farming com- munity around. Q. What is your population ?— A. About 8,500. Q. What is the assessed valuation of your property? — A. I do not remember what our valuation is. Q. Approximately ?— A. Nine hundred thousand dollars. Q. What does your police force consist off — A. A marstal and two policemen. Q. What steps did you take to suppress these difficulties, and what steps were LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH ANE WEST. 3 taken by your marshal and his assistaats to protect the property of the company and arrest those who were guilty of injuring it or destroying it t These things, you say, ■were done before your face, and of course you had authority to arrest the parties. — A. I issued a proclamation calling on every able-bodied citizen to come out ; but a great many were afraid to come, and a great many said that they would not risk their lives. We put on extra police. Q. How many ? — A. I think sometimes as many as thirty were put on to guard the company's property. Q. Did yon make any arrests? — A. There have been some arrests made. Q. Yon simply issued a proclamation ; you did not send the marshal to summon them as a posse ? — A, Ifo, sir ; not at that time ; but there were a hundred and forty or a hundred and fifty regularly summoned. Q. I understood you to say a moment ago that the citizens declined to come forward to assist ; was that at a different time ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it prior or subsequent to the proclamation that they plucked up courage, and about 140 or 150 responded ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that is the body with which yon went down and tried to force your way through the strikers without violence ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that was also the time when the women stopped in front of the engine and pelted you with rotten eggs? — A. Yes, sir; they, with families connected with the strikers. Q. (By Mr. Paekek. ) How much or what do you include in the word " strike," as you give it ? — A. People that have refused work, or who will let no other men work la the shops. There were many of these people who belonged to the Knights of Labor, but were not employed by the railroad companies, but who were sympathizers with them and took part with them. Q. Was there no other case of stopping trains than this in which you speak of their putting themselves in front of the engines ? — A. That was, I think, all ; putting themselves in front of the engines, intimidating the fireman and engineer and getting them off the engine, and killing the engines. Q. What were the cases of killing engines that you saw ? — Jy. They would open the mud-valve and blow the water out of the boiler, and put irons in the guides to dis- able them. At one time there was a link or pin thrown into the cab and broke (he water-gauge, so that it could not be nsed, and drove everybody out of the cab with with the scalding water and steam. Q. What is the population here? — A. About eight thousand. Q. You spoke of factories that were stopped ; what factories do you refer to ? — A. There is nothing very extensive but the plow factory here ; that is doing quite a bus- iness ; and carpenters' shops. Q. Is this a center for agricultural products ? If so, what effect had the strike upon the shipping of farm products ? — A. There was a very serious stoppage. Nothing was allowed to be shipped out or in, and seeds that were ordered here, were very much delayed. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite. ) You mean that seeds did not come on in time to be sown ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekbk.) How long was the stoppage ? — A. I do not remember exactly how long it was ; about five weeks, or between four and five weeks. Q. You spoke of the switch being prevented when goods were wanted; how was that done ? — A. By not allowing any one to get out and get on an engine. If a man went out and got on an engine he was ordered oft". Q. How did they get him off? Why did he not go on with his work ? — A. I cannot say as to that ; I simply know that they were not allowed to go on with their work. Q. The passenger trains ran regularly during this period ; there was no interference on the part of the strikers with the passenger trains ? — A. There was no interference that I have known or heard of. The Chairman. What time do farmers plant here f — A. They commence about the first of April. ANGEL MATHEWSON sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. What is your age? — Answer. Forty-eight. Q: How long have you lived in this city? — A. I have lived here sixteen years the latter part of this spring. Q. What business are yon engaged in? — A. I am in the banking business. Q. Were you here to inquire into the cause and extent of the disturbance of com- mercial business resulting from the strike on the Southwestern system. You may state what faists yon have observed in regard to that matter. — ^A. Well, in the first place, this city is largely supported by the railroad shops operated by the Missonii 4 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Pacific Eailroad Company, and our commercial business, and all our business here, is largely dependent upon the employes in those shops and the money received by them as wages from the railroad company. Q. To what extent has it interfered with the business of the town, as you have ob- served it? — A. Well, the pay-rolls of the employes of the Missouri Pacific Company here are from |20,000 to $30,000 per month, and there was a suspension of busi- ness here for at least one month. It was just at the time when agricultural im- plements and seeds were being received, and of course those goods were en route. They were stopped on the road and our farmers very much inconvenienced. Agri- cultural implement and seed dealers also had their business practically suspended. The employes not receiving their money were unable to make their payments to the merchants, which had a depressing effect generally upon all classes, as all such strikes do. We had in view something of what yon might call a "boom" in onr town for this coming season, which seems to have been nipped in the bud by the strike. Q. What was the nature of that boom ? — A. It was a building boom, and the build- ing of a new railroad and a large hotel we had in contemplation, but which has been suspended on account of the strike. Usually at this time of the year we have been very actively engaged in building in the city. As an illustration of the fact, three of our carpenters and builders, who have been serving as a guard at the railroad shops employed by the city, Mr. Young, one of onr contractors and builders, Mr. Goodman, and Mr. Burton, are on guard at |2 a day, because they had nothing else to do. Q. Can you give in dollars an estimate of the amount of building that has been pre- vented by the strike ? — A. No, sir ; I can hardly do that ; I think it is impossible. There may have been other causes to keep back- the building, apart from the strike ; hut at this season of the year it has been very active. Q. And this present season, what is its condition ? — A. We have had very little doing in that line ; in fact onr builders now seem to be quite idle, and are as anxious to get a little job as they would have been to get a contract before the strike. Q. Do yon know anything of the organization of a law and order league or some- thing of that character by the citizens here ? — A. I do. Q. Of how many citizens does it consist? — A. I think something like 400. Q. What is the object and purpose of that league ? — A. To protect property and maintain order in the city. Q. You spoke of the delay in receipts of agricultural implements and seeds. Do yon know whether any portion of the seeds were obtained by mail ?^-A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. Do you know whether auy shipments of produce important to this climate were delayed by the strike? — A. Well, all shipping was stopped. Of course this is a ship- ping point for grain, and all shipments were stopped for the time being. Q. But do you know of any especial produce that was prevented from going for- ward ? — A. This is a place where farmers bring their produce for shipment, and there was a delay in the shipment of goods. Q. Shipment of what ? What character of shipment were interfered with ? — A. The shipment of cattle and live stock. Q. To what extent has that occurred at this point ? — A. Well, we have two or three men who make that a business here, and they could ship no cattle or other stock. Q; Can you tell about how many car-loads they ship in a week ?— A. No, sir. That is something to which I have not paid any attention. Q. These shipments of corn and cattle are generally sent to what market?— A. They are usually sent to Saint Louis, and sometimes to Chicago. Q. Can you give an estimate in dollars as to the amount of damage that has been done to your town by this strike f — A. No, sir ; I cannot. It is a thing that cannot be estimated very easily. It is simply a suspension of business of a certain amount done for a certain length of time. Q. Do you know of any business embarrassments or assignments resulting from the strike ? — A. No, sir ; I do not know that as a fact.' It is generally understood that Martin & Sargent's, grocers, on Johnson avenue, trouble is attributable to the strike. They had been in the habit of crediting the employes. Q. Do you know how large a firm that is ?— A. I do not think that they were very heavy in their line, Q. (By Mr. Paeker.) Was there any aotice or warning given by the strikers, or aty one of them, to you ot the business men of the town, that they intended to strike? — ^A. No, sir ; the first intimation we had of it was the blowing of the whistles at the shops. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Do you know anything about amy shipment of trees that were stopped in consequence of the strike ? — ^A. Well, I was informed by nurserymen that aU their shipments were stopped, and that they could not deliver their trees on the line of the road on time. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 5 ALPHA O. BEOWN recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Qaestion. Were there any arrests made during the first 30 days ? — Answer. I think not, sir. Q. (Examining a statement of account presented by the witness as to the expenses paid by the city of Parsons daring the strike.) This Is the amount of expense the city was pnt to on account of the strike. Is this a correct account f — A. Yes, sir; it is made out by the city clerk. Q. And is in addition to the ordinary expenses T— A. Yes, sir. The account was read as follows: Account of expenses paid iy the dty of Parsons, Kans., during the strike, spring of 1886, to date. Special police $1,530 25 Printing 25 00 Ammanition 7 00 Rent of hall 70 OO Freights and misceUaueons expenses 36 00 Livery , 18 00 Total 1,686 25 Pabsons, Kans., May 3, 1886. EespectfuUy submitted. K. F. MILLS, City Clerk. CHARLES H. KIMBALL sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker: Qaestion. Please state your age.-^-Answer. My age is forty. Q. How long have yoa resided here f — A. Fourteen years. Q. What is your business ?— A. I am a lawyer. Q. What official position do yon occupy?; — A. Well, I am at present State senator &:om this district, and have occupied the' position of city attorney in years past. Q. For how long have you been familliar with the business here ? — A. Ever silice I have been here. Q. Yon were here daring the period of this strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, you can go on and describe what has come to your knowledge in regard to it ? — ^A. The first that came to my knowledge concerning it was a rumor upon the streets that the railroad men had all struck. I heard the whistle blow, which was the signal for the men to come out, and soon after that saw crowds of them con- fregated on the streets and going to the room occupied by the Knights of Labor, inquired what the occasion for the strike was of members of the order and of others, and was informed that it was the discharge of a man by the name of Hall, in Texas, and the refusal to reinstate him. Within a short time after the strike was inaugu- rated the freight trains 'were stopped; that is, the running of freight trains into or out of OUT city. That was done, in the first place, by removing parts of the locomo- tives and disabling parts of the locomotives and in other ways, with all of which I am not familiar ; and afterwards by the disabling! of locomotives just as they were about to take trains ont — "killing" them, as it was called. Q. Can you give any additional description as to facts that the other witnesses have stated ? — ^A. I did not hear the statement of the other witnesses. I have just come in. The killing of engines was done by opening a valve which let the water and steam out of the boiler; another way was by breaking the gauge-glass which is used to show the height of water in the boiler ; another way was by putting irons into parts of the machinery that would break the machinery ; that is, by putting them in such places that either the machinery would be broken or the iron would be crushed that was thrust into it. Q. By whom were these things done T — A. They were done by the strikers. Q. Have yon any knowledge whether those who did these acts were Knights of Labor ? — A. I have no positive knowledge as to who are Knights of Labor, exoexjt as I have heard; but I know this in reference to it, that immediately after these things vrere done upon one or two occasions, to my knowledge, some leader of the Knights of Labor would mount the disabled locomotive and say, " To your hall," and at once the crowd would disperse and go up to the room occupied by the Knights of Labor. Q. You were present several times when trains and engines were stopped from moving out, were you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may go on then and describe what you witnessed there? — A. Well, upon one occasion an engine started to move a train coming south, and it had got down as far as Johnson avenue where it was surrounded by a large crowd of men, and some one -6 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. of them rushed in and opened the valve and disabled the locomotive. Afterwards the fires were drawn and put out. This, I think, was on the morning of that day ■when the mayor had issued a call for a meeting. There had been, I might say, sev- eral occasions of a similar character previous to this, but that was the first that I had ■witnessed. Q. What was the general nature of that callt — A. It was a call on all law-abidmg citizens of the city of Parsons to assemble at the opera-house hero for the purpose of aiding and enforcing the law and preserving order in the city. Q. Was there a meeting ? — A. There ■was a meeting. Q. Did an organization grow out of it ? — A. Yes,, sir. Q. Did it take any name t — ^A. Not at that time. The persons assembled were all sworn in as special policemen. Q. To the number of how many? — ^A. About 178. Q. What did they do then ?— A. They marched down to the railroad with the ob- ject of pre venting any further interference with the train that was about to move out. Q. Were you one of them ? — A. I was, sir. Q. What occurred when you reached the railroad tract ? — A. The first time we ■were informed that the train would not move out until after dinner. We again as- sembled at 1 o'clock. The force was deployed in a line on either side of the train with a platoon across the track in front of the train. The engine and train attempted to move slowly down the track, and did so until it met with a crowd mostly of men at the Johnson avenue crossing. That was the place ■where they generally assembled. Q. Were they railroad men?— A. Of course a large number of them were railroad men, and many who were sympathizers with them or spectators were in the crowd. Q. What occurred there to the engine after getting that far ?— A. The train moved along until the platoon in front of the engine ran against this crowd. The crowd was a great deal heavier than the platoon, and refusing to give way, they pressed the platoon back against the engine. The crowd ■were on the point of getting on to the engine when the sheriff commanded the crowd to disperse in the name of the law. He said he was there to protect that property and called their attention to the governor's proclamation, in ■which they had been warned to cease from interference with the movement of trains and commanded them to disperse and refrain from in- terfering with that train. They hooted him and jeered at him. Then the mayor com- manded them to disperse, and his orders were met in the same way by shouts and jeers. Then, as I saw the crowd refused to give way before the platoon of special police that were moving down there, and that in the struggle between the police and the crowd the police were forced back against the locomotive, or almost against the locomotive, so that perhaps if the engine had kept on moving the police would have been crushed by being forced into the machinery, and the crowd refusing to give "Way, the engine was stopped. Q. How many were apparently opposing the police ? — A. I should think there was about a thousand in the crowd ; a great many on the outskirts were merely spectators. Q. What number would you think took part there by ■word or act against the per- formance of duty by the special police ? — A. Well, of course, I do not know that there were more than fifty, perhaps not more than thirty or forty, because the point of at- tack was right around the locomotive, and perhaps eight or ten feet back, and these were the only ones that could by any possibility take part in a possible attack. I could not say how many there were in front, bnt they ■were four and five ranks deep. Q. From ■what you saw of the crowd, were they mainly sympathizers with the strikers, or what is the fact about that ? — A. There were perhaps right round the front of the locomotive about 150 railroad employes and strikers, but as I say not more than thirty or forty were close to the engine and outside of that were, of course, a great many who seemed to be urging the strikers on by various encouraging cries ; and then, of course, there were a great many who did not sympathize with them. Q. Now as to arms and weapons of any sort on the part of either side? — A. There were some pistols exhibited among the strikers. I saw two pistols shown, not with a threat to shoot, but yet I saw them in the hands of persons. Q. How was it with the policemen? — A. They had no arms except that some of them may have had pistols in their pockets. The order was not to draw any pistols. Q. Did either side have clubs ? — A. Yes ; I saw two policemen's billies, as they are called, or clubs resembling a policemen's billies. Q. But the patrol as a rule had nothing of the kind ? — A. Those that I saw were in the hands of the strikers. One striker endeavored to climb on the pilot of the engine with a club in his harvd, and another with a coupling-pin, and another had a rock in his hand. I do not know who it was, but it was one of the railroad men I have reason to believe. Q. What cursing or threats did you hear, if any ? — A. More than I can remember. They called to the sheriff and told him to get down oijt of that, and called to him anA said, " Got down or we will pull you down ; " and somebody said, " Shoot the son- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 7 of-a-bitch ; " and somebocly else said, " What in the hell are you doing np there ? " and tHings of that kind. Q. Was any threat made to you personally for the part that yon took in aiding to suppress the disturbances at any time ? — A. Well, none orally. Q. Did you receive any notice in writing? — A. I received two anonymous letters, one of whioh was left at my house and one was left at the offlce! Q. Were they similar ? — A. Well, no ; they were not similar. (4. Give US the general purport of the two. —A. One of them said, "You cannot afford to take the part you are taking in reference to the labor troubles " ; and there was an additional sentence connected with that which I was at a loss to know wtetlier I would be made to suffer politically or in property. Q. Was there anything more in the other than you have given us? — A. Well, yes. In that other it was written by a different person. The first was written by a person of some education. The second was by a man who could not, or did not, write decent English. It had the words, " We have got it in for you." I have known of several others. Q. Go back to the interference of the crowd and tell us what further was done.^ A. I had described the situation when matters were very much strained between the police and the crowd. The men that were attacking the engine were evidently a number of them very much enraged. Their demeanor showed that. Their eyes glared and they were fierce and angry, and endeavored to pull the sheriff and myself from the engine. Just at that moment somebody in the outskirts called attention to the fact that the passenger train was coming in. The train pulled in, and some one found from the Eastern papers, that the strike had been declared off. If you remember, there was an issue of the daily papers in which it was announced that the strike was off. Some one got on the platform and read that the strike was off, and that the latest news was that Chief Powderly had declared the strike off. After the paper was read from the pilot of the locomotive by the sheriff, and then, I think, afterwards by Mr. Buchanan, a leader, and one of the executive committee of the Kniglits of Labor. After he had read it he stated : " That is what the iiaper contains. 1 have not got it. I have received no such dispatch." That was the substance of what he said. Then the strikers said that there would not be any further interference with trains. It was proposed to let that train go out peaceably, and they said, " No " ; but let that train be taken back, and if they received corroborative dispatches there would be no further interference. The police were withdrawn and the train was taken back into the yard, and then I understood that the strikers did not receive corroborative dispatches. Q. Was this the substance of all that occurred that day ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When was another attempt made to move a train ? — A. Another attempt was made that evening or possibly the next one. Q. Were you present ? — A. I was not ; another engine was killed. The adjutant- general of the State was there. I will further state that on the evening after we attempted to move the train, and when it was found that they were still going to in- terfere with the moving of trains, a number of us joined in a dispatch to the governor, setting forth that it was impossible for the civil powers to successfully cope with the mob that was opposed to the movement of trains. Q. Was that the same day on which this disturbance occurred? — A. If I remember correctly, it was the same evening. Q. What was the date of that? — A. I cannot remember. I would state that the substance of the dispatch was that the presence of a body of troops here would be of importance to settle the question without loss of life, and requesting him to send troops here for that purpose. He sent the adjutant-general down here, and the adjutant-general, as he afterwards stated in my presence, had an interview with the Enights of Labor in their hall, and they promised him that there should be no inter- ference with trains. Mr. Parker. That is hearsay. The Witness. After that interview was had, the adjutant-general gave notice that he was going to move trains, and the train was made up by the railroad authorities, and was moving out of the yaxd. Q. How long was this after the disturbance that you have described? — A. That was the second day after. Q. And that train moved off and went to its destination, as far as you know? — A. It did. And then they attempted to move another train, and it was disabled right in the presence of the adjutant-general. The crowd surrounded the engine, as it had done before, except that that crowd originated at the depot, and not as far north as the former one. I saw various members of the crowd making a rush for the locomo- tive, and I saw no more: but I was near enough to see these rushes, and in a moment I saw a cloud of steam forcing itself out from the pl.Tce where this valve was located, and I recognized at once that the locomotive was killed. 8 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WeST. Q. At this time where was the adjutant-general^of the State of Kansas? — A. I be- lieve he was on the locomotive, or right near it. Q. Then it was done in his immediate presence ? — A. It was done right in his im- mediate presence. Q. About how many Knights of Labor or their sympathizers were there in that crowd ?— A. 1 should think the crowd did not amount to more than five hundred. I went down and got close to the locomotive and saw the part that had been dis- abled. The glass had been broken. •. Q. Did anything more occur at that time? — A. I saw the locomotive afterwards when it was taken back in the shops ; the taking out of the train was abandoned for the time being. Then the adjutant-general mounted the pilot of a locomotive stand- ing near there and made an address to the crowd, in which he warned them against further interference, stating that he was here in obedience to the order of the gov- ~ ernor of the State, and in obedience to his proclamation, for the purpose; of seeing that the laws of the State were enforced, and for the purpose of seeing that further interference with the movement of trains on this railroad cease, and that he warned the strikers to desist from interfering further with the movement of trains, and stated that the entire power of the State, both civil and military, would be brought to bear, if necessary, to enforce what he was stating to them. He stated that he was about to attempt to move another train, and that another train would be ready in the course of half an hour or so, and would be moved out of this city. He hofjed that the persons who were there assembled in that crowd would not interfere with that train, because if they did it would be the means of sending a military force to this city. He went off then towards the shops with the superintendent and master mechanic for the purpose of getting the train ready. Q. Was there any response of the crowd to his remarks ? — A. None, except an occa- sional yell. , Q. But no response that any one should be held rpsponsible ? — A. No. They were waited on by a committee of strikers for some sort of a conference, as it was called, to interview them and try to get them to refrain from moving a train on that day. Well, shortly afterwards the adjutant-general returned from the shop with the su- perintendent of the road, and they informed me that no further attempt would be made to move a train that day. I asked them why. They said that they had agreed with a committee of Knights of Labor that they would not attempt to move a train that day ; and the committee represented to them that in all probability they would receive advices before next day that would enable them to cease entirely from the interference with the movement of trains. The next morning there was an attempt made by the adjutant-general again to move a train and that engine was killed or disabled in the same way substantially as the others. The strikers or some one from the crowd would rush to the locomotive and open this valve and disable it. There was an attempt made to break the gauge-glass in that engine also. Q. Was the engine run back? — A. That engine was backed up into the round-house and the movement of that train abandoned. The adjutant-general left that day, and within twenty-four hours from that time he had troops here. Q. How many ? — A. We understood that he had four hundred and something. Q. The Kansas State militia, and armed? — A. The entire First Regiment of Kansas State Militia, armed with breech-loading Springfield rifles. Q. After they came what occurred as to the movement of trains? — A. Well, the first attempt to move a train I think was in the forenoon. They arrived here in the evening of one day and the first attempt to move a train was during the next fore- noon. They had a number of soldiers on the pilot of the locomotive and at other points on the engine, armed with loaded muskets and bayonets fixed. There were also guards on other parts of the train, which moved slowly through the city, guarded in that way. Q. And went on to its destination so far as you know ?— A. Yes, sir, it did so far as I know. The mayor issued a proclamation in which he spoke of the presence of troops in the city, and warned all citizens to keep away from the right of way of the com- pany, as there might be a collision between the troops and the mob and he did not wish any one to be hurt, and to avoid trouble not v^ry many were down about the train when it moved out. Q. And no attempt was made at interference ? — A. No attempt was made at inter- ference. Q. Now in general terms you can state what further occurred. — A. The troops re- mained here for several weeks, and at first every train was sent out under guard. Q. For^about how long were they sent out under guard ?— A. Possibly about a week. A patrol was detailed to guard the buildings and right of way, &o., of the railroad company. The vigilance of the guard and the number of them was relaxed considerably when it was found that there was no interference on the part of the strikers with the movement of trains. After they came here there was absolutely no LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 9 interfeience at all, and nothing further to show that it was necessary to keep guard here while they were here. Q. Well, after they went away, did trains continue to move ? — A. I have, perhaps, overlooked the fact that before the military did come, at the instance of the adjutant- general, we had been discussing the matter here in the city. We formed a Law and Order League. It was over 300 strong before the military went away, and we had arms sent to ns by the adjutant-general through the proper authorities, furnishing us with a hundred stand of breech-loading Springfield rifles and ammunition. We de- tailed a guard from our league to go up there and assist in guarding the shops and property of the railroad company before the military were taken away. We did this in order that there should not be a complete letting down by moving the entire mili- tary away at one time ; and they were gradually withdrawn, until finally when they left, our guards, to the number of fifty altogether, took their places and guarded the property. We have in a few instances furnished guards to trains, and our guard has been reduced. Q. Is that guard still continued ? — A. The citizen's guard is still continued. It has been reduced to twelve permanent guards, but with a detail at night for several days past for the purpose of giving additional protection at night. Q. And this guard has been for the purpose of protecting property from destruc- tion ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In your judgment is this guard still necessary ? — A. I am inclined to think that the time has come when it can be dispensed with. Q. That covers in general terms what has occurred in these disturbances t What has been the position of these strikers as to obtaining work f — ^A number of them have returned to work ; a number of others have been arrested and bound over under charges for the violation of criminal statutes. Q. Tou mean some of them have returned to railroad work and on the roads, and those who have not returned to such work, what have they been doing ? — A. Trying to induce the others to quit. Q. Have they been living without any earnings ? — A. Of course some of them have left town and have perhaps secured work elsewhere. Others that are still here have not labored any to my knowledge. Q. Have you knowledge of acts done by those not working to prevent others that are working or were working from continuing in employment ? — A. I have as a mem- ber of the Law and Order League. They were reported to me. Q. You may mention some of the more prominent ones who have ever told you of that. — A. I have been approached by four or five gentlemen who are at present en- gaged in working at the shops who have told me that they were interfered with. Q. Can you give the names of those men, or some of them ? — A. I do not remember any that I can give them now, and I do not think I can give you the names. I was not acquainted with them before. I think Hurst was one of them; I do not recollect his full name. He was a workman in the machine shops. And then I think there is a gentleman who has a son that wears spectacles, named Mendall, who works in the shop, He has also made some communication in tliat connection. Q. This strike, so far as you have knowledge, was without notice to the business men of the community ? — A. It was, so far as I know. Q. Now these trains that you spoke of that were interfered with. Where were they going ? — A. Some of them to Texas and some to Missouri. Q. Then they were trains that were going to other States than this ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And of course carrying inter-State commerce ? — A. I understand that a number of loaded trains bound for Texas were stopped here, and detained in our yards for a number of weeks. Q. Had you knowledge of the local disturbance to the business men of the town and the farming community that has been detailed here ? — A. I have some knowledge in that direction. I know that our business men who had bought their goods in other States, and wanted them here, could not get them, as they were on the way. Q. And how as to the farmers shipping their products and receiving their seeds and agricultural implements? — A. I know that the implement men here complained at that time. Q. Is there any other important matter connected with this strike of which you desire to speak? — A. Nothing further that I know of. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Please state the charges upon which these men were arrested, in general terms. — A. Well, they were arrested on different charges. On the charge of conspiring together to prevent the operation of a railway and the transaction of its business in the movement of its trains. That, under our statute, is a misdemeanor. With the actual prevention of the movement of train's, with obstructing the road — I do not mean by tearing up the rails, but obstructing the bus- iness of the road and interference with its business. That, under our statutes, is a misdemeanor. Then with injuring the property of the railroad company, its locomo- 10 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. tives and cars. Injuring a locomotive is, under our statute, a felony. A uumbei of them were charged with that. Q. A felony is a crime punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary ' — A. Yes, and misdemeanor by imprisonment in the county jail or a fine. And they were charged with tearing up, with the removal and displacement of rails so as to derail a tram. That was a train thrown from the track two or three miles from here. And, by the way, in that connection I wish to say that the rails were displaced just about the time when the special police were attempting to move the trains out of the city. They were displaced in such a manner that if the police who were attempting had succeeded in getting the train out of the city, it would have been derailed and thrown into the creek. The train that was attempted to be moved was to go south. The displacement of the rails was on the north side of the ereek, and but a few feet from the creek, so that the train would have been derailed and precipitated into this stream. The train not succeeding in moving from the city, why, of course, that train was not derailed. The next train, coming from the south, was derailed, but as the misplaced rail was on the north side of the bridge, the train was not precipitated into the stream. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Was that a freight or passenger train ?— A. It was a passenger train that was derailed. Iq that connection it was reported to me that a number of men were seen moving down the track just about the time that we were attempting to take out this train. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Please state how these charges were made against the persons arrested. Were they by affidavit or presentments? — A. They were made upon aiiSdavit. The grand jury was not in session, and it was deemed expedient to have arrests made at once, because some of the parties were leaving. Q. Have any persons been arrested for the derailing done? — A. No one. Understand, I do not state that all the cases of actual obstruction to business, actual injury to . locomotives, the removal of parts of locomotives and the displacement of rails, were charged iu these affidavits to have been done in pursuance of an unlawful conspiracy and in the carrying out of any purpose attached to that conspiracy; and therefore persons who were not directly chq,rged with the displacement of rails or injury to lo- comotives were only charged with the conspiracy, and also held respoijsible for doing those acts in carrying out the conspiracy. Q. You had a citizens' meeting after the collision occurred in the attempt to move the trains?— A. No; before. There had been a number of trains attempted to be moved and prevented before we had that meeting. Q. I mean the meeting in which a large body of the citizens participated ? — A. We had a meeting before that in the opera-house. Q. Was there used in that meeting any violent or severe language, such as they would crush out the Knights of Labor, or other incendiary language ? — A. No, sir ; nothing of the kind. I have invited Knights of Labor to join our law and order league, and have never denounced them as an order. I have said that they were under improper leadership at present, and that as good, law-abiding citizens they ought not to act in sympathy with those men who were responsible for the acts that had been done. I may say that a prominent Knight of Labor attended and warned ns against the move we were about to make, and while his warning was somewhat ambiguous in terms, gave us to understand that it would be fraught with danger and perhaps bloodshed if we carried it out. ALPHA O. BROWN recalled and examined. By the C&airmaK : Question. Since you were on the stand this morning this document has been handed to me with the request to ask you who served it on you? — Answer. I handed it to the judge a few minutes ago. Q. What was the date ? — A. The strike commenced on the 6th of March. That was handed me by Mr. Buchanan, one of the executive board of the Knights of Labor, on the second Sunday after the commencement of the strike. Q. What day ^as that ? — ^A. I do not remember, but about the 20th of March. Q. This city is within a county, is it?-^A. Yes, sir. Q. And the sheriff has jurisdiction in the city just as much as he has outside ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that circular published? — A. Yes, sir; one of the Knights of Labor kept a copy and handed it to one of the papers of Parsons, the Suu or Eclipse. ' Q. Did he say anything to you at the time he delivered this to you ? — A. No, sir ; I asked him if it needed an immediate reply, and ho said; "Not necessarily at present; you can read it over at your leisure." Q. Did you make a reply to the circular ?— A. I did not think it necessary ti; make a reply. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) State whether, when these attempts were made to move the trains, the sheriff or any of his deputies were present. — A. He was here himself, LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 11 and I think he broujjhtin from 20 to 30 men that he brought from outsifle the city, besides what he got here. Q. Were the deputies armed T— A. I cannot say positively that they were. Mr. Obain^. What is the county seat? — A. Oswego, 14 miles from here, and the sheriff resides there. The following letter was then read as a portion of the testimony of Mr. Brown: AN OPEN ij;ttek. Executive Rooms, Knights op Labor, Parsons, Kans. To A. O. Bkotto, Mayor City of Parsons : Sir: We are informed on reliable authority that it is your intention to appoint a number of special police for the alleged purpose of protecting the property of the Missouri Pacific Company here ; that you propose to import from the Territory for this purpose a class of men whose presence in our midst would be a lasting disgrace upon your administration of municipal affairs and a standing reproach upon the fair name of our city. If such be your intentions, we, in the name of the Knights of Labor here, enter our solemn protest against such an outrageous usurpation of power, and would earnestly call your attention to Ordinances, City of Parsons, 13, section 7, and also to senate bill 87, passed at special session of legislature, 1886. For the wanton violation of the laws we propose to hold you responsible. It is not claimed that lawlessness or violence has been attempted here, but, on the contrary, the peace of the city has been maintained and the property of the company amply protected. Yet with a full knowledge of these facts you and your allies have called the sheriff of Labette County and a posse of railroad oflBcials to usurp the functions of your office, where his presence was not required and whe»a he had no interest or jurisdiction whatever. The question may be asked, and it is a pertinent one here, why should railroad corporations be so zealously protected by law while the interests of 90 per cent, of our citizens are disregarded or left to protect themselves as best they can, and those citizens the very men who build up our city by produc- tive industry ? Sir, there can be but one answer to this question. The servile fol- lowers of soulless corporations must obey their dictates, and in this case the old proverb holds good, "The thing created cannot rise above the creator." This struggle in the cause of labor will continue. Our flag may go down in the conflict, but if so, it would be by the difftdence of our city officials and their ever ready submission to cringe and bend their knees to their god — Mammon. But be- fore our banners are furled in Parsons we will ascertain who are our friends and who our foes are. "Freedom's battle, once begun, Bequeathed from bleeding sire to son, Though baffied oft, is ever won." Local Executivb Board, No. 3703, Knights of Labor. JOHN DEAN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. How long have you resided in Parsons ? — Answer. Eight years. Q. How long have you been engaged in business here ? — A. Six years. Q. What is the character of your business ? — A. Greneral merchandise, dry goods, and groceries. Q. Wholesale and retail 1 — A. Tes, sir ; we do some wholesaling. Q. What is the aggregate amount of business in your line in this city ? — A. I can hardly say. There are four or five general stores here. Q. Can you give me an estimate of the aggregate amount of business transacted here in all the stores ? — A. I suppose they do a business of a million and a half a year, I should say. Q. Was there a loss on account of the strike in the month of March? — ^A. I should think so. , Q. Can you give an estimate of what the percentage of loss was ? — A. As near as I could give an approximate idea of it, it would be about 25 per cent. Q. Traceable directly to that cause ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the prospect at the beginning of this season for this city ?— A. I think we had a very fine prospect. We had some railroad building in view, public building, and a hotel, and everything looked as though we were going to have a remarkably busy year. 12 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. / Q. Do you include this anticipated prosperity in the estimate of your loss, or do you refer to the actual loss f — A. I refer to the loss itself. Q. On a basis of the business that you did last year t — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have heard the statements made by other witnesses in regard to this con- dition and how it affected the farmers and their produce. What is your opinion in regard to those statements ? Do you coincide with those gentlemen or not ? — ^A. Yes, 'sir; and there are some additional matters that have not been mentioned. Right south of town here there is a man who ships a great many trees. There has also been a good deal of delay in getting seeds here — garden seeds and matters of that kind. We had some of them tied up during the strike on the Missouri Pacific. Q. I am requested to ask you in reference to other matters. Did yon testify in court that you believed the sheriff was drunk when he signed the telegram requesting troops f — A. I did not. Q. Do you refuse credit to these strikers? — A. I did after a certain time. We had a good many of these strikers trading with us on credit, and we waited some for the pay-car to come, and we did not feel able to carry them any longer, and we were ob- etrncted some. Q. What do you mean by your being obstructed — that they were out of employ t — A. The pay-car did not come around because of the strike. VELASCO J. KNEIPP sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. State how long you have been living in Parsons. — Answer. I have been living in Parsons and the vicinity for fifteen years. I was on a farm that I have. I have lived on the farm about five years, and do business at the same time. Q. In what business are you at present engaged ? — A. I am engaged in the real estate business. Q. I would like a statement from you as to the effects of the strike upon the busi- ness of Parsons ? — A. Well, as far as my business is concerned it has been very maoh depressed. There is absolutely no selling property at any reasonable price, and if there are any sales they are few. Q. What has been the state of the real estate market during the last eighteen months ? — A. Well, it was depressed last fall, but we looked for a better time this spring, and had reason to expect it. Q. Can yon state anything in regard to the effect of the strike upon the commercial business at Parsons ? — ^A. I can only state that as I have heard it from the merchants. Q. What is the general opinion upon that subject ?— A. The general opinion js that the trade has fallen off a great deal this spring. Q. Trade to and from the City ?— A. Yes, sir ; all round. Q. The goods necessary for agricultural purposes have been delayed, have they ?— A. Yes, sir ; to a considerable extent. Q. Were the shipments from this town to Texas and Missouri interfered with?— A. They were. On the Missouri, Kansas and Texas road they were stopped entirely, except by express, and were delayed some on the Gnlf road. Q. Were you present at any of those attempts to move trains described here by Mr. Kimball? — A. Yes, sir ; I was present at the time. Q. You have heard his statements of the circumstances that occurred there at the time. Do you corroborate his statement ?— A. They were substantially the same as I saw. There are some parties that have a lot of hay in the Indian Territory. They had large orders for the hay and could not ship it on account of the strike. Mr. John S. Sipple was the party who was baling the hay and shipping it. Q. To what points would they ship ?— A. That I do not know, because I never was acquainted with their business. They lost a good deal of money by the tie-up. Q. Were any threats made towards you for your participation in the law and order movement as it is called?— A. There were no personal threats made towards me. I received a couple of little notes before the Law and Order League was started, but not since. Q. Were they anonymous ?— A. Yes, sir ; they were. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Have you any idea who were the authors?— A. I have not any positive knowledge of it, HARLAN PENFIELD sworn and examined. By Mr. Pakkeb : Question. Where do you reside f— Answer. At Nevada, Mo. Q. Go on and state what you know about the strike at that place. —A. On the 6th day of March at 10 a. m., the switch-engine in the yard whistled, givino' a sig- nal that there Was to be a strike. Immediately after the whistle sounded my cash- ier turned his keys over, saying, as he turned them over to me, that there was a strike. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 13 I asked him if he had any grievance, and he said " No, we were j ust ordered to strike," and he was followed in his action by almost all the station employes and the whole of the yard men. I talked to the men and asked them if they had any grievances, and they said, " No ; that they had been ordered to strike." Q. Yon are railroad agent at that place on the Missouri Pacific Railroad? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How far is that distant from Parsons ? — A. Seventy miles. Q. Now go on with your statement? — A. Well, my men all quit with the excep- tion of two warehouse men, the night watchman, and three yardmen. Q. About how many men quit? — A. About 18; from 15 to 18 quit. They put the yard-engine on the side-track and as other trains came in they put them there, and there -were no yardmen to get them out. On that night we jfiad a through freight train with perishable and time freight to pass our station about C o'clock. When they were just about ready to pull out, the strikers in the darkness went to the en- gineer and told him not to go out. They took charge of the engine, disconnected it from the train, put the engine in the round-hdnse and side-tracked the train. That was the last freight train we had that day, and there were five trains left in the yard. That evening the strikers or Knights of Labor went to the city mayor and wanted to be appointed to guard the property of the company. He commissioned S5 or 30 as special police. They came about the property armed with revolvers, and every time I hired a man they would wait upon him and say: " We are appointed by the ex- ecutive committee to notify you that you had hotter not work here." Even going so far as to tell men that these were dubious times and that they had better not go to work. I asked the men what they were there for. They were there all the time, preventing men from working. Finally I went to the mayor and told him that they were there presumably to guard property, but really to prevent any work being done at that station, and requested him to order them away as special policemen. He did, and put on our own men. As long as these others were there we could not make any at- tempt to transact business. On the 21st of March I got orders to make arrangements to take a Government freight train on the 22d from Nevada to Parsons. When the engineer came to fire up the engine the strikers, who had for several days been ab- staining from coming on the property, gathered around, I should say, to the number of three, four, or five hundred. While they were making preparations to get the engine fired up they were talking to the men and endeavoring to dissuade them from doing so, and a man named Frank Bristol and another named Henry Stratton, not a striker, but a Knight of Labor, obstructed the track right by the round-house — the main track — by pushing cars down. We finally succeeded in getting the engine fired up and were switching and pulling cars back. After we got the cars back they still insisted that we should not do any work, and I remember that two men, a man named Campbell and another, said that the engine should never go out of the round-house. I told them that the superintendent had told me to take a train of Government freight from Nevada to Parsons, and gave them to understand what it was. Q. What do you mean' by Government freight ? — A. Government supplies for the use of the troops. However, the Government freight train did not come. Nevada is a coaling station. We have a platform that holds between three and four hundred tons, and 1 wanted to put on it enough to supply the passenger trains. As we could not take out theGovernment freight train, I thought we should put up some coal. I asked the engineer if he would move some cars for me and put the coal up there, and he said he would. We commenced to do that, and one John Vandolan warned me not to do it, and told me if I did do it my name was Dennis, and used such other epithets as " son of a, bitch and scab." We succeeded in getting the cars coupled together and making the switch. We found the crowd still there in increased numbers, I should say fifteen hundred or two thousand, and as we were attempting to leave the track for the coal chute, and I got off the cars, some one said to me: "If you touch that switch, you do it at the peril of your life." The United States marshal told them that the coal was being put up there for the use of the mail trains, and that if any man molested me he would shoot him on the spot. I turned the switch, and we took up the coal and put it at its place. I then received instructions to put the engine back in the round-house, and see that it was properly protected. I did so by putting guard on the engine, and at ten o'clock at night these guards were approached by a mob of eight men masked, who told them to leave the engine right away. They left the engine, and it was killed, by drawing the fire, taking out the water, and taking part from the engine. Q. And was it actually disabled so that it could not be used? — A. It had to be re- paired again. That was on the 22d. For two days no effort was made to move a train. On the 26th I received notice from the superintendent that they expected the Government train on the 28th, and to make the necessary preparations to take it from Nevada to Parsons. Tho same opposition was repeated during the firing of the en- gine, but there was no interference with the movement of the train. There was a Government officer there, and there was no open interference. 14 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And tlie Government train was moved and went on towards its destination f— A. Yes, sir. But after the train passed tliis station we had some work to do and we attempted to do the work in the yard in trying to get a freight train started. Q. Were you interfered with in doing it ?— A. Yes, sir. After the train moved we wanted to put up coal again. They sent notice to the engineer not to work the engine— signed by members of the Executive Board of the Knights of Labor, not to use that engine ; and even came down and threatened an engineer by the name of Cross and the fireman, and told them that it was dangerous to run that engine. The engineer told me that they had been threatened and that he could not work, and I called upon another engineer and he said he would work it, and he did so. Q. Did he use the engine ? — A. He did use the engine. Q. Was he interfered with in doing it?— A. Yes, sir; a man, one of the strikers, got upon the engine and refused positively to get off and he was pushed off. Q. Was the engineer able to handle the engine and run it f — A. Yes, sir ; he ran it with the protection of officers. A day or two following this the same occurrences took place again, fxcept that they were more demonstrative. They interfered by pulling the pins and throwing them at yardmen and switchmen, and setting breaks. They got onto the engine and when the deputy sheriff told them to get off they said they would not go until shot. Their eyes were glaring and they were almost frothing at the mouth, and they boaided the engine and forced the engineer off, telling him that he could not run that engine. Q. Did they stop the handling of the engine that day ?- A. Yes, sir. Finally, we called upon the citizens of the town and they came down in a body of from fifty to a hundred and determined to protect the property. Q. Under their protection did other trains commence moving? — ^A. Under their protection the Knights of Labor gave way. Q. And you went on with business regularly after that? — A. Yes, sir; after that we did business pretty regularly. Q. And about what date was that ? — A. We have done business since about the 29th, 30th, or 31st of March. Q. What became of this train of perishable freight? — A. Well, sir, we had six cars of perishable freight. I sold the contents of three of the cars by order. Q. What was in these six cars ? — A. Three cars were potatoes, and in the other three there was butter. We had to throw some of the contents away. Q. Now, I want to know as to the amount of freight at present being moved com- pared with the freight moved before the strike ? — A. There is an increase, I think, judging from the loads. Q. I do not mean cars, but the amount of actual freight, and wish to know whether there is more moving or less moving than prior to the commencement of the strike ?— A. I should say there is more moving. Q. How does the number of men you now employ there compare with the number of men employed before the strike began? — A. It is about the same. Q. How many did yon employ before the strike began ?^A. My pay-roll carried sixteen men before the strik'C, and I am carrying eighteen now. I would say that about the time we were attempting to move trains, after we first commenced with it, we had a water-tank about three miles south on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and another about twelve miles away. They continued to prevent us filling engines by breaking these tanks, and some one disabled tho tanks both south and west of us, and we had to fill one or two engines at the city hydrant. Q. Were the tanks disabled ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. By breaking the tanks ? — A. By breaking the engine and breaking the machinery or moving it. Q, You have no knowledge as to who did this?— A. I have no personal knowledge. Q. You had no knowledge of who did any of these acts of violence? — A. No, sir; I am sorry to say I did not. ' Q. (By Mr. O'uthwaite.) Did yon not say that there were eighteen men who quit , work, leaving five in your employ? — ^A. I said twelve to fifteen when the strike first began. Q. (By Mr. Pakker.) How many unemployed railroad men are there now at Ne- vada? — A. All with the exception of two or three, who have removed; the others re- main idle. Q. Then there are twelve or about that who remain there idle; do you mean that, or a larger number? — A. About ten or twelve. Q. (By the Chairman.) Did you ever know the cause of the strike?— A. No, sir; tho men there were all satisfied. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Did they never tell you what their grievances were?— A. They never have to this day. Q. Did they never make any statement in your presence as to the reason for the strike? — A. After the strike occurred they told me that a man named Hall had been discharged; but I am speaking of the grievances at Nevada Station. There was no cause or grie'tance there. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 15 Q. This question is suggested for mo to ask you: Would they come to you with a statement of their grievances ; was your authority over them such that they would look to you for redress t — ^A. The men always have confided with me, but after they struck they reported to the officers of the Knights of Labor. VELASKO J. KNEIPP recalled and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. State what causes or reasons for this strike you heard given by the men who struck, at the time it occurred. — Answer. I talked to several of the men who went out on the strike, and they all stated that they had no wrongs of their own ; that they were simply ordered out by the committee of the EJoights of Labor. I asked several of them what reasons the Knights of Labor had for ordering them all to quit, and they said it was in reference to this man who had been discharged in Texas and they refused to take him back. , Q. Did they ever state in your presence any other cause ? — A. Every one I have talked with said they had no reason as far as they were concerned themselves. They did not want to go out on strike, but they were ordered to go out, and did it. Q. What statement, if any, have you heard them make justifying their action? — A. I never beard them make any statement to justify their action. They simply seemed to feel that the laws of their order compelled them to go out. Q. You may state whether at any time you heard any complaint concerning the wages of section-men ? — A. Yes ; after the strike had been on about two weeks they commenced to complain that the section-men were not paid enough; but they did not say it was the cause of the strike. Q. What was their claim in regard to the section men at that time, after the strike had been on a couple of weeks ? — A. They said they were not paid enough. Q. Did they not claim that an advance had been promised them from $1.50 to $1.75 per day ? — A. No, sir ; I never heard anything of the kind. They never said It to me SAMUEL J. THUEBEE sworn and examined : By the Chairman : Question. Where do you reside ? — Answer. At Parsons, Mo. Q. What is your business ? — A. I am traveling engineer for the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Q. How long have you been so employed ? — A. Three years. Q. Are you still in the employment of the company ? — A. I am. Q. This investigation, as you'are aware, is to ascertain if possible the causes of the recent strike on the southwestern system. If you know anything pertinent to that subject, please state it and give your means of knowledge. — A. I was most of the time at Nevada. I was sent for on the 22d of the month to iire up an engine and bring a Government train through ; that is, a train containing Government freight. I fired up the engine and then got out to put some coal on the shutes. There was a great mob collected there, ajiout 400. They tried to stop me from moving the engine, but I took her up and put coal up there and then put the engine on a side track. I was in the office, and while there some men came there and called me. I went out to the track and found the fire out and the water blow-off cook was open. That was the last trial that we could make for four days. It appeared^that the freight train had been delayed. I afterwards got orders from the master mechanic to fire-up the engine again. I fired her up again with the intention of bringing that train out of there, and they did not molest me at tbat time. Q. What was that train loaded with ? — ^A. I do not know ; It was the Government train, and that was why they said they would let it go. Q. You are testifying to the same subject as Mr. Penfield ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You heard his statement of the facts about this matter? — A. I did not hear all of it, he talked so low. Well, then I went back on the 27th and fired up two more engines to get a train out toward Sedalia. We had a great deal of difficulty. They got up and set brakes, pulled pins, and finally the sheriff arrested one of the crowd. Some of them got into the cab and we threw them off. Q. How did you get them off f — A. We threw them off. Q. Were there any threats of personal violence made towards you? — A. Not towards me. Q. Did you ask them to get off before you threw them off? — ^A. I told them to get off. Q. Did they attempt to kill the engine ? — ^A. No, because they did not have time ; l)ecause they got off or were off; before they could kill her they were on the ground. Well, they went off, and then I went on to Sedalia. I went back on Sunday and took the pony out. She was disabled. The pony engine is the switch engine that is used m the yard. I took her out to the tanks, filled her up, and brought her out. That 16 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■was on Sunday, There was nothing done there that day. On the Monday morning I started out to switch in the yard, and the crowd tried to stop us ; the men pulling out pins. I went up to a deputy to give orders, and I saw my engineer and fireman coming out of the cab. Some of the men pulling them out ; and the engine was then taken into the side track. With the deputy sheriff to fire for me, I went out with the engine myself, and then after we came back we did not do any switching ; and we did not do much there till they got out warrants and the citizens took Iiold of and settled the affair. Q. Have you stated all that you know about what occurred at Nevada? — A. That is all I know about it at Nevada. Q. What do you know about the troubles here? — ^A. I was here the morning the first effort was made to get out a train. Q. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Kimball on that subject ? — A. Yea, sir ; but I do not remember much of it, though. The Chaihman. We do- not want an accumulation of testimony on the same sub- ject. If these witnesses have stated in substance the fact, there is no necessity to re- peat. 1 The WiTSKSS. Well, I was sent out to get engine 53. The sheriff came up with me on the engine there and we came up here, and a big crowd of people were present. We worked our way up to the turn-table, turned around and came back as far as the water tank, and took water and stopped. The crowd tried to persuade the engineer not to go out, and they afterwards took the engine back to the turn-table, killed the engine and put her in the round-house. I tried to stop them, but they took rae back. Q. Do you know anything about the causes of the strike ? — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. Have you heard any of the Knights of Labor state what the causes of the strike were? — A. Well, yea; theytold meitwas on account of a man in Texas, or Jericho, or somewhere, that they struck for. That was all that they ever told me. Q. Did they ever make any complaint to you of a different character ?^A . No, sir; that seemed to be all there was of it. Q. Was the only complaint that they ever made based upon the discharge of H in Texas ? — A. I did not know anything about the strike until the whistle blew they all turned out and said it was a strike. Afterwards I heard that this man HaU was the cause of it. Q, What is the duty of a traveling engineer ? — A, Well, as a traveling engineer I have to look after the machinery of the road and the engineers tosee that they keep their engines up in good shape, and see that they are capable of running them. FRANK P. ANDERSON sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. Where do you live f — Answer. At Nevada, Mo. Q. How have you been employed recently 1 — A. I am a railroad contractor, and I am also engaged in coal mining and in zinc and lead mining. Q. At what points ? — A. I do the coal mining at Rich Hill, and lead and zinc min- ing in Jasper County, Missouri, but my personal attention has been given to railroad building for the past iive or six months. Q. I will request you to state what you know of the cause of this strike, if any- thing. — A. Well, sir, I do not know anything of the cause of it except what the strikers have told. ' Q. Were their statements made at the time ? — A. Yes ; made at the time that, the strike took place. Q. What statements were made to you as to their reason for striking ? — A. They first claimed that it was on account of the discharge of a m^n named Hall on the Texas and Pacific road, but it appears that when that became untenable they after- wards claimed that they had other grievances of their own, and that the strike was made on that accouut. Q. What were the personal grievances that they claimed to have had ?— Ai I do not know, except that I saw them stated once in the papers, Q, Have any of the strikers themselves told you directly of their personal griev- ances?— A. The only personal grievance that I heard them give was on account of the pay of the section men. Q. Was it because it was not advanced from $1.50 to $1.75, or something of that kind?— A. It was something of that kind that they claimed. I think they claimed that it was probably $1.10 and that they wanted it raised to |1. 50. Q. Please state what you have observed as to the effect of the strike upon the busi- ness interests of the country, the commercial and business interests especially.— A. As far as my observation has gone it has been very great, Q. How has it shown itself ?— A, I believe that for twenty or thirty days business was at a standstill ; that is, all railroad business. Q. Is the coal which you mine at RichHill transported out of the State of Missouri?— A. Yes, sir ; a portion of it. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 17 Q. Was that transportation interfered witli by tbe strike ? — A. Yes, sir. The com- pany that I work for in the coal business in taking out coal ship over the Missouri Pacific system; and, of course, their trains having stopped, that suspended the coal business; and there tvas no coal transported until the trains got into operation again. Q. How did the strike interfere with the other business in which you are engaged ? — A. Well, I cannot say how it is in the business of the lead and zinc mine, and in the shipment of ore. The ore is sold to purchasers, and we do not know whether it will fo over the Missouri Pacific road or whether it would have gone over the Frisco road,» was not there during the tie-up, and consequently cannot speak of its effect upon that business. Q. What other facts do you know that would throw any light upon the question ? — A. It afiected us very much in the building trade. A great many contemplated new buildings. The State of Missouri is building an institution for the insane ; the con- tractor had come on the ground and prepared to commence work, and he was stopped for twenty or thirty days on account of his inability to get lime and lumber ; and he would have been able to have given employment to 50 or 75 men. Q. Where had he to get the lime from? — A. The lime comes, some of it, from Han- nibal, Mo., some from Chicago, 111., and some of it from Kansas. We have no sys- tem of road except the Missouri Pacific, and we were cut off from connection with any other road. The merchants had to haul their goods over from Port Scott during the continuance of the strike, and they had also to haul flour, as we have only one flouring-milWn our town. Of course that all had a tendency to put up the price of those commodities. Q. What is the population of Nevada ? — A. It is about C,500. DAVID H. HOLLISTER sworn and examined. By Mr. Pabeer : Question. What is your age ? — Answer. I am 42 years old. Q. Where do you reside ? — A. At Nevada, Mo. Q. How long have you lived there ? — ^A. About a year and two months. Q. What is your business there? — A. lam a yard-master for the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Q. Were you on the ground during the strike at that point ? — A. I was employed there as yard-master about the 6th of March. Q. Tell us what occurred there in addition to what the other witnesses have told and which took place in your presence ? — A. The first I knew of it was that a com- mittee of Knights of Labor came to my house to see me — I work at night and sleep in the day time — and wanted to know if I would not join with them in the strike. I asked them what was their object. They said it was for the benefit of the laboring class, and they also said that they wanted me to join with them. I told them that I was satisfied with my wages for the present ; that I had no complaint, and that I did not see how I could, bat I would not go down and work that afternoon. Q. Did they specify anything more definite as the reason for the strike than that it was for the benefit of the laboring classes ? — A. No, sir; they said nothing else at that time. Q. Was anything said as to wages? — A. There was nothing said about wages. Q. Was any thing said about Hall ? — A. Not at that time. I went down that after- noon and found all my men were ordered off duty. Our engine was killed, and there was nothing for us to do but look after the passenger trains. There was no labor for us. Q. Did the occurrences take place after this as have been stated by the other wit- nesses who have testified here — Mr. Fenfield and Mr. Thurber? — A. Pretty ^uch the same. I have asked a great many of these men what they were striking for, and the general expression was, " Damned if I know." They would say there is to be an assess- ment of 5 cents apiece, and something like a million and a half of money raised. The strike went on, and then there was some talk that the section men were to get some benefit out of the strike. Q. Have you heard whether there was any dissatisfaction on the part of section- men as to the amount of wages they received? — A. At the outset that was probably talked of. Something was said about the sectionmen. Q. When did you hear that? — ^A. I think it must have been the second day after the commencement of the strike. Q. Not before that time? — A. I think not. jQ. And then not from the sectionmen, but from other strikers ? — A. I heard it from sectionmen and other strikers. Q. They then made chat complaint ? — A. They then made that complaint. Q. And gave that as a ground of the strike ? Did they or did they not ? — A. They said they struck because they were requested to strike. Most of them did not give it as their grounds. Q. I understood you to say at first that they did not give the cause, but stated that G984 LAB 3 2 18 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. they were ordered to strike, and tliat the reason was for the good of the working class, and now you state that there was some talk ahont the wages of sectionmen.— A. I said that the men that approached me when they were first ordered out said that, and afterwards the sectionmen and other men spoke ahout the pay at a later day, and up to the present they speak about the same thing. Q. I want you to tell us a little more definitely what they said and who said it, and what class of men it was that complained as to the sectionmen'o wages. — A. What tclass of men that spoke ahout it ? Q. Did sectionmen complain to you ahout their wages, or explain to you that that was the ground of the strike ?— A. I guess they did ; some of the sectionmen. Q. Now, when was that that they complained to you of it ?— A. It must have been the second or third day after the strike. , Q. Did other men besides the sectionmen give that as one of the grounds of the strike ? — A. I do not know that they did ; but said that it would be a benefit to thorn, and that they were to be benefited. Q. (By the Chairman.) What were the names of the committee that waited on you ?— A. Mr. Nichols, Mr. Saka, Mr. Shell, Mr. Danphine, and Mr. Kelly. Q. Were they Knights of Labor?— A. I do not know, sir; I understand that they were. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor f — A. I am not. ■Q. Are your assistants in the yard Knights of Labor? — A. They were not. ■Q. You never did quit work, then, did you? — A. iTo, sir; I did not. • •Q. That is, you never voluntarily quitted work ? — A. No, sir. JOSEPH M. SHEA sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. What is your occupatiou ? — Answer. I am a switchman at the present time. \ Q. Was that your occupation at the time of the strike? — A. It was previous to the strike. Q. Were you in the employment of an j- railroad company at the time of the strike!— A. I was in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Q, Where?— A. At Nevada, Mo. q1 State what you know, if anything, in connection with this strike, and theoanso of the strike ? — A. I did not know the cause. I was working nights, and about half past ten o'clock the clerk came up to the room and notified me that there were several gentlemen downstairs wanted to see me, and I told him to bring them up. They were Mr. Saks and Mr. Bowman, and several others whose names I don't recollect. They asked me if I would not strike, and I asked them what it was for, and they said it was not necessary to explain that. All they requested of me was that I should quit, the same as they had. They told me the engine was dead and in the hole,aud that if I was called upon to take employment I was to say that I did not want to do it,and they went out. I believe I told my yardmaster of the conversation, and told him that if he was ready to go to work that I would get up and go down there after dinner. I met several of these parties and asked them what the strike was for, but they did not tell ine ; and they have never yet told me. Q. Had you anything to do with the attempt to move engines and trains there!— A. Yes, sir ; the night after they bad notified us not to work I went there and found Mr. HoUister (he was at that time night yardmaster) and Mr. Treadway, a man who is working with me, and asked if it would not be best for us to stay and assist in changing sleeper on the L. and S. division when the train come in, and vice versa, and we all concluded to do it, and we asked Mr. Penfield if we worked would we he paid for it, and he said he did not know. We changed the sleepers that night, and we were lying in our beds about 1 o'clock, when Mr. Saks and Mr. Kelly and two or three others came into the room and remarked that we were pretty " sons of bitches," and that they had quit. We told them that all we had done was to change the sleeper, but they did not accept our excuse, and the consequence was that we went home. Q. What idea do ^ou mean to convoy by that ? — A. Tliey threatened that we would be violently dealt with in case we continued to work. My life had been threatened before by the Knights of Labor, and they had sent me notice with their seal on it, telling me that I had to leave town, as I was known as a company man. I do not recollect all the expressions used to me, but only some of them. This was given to me at Kansas City, by a man named Mendle, William Eockwell, and some others. Q. Did you know them to be Knights of Labor ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; I knew them to be Knights oif' Labor. Q. How long before this affair did they notify you ? — A. I think it was about the 28th or 29th of November ; and then I got anonymous letters afterwards. Q. Do you know whether they came from Knights of Labor or not ? — A. No, sir; LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 19 I did not. I was giving that as an explanation for my reason for going home. I did not want to stand up against three or four men. Q. Toll us what language they used f — A. They told me I would he lulled in case I insisted upon working at the office. Q. And yon helieved them ? — A. I positively did at the time ; I took their word for it. Q. What became of the other man that was there with you ? — A. He went home also. » Q. Wore you treated with any violence during this strike? — A. I had been pulled from cars and trains by the Knights of Labor and by one named Vandole. There were crowds there of some two or three hundred several times, and I cannot say on which occasion that was, but it was during the time we were attempting to get out ■a, train north. Q. How long did this state of affairs last ? — A. The violent element infested the yard about two or three days. Q. Killing engines and doing damage to property — is that what you mean ? — ^A. I mean the mob. They did not kill many engines. The citizens rose up after awhile and said that they would not allow any such work done in Nevada ; and after that we did not have any more engines killed. Q. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Penfield and Mr. Thurber as to the occur- rences there. What have you to say as to the accuracy of their statement T — A. What I hear^of them I believe to be identical with what I saw. Q. Do yon know anything specially that is not known to anybody else but your- self in this matter? — A. I do not know anything in particular. Q. (By Mr. Otjthwaite.) Please to fix the date of the communication which you received, and which you state has the seal of the order upon it. — A. I think it was the 28th or 29tb of November. I turned that over to Mr. Frey, and I suppose it is in the hands of the ofBcers at the present time. It came about in this way : I was ap- pointed, through the influence of Mr. Frey, agent at Kansas City. I refused to join ihe Knights of Labor. Then the Knights gave notice to Mr. Drake that in case I should take charge they would strike. That was the 1st or 2d day of November. I had gone over there on the 28th of October. Q. How did you know that they interviewed Mr. Drake? — A. Mr. Drake and Mr. Dalby went down and mot a grievance committee, and when they came back they told me that they did not want to have any trouble with the men, and the best thing they thought would be to let me go back to Nevada, I staid there ten days, and then came back. That was a position of $135 per month. Q. (By the CllAlEMAN.) And the company did not sustain yon? — A. The company backed down and did not sustain their nominee. Q. And when your life was threatened you backed down that night ?^ — A. I left that night. Q. I believe yon say that none of them told you what was the cause of the strike? — A. They never told me. Q. What company were you going to work for ? — A. It is the Southwestern system. I have been at work for no other company. y. The reason assigned to you by the railroad officials was that the Knights of Labor threatened to strike in case you were employed, and that they did not want to have trouble with the Knights of Labor, and therefore they could not employ you, is that correct? — A. Yes, sir; that was at Kansas City. Q. What positions in the railroad company didMr. Drake and Mr. Dalby occupy ? — A. Mr. F. B. Drake was assistant superintendent at the time ; he is superintendent at Sedalia now. Mr. James Dalby was trainmaster ; he is at Kansas City, at head- quarters. TEAVER W. NEWALL sworn and examined. By Mr. Pakkeii : Question. Where do you reside, and what is jour age ? — Answer. I reside at Par- sons, and my age is forty. . Q. What is j^our occupation ? — A. I am master mechanic of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Division of the Missouri Pacilic road. Q. And that was your position during the month of March last? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have heard some of the evidence this morning? — ^A. Yes, sir ; some of it* Q. As to the strike and the trouble growing out of it? — A. Yes, sir. Q; Have you any knowledge of the cause of the strike ? — A. No, sir. On the 6th of March I was in the shop and at 10 o'clock the whistle blew. I immediately went back to the office and there met the general foreman, and asked him to go after the committee. Q. What committee do you refer to?— A. .The local grievance committee in the shops. Q. Of what order? — ^A. I presume the Knights of Labor. While he was gone they 20 LABOR TROUBLES IK THE SOUTH ASD WEST. came into ray ofiBce. I asked the question or rather remarked, "Why have you stopped work ?" The answer was " We have stopped to win." Q. Who were this committee ? — A. Ej B. Hollis and Charles Dope of the ronnd- honse. Q. Were thcy'employed in the shops f — A. Yes, sir. I asked the question what they proposed to do, and ^h'eir answer was to the eifect that they would let the passenger trains run, but nothiog else. The question was then asked about our office force, a* it was that time in the month when it was necessary that the force should be used to settle up last month's business, and I wanted that force to be allowed to remain. Part of the pay-rolls were made out. But they did not propose to have that done. They said they proposed to guard the property, and 1 told them that if they did they would have to pay for it themselves, to which they did not object. That was about the substance of that conversation. Q. Was anything said during that conversation as to the reason or cause for the strike! — A. I asked him if there was any trouble here. Theysaid, "No, sir; we have got no grievances here." The next morning, Sunday morning, Mr, Golden, division superintendent, and myself went into the assembly room of the Knights of Labor, and as some of our engines had been disabled here,*I made a demand that the parts that had been taken from some of the engines should be restored. Q. What were those parts T — A. The valve-rod, throttle-connection, and the link of the lever. Q. Without which the engines could not be used ? — A, Most emphatically not, sir. They answered the question, " How do we know where the pieces were, or who did this thing ? " The question was then asked if there was any trouble, or any cause, or anything here that we could settle to end this trouble. They said there was nothing; the only place it could be settled was at Marshall, Tex. On March 6 there were five disabled engines in the round-house here at Parsons. During that night, and after- wards, as engines came in they were disabled. At different times during the strike there were seventeen engines in all disabled. Q. And all disabled at one time? — ^A. Yes, sir; until we could get sufBcient time t^ guard them and put them into repair again. Q. During what period were they in that disabled condition ? — A. From the 6th of March until the troops came here, on the iJd of April. Q. Go on with your statement of the occurrences at the interview with the Knights at their room ? — A. They simply laughed at us. We made repeated attempts to movo trains out, but the cars were uncoupled and the engines killed. Q. How many men were employed at the shop 1 — A. There were 208 men employed at the shop before the strike. Q. How many struck ? — A. They all went out. Q. Did they go out voluntarily or because they were ordered out? — A. The ma- jority of them went out voluntarily, but quite a number went out because they were ordered out. Q. Ordered out by whom ? — A. Most certainly not by the company. Q. "Vyere they not compelled to stop by the company after the pay-roll was suspend- ed ? — A. Some firemen were, after our business was suspended. Q. What other information have you as to the cause of their striking or the rea- sons that were given by the men for going out f-^A. Well, sir, the only information I have as to the cause was the allegation about this man at Marshall. Q. Had you heard any complaint as to the payment of the section men f — A. That was a subsequent question brought up after the strike. Q. You have heard the evidence of other witnesses as to the collision between the officials and the strikers and the other disturbances. Are these statements, so far as yon have knowledge, correct as made here t — A. I believe they are. Q. Are there any other facts not testified to that yon know of? If so, just state them.^A. I know of nothing but what has been offered here. Q. How many men are you employing in the shops now ? — A. One hundred and thirteen. Q. Is that all you need ? — A. That is about aW we need. Q. How many strikers are there here now and ontof employment ? — A. I cannot tell; some of them have left town. I cannot approximate them. The time was so short from my first coming here that I knew few of them. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) How long were you here before the strike ? — A. I came here on the 8th of February, and the strike was on the 6th of March. Q. (By the Chairman.) How is it that you can now do the work with 113 men when it required 208 before the strike ; have yon increased the hours of labor?— A. We have increased the hours of labor from nine hours to ten hours. Previous to the strike the hours were nine hours a day. • Q. Have you increased the wages correspondingly ? — A. Most assuredly. The mon are paid by the hour. iLABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 21 Q. Yoa do not pay them by the day f — A. Wo pay them by the day, but if they •work nine hours they are paid for it, and not paid for ten hours. Q. They are not paid for a nominal part of a day ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Can you give any reason why these 113 men are sufficient to do the wort that 208 were doing ? — A. The only reason I can give is the fact that with but few excep- tions the men who have come back are skilled laborers, and a majority of them went out in this strike. With few exceptions all of them have made application to go back to work. Q. How is it that you can carry on your work with 113 men now— many of whom were employed before the strike — when, according to your statement, it required 208 men to do the same work before the strike ? — A. Before the strike the company was carrying more men than it needed, and the -work can be done to a better advantage with less force than we had before the strike. The officials had really no authority in the shops. The men practically ran them, and the officials could not discharge a man but what they would be compelled to put him back. ■ Q. (By Mr. Parker.) To whom do you refer as the officials f — A. The officials im- mediately in charge of the Department. The foreman or master mechanic. Q. The policy is changed as to that ? — A. It is the endeavor of the company to op- erate the road itself, I believe, as far as it can. Q. (By the Chairman.) Do you intend to convey the idea that the railroad corpora- tion kept in their employment nearly a hundred more men than they needed T — A. There was a larger force than was necessary, Q. How much larger 1 — ^A. About 25 per cent. Q. Then you need more men than you have got now ? — A. Probably we will put ■on more men as our business will permit. Q. Mr. Penfield said the work was greater than before the strike. If so, would yon not require more men now than you have employed f — ^A. Yes, sir ; we. will employ more men. Q. Will you wait for them to come and offer themselves f — A. Yes, the right men •can. Q. Are yon instructed by the management of the company not to employ Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. When a man comes for employment, do you ask him no-w if he is a Knight of Labor ! — ^A. Sometimes I do. It depends upon the man. If a man has been ob- 4noxiou3, or violent, I ask him. I have asked some men to withdraw from the organ- ization and I would employ them, and I have got others employed now that I never disked anything. Q. Were there any instructions issued to you on that subject ? — A. No positive in- Btractions in any way. Q. What do you mean by the word "positive?" — ^A. I have no instructions that -are positive any further than to be carefal as to who was employed. Q. You seem to intimate that you had some instructions ? — A. Only that. Q. Do you know anything about any intimidation or threats that were made to the men who went to work? — A. Only as it has cometo me ftom them. Q. What proportion of the strikers went back to work? — ^A. About 60 per cent, of the force was employed. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Wasanycomplaintmadetoyou priortothestrikeofgriev- -ances ou the part of any of the employes in your department ? — A. The only grievance that came under my observation while I have been here was, that ou the 27th of February a committee composed of Mr. E. B. HoUis, of the machine shop ; Mr. Dote, round-house foreman, Mr. Quarles,foreman painter, and two others. I think one of them was Mr, Piefer. They demanded the removal of the foremen of the shop. They re- quested that the foreman carpenter, Mr.Shoose, and the foreman boiler-maker, should be removed. I asked the reason for it and they told me from the fact that they were obnoxious to them. I told them in answer to that that I had been here so short a ■while that I could not take action at that time ; that so far as the work of these two men vras concerned I had no fault to find. I told them that they must prepare their grievances on paper, and I would consider them. This they did not do. There was also a demand, or a request, made that the pay of some axiprentice boys should be in- creased. I told them that that was beyond my latitude, but I would refer it to the management. I did so, and got instructions to increase their pay. Q. What increase was given ? — ^A. 10, 12, and 15 pey cent, increase was given to these apprentices. * Q. From whom did these requests come ? — A. From Knights of Labor, I presume. Q. Had that request been complied with before the strike ? — A. Yes, sir ; it went into effect that month. Q. Just before the strike did you or did you not make a statement that you had lots of work to do, and that you would probably need more men ? — A. Most assuredly I ■did not. For I had instructions not to increase the force. 22 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. CHARLES W. WELLER sworn and examined. By the Chairman : , Question. What is your occupation ? — Answer. I am foreman of the siop of the Mis- Eouri, Kansas and Texas Road at Parsons. Q. How long have you been employed in that capacity t — A. I have been here for the last eight months. Q. State what you know about the cause of the strike in March. — A. About all I know is about the same story that Mr. Ne wall has stated. One of the executive com- mittee of the Knights of Labor told me that they had no cau?e outside of the discharge of that man Hall, in Marshall, Tex. He told me that himself, about the 25th of March. , ,Q. After the strike had been on about nineteen days? — A. Tes, sir. Q. Did the men ever present any grievances to you f — ^A. They never did, but tolrt me they had no grievances here. They told me that on the 6th of March. Q. Your testimony, then, would be substantially the same as Mr. Newall's, and you corroborate his testimony ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any threats made to you or to the men who were taken back into the serv- ice of the company ? — A. There have been threats sent to a great many men working down there. They have had notices served on them to quit work. Q. Have you any of the notices with you ? — A. I have not. Q. Do you know where there are any of them ? — A. I gathered up several of them and gave them to the master mechanic. Mr. Nbwall. They have been gathered up and sent to Saint Louis. Mr. OuTHWAiTE. How could they be identified ? The Witness. They bore the stamp of the order. Q. Give us the names of the men to whom they were sent, so that we can have them called and take their testimony. — ^A. Charles Mendle, junior and senior; Phil. Law- rence, and J. V. Scott. That is all that I can think of just now. Q. What were the contents of those notices? — A. They notified them to come np to- the assembly room, and that certain of them would be expelled if they did not com© round to the hall. Q. Those were notices to como to the hall ? — A. Yes, sir; they were for them to come to the hall. Q. I thought from your testimony that they contained threats of violence to them f — A. No, sir ; they contained no threats of violence. Q. Were any threats made to you ? — A. No, sir ; not personally. Q. Did you receive any in writing ? — A. They notified me through the executiv& board to leave the shop, and go home and stay there. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — No, sir; I used to be a Knight of Labor. Q. Were you at that time ? — A. No, sir. Q. You had withdrawn ? — ^A. I do not belong to this order at all. Q. You were notified to quit work ? — A. I was told to go home by the local execu- tive board, and stay. Q. Did you obey this instruction ? — A. I did. I obeyed them for three weeks. I -went home and stayed there for that time. * Q. Did you go back to work ? — A. I did. Q. What was the cause of your going back to work ? — A. I had to have something: to eat for my family. I had to support them. Q. Did the company take you back without any objection ? — A. They did. Q. Did they exact any condition from you in taking you back ? — A. They did not. Q. You applied for your former position ? — A. I applied for anything they would give me. I did not know whether 1 was goinff to be employed iu'the same position or not. Q. Did they reinstate you without any question whatever ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know anything about the cause of the strike except what you heard f— A. That is all. An engineer friend of mine came to me last evening and told me to be careful what I did, as they had some scheme afloat, and they said it would either happen on Tuesday or on Friday, and he came to put me ou my guard. He is in the hall now. His name is McLean. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor ? — A. I cannot say. Q. He warned you that there was some threatened danger ?— A. He did, sir. Q. Did he indicata»to you what it was ? — A. No, sir ; he did not. Q. What was his language?— A. That was his language, just as I have repeated it.. He went to my house and not finding me there he came down after me. Q. How many were there at work in the shops just previous to the strike?— A. About 208 or 210. Q. How many are employed there now ? — A. Between 113 and 117. Q. Do you do as much work in the shops now as yon did prexious to the strike t— A. Well, wo do not. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 23 Q. Were any new men hired jast previous to the strike ? — A. As fast as men would quit and go away we would fill their places, merely keeping the force np to the num- ber of about 208 to 210. Q. What proportion of the amount of work that was done previous to the striked© you do now, or what percentage of work is done now compared with the work done before the strike f — A. With the force of men we have there now we do about 70 per cent, of the amount of work we did before the strike. WILLIAM T. NELIGH sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitk : Question. What has been your employment for the last year or so T — Answer. I have worked i n the shops of the company. I have learned my trade here. Q. What position had you within the last six months? — ^A. I am a lathe-hand. Q. State T.hether yon are a Knight of Labor f — A. I am, sir. Q. What information had you of this strike before it was declared ?— A. None at all. Q. What cause was given to you for the strike ? — A. There was no cause given at all. I ought to state that we ^ave a constitution and by-laws in our order, and of course wo are expected to live up to them. In regard to the strike the constitution iind by-laws is not lived up to. They state that yon have got to go about it in the right way. That is, you have to make all attempts to get a settlement by arbitra- tion before you order strikes. So I asked the question of some of the members in re- gard to whether they had put (forth these efforts, and they said they had not. And I then thought wo had no more right to strike. Q. When the;^ said they had not, did any of them tell you what was the reason, as they understood it, for the strike ?— A. They claimed it was Martin Irons, who had 1 he power, and that he had done it. Q. What reason did they say Martin Irons gave, if any, for the strike ? — A, Well, that is the mystery at the present time, and I have never had an opportunity to draw it out of any of them. Q. You have met them daily ? — A. I have been right in their hall with them. Q. You have heard them talk ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have any of them said in your presence to any one else what was the reason ? — A. Some of them claimed that it was on account of Hall, in Texas ; then others would claim that it was not, and that there were other grievances. When I asked the ques- tion as to the other grievances, and asked them also, " Did you try to arbitrate those grievances?" then they said, "Well, no ; I do not think that they did." I had par- ties call on me at my room, and I asked them if they were not violating the constitu- tion and by-laws of the order. I generally converted these persons, and they came to the conclusion that I was right. Q. Have any of them gone back to work f — A. Yes, sir ; I have gone back to work, and my partner also has gone back to work. Q. How long did you stay out ? — ^A. I stayed out until Mr. Powderly, the Grand Master Workman, gave the order to return to work. Q. Did the company exact any condition of you when you went back f — A. They had a paper there which just said that they would have the power to discharge me whenever they thought fit. They never asked me whether I was a Knight of Labor or not. Q. Yon may tell whether any threats have been made to prevent you from continu- ing to work for the company? — ^A. . Just before I went to work, when I was walking out of the room one nighty I got something. It was a note. I took it back and went into the room and found it stated: '' Look here, Neligh, some of ns understand you are going to work. If you do so your death is on your own head," and signed " Knight of Labor." It was all misspelt, and the note was fixed up in such a way as to disguise the handwriting. It was an anonymous note. Q. Have any direct threats been made to you by any members of the order ? — A. No direct threats. Q. Have you seen any portion of this trouble during the attempt to resume traffic f — A. I only saw one train wrecked ; that was the day the ad,iutant-general was here. Q. How many Knights of Labor have returned to work? — ^A. Well, there is, I should judge, about twenty mechanics that have gone back to work. Q. Do you know whether they arc Knights of Labor? — A. I know one of them is. One of them is a German, and I asked him If he was a Knightof Labor and he said he was. Q. You say there are twenty mechanics. Do you know any Knights of Labor in any of the other branches? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many that you know of? — ^A. I do not know exactly, because I do not know f heir names. I think that there are men in the round-house, in the car dej art- ment, and in the machine-shops. Q. If you are not personally acquainted with them, tell us how you know they are 24 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Knights of Labor f — A. I have seen them in the hall when I have been there at meet ings of the organization. Q. Have you been expelled from the Knights of Labor ?— A. I have been expePM or replaced from -what they tell me ; they put me on the list as a "scab," and I tOxaet- stood that is done by the executive board ; a man came by and told me that they had. Q. Who was this man that told you they had put your name on the "scab list"?— A. It was a man named Berry that came by and told me. JOSEPH MALSEID sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Question. What is your age ? — Answer. My age is forty. Q. Where are you employed ? — A. In the machine-shops of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railroad. Q. How long have you been so employed ? — A. Two years; with the exception of a few weeks that I was off during the strike. Q. What is your trade ? — A. I am a machinist. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. I was up to the strike. I understand that I have been expelled along with others. Q. What was your position in that order? — A. I was master workman in it for some time previous to the strike, and last mentioned on a " scab list." Q. Do you know what that is ? — ^A. I understand from that, that the names of those who went baek to work are put up on the blackboard jn the hall. Q. And that is called the scab list? — ^A. I believe it is. Q. What knowledge have you, as a Knight of Labor, as to the cause of this strike ? — A. The nominal cause of the strike was the discharge of Hall on the Texas and Pacific road ; also, I believe, that there are grievances behind that ; but they were never submitted. Q. Have you taken any steps to try to find out what the cause of the strike was ?— A. No, sir ; I have not ; any further than we would get at the hall. Q. Have you been in Texas lately? — A. I was in Deuison once soon after the strike was inaugurated. Q. Did you find out what they claimed to be the cause of the strike at that place ?— I found that the men of Denison were willing to return to work. That was the first week of the strike. They claimed that the cause was insufficient to justify the strike. Q. What was that cause ? — A. They stated that they appointed a committee to ex- amine into the cause to see if Hall was competent, and the committee reported that he was incompetent ; and yet a demand had been made on the company to reinstate Hall. Q. Was that report made by the committee or by the executive board ? — A. By the executive board, and they said they were going to report it to the order. Q. And Jibe matter was dropped there ? — A. No, sir. Q. What more was done about it? — A. They wont out on the strike and have con- tinued on it. Q. Who were this committee that investigated Hall ? — A. I only know one of them, George Lyman, of Denison. Q. Upon this information or report that you received at Denison did you go back to work ? — A. Not until some time afterwards ; probably about two weeks. Q. What indaeed you to go to work ? — A. I was satisfied in my own mind that we could not make a success of the strike. Q. What was your judgment as to the cause being snflicient or insufiicient to order the strike ? — A. I did not think that we had any right to demand the reinstatement of a man on a road in the hands of a receiver of the United States court. Q. Did you consider that that justified you in returning to work? — A. That to- gether with the fact that the cause was hopeless, and from the further fact that we were in opposition to public opinion, which was against us ; and other things. Q. How long is it since you went to work ? — A. Three weeks ago to-day. Q. Have any threats been made against you since you went to work? — A. Not per- sonally. I never had any trouble with them. Q. Have you been threatened in any manner, by writing or otherwise, since you went into the employment of the company? — A. The day that I was to go to work I went down and signed that statement of the company, and there was a stone thrown at my house, by whom I do not know, between eleven and' twelve at night. I got up and looked out and saw three or four figures retiring, but I could not recognize any- body. Q. Did the company require any pledges on taking you back, or require yon to dis- connect yourself with the Knights of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. That statement that you signed, what was the substance of it? — A. That the company reserved the right to hire or discharge whoever they pleased whenever it was necessary. ' LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 25 Q. With whom did you have a conversation when you signed that statement A. with Mr. Newall. Q. Is there any law or rule in the district assemWy requiring the question of a strike to be submitted to the local assemblies before the strike is ordered f — A. There is. District Assembly No. 101 requires a vote to be taken before the strike is ordered. Q. To be taken by the local assemblies? — A. By the local assemblies constituting the district. Q. Was that done ? — A. That was done so far as I know. It was done in the as- sembly here. Q. And the district assembly has no authority to order a strike until the local as- semblies constituting that district have so voted? — A. That is the intention of the law. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) You say that that was done in the assembly here ? When was it submitted? — A. The question I voted upon was " Shall the executive board of District No. 101 be sustained ?" Q. When was that submitted to you ; after the strike f — A. Previous to the strike. Q. "Sustained" in what? — A. In demanding Hall's reinstatement. Q. That was the question that was submitted to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) What was this question in your assembly ?- A. It was to sus- tain District Assembly No. 101. Q. Did you understand that vote to authorize a strike in case Hall was not rein- stated ? — A. I understood it that they should use every means in their power to set- tle the question first before the strike was ordered ; and I am satisfied that that was not done. Q. Then the effect of your vote was not to order a strike, as you understood it ? — A. It was merely to sustain District Assembly No. 101 in using all the power at their command to get his reinstatement. Q. What does that imply ; that they were to seek to obtain arbitration ? — A. Yes, sir ; by arbitration. Q. Did it inclade a strike in case he was not reinstated by the company, or was it to obtain it otherwise than by strike ? — A. I suppose it would mean that. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) State whether a vote was taken on demanding a recogni- tion of the order at that time. — A. Not in my presence. It might have been at another meeting that they might have had. Q. Such order or vote was taken as to a demand for an advance of the pay of section hands ? — A, That vote was taken in Saint Louis at the regular meeting of the district assembly in January. Then that demand was made. Whether the executive board submitted it to the officials of the railroad I cannot say. That and other measures, as to the apprentice system, was talked of, and of refusing to work overtime, except in cases of necessity. All these measures were submitted in Saint Louis in January. I have never been fully satisfied that they have been submitted to the company. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) You state this from what you heard, or were you there? — A. I was a delegate at Saint Louis. I know these measures were passed upon ; but I have never been satisfied that they were presented. CHARLES M. MENDLE, Sr., sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. What is your occupation ? — Answer. I work at the machine shop ; I am a machinist ; in the Missouri, Kansas and Texas shops. Q. How long have you been so employed ? — A. About five years. Q. Were you so employed on the 6th of March last? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — ^A. I did. Q. Have you gone back to work ? — A. Yes, 'sir. Q. Have you been threatened since ? — A. To some extent. Q. State the extent. — A. Well, I was threatened to the extent that when those that were out got in "all black sheep would be kicked out ;" that was said to me. Q. Who said that to you? — A. A man by the name of Wilkinson. Q. What position did he occupy in the Knights of Labor ? — A. I do not know that he occupied any position. Q. Was he a member of the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He simply made that statement to you ? — A. Yes, sir. I have been talked to a number of times since then. They paid off here on Saturday, and I received two checks; one check was for February, and for March there were five days; then I found it was understood that all men who wanted a job should go and see Mr. Newall, the master mechanic ; well, on Sunday morning I went down in town and .some others stopped me and wanted to know if I was not going back to get my job. Q. Were these people who had gone out on the strike ? — A. Yes, sir ; I saw quite a crowdofmen going overtowardsthe office, and I went over there; I inquired on my way 26 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST; ■^ho these men were, aud I was told they were men going to get their jobs again. 1 saw Mr. Newall and said to him, " Well, Mr. Newall, I have come to see you, and to see if I can get my job again V He said, " Can yon sign that?" pointing to a paper that was there inside the office. I asked him what it was, and he said to me, " Go and read it." Q. What was it? — A. It was to this extent: "That they could discharge a man ■whenever they wanted, and that they could quit whenever they wanted." Q. Were you reinstated in the same position that you held before ? — A. Yes, sir. That was on the Sunday, perhaps, along about the forepart of April, and about half- past eleveninthe forenoon. John Murphy and John MoFeely, Knights of Labor, asked me if I had been over to the shop, and I told them that I idad, and that there were 19 or 20 men that were over there. I came down town and met two men, by the name of William Loveland and John Brannon, and Loveland said to me, " You are a damn pretty man; yon ought to be ashamed of yourself." I worked that afternoon. So that evening I was standing at my house, and two men came — Jesse Bate and Walter Martin — and there were two more came np. I asked them what they wanted. They said they wanted to have a talk with me about going back to work, Q. Were they talking as representatives of the Knights of Labor or as individuals! — A. That I cannot say. One of them remarked that "I could not be a friend of his, and go to work in that shop," and I asked him if he did not try to get a job there, and could not get it. Q. All this, you know, is personal. The Knights of Labor as a body are not respon- sible for the acts of individuals unless those individuals represent thcra by authority. Do you know of any such case ? — A. Yes, sir; as far as the man said he came there, and said he volunteered to come as a committee. His name was Davidson. He wanted me to come to the assembly. I told him I would not come. He tried to got me to comOj but did not use any threats, and I did not come. The nest Sunday I received two or three notices to oomo to the assembly. Q. What was iu those notices ? — A. The first one stated that if I did not pay np ®1.10 dues that I was behind, they would treat me according to Jaw. The next one was that some one was to be there to make a speech, and that I should be there, and that I had been misinformed about being expelled. It also requested mo to come np to the room next day. Q. Are these the threats that yon have been speaking of? — A. These are not threats. Q. Have you ever been threatened with personal violence f — A. Nothing more than that when they got in of course the "black sheep," "scabs," and so on, would be thrown out, and could not get a job in the United States. Q. (By Mr. Buchan Aif . ) Were you gl.lO behind ?— A. Well, I cannot say as to that ; perhaps I was. The Jaw requires that three months' notice shall be given before ac- tion is taken on arrears of dues. Q. (By the Chairman.) What induced you to go back? — A. Seeing so many of them make application to go back, and being advised by men whom I considered to be my friends, that was what induced me to go back. Q. Grive the names of the parties who visited you after you had been to see the master mechanic, and what they said ? — A,' Sam Golden and Jack Wilkinson. They both requested me not to read that paper. It was the Eclipse. 1 told them I would. They said, then, "We want to talk to you." I asked them, "What do you want to talk to me about?" Golden says to Wilkinson, " Don't talk to the damned fool." I said to him, "You have got no right to talk or me in that way," and passed him by, and he said to me, "You are God-damned scab." Wilkinson ordered me never to visit his house. Then my near neighbor came over there, and they went off. Q. What is the Eclipse ? — A. It is a pai)er printed in this city. Q. Why did they object to your reading that newspaper? — A. That paper was pretty severe on some of us. Q. Were you a deputy sheriff? — ^A. I believe I was sworn in. Q. Was that after you went back to work ? — A. Yes, sir. I believe it was on the 8th of April. JOSEPH MALSEID recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Do you identify that circular [exhibiting to witness copy erf resolution adopted by District Assembly 101, at Saint Louis, in January, 1886]?— A. Yes, sir; that was passed upon in Saint Louis in January, and ordered to bo printed. The following is the circular referred to : CIRCULAP.. The following resolution was adopted by District Assembly No. 101 at its annual session in Saint Louis, January 9, 1886 : i " In view of the fact that a great many of our members are out of employment, LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 27 and believing as wo do that the hoxirs of lahor should ho reduced as soou as possible to eight hours : "Therefore, this district assembly, in executive session, declares that no Knight of Labor (road men excepted) being a member of any local assembly attached to this district assembly, be allowed to work more than ten hours in each twenty-four hours, unless considered to be absolutely necessary by the local executive board, and that this district assembly declare that no work be considered a necessity, except the prompt movement of the United States mails. " Per order of District Assembly No. 101." Q. What does that " O. K." mean [referring to a pencil mark on the copy]? — A. That has been posted up in the shop. I do not know what that means. Q. What does the " 147 " in pencil mean over the head of the circular ?— A. I do not know, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) When the vote was taken as to sustaining District Assem- bly 101 were there any opposing votes? — A. There were one or two, I believe, but It was almost unanimous. Q. Did you vote against the proposition ?— A. No, sir. THOMAS G. GOLDEN sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. State your age. — Answer. I am 44. Q. Where are you employed at present ?— A. In Parsons. Q. In what employment ? — ^A. I am division superintendent of the Missouri Pacific. Q. How long have you been in the employment of that road f— A. Six years. Q. How long have you been located by your employment at this place ? — ^A. One year. Q. State what you know of the beginning of this strike. — A. The strike commenced at ten o'clock on the morning of the 6th of March, by the men all quitting work. Q. What knowledge had you that it was going to take place at that time? — A. I had no knowledge whatever. Q. What information had yon as to any grievances, or cause for the strike ? — A. I had no information until after the strike. That evening I sent a note to Mr. llollis and Mr. Quarles, of the executive committee of the Knights of Labor, and requested them to call at my ofiSce, which they did. I asked them for the cause of the strike, and if they had any grievances. They said that they struck to sustain the brethren of their order on the Texas and Pacific Railroad. I asked if it was the case of C. A. Hall, at Marshal, and they said it ^lyas. I asked if they had any grievances, and they said they had not — none of sufficient amount to cause a strike ; and I then asked Mr. Hollis if we couldn't settle without a strike. Q. Have you heard any farther statements since that time as to the cause of the strike? — A. Nothing, except what I have read in the papers. Q. I mean from the Knights of Labor, have you had any other information.? — A. No, sir. Q. Where were you during the efforts to resume traffic here ? — A. I was in Parsons. Q. Were you present during the time when Senator Kimball gave his statement ? — A. I heard Senator Kimball's testimony. Q. In the main, is your recollection the same as his? — A. It is like his, with the single exception that he stated the adjutant-general and myself agreed to suspend operations &om 3 o'clock until 9 o'clock next day. I was not a party to that agree- ment. The adjutant-general made it, and asked me to respect it, and I did. Q. Do you know whether any statement was made that the section hands had been promised an increase of wages from $1.10 to $1.50 per day ? — ^A. I have no knowledge of such a promise. Q. Do you know anything of a complaint that certain apprentices were not receiv- ing as much pay as they were entitled to ? — A. I heard of that ; it was in the machine department, and was settled at the time. Q. Do you know any other facts connected with the strike than tfiose which hate been testified to here ? — A. Nothing of importance about the strike. I would like to say that during the year prior to the strike I had two or three grievances presented to me by the men, and in every instance the company settled them by acceding to the de- mands of the men. Q. What was the nature of those grievances? — A. One was to increase the pay of the yardmen and switchmen at Parsons, another was the case of a man discharged for the destruction of the company's property; after he had been discharged the Knights of Labor waited on us, and I put him back. Q. Any other? — A. I do not know of any other now. Q. How do the men work here — piece-work or by the day ?- A. In my department- they work by the day. 28 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are there any departments in ■whioli tbey do piece-work t — A. Mr. Newall, who is master n echanie, c^n give you better information than I can on that subject. Q. Has there been any increase of labor for the same amoant of wages in your de- partment ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) In the conference which you spoke of, did you ask those parties if they knew that the Texas and Pacific road was in the hands of a receiver f — A. I told them both of it, and told them that the Missouri Pacific had no power to reinstate Hall. Their reply was that it could give instruction to have it done. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Have you been threatened with personal violence in any way f — A. No, sir. I heard Mr. Ne wall's testimony, and I would like to confirm that part of it which pertains to the interview in the assembly hall, when he demanded that the macSinery be replaced. Q. You went with him; what was the demand, that the machinery should be re- placed, and what reply was made? — ^A. Mr. HoUis said that he didn't know where , the missing pieces were, and after some other conversation he made a remark like this, " Suppose that four or five hundred names were put in a hat, how would you know who took certain numbers out f " giving me and Mr. Newall the impression that lots had been drawn and certain* men detailed for that work. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was that all that he said in reference to the missing pieces of machinery ? — A, That was the most important part. Q. You spoke of an impression being left on your mind and on Mr. Newall's ; sup- pose you give the important words that created that impression. — A. It was the re- mark of Mr. HoUis, " Suppose four or five hundred numbers to be put in a hat, how would you know who drew certain numbers ? " Q. You say that these men told you they quit work ; did they say from whom the instruction came, or whether it was from any association ? — A. The men present talk- ing with me I knew to be Knights of Labor. , Q. They didn't say from what person or assembly ? — A. No, sir. Q. Yon say that in your department the- men work by the day ; what is your de- partment, or what men are under your department? — A. The men in the train serv- ice. They work by mileage, and are paid by the mile. Q. Then they are really working by the piece rather than by the day ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You spoke of an increased pay to the yardmen. What was their former pay, and. what was the increase ? — ^A. The yardmen had been paid $1.65 per day ; it was increased to $1.70. The switchmen had been paid $2, and it was increased to f 2.20. The arrangement was entirely satisfactory to the men. Q. Were those the only ones who had their pay. increa.sedf — A. They wore the only ones for whom an increase had been claimed. WILLIAM T. NELIGH recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Yon signed an agreement with the company before you went back to work. Is that a correct copy [showing witness the annexed agreement dated Par- sons, April 5, 1886] ? — Answer. That is a copy of the agreement. It was introduced as follows : "Paesoss, Jpril 5, 1886. "We, the undersigned, being desirous of employment, hereby apply for positions in our respective branches of the service. In accepting said employment with the Missouri Pacific Eailway'Company, leased and operated lines, we distinctly under- stand that we are to be employed by the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, leased and operated lines, for just such time as the said company may desire to retain us. " We further understand that the said company will retain our services foi; only such time as it may be deemed necessary and to the said company's interest." Q. (By Mr. Parker.) What do you mean when you refer to the "scab lisf'f to whom does that apply ? — A. The " scab list " is a list of those who have gone back to work. Q. Do yon refer to any particular list of names? — A. I do, sir. For instance, if a man returned to work they put his name upon the blackboard. Q. On the blackboard in the assembly, and that was what that list was called t — A. That is what it is called. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) In what was that l^lack list written?— A. It was written in chalk. JOSEPH B. LAMB sworn and osaniiued. By Mr. Pahker : Qnestion. What is yonr ago ? — Answer. It is fifty -nine. Q. Are yon a resident of Pai'.sons f — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IW THE SOUTH AND WEST. 2& Q. How long have you resided there ? — A. twelve years. Q. What is your present business f — A. I am running a newspaper. Q. Are you the editor of the Eclipse, that the witness named ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Has that paper taken decided ground upon the strike T — A. Tolerably so, sir. Q. Justifying it, or otherwise ?— A. We never undertook to justify it. Q. What Tvas the cause of the strike? — A. Well, sir, &om the best information I could get at the time, as I was reporting the facts for the public use, Iiheard it -was on account of the discharge of a man named Hall, down in Texas. Q. Anything else ? — A. There was no other reason alleged at the commencement of the strike. Q. From what sources did you obtain this information ? — A. I generally picked it up on the streets, around the stores, and of different people that I met. Q. Do you mean Knights of Labor, or do you include the citizens generally ? — A. Some were Enights of Labor, and some were not. I mean to say that that was the current report. That was the report given by the strikers themselves, and was re- ceived by the people. Q. Now, what can you say as to the effects of the strike f — ^A. Why, I can say that its effects have been disastrous to everything. Everything has suffered more or less from it. Q. What benefit has it produced ? — A. Well, if there has been any good come of it, I do not pretend to know what it is. Q. If you can recall circumstances as to the effect that have not been stated by other witnesses we would like to hear them, but we do not care to accumulate testi- mony on the same points. — ^A. I have heard most of the witnesses who have testified, and they have described everything very accurately. The information received from them is exceedingly accurate. Q. And yon indorse the statements that you have heard given here to-day. Have jou any other facts f — A. I do not think that I have any further- facts to add to the statements of those who have preceded me. DAYID EELSO sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. What is your profession t — Answer. I am one of the attorneys of the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad system. Q. And you reside in Parsons T — A. Tea, sir. Q. How long have you lived here 1 — ^A. About twelve years. Q. Ton have heard the testimony given here on the subject of this strike f — A. Tea, sir. Q. Do you know of any other facts that would be of interest or utility to the com- mittee f — ^A. In addition to what has been said, I may state that I am generally over the road, and attending to law cases that have arisen on the line of this road at points where there are no other railroads except the Missouri Pacific, and at those points the people were enffering to a great extent. At Council Grove, for instance, a town of 2,000 inhabitants, they had to send away twenty odd miles to obtain the necessary supplies to sustain themselves, and the effect of the strike was very great in all those towns where there was no other road but the Missouri Pacific. I would state that I made individual inquiries, because Mr. Hoxie wired me frequently during this late unpleasantness to get the information, and that occasioned me to make more inquiry than I otherwise would have made as to the effects of this strike. The cause generally given for the strike was the discharge of this man named Hall, at Marshal, Tex., who was in the service of the receivers of Jhe Texas and Pacific, for the United States court, and in a corporation at that time severed from the southwestern system, and not under its control, I said to a great many of the strikers that they were asking this company to do a physical impossibility. I told them that if there were any wrongs the company would redress them. I told them further that it seemed to mo to he a terrible thing for them to paralyze the business of the country without suffi- cient cause, and that I thought that the executive board, some of whom I knew to have intelligence and. honesty, when they studied the matter, they would reconsider this step and go back to employment. Among other things they said that there were grievances with regard to the section hands along the road : that some of them did not receive sufScient pay. I inquired of various section foremen, and they told me they had no grievances, and they said that their men were getting more wages- than they could get from farmers ; that farmers in the country were paying $16 a month, without limit to hours, and that the railroad company was paying them more wages and required less hours of labor. Some little was said about the hos- pital fund that the company is handling for its employes for the support of a hos- pital at Sedalia, Mo. It is one of the best institutions that the railroad can have, to save large doctor's bills for its employes and supply them with the very best physi- cians that the company can employ. I said to some of them that there was iio cause 30 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. for this strike; that I was friendly to them ; and that I had not the least feeling ia the vorld that would prompt me to say anything against their interests ; that they ■ware getting satisfactory wages, and that it seemed to me to be better judgment for them to rfeturn to their employment; but the reply would be: "We are ordered to strike. It is a matter beyondour jurisdiction. Weare controlled by a superior body, to which we owe allegiance, and we must obey orders, to the sacrifice of ourselves." Q. Canyoil give me the names of those who gave utterance to such expressions?— A. Mr. Neligh, who has just been before the committee, and Mr. Campbell. I think we had conversations to that efltect. Q. AVhen you told them about the situation on the Texas and Pacific, and that it was under the control of the United States court, what reply did they make to you ?— A. They were dumb as to that. They did not make any answer. Q. This |16 a mouth that is paid by farmers to their laborers, does not that include board ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is there any other fact that you know of that would be of service to the com- mittee f— A. Nothing but what I did in reference to serving notice on the city author- ities for the safety of the property. 1 served notice upon the city that the company would hold the city responsible for the action of the mob, and asked the mayor to use his power to suppress the mob that was here. Q. (By the Chairman.) Have you a law of the State that makes the city liable for the damage done by mob violence f — A. Yes. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Have you any law in this State making the malicious de- struction of pj;operty a criminal offense ? — A. Yes, sir. We have also a law in the State making it a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of from |50 to $500 and twenty days' imprisonment, for any person intimidating another. Q. So that for all acts of violence, either to person or property, your law in this State is ample already to punish ?— A. Yes, sir. The statute defines two or more per- sons engaged iathat kind of business as a mob. Q,. I mean that as to any act of violence either to person or property your State law is ample to protect, if it bo properly enforced ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you know of no legislation on that subject further than you have stated!— A. No, sir. We have in force an arbitration law in this State for railroad employes or employes of any company. Q. Has that been made use of in this State? — A. No, sir; it has not. My observa- tion has been that in this case there were no grounds for arbitration of any griev- ances. Q. How long is it since that law was passed in this State ? — A. It was passed last winter, at the instance of the Knights of Labor. Q. And there has been no necessity for its use since ? — A. As a member of the leg- islature, at the time it was passed, they came to my desk and asked my influence in its favor, and I gave it voluntarily. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Were you present at the time when the switch engine was taken to the round-house ? — A. Yes, sir ; I had a ride upon that engine. Q. It is reported that you were armed and drew your revolver upon that crowd?— A. I have never carried a revolver since the war, or any fire-arms, except to hunt, and then a shot-gun. Q. Do you know of employes of the road being compelled to sign a release to the company from liability for any injury before they can have the benefit of the hospital service ? — A. There is no such rule that I havo'heard of. If there is such a rule I have never seen it. I was going on to say that I notified the city that it was liable, and that I served notices upon the city. I made an individual effort to protect the property, to save the city as much as possible from damage, and had the approbation and consent of the first vice-president, H. M. Hoxie, to employ about thirty-five or forty reliable, steady men, and they were to be furnished with arms and ammunition and supplies to guard the property in the shops and near Parsons from destruction. This was done because of the fact that I received information, which I am not at liberty to tell, that an attack would be made upon the shops and injury done to the locomotive power and the stationary engine. I had occasion to go to and from the shops frequently, and see that these men were at their posts doing their duty. When the governor made his proclamation, and as soon as I could get the sheriff here, there were appointed special deputies to take care of the property np there, and I think that by keeping these men there the property was saved from destruction. Q. (By Mr. Odthwaite.) During this time were any threats made against you per- sonally f — A. Yes, I heard of a gi'eat many ; but I do not care to mention them ; I do not think that anybody intended to hurt me. The boys generally are pretty friendly to me. I do not think any of them are afraid of me, or that I of them. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Do you know of any instances in which after men who had heen injured had entirely recovered they were denied employment by tlie company unless they would sign a release of all claims against the company, on account of LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND ^VEST. 31 those injuries t — ^A. Well, sir, I do ; l)ut not during tbo time of the Missouri Pacific having charge. I remember of an Instance; but it must bo ten years old now. Q. None later than that t — A. I have heard an intimation to that effect. I think a man named Nichols, in this town, made a remark of that kind. I said to him that our company did not damage its men, and that if one was guilty of negligence I did not see how' he could have any just claim against the company, and he answered that be could not get employment without signing a release. I told him that I would not give employment either, under such circumstances ; and that I would not employ him or anyone else, because I said to him we have had some instances where parties pros- ecuted claims which I thought were groundless, perhaps more from prejudice against the company, and on account of the general favoritism tow^ards men who were claim- ing for injuries against the railroad companies, while they were themselves the very men who caused these injuries. Q. Is it not a fact that all these injuries might have been caused by some other employ6 and not the emijloy^ that was injured?— A. Certainly, there are cases in which they occur. Q. Do you know of any case where an employ^ was refused employment after his recovery, and where he had been injured through no negligence of his own ? — A. No, sir; in cases that I am thinking about of that character, the men were killed. Q. Was the man of whom you are talking injured through any fault of bis own ? — A. I do not know that it was through his own fault, but that was the evidence. Q. Your observation was made in the light of your understanding that the injury was partly his own fault? — A. Because another man, associated with liim, aud near the same grounds, was present and subject to the same injury, and clainjiug to have received the same Injury, found out that he had no claim, and dismissed his suit and went back to work. Now this ulan can go back to work. I was going to say that the accident occurred in the shops, and was from actual carelessness, as shown in the case of John Perrigory. The testimony was very contradictory, and the employes in the shops testified directly against the testimony of the master mechanic, of the clerk, and of the foreman of the blacksmith shop ; in fact, the bulk of the testimony was against the claim, yet the jury believed the testimony of these two parties in prefer- ence to the class and number of men that have testified for the company, and gave an award of damages. My experience is that a discharged employ^ is the most danger- ous witness that can bo put on the stand as far as the company's interests are con- cerned. Q. But is not the average Kansas jury likely to do justice? — A. Yes, sir. JAMES J. McFEELEY sworn and examined. By Mr. Pakker: Question. What is your age ? — Answer. Thirty-six. Q. How long have you resided in Parsons ? — A. Nine years since last July. Q. What is your present occupation ? — A. I am a practicing attorney and justice of the peace. Q. Have you been present in the hall and heard the testiinony given here to-day ? — A. I heard a portion of it. Q. Did you hear the testimony of Mr. Kimball ? — A. I heard a portion of his testi- mony. Q. You may go on and describe what you know as to the cause or origin of the strike. — A. All I know is from talk with the strikers. Q. Have you anjr personal knowledge of the cause of the strike ? — A. No, sir. \ Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — ^A. I am, sir. Q. You may go on and state what "you saw of the origin and continuance of the strike; but first let me ask you, did you say you were a lawyer and also a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. [Laughter.] I was admitted to the bar after I had joined the Knights of Labor. I was formerly employed in the M. K. and T. shops. 1 am a ma- chinist by triide. Q. And after you became u, Knight of Labor you became a lawyer ? — A. I was admitted to the bar. Q. And, being so admitted after being a Knight of Labor, yon continued and are now a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now go on and state what you know of the origin and continuance of the strike? — A. The only thing that I know about the origin of the strike, or the first that I heard of it was, the whistle blew on the morning of March 6. I was in my office, and I heard some grumbling among the men before that, and as soon as the whistle blew on the Saturday morning I had some idea what it was. There was a iieneral feeling of uneasiness, and some grievances, and one thing and another, and I kuew all felt that it was a strike, and that the men were out, Q. Now go on and tell us what yon saw of it and knew of it. — A. I cannot say that I 32 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. saw muoli of jt. I was uot upon the railroad company's grounds but once during the whole strike, and that was for about fifteen minutes. Q. Was that at a time when any of these difficulties occurred that have been testi- fied about?— A. It was right after the adjutant-general had got through talking to the crowd. I was passing down Central avenue and I saw the adjutant-general upon the pilot of the engine talking to the crowd, and I went down that way and he got through two or three minutes after I got there. Q. If you can describe any local effects of the strike, you may please do so as they appeared to you. — A. I will say this, that there is a very bitter feeling existing here between some of the citizens and the so-called strikers, and it is so bitter that some- times it seems to be hardly safe in the community. It is reported and generally under- stood that the so-called law and order organization is for the special benefit of a few men seeking to accomplish their own objects and ends, and to get rid of some men, and for the pnrpose of promoting their own benefit. Threats have been made at different times as to what would become of men who would not join the Law and Order League. I have been told that some members of the Grand Army here have stated that they were told if they did not join the Law and Order League their pensions from the United States Government would be stopped. Q. Who told you this T — A. Mr. John M. Jones told me. Q. IsheaEnight of Labor?— A. Yes, sir; I nnderstoodit from George Camp and a man named Jeffries. Q. Whose pensions were threatened if they did not join the Law and Order Leagne? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now tell us when thi.s bitter feeling that yon spoke of began ? — A. Well, I would have to go back many years, to go back to the beginning of the ill will between a few citizens here. Q. It began before this strike, then ? — A. It has been a part of the contention be- tween two factions for political power and for other purposes. Q. Were the Knights of Labor members of either faction f — A. Not that I have knowledge of. Q. Then this bitter feeling you spoke of was not between the Knights of Labor and citizens, but between factions outside of Knights of Labor ? —A. It was between fac- tions outside, sir. Q. Then this strike was an Independent movement, so far as that contest is con- cerned ? — A. Yes, sir ; it was an independent movement. Q. The Law and Order Leagne, was that organization, so far as y'ou know, for any other purpose than to deal with the disturbances arising out of the strike? — A. Well, sir, I have beard it reported that the leaders had other objects in view. Q. Do yon know of any fact indicating that the Law and Order Leagne originated in any other purpose than to meet the disturbances occasioned by the strike ? — A. Per-' sonally I do not. Q. Then the Knights of Labor and the Law and Order Leagne have no necessary eonnection with any factional difference existing previously, have they ? — A. Well, I may say they have and they have not. There ,are some members of the Knights of Labor who have the enmity of the Law and Order League, but I do not suppose the Law and Order League was organized for these few men. Q. The Law and Order Leagne is composed largely of the business citizens, is it not ? — A. A few of them. Q. Are not most of them ? — A. Well, I do not think they are, but they may be ; I do not know. Q. Do you know of any body or class of citizens who are outside of the Law and Order League, unless it be the strikers ? — ^A. I have heard other men who are not strikers, and not Knights of Labor, saying that the Law and Order League was un- necessary, and has done as much injury or more injury than the strike has. Q. Can you tell who they are t — A. I think I heard Mr. Tisdale pass that remark, and Mr. S. M, Daley pass the same remark. Q. Are they business men here? — A. Yes, sir; and then there are others I cannot now recall ; I think Dr. A. M. Fellows passed the same remark. Q. Can you give anything further as to the effects of this strike here ? — A. The strike has been very injurious in effect. Q. Have you any knowledge, speaking as a Knight of Labor, that it has benefited anybody ? — A. I cannot say that it has. Q. Were you present at the time when it was voted to sustain District Assembly No. 101 in demanding the reinstatement of Hall ? — A. I was not, sir ; then I will state further, in order to show the feeling produced by the Law and Order League against strikers, and against Knights of Labor, that last week we had a prosecution where it was charged by a striker that an assault had been committed upon him by one, formerly a striker, who is now in the employ of the company. The evidence was clear, even by the defendant's own admission. The case went to the jury. Three months ago that jury would have been out two minutes. It was an intelligent jury. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 33 and as good a jury as that would not have been out three minutes before on this occa- Bion. On account of this feeling that I speak of, they were out for five or six hours, and stood six to six, and so they had to be discharged. I xiuderstand that is the way the jury stood from what I heard some of the jurors said. At least I have been told 80 since. Q. What reason would you assign for their action t — A. I knew they were intelli- fent, and could tell what was right from wrong, and the evidence was so plain that cannot attribute it to anything else but this outside feeling. Q. The jury iu the case did not decide as you thought they should have decided f — A. That often happens. Q. (By Mr. Bochanan.) You do not refer to the cases in which you win ? — A. I do not refer to the cases in which I win. Q. When you heard this about pensions being cut off, what reply did you make ? — A. I did not believe a word of it. Q. You had no idea that General Black would cut off pensions for that cause ? — A. It was a threat. They used to have a good deal of influence with gentlemen in Washington. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) That was before General Black came in, was it not ? — A. Yes, sir; that was before General Black came in. Things have changed some since then, but they have not realized it here since. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was it stated to you that this strike was ordered to sus- tain the strike on the Texas and Pacific, arising out of the discharge of Hall t — A. That was one of the reasons. Q. Did you understand that Hall was discharged from the Texas and Pacific, and not from the Missouri Pacific? — A. That was my understanding. Q. Do you know whether the Texas and Pacific was in the hands of a receiver at the time that the strike occurred ? — A. I heard that afterwards. I did not know it at the time. ALLEN B. HACKER sworn and examined. By the Chaikman : Question. Were you iu the Army during the war ? — Answer. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. Are you a pensioner t — A. I am a pensioner. Q. Do you know the purpose for which the Law and Order League was organized in the city of Kansas? — A. I can give my impression. Q. What is your opinion based on? — A. My opinion is based on the rumor that it was to carry out Jay Gould's proposition that the Law and Order League has been organized. Q. Had yon any knowledge of its purposes, and, if so, how did you obtain it ? — A. Only from what I saw and from what I could hear and could catch on the street. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb. ) Please tell us what you heard and caught on the street. — A. By hearing through street talk that the object was to secure position, and to carry out the objects of the railroad company. Q. (By the Chairman.) What were the rumors that you heard on the street? — A. These rumors. Q. Whom did you hear saying these things ? — A. I could not state at this time who they were. Q. Were they members of the Law and Order League ? — A. As you have perceived, there is a discrimination on the part of the people. One part are Knights of Labor and the other citizens. Q. Who were the parties that you heard declare the object of the Law and Order League ? — A. They were citizens. Q. Were they members of the Law and Order League? — A. I do not know. I con- vcsed with citizens. Q. Do you know that there is a Law and Order League here ? — A. I have heard that there is. Q. You say that you know the object of that organization? — A. I do not say that Ida^ Q. I want to know whether these men were members of the Law and Order League who told you what its objects were? — A. I cannot say that they were. Q. Were they Knights of Labor? — A. I cannot say that they are Knights of Labor. Q. You heard, then, someflyingreportsthattheorganization of this Law and Order League was to intimidate the Knights of Labor and drive them off and fill their places with other men ? — A. I do not know that they were flying reports. They were con- versations that I heard frequently. Q. Have any threats been made to you that if you did not join the Law and Order League your pension would be taken away from you ? — A. I think so, sir. Q. What was said to you on that subject ? — A. When the militia were here I said that it was unnecessary, and that I could see no cause for the militia to be here ; and 3084 LAB 3 3 34 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ibej said if I did not take care that I would get my pension taken fiom me, and all those old soldiers beside ; and it became the general talk through the streets, and there was a talk that the old soldiers should send a committee. Q. Was such a committee organized ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Who were the men that talked to you in that way ? — A. One of the head men spoke to me. I think his name is Mr. Demar. Q. Was he a member of the Law and Order League ! — A. I do not know that I can say he was. Q. Did he threaten you? — A. Yes; he told me that himself; for I know he was very angry over it. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan-) State the name of any other party that threatened yon. — A. i'here were no other parties that threatened me. I have understood that they threatened others. I have heard of hints. Q. What were the hints, and who made them ? — A. Well, Dr. Vanmater. Q. What did he say to you? — A. He did not say anything to me. No other man hinted to me, except what I have said about Demar. Q. Any others ? — A. Not to me. Q. (By the Chairman.) Is Mr. Demar a Knight of Labor ? — ^A. Not that I know of. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Do you know whether he is or not, or anything about it? — A. I think he has been. Q. Now, my question is : Do you know whether he is a Knight of Labor or not? — A. He is not a member. He is not a Knight of Labor. He has belonged to it. Q. When did he quit ? — A. He has been quit several months, I guess. Q. Do you know ? — A, I have not been able to know, because I have been sick all winter ; but my understanding is that he is not a member. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. I am, sir; bat that isoneof the things that we aro not disposed to answer. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) It may be that you cannot tell who is another Knight of Labor ; but I have the right to ask you that question and to compel an answer. WILLIAM P. SHELL sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitb : Question. How long have you lived in the town of Parsons ? — Answer. About nine years, sir. Q. Were yon living here recently, when the strike began ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were yon in the employ of the railroad company ?— A. No, sir. Q. Were you a member of the Knights of Labor at that time ? — A. About a year ago I was, and might have been at that time, and may be yet. I have not kept track of my dues, and I do not know whether I am or not. Q. What can you say as to the cause of the beginning of the strike ?— A. Almost nothing, except what I have got out of the public journals. Q. Do you know of any bad feeling existing between the Law and Order League and the Knights of Labor as an organization ? — A. Well, I have seen such manifesta- tions ; but could not give any particulars without some suggestions or questions. Q. It would be impossible for me to give you- any suggestions, as I am entirely ig- norant of anything.you may know about it. — A. I did not know what questions were expected to be answered by me, and am at a loss as to how*o come right down to the facts iu this matter. Q. Can you tell us anything aboutthe effect of the strike, as to the oommetcial busi- ness of the town ? — A. The business has certainly been damaged since the strike, com- menced and during the strike. Q. There has been a high state of feeling here? — A. Yes, sir; there has, undoubt- edly. Q. I am requested to ask you if you were a member of the jury that sat on a case where a citizen was prosecuted for an alleged assault recently? — A. It was one day last week ; I was one of the jury in the case that you speak of. Q. Were the jury divided equally when it was discharged? — A. The first vote was 8 to 4 in favor of conviction, and it was admitted by the opposition that' by the man's own evidence he should be convicted ; but it was said that it would be a dangerous precedent to establish in the place here, to say that a man going home, who had been seeking work, should not be protected, and have the work. Q. That was said in the discussion ? — A. That was said in the talk before the jury. Q. In the jury-room ? — A. Yes, sir. Q, (By the Chaikman.) You say "opposition." Do you mean the four jurymen who held out, admitted that he should be convicted t — ^A. Three of them did, and that he should, according to his own evidence. Q. (By Mr. Paiiker.) Is it certain that they believed his evidence T — ^A. I am not able to answer that question. LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTU AND WEST. 35 Q. I asked you if you had knowledge that the three jurors believed Ms evidence? — A. I do not think that I had such knowledge. Q. (By the Chairman. ) You stated a few moments since that it was said in the jniy-room ihat he should be convicted upon his own statement f — A. I so understood. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) I am requested to ask whether there was any testimony in the case that the Law and Order men had given orders to shoot any one who would call out "scab" toanyof the new employes of the railroad? — A. Such evidence given in the witness stand ? No ; I did not hear of any. This was only talked before the jury. One of the jurors said that that was his order, as a guard, when he went out to guard — to shoot any man that called laborers in the shops a " scab." Q. (By the Chaikman.) His orders from whom, sir? — A. I do not know that he spoke of any officer particularly. But he said that was their orders —to shoot any one that called another a " scab." Q. (By Mr. Pabeeb.) Do you believe, sir, that any citizen of this town would have shot another citizen for calling another that name ? — A. I cannot believe this man that made this statement before the jury. I cannot believe that he is that kind of a citizen. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You do not wish the committee to understand that that kind of citizens are very plentiful? — A. I do not want to give such an impression. Q. Have you any official position in the city ? — A. No, sir. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. On account of physical disability, I have retired £rom business, sir. WILLIAM SULLIVAN sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. How long have yon resided here ? — Answer. About six years. Q. What is your business? — A. I am a druggist. Q. Are you a member of the Board of Trade ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know any action taken by the board in reference to the Knights of Labor ? — A. Well, the last action taken was in a meeting in Mr. Kimball's office, and was in reference to sending an article to Mr. Hoxie, showing the sympathy and good feeling of the board of trade to him and the company. Q. Do you know of any other action? — A. Any ultimate action ? No, sir. Q. Are you a member of the Law and Order League? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know anything of their meetings? — A. I was present at one of their meetings. Q. Do you know anything on the part of the board of trade or the Law and Order League of Parsons, taking any action looking towards the thwarting of the efforts and purposes of the Knights of Labor as an organization? — A. Well, there was no action taken, but the subject was discussed both in the board of trade and in the meeting of the Law and Order League, at the first meeting they had, in reference to whataction they would take in subduing the Knights of Labor in regard to interference with trade. Q. In either one of these bodies, so far as you have knowledge, was there anything said or done looking toward interference with these railroad troubles outside of as- sisting in suppressing violations of the law as regards the security of persons or prop- erty ? — A. Well, in regard to security of persons, some members were somewhat singu- lar and rabid in their expressions in regard to arming themselves extensively and meeting them in battle array. Q. A battle array which has not yet been formed ? — ^A. It was not made, and the clearer heads had power over the others ; and perhaps gave them to understand that their person was dearer to them than a real fight. Q. The feeling among the citizens has been very intense ? — A. I believe about one- third were ahout ready for a war. Q. But wiser counsels prevailed ? — A. Wiser counsels prevailed to the extent of in- ducing them to take care of their bodies. Q. Is that all you know in reference to these troubles that would throw any light on their cause, extent, and possible remedy ? — A. 1 believe it is, sir. Q. This question is handed me to be askud : Was it agreed that Mr. Mathewson, the banker, should not go on the bonds of strikers ? — ^A. 1 was not present, and never heard him make any such statement. Q. Yon have no knowledge as to that ? — A. No, sir. JOHN WOOD sworn and examined. By the Chaibman: Question. Were yon a Knight of Labor at the time the Law and Order Leagae was organized ? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go to any of their meetings ? — ^A. No, sir. ' 36 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you attempt to attend any of the meetings? — A. No, sir; I came to thehal] on other business. Q. What happened at the hall, if anything? — A. I came up here to see another gen- tleman and called him out. There were two of us together, three of us, and while we waited outside he came out and we had a consultation with him. Ho went back into the hall, and we waited and expected him to come out and give us an answer to our inquiries. He said he had to consult with the League before he could do anything in regard to what we were asking him to do, and we waited out there a few min- utes. A man came out and pulled a pistol halfway out of his pocket and told us to get out. Q. And you left ? — ^A. No, sir ; we did not leave. We had business with a gentle- man that was urgent, andr we did not leave. Q. What was your business ? — ^A. It was in regard to some bonds for men who had been arrested. Q. Who was the man you wanted to see ? — A. Mr. Mathewson. Q. Did you see him any more ? — A. Yes, sir ; he came out and said he could not sign any bonds. They would not allow him. Q. Who would not allow him ? — ^A. The League. Q. Were you three a committee of Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you appointed by the assembly to come and see him for that purpose f— A. Yes, sir. Q. Some of the members had been arrested for alleged violations of the law, had they not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And your object was to induce him to go on their bonds ? — A. Ye^ sir. Q. And he said he would have to see the members of the Law and Order League?— A. Yes, sir. Q. He came out subsequently and told you th^ members would not permit him to go on the bonds ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Previous to that another man came out and half drew a pistol and ordered yon off?— A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Parker : Q. Was this during the day or in the evening ? — A. It was in the evening. Q. About how late ? — A. About 9 or 10 o'clock. Q. You were in the hallway? — A. Yes, sir; just outside. Q . And the meeting of the Law and Order League was held in the same building f — A. In here, sir. Q. And you were in the hallway outside ? — A. Yes, sir. Q, Was it lighted ?— A. There was a light. Q. And this man came out and saw you there. Did you tell him your business ?— A. He did not give us time to give any explanation. Q. You did not go away and he did not take out his pistol ? — A. No more than half wa^. Q. And made no effort to hurt you? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Buchanan : Q. Who was it? — ^A. His name is Eye. I cannot give his initials. Q. You do not justify assaults on persons, do you ?— A. No, sir. Q. Do you justify the destruction of property ? — A. No, sir. JAMES TISDALE swbrn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Question. You are a resident here and have been for how many years? — Answer. Since the 30th of October last. Q. What is yojir business here 1 — A. I am selling goods. Q. What knowledge have you as to the feeling towards the strikers here in general by the citizens and business men and members of the Law and Order League ?— A. I ' thluk it is very bitter. Q. When did it originate? — ^A. Since the strike. Q. Have you any information of any boycott on the part of the Law and Order League, or anything that amounts to that, on the Knights of Labor or their friends f — A. I do not know what you call a boycott. Q. Have yon information of any influences being thrown against you or any other man by the Law and Order League because you were friendly to the strike ?— A. I suppose that there has been a good deal of influence used against me because I carried customers that I had when the strike commenced. ' Q. And you continued that custom afterwards ?— A. I continued it simply to carry ijliose parties, and they afterwards paid me from the day that the strike commenced to the present day. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 37 Q. What injury have you received and wLat facts can you state indicating that you have been injured or boycotted by the citizens or the Law and Order League on ac- count of that t — A. I have been refused goods &om a house I bought of in Kansas City, which wrote me that it understood that I was giving credit indiscriminately to cer- tain parties. Q. When was that T — A. From as soon as the strike commenced. I have a letter that I received this morning. I may state that I have not given them any cause at all for such a statement, and that I gave no credit except to those who were trading with me before the strike commenced. Q. And you understand that on account of your action in that respect your credit in Kansas City has been injured! — A. I do, sir. Q. What knowledge have you that it was done by information sent from this town from members of the Law and Order League t — A. I have been so informed by com- mercial travelers. Q. Was it done because it was thought it was unsafe to invest further in trade just now, or because they were asked to do it ! — A. They said they were told that I was giving aid and giving credit to any man that was on the strike. Q. Do you know any fact that indicates that any man here in Parsons has sought to injure your credit because you disagreed with them as to your opinions of the strike and the strikers? — A. I have been told so. Q. Do you know any fact that would indicate that ? — A. Men have come into the store and said that if I did not go into the cash system, and if 1 sold goods to any- body, especially to these strikers, I would lose my trade. Q. Who were those men ? — A. Mr. Heoker. He told me that. And he came and told my partner. Q. He told you what somebody else told him. Had you any knowledge of that yourself? — A. Nothing but what he told me. I have received that letter. I sent an order for sugar, and they wrote me they did not sell sugar alone, and they refused to fill my order on that ground. [Witness here handed a letter to Mr. Parker.] Mr. Pahkbr. You have handed me a letter as bearing out your statement. It does not bear out your statement, but flatly contradicts it. The WiTifESS. It refers to this. It says that they understood that I was giving oKjredit largely and not wisely, and to my having given a chattel mortgage. Q. Is there anything in that letter to indicate that any citizen has sought to injure your credit? — A. They say that it has been reported to them, and that I had made a cha tel mortgage. Q. I will ask you this: Is that substantially your evidence upon this point? — A. It is. The chairman read the following letter: Kansas City, Mo., Jiml 30, 1886. Messrs. Tisdale & Hanlky, ^ Parsons, Kans. : Gentlemen — We have your order of the 28th, and we regret that in the light oi: our present information as to the condition of your affairs it seems to us unwise to ship, except for cash. It has been recently stated to us that yon have given a chattel , mortgage on your stock, that you are giving credit largely (and in some cases not with due caution), and that these things indicate the desirability of our informing ourselves as to your exact condition before we ship. We shall hold the order, there- fore, until we hear from you, and we trust that we may receive from you such satis- factory evidence of your sound mercantile standing as will warrant us in filling the order promptly. , Yours, respectfully, CORLE CRACKER & CONFY CO., LEWIS. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was that the first order you had given that firm? — A. No, sir; I had been dealing with them ever since I had been in business. Q. This credit that you say you have given was to parties who had dealt with you before the strike and paid you cash ? — A. I have never taken on a man who did not deal with us before the strike. Q. What is the reason that you have given them credit since? — A. Simply because it is a principle of my. life that if a man commenced dealing with me, and paid me promptly, I would give him credit when he needed it. Q. Did you keep them on credit because they had no cash to pay ? — A. I gave them credit simply because they had been customers, and had paid at the end of thirty days. ' Q. Did you give them credit because, having no cmploymaat, they could not pay cash ? — A. I carried them on the principle that they had paid me before, and there- 38 I.AI30R TEOUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. fore carried them as if there had been no strike. They were supposed to pay every thirty days, but all citizens do not pay up every thirty days. Q. So you kept on just the same ? — A. I kept on just the same. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Do you know Mr. Lee Bristol ? Is he in your store I — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you say, in your store, that you would rather see the town in ashes than see the strikers fail ? — A. I did not say so in so many words. Q. Did you say so in effects — A. Mr. Bristol was asking me what I thought about the strike, about the time they were killing the engines, and I made the remark to him that there had been a struggle going on ever since the beginning of time between the workingmen and capital, and I told him that I was in favor of labor, and that Parsons might be burned up ; that did not amount to anything ; if a settlement was obtained between capital and labor it would be all right ; that I would be glad to see everything I had in the world go up if it brought about a settlement between capital and labor ; and he said he would not give a dollar. Q. (By the Chairman.) I understand yon to mean, and if I am not correct you will put me right, that these strikers had been customers of yours and had paid yon promptly, and as they were out of employment you did not refuse them supplies, hut you still trusted them, expecting that they would pay you when the relations be- tween them and their former employers had been resumed ? — A. I trusted them the same as ever — every man who had been dealing with me. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You have stated that your orders were declined, and you have stated the reason to be that your credit had been injured by parties here. What is the fact as to your store having been closed by legal process within the last twelve months ? — A. It never was closed at all. I bought the stock of goods from Mr. Hold- ers, and he agreed to give me all the time I wisned to pay up the balance. I was to pay him $5,000 down, and give him a mortgage for the balance. He got broke np about something one day, and told me he was going to shut up the store in the morn- ing. I told him I could get money from friends in the country if I had time to get to them. Morning came, and he brought in his lawyer and had the mortgage signed over. He then demanded the key, and I gave it to Mr. Simon. I got my friends in, and all the money was paid. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Do you know whether the firm that wrote you this letter are related to any stockholders or officers in the First National Bank in this ci(y ? — A. I understand that they are. Mr. Hewitt told me they had brothers-in-law in the rirst National Bank. Q. (By the Chairman.) Have the orders that you have been filling for the strikers- t)een carried by the executive board of the Knights of Labor ! — A. They have every one, and are still. Q. Do you get your pay from them ? — A. We do. We have been paid regularly. Q. Then you have not been carrying these men f — A. We have not been carrying anybody. They came to us and said, "Will you accept orders of 3703 ?" and I said I would. SpLOMON C. HINCKLEY sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. How long have you lived in the city of Parsons ? — Answer. A little over two years. Q. What is your occupation? — A. I am not doing anything now; I have been a clerk, and was until the strike. Q. Are you a member of the Knights of Labor? — A. I am, and was at the time of this strike. Q. Did you go out at the time of the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. How did you get out of employment ? — A. I was instructed by the agent that I would not be required until this strike was over. Q. What reason did he assign ? — A. None ; but that he had orders from headquar- ters that the business would not justify it, and that they had to curtail expenses. Q. Was there any one put in your place ? — A. When they resumed. Q. Did you apply for your place f — A. They did not give me time. Q. Why? — A. Mr. Moss, on resuming business, said that he would not be allowed but two clerks, and I asked Mr. Moss if I was finally discharged ; he gave me but little consolation. I then went to Mr. Golden and asked him if he did not think when "business picked up there would be a chance for n.e to come back, and he said it would ■fae with Mr. Moss to say. After they bad got other men Mr. Moss said he had orders for me not to go to work ; but I saw Mr. Golden again, and he said he had nothing, to do with it. Q. Was any reason assigned by Mr. Moss for not taking you on ? — A. There was none given by him further than what I have stated. Q. Did you know anything about the condition of the traffic business of the Mis- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 39 souri Pacific Railroad f — A. Well, I have given it pretty imicli study, and I was pretty folly acquainted with it before the strike. Q. Is there as much business done on that road now as therewas before the strike? — A. I do not think there is, from what I can see from the outside. I have made an esti- mate that there is not. Q. What have been your opportunities for observation ? — A. By living close at the: track and watching the trains as they pass, and also from conversations with some of the contractors in regard to how heavy the trains are, and what they are composed of. Q. What comparison is there between the business done at this time and the busi- ness prior to the strike J — A. Business generally is not more than half. They have not done near as much, and a good deal of stock that would naturally have gone over the road has not gone over it. Q. Has business been resumed on the Missouri Pacific ? Are trains running regu- arly ? — A. They are running. 1 Q. Without obstruction?— A. So far as I know they are. After they first opened business here, business began to pick up a little. I watched it pretty closely for the first ten days. . The first day or two they started out pretty heavy, doing as much as they did prior to the strike. Q. I have here a memorandum addressed to Martin Irons, which states that they had about li miles of track in yards which required two yard crews, consisting of yard- master, engineer, and firemen, and each engine of two laborers, making in all foreacb twenty-four hours, two yard-masters, four engineers and firemen, and eight switch- men. — A. They have the same body at work yet. Q. And that the regular number of freight trains was eight east and eight south on the main line of the Kansas and Topeka, and the same number to arrive. One> train to leave by the Neosha, and one to arrive. The railroad company have power to remove all cars at this place except bad order ones ; that but few of them are loaded. They are transferring them. And then it says : The following is a complete list of the trains since the militia came. Then you give the recapitulation as a total. Explaia that recapitulation. — A. The recapitulation shows 105 trains departing, composed of 1,517 cars, 299 of which were empties. Arriving, there were 90 trains, composed of 1,265 ears, 211 of which were empty, making a grand total of 195 trains, 3,782 cars loaded, and 610 not loaded. Q. You have an explanation here in which you use the statement that you "dis- cover in this recapitulatton the secret of Mr. Hoxie in his report to Mr. Gould as to how he arrives at such enormous figures. For example: A train starting from Hanni- bal with twenty other loads for Texas would be reported ' one train oui of Hannibal, in and out at Sedalia, in and out at Parsons, and in and out at Muskogee, and into Denison;' making one train show as four trains." You wrote that to Mr. Irons? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you mean what you wrote? — A. Certainly; that is what I wrote there. They wanted a comparative statement here, and I had been watching it as near as I conld, and I so made the report. Q. I see you signed this under seal ? — A. I was appointed as a committee. Q. You signed it as " chairman of this committee for this report ? " — A. I do not say that that is exact, but it is as near as I could give and as sear as possible. I did sign it as chairman. Q. How do you know that Mr. Hoxie reported the trains in the way that you speak ? — A. By the papers. I looked into the matter, and that was the only way that I could understand his figures. 1 noticed in Mr. Golden's ofSce that they would assume a greater proportion than what trains were capable of hauling. Q. Do you mean that his object was to show that the road was doing a big busi- ness ! — A. That was the object ; to show the exact amount of business that it does. Q. Was not that right ' — A. Certainly ; their freight that was being handled was reported at two places, Sedalia and Parsons, but I did not make that report with the expectation of its going to Congress. The Chaikman . It is handed to us by a representative of the Knights of Labor. The Witness. It was not quite so explicit as it might have been. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) A train starting from Hannibal with any number of loads for Texas would be regarded as a train out of Hannibal, and in and out at Sedalia, in and out at Parsons, &c. Now, do you intimate that Mr. Hoxie's reports were made up by calling these different trains ? — A. The reports were received from each division of cars received and cars sent out. Q. Upon what do you base your judgment that they were so reported? — A. Simply from the fact that they were handled. Q. A train goes into Sedalia and it is reported, and when the same train leaves Se- dalia, that train is also reported ; the train for the same destination all the way through ? — A. The locomotive and crews are changed. Q. Then each of those places that you have named are terminals of divisions ? — A^ Yes, sir. 40 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. But the trains reported are all the same cars?— A. Yes,, sir; they are the same cars. They may be reported on the Hannibal division tomorrow, and perhaps on the next division the next day. Q. Did you say that you left the employment of the company voluntarily ; or that you were discharged t— A. I was told that my services would not be required until after the strike was over, abont four or five days after the strike was commenced. Q. When the strike occurred you did not leave? — A. No, sir. JOHN B. BRANNON sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Where do you live ? — Answer. In Parsons. Q. Where did you live in March ? — A. In Parsons. Q. How long have you lived here ? — A. Six years the 14th of last January. Q. What business have you been engaged in ? — ^A. I have been a molder, working in the Missouri Paoiflo foundry. Q. For the last six years ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you working for any company now? — A. I am working for Daly & Co., of Palestine, Tex. Q. Where were you working in March? — A. I was working here in Parsons, in the Missouri Pacific foundry. Q. What is the reason that yon are not working for them any longer ; did you go out on the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. How did you come to leave ? — A. I have not left them ; I am still in the employ ofDaly&Co. Q. I understood you to say that you vieie working in March in the Missouri Paci- fic foundry ? — A. But it is now in the hands of Daly & Son. Q. Then you did not go out on the strike at all ? — A. No, sir. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do yon know anything about any agreement entered into between the officers of the company and the employes in March, 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it agreed at that time that all work belonging to each roadluithe system should be done on that particular road and not to be taken to the shops of any of the other roads ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Has the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated this agreement in any way ; if BO, how ? — A. They have, by taking the work from the Missouri Pacific foimdry to the Missouri car works, in the city of Saint Louis, consequently cutting down the hours of labor in the foundry and putting the men on short time, which was a viola- tion of the agreement on their part, entered into by the two governors and the com- missioners of the States of Missouri and Kansas. Q. Have the men ever complained of this, and if so, to whom? — A. They have com- plained to Mr. Hoxie. Q. In what way was the complaint made to Mr. Hoxie ? — A. By the executive board of the southwestern system of Knights of Labor. I was a member of the board at that time, and was called, on or about the 8th of August, to the city of Denison, Tex. We had a meeting there from all points on the Southwestern, the Gould Southwestern System. Each road was represented there by a delegate, and each delegate that had any grievances brought them before the executive board of the Southwestern System that was in convention at that time in Denison. One of the grievances was that the September rates of wages had never been restored at Big Springs, Tex. That was a violation of the agreement, and that was one of the grievances. And there was a de- mand to be made for a dollar and a half a day for all skill ed labor on the line. A mong the grievances they had was the grievance of the Missouri Pacific Ibuudry here at this point. Q. Did you go to see Mr. Hoxie in reference to that ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who went ? — A. I went as one of them. There were five of us. Q. Did you see Mr. Hoxie ? — A. No, sir, I did not. It was about the 14th of Au- gust when we got there. Q. Why did you not see Mr. Hoxie ? — A. Because we found after we had got there that he had skinned out. Q. How do you know that he knew you were coming ? — A. Because while we were in Denison we sent on for transportation to Mr. Hoxie, at Saint Louis, and,he knew of our coming, and knew that we had these grievances, and were requesting him to stay there until we got there. At the time we had got there he had left. Q. How did he know that you had these grievances? — A. He knew there was trouble, because the executive board sent for transportation so as to go there and present these grievances. Q. Did they ever notify him that they had grievances ? — A. They notified him by letter. I am not positive that the chairman notified him, but I know he was in- structed to do so. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 41 Q. You cannot 6ay Tvhether it was Tvritten or not written in time to reach Mr. Hoxie t — A. Yes, sir ; it was a telegram tliat the chairman was to send. Q. Did he say he sent the telegram ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was he?— A. E. W. Drew. Q. Where is he ?— A. At Sedalia. Q. Did you leave the grievances with anybody when you went to Saint Louis f — A. We left them with Mr. Hoxie's chief clerk, Mr. O'Hara. Q. What passed between you and him about those grievances? — A. We told him he was to present them to Mr. Hoxie. He said that he would not be back for ten or eleven days, and that he had gone to New York. Q. What action was taken afterwards, if any, by any member of your organiza- tion ? — ^A. We left all the grievances in the hands of the executive committeeman, H. M. Palmer, and instructed him to see that there was something done with them when Mr. Hoxie got back from New York. After Mr. Hoxie got back from New York Mr. Palmer went to see him. ' Mr. Hoxie was in his private room at the time, and he had given in8ti:uctions to the parties in the office that he would not see anybody. So Mr. Palmer went away and came back next day, and could not get to see him, and then he went the next day, and so on and on. The conclusion we arrived at was that he did not want to see our committeeman. Q. Were the grievances ever redressed ? — A. No, sir. They still remain there, if they have not been thrown into the waste-basket. Q. Were the things you complained of corrected by the company?— A. No, sir. Q. Do they still exist? — A. They stili exist. That is, with the exception of the Big Springs. I think that these men got that grievance settled ; but they had to go out on a strike to do it. Q. Is the foundry at Parsons in the same hands now that it was then? — A. No, sir. Q. Whose hands was it in ? — A. In the hands of Daly & Son, of Palestine, Tex. Q. Did the grievances that you had complained of still exist after the foundry had changed hands ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I understood you to say that these grievances existed after you left Saint Louis and up to the time that the foundry changed hands? — A. It still existed. It never was corrected. Q. Give the names of the committee who visited Mr. Hoxie ? — A. They were R. W. Drew, of Sedalia; M. H. Palmer, of Saint Louis ; J. B. Brannon — that is myself-^of Parsons; C. A. Hall, of Marshall, and M. Mahaney, of Denison. Q. Is the man Hall named by you the same Hall there has been so much talk about? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, what was the cause of this strike? — A. The cause of the strike, as far as I could learn, is the repeated violation of the contract entered into by the two governors and the commissioners of the two States of Kansas and Missouri. Taking work away from the Missouri Pacific foundry whep they pledged themselves that the work, should be done on these respective divisions. The Missouri Pacific foundry being the only foundry they had on the system at the time, the work should have been done there. It-looked like they wished to discriminate against th^men implicated in the strike of a year ago, and they had the men cut down three days a week. The labor- ing men were cut down. They could not work if the molders did not work, and con- sequently these men had to live on $3.75 a week, as they got $1.25 a day. The cause of the stiike was the grievances we presented in Saint Louis right after this strike, I think about August 14 ; and the cause of the strike was the Violation of the agree- ment. Q. You say the grievance was never redressed up to the time the foundry changed hands ? — A. It never was redressed. i Q. When did the foundry change hands ? — A. I think it changed hands in February of this year. Q. Then the grievances no longer existed after the foundry changed hands, did they ?^-A. Certainly, but they would not recognize it as a grievance. ' Q. Then how was it this strike was not ordered till the 6th of March, when that was one real, if not the only real, grievance? — A. We still hold that as a grievance. The committee was not recognized, and they still hold it as a grievance that shculd be redressed. Q. Was there any other reason but this for the strike ? — A. There was the demand for $1.25 f(jr unskilled labor and for the reinstatement of brother Hall by the Texas and Pacific road at Marshall, Tex. Q. Was not Mr. Hall in the employment of the Tfexas and Pacific ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was not that in the hands of a receiver? — A. I understopd it was in the hands of a receiver, but still it was a part of District No. 101. Q. You, of course, do not understand the difference between the management of a road by a private corporation and its management by a United States court. I sup- pose you presumed that the Texas and Pacific road was still a part of the same sys- tem and running in the same way as before it was put in the haudsof the receivers. 42 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST and because Hall was discharged by the Texas and Pacific and not reinstated this en- tire strike took place. Is that correct ? — A. The strike did not take effect on account of Hall alone. That was only part. The officials of the road would not recognize the Bxecutive board of the Knights of Labor. They did not recognize our committee at all; and there was a demand for |1.50 a day for all unskilled labor. All that went to make up the cause of the strike. It was not on account of Hall alone, but there have been violations of the agreement right along, twenty days after the agreement had beenmade. Q. Why did you not strike then f — A. They were not ready to strike. Q. Why did they not strike a month later or two months later ? — A. They were not ieady. Q. Wliat do you mean by that? — A. They were not thoroughly organized, and they thought they could not get these grievances redressed without going on a strike. They had other grievances here and there, and they would go to the officials of the different departments and try to have them settled without having any trouble and without having a strike on thesy stem. And they tried everything in their power to have aset- tlement, but it seemed like they intend ed this strike, and that it had to come some time. Q. Who wanted it ? — A. The railroad company wanted it. Q. Do you know anything about the agreement made in May, 1885, between Mr. Hoxie and the Enights of Labor, in which Mr. Hoxie, as manager of the Missouri Pa- cific Railway Company, agreed to reduce the hours of labor instead of reducing the number of men in the various branches of work f — A. Yes, sir. Q. State what you know about that. — A. I will state that there was an order camo here to reduce the force in the foundry 33J per cent., and we thought it was to get rid of the men that took part in the strike a year ago; so we turned round and agreed among ourselves that the number should not be reduced, but that they should reduce the hours. We made that plan, and told them that we jvould rather reduce the hours and keep the same men on, and they agreed to that, and cut us down to three days a week rather than that the men should be reduced. Q. Did the company agree to that f — A. Yes, sir. We went on that way for about eight months. Finally the work accumulated a little and we wanted them to put us on more time. Well, they did not want to do it. Then we took and sent our committees to Saint Louis, who found that the work was being done in the Missouri Car Works, in the city of Saint Louis. Consequently, it seemed to the men that the company was trying to get rid of them — to freeze them out. They wanted to get rid of them, so they let out the foundry to Daly & Son. The company agreed to our proposition to reduce the hours, and so we reduced the hours and kept the force on. Q. Do you know of any other violation besides the one you have just stated! — A. Whenever a man got hurt in the foundry or any other department they would never hire anybody. Consequently, that made one man do two men's work. We had it in our department in the foundry when it was part of the company's works. Three or four laborers quit, and these men had to do their work and they were forced to make a grievance committee of it and go to the master mechanic and have it redressed. Q. Was it redressed ?.— A. It was after the molders went out on strike to get this grievance redressed. Q. Do you knov of any other violations of the agreement ? — A. That is the only violation I can #u(nk of at the present time. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Where were you bornf — A. I was born in Oswego, in the State of New York. Q. How long have you been at work for this road ? — A. Six years last January. Q. Did you learn your trade in Oswego? — A. No, sir, I learned it in Cincinnati, Ohio. Q. After you called at Mr. Hoxie's office, in August, did you press for a hearing upon those grievances any further after you returned? — ^A. We left them in the hands of Mr. Palmer. Q. Did he do as you have stated ? I wish to understand whether that is all that was done towards getting Mr. Hoxie to act upon these grievances. — A. That i^ all I know of. I wrote brother Palmer myself, in Saint Louis, and asked him if he had Been»Mr. 'Hoxie yet, and told him to push those grievances red-hot, because the men were in a very bad position here at the time, making only three days a week. Q. At how late a date was this letter written to Palmer ? — A. I guess it was three or four weeks after we had been to Saint Louis. Q. Some tinie in September, probably?— A. Yes, sir. Q. At that time how many men were at work in the Missouri Pacific foundry ?— A. About sixty, I believe. Q. Were they all working reduced time, as you have stated?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the men remaining after the factory changed hands continue on reduced time, or did the new contractor furnish work enough to keep them busy t — A. No* at the start. They had some trouble about some patterns. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SODTII AND WEST. 43 Q. Did the rule as to time chaDge when the new contractors came into posses- sion? — ^A. Yes.the time changed. Q. Were you paid full time after that f — A. Yes, sir ; we got more time. Q. Did it reach pretty near full time ? — A. Yes, sir; it was pretty near full time. Q. Immediately T — A. Not immediately. Q. When the strike was ordered, you were all on full time? — A. Yes, sir; we got about i'ull time. Q. Then that grievance was done away with, by your having all the work you had a right to expect at that time ? — A. These men in the foundry had thought no more of it alter the foundry changed hands. They thought they could not do anything with it, and so they let it drop. Q. So that grievance did not exist at the time the strike was ordered ? — A. It still existed in Mr. Hoxie's office. It was never redressed. Q. Then the grievance about having short time did not exist at the time the men struck t — A. No, it did not exist. Q. As to this man Hall. Yoti did not understand, then, that there was any cause in the discharge of that man Hall, down there in Texas, as a cause or excuse for you throwing the business of all this system into confusion, together with the business of the farmers, tradesmen, and labor, and everybody connected with production or em- ployment? Did you consider that Hall's discharge was sufficient to justify that ? — ^A. Well, I did not get the clear facts of the case at that time why Hall was discharged, but I did get them afterwards. I found out that Hall had been discharged for attend- ing a meeting of District Assembly 101 , when it was in session at Marshall, Tex. Afterwards it was claimed that he was discharged also for not being competent. Q. You do not know really which he was discharged for ? — A. I believe he was dis- charged because he was a Knight of Labor. Q. You do not know that ? — A. 1 believe it myself. Q. Yon havo no evidence of that ? — A. I have no evidence, but I think that was the reason. I think so, because he was discharged immediately after the district assembly had adjourned, and after he went back to work. Q. If he was removed for some other cause, you would not justify the strike on ac- count of his removal ? — ^A. No ; not if it was justified. Q. Would you feel that if Hall was removed because he had attended the assembly of the Knights of Labor that would be sufficient cause to justify all the confasion in business in these five States that has followed this strike ? — A. Well, not if it could be avoided without a strike, and if they would arbitrate and try to redifess the griev- ances. But they never made any attempt, and it was no more than right that the Order should stand right by their brother that was discharged for attending a meet- ing of the Knights of Labor at Marshall, Tex. It showed plain enough to me, or any thinking man that belongs to the Order, that he was discharged for being a Knight of Labor and attending the meeting of District Assembly 101. It was not because the man was not competent. He had worked there for years, and was competent for that length of time ; and I think he should be competent after that. Q. Do you think the removal of a man for attending a meeting of the Knights of Labor sufficient cause for throwing the business of five States into confasion ? — A.. If we could not get round it any other way. Q. Do you know of any attempt on the part of the Knights of Labor to arbitrate Hall's case with the Texas and Pacific? — A. I understand they had a meeting of the citizens there to try to redress the wrongs on the part of the company. Q. Do you know of any demand or request on the part of the Knights of Labor on the Texas and Pacific to put Hall back, or to arbitrate his case ? — A. I believe there was a committee. Q. You have no knowledge of it. Do you think so? — A. I understand there was. Q. Do you not understand that about the time of that trouble the Texas and Pacific had severed its connection with the Missouri Pacific, and was under another manage- ment ? — A. I understood by the papers that it was in the hands of a receiver. Q. Let us go a step beyond that. Do you consider that the Knights of Labor had the right to throw these five States into business confasion because the managers of the Texas and Pacific, under a court, refused to reinstate Hall ? — A. I do not think it was done exactly for that — ^for the discharge of this man Hall. I do not think that it was for that that the strike was ordered. Q. The Big Spring trouble was settled and adjusted ?— A. I understood it was ad- justed. Q. If that was settled and adjusted, and the foundrymen were at work on full time, what else was there at that time presented excepts Hall's case as a grievance before the Knights of Labor? — ^A. There was the |1.50 a day for unskilled labor. Q. Was not that presented to Mr. Hoxie in the paper that was left there by you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You state that the recognition of the Knights of Labor was one of the points 44 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. involved. Do you. say that the recognition of your committee ^vasouo of the poihta involved? — A. Yes, sir. Q. So that after you came back and failed to see Mr. Hoxie and get an ansvsrer from him, that was one of the grievances ?— A. That was after we came back. That was on this strike. Q. After you came back from endeavoring to see Mr. Hoxie, in August, was that considered a grievance, because you could not get an answer from him? — A. No, sir, Q. Was the fact that the Knights of Labor ofHclally were not received by him with due respect one of the occasions of the strike ? — ^A. That I cannot answer. I do not know anything about it. Q. Did the fact that Mr. Hoxie failed to meet you when you sent to him, and failed to answer the grievances you left on the paper, induce you to think that the man- agement was not inclined to recognize the Knights of Labor oflSoially, and therefore _ kiduce this strike, in part, to compel a recognition of your order as Knights of" Labor? — A. No, sir; not altogether. Q. Was that one of the intentions of the strike ? — A. Not altogether. Q. Was it in part ? — A. It was in part. I consider it in part. Q. Was there any ■ proposition to arbitra;te the standing of the Knights of Labor with the management of the road? — A. In this last strike; yes, sir. ,Q. When do you refer to ? — A. By the committee going to see and try to have aa arbitration at Saint Louis. Q. In last August ? — A. No, sir ; this March. Q. Did the committee go to Mr. Hoxie about that time ? — A. I do not know whether it was about that time or not ; I think it was a little after. Q. After the strike was made? — A. Yes, sir; they have made an attempt to arbi- trate. Q. Was there any attempt, to your knowledge, to arbitrate anything after the at- tempt to get action upon the grievances in August and September, and before the strike was ordered ? — A. I think there was. Q. When? — A. I think Martin Irons had gone to see him. Q. Have you any knowledge about it, or is it simply rumor ? — A. It is only what I heard. Q. (By the Chairman.) Has the foundry force been reduced since Daly & Son took charge of the foundry ? — A. No, sir ; there have been several who went away of their own accord. Q. Did they supply the places of those who had quit? — A. No, sir. Q. How many quit? — A. I think three or four molders left and several laborers. Q. Were there practicallyas many men working in the foundry in February as there were in January? — A. No, sir. Q. Was the force reduced in February ?— A. No, sir ; some men had quit in February ; about three, I think. Q. Do you know that in the month of January, under the Missouri Pacific Company, it took twenty regular days to turn out a hundred and eighteen thousand castings, and that in the month of February Daly & Co. turned out one hundred and twenty thousand castings in twelve days, with a smaller force ? — A. Well, they have been making more time in February than in January by an increase of the day's work. Q. My question was this : Do you know that in the month of January it took twenty regular working days to turn out one hundred and eighteen thousand castings, and in the month of February Daly & Co. turned out one hundred and twenty thousand in twelve days by a smaller force ? — A. The cause of that is the work has been raised and the men have been doing more work. Where a molder put up nine flasks, or nine boxes, they wanted ten put up in February. Q. I call your attention to the fact that more was done in twelve days than in twenty days. — A. I do not know whether there has been that much difference, but I knoy there has been an increase in the work of the men, because the men have to put np ten flasks now instead of nine. Q. The ultimate' result is an increased production, is it not? — A. Well, they do; they turn it out. Q. Have they increased the hours of labor ? — A. Yes, sir ; thej' work ten hours a day, where we were working nine. Q. Did you work ten hours a day in February? — A. I do not know. Q. How are you paid, by the day or by the hour ? — A. We are paid by the day. Q. What'is considered a day's work in time ? — A. Ten hours. Q. What was considered a day's work under the management of the Missouri Pa- cific ? — A. Ten hours. Q. I think you said you only worked nine hours ? — A. They paid us then by the hour and they cut down the day. Mr. Buchanan. Mr. Powderly has testified before this committee that it was one of the objects of the order to discourage strikes. Is that generally understood among the Knights in this section to be one of the objects of the order? A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 45 Q. And is tlieir desire aucl their purpose to exhaust eveiy jtieans of reconciliation by arbitration before resorting to a strike? — A. Most iindoubteclly it is. Q. In this case of the discbarge of Hall was any investigation made by the strikers here as to the real fact of the case before they went out on tee strike ? — A. Well, I can- not exactly answt" that question. I was not a member of the district, because of the foundry going out of the system. i Q. But yon took your information from those who were members ? — A. I understand that there was a committee who went there to investigate the matter. Q. Suppose it had been discovered that Hall had been discharged for incompetence. I understand you to say that in such an event the Knights would not have taken his case up 7 — A. No; if he was not competent to fill the position. Q. I understand you further to say that he was discharged because of attendance upon a meeting, and you felt it to be your duty to stand by your brother ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Suppose yon had discovered further by investigation that in fact he had been discharged for that reason, to wit, attending a meeting of the Knights, but that this road was powerless to restore him ; would that state of affairs, in your j udgment, have justified this strike here ? — A. I think not. Q. (B^ Mr. Parker.) What do you consider constitutes u. strike? — A. A great many things constitute a strike. Q. Tell me what they are. — A. The first thing, if there are any grievances existing in a shop where there is an organization — where they have a shop committee — they are always submitted to the shop committee and the grievance committee. They have a committee in our department called a local grievance committee. These griev- ances are put into their hands and theiy investigate them, and if they do nob see suf- ficient cause to snstaiu the grievances, why, they let them drop. They investigate every grievance thoroughly, and if they cannot settle it by going to the officials of the road this local grievance committee then submit it to the general executive board of the district. They take it in their hands and they use all means in their power to settle this matter by arbitration, or by a mutual agreement of some kind with the company and the committee. If they cannot settle it there, why, then it is submit- ted to all the local assemblies on the Southwestern System to take action on it. Q. And suppose they do not get it adjusted? — A. Well, then it is left to the local assembly to take action upon it, and to strike or not. Q. Suppose they decide to strike, what then? — A. They say strike ; why, then they strike, Q. What do they do when they strike ? — A. They inorely go out. Q. And quit work? — A. And quit work. Q. What next ? — A. Well, they will send these committees and see if they can arbi- trate this, and use every effort in their power to have a settlement. Q. By breaking up trains before they start ? — A. I do not know that. Q. Was that any part of the strike ? — A. No part of the strike that I know of. Q. What aljout killing engines ? — A. Killing engines ? That is something that I do not know anything about. Q, Ton Lave heard to-day that at one time there were In the round-house here sev- enteen engines that had been killed ? — A. I am not aware that seventeen engines that had been killed were in tjie round-house. I have heard of engines being killed. Q. Was that part of the strike f — A. I do not know whether it was part of the strike or not. Q. Will you be kind enough to tell me, in your judgment, was that part of the strike? — A. No, sir; it was not. Q. Then it was done without any connection with the strike? — A. Yes, sir; the Knights of Labor do not authorize anything of that kind. Q. Do they oppose it? — ^A. Yes, sir; they oppose it. Q. It was done without their consent? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And done against their wish? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is your understanding ? — A. That is my understanding. Q. Done outside of Knights of Labor ? — A. I cannot answer who it was done by. Q. But whoever it was done by, it was without sanction of the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes; as an organization. Q. Was it done, as far as you have knowledge, here by members of the Knights of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Then your understanding is the same as Mr. Fowderly's, that anything which transgresses the law is against the teachings of the Knights of Labor, and is con- demned by them? — ^A. It is condemned by the Knights of Labor ; yes, sir. Q. As to the treatment of these men who are called " scabs ;" is their ill treatment recognized by the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. You say that you consider it your duty to stand by a brother who is removed, as you think, improperly ? — A. Yos, sir. 46 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. That Tvas acting upon the principle that "the injury of one was the concern of all," was it not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Has not the man whom you call " a scab '' a right to go to work and earn wages to support hisfamily ?— A. Yes, sir, he has a perfect right ; and I have a perfect right, also, to use all the moral persuasion I can to have that man quit work, without in- . inring him, or calling him names. I do not think they can do any good in calling a him a "scab." Q. Then they should not use physical injury or personal abuse ? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Buchanan : Q. Do you not regard the man who does use physical injury either to the workman or to the machine as in reality one of the worst foes that Knights of Labor can have ? — A. Yes, sir. By Mr. Outhwaite : ' Q. I see that yon have a seal attached to orders and letters, &c., in your order. Do you know whether that seal was attached to any order directing this strike ?— A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever seethe order upon which this strike commenced? — A. No, sir, I have not. Q. Doyou knowwhetheranypuch order wasever issued byany one? — A. Iheardso. ^Q. But you have never seen it? — A. I never have seen it. Q. Does your order keep a record of its proceedings ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is there any record in any of your assemblies in this whole Southwest that you have seen, showing that your grievances were presented to the railroad officials?— A. Do you mean those late grievances ? Q. Any of them that yon complain of now? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Wliere will we be able to see that record?— A. I had a letter from Mr. Palmer in regard to the grievances of the foundry. Q. I mean action that was taken by the order, after it was concluded that the rail- road officials would pay no attention to those grievances. I want to know if the Knights of Labor took any action upon that? — A. No, sir; they did not that I know of. We could not get this grievance adjusted about the foundry, and it apparently died out when the foundry changed hands ; but the grievance did exist at that time. Q. You spoke of a grievance that when a man would quit they would not employ another in his place, and one man would have to do the work of two men ? — A. Yes, air. Q. Had he to do it for the wages of one man or two men ? — A. For the wages of one man. Q. In the foundry ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He wonld have to prepare for the casting of twice as many pieces as one man had ? — A. Yes, sir. There are generally two men carrying one end of the ladle, and when tbese men quit the other men would have to do two men's work. Mr. Buchanan. Was that physically possible ? — A. Yes, it was physically possible. Mr. Outhwaite. Yon sjioke in one place in your testimony about the fact thatthere had not been proper recognition of the order or the committee, and gave that as one of the grounds loading up to the strike ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. How did you expect to redress that by means of a strike ? — A. That is a griev- ance. I think that the organization of the Knightsof Labor and its committee should be recognized just as much us the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers or Firemen. Q. I wish you to state, if you never saw the order directing this strike, and never saw an order issued from the proper authority, or an authority which directed this strike, how you know what reasons were given by that authority for the strike at the time they directed it. — A. I have not seen it, that is, to read it, but I had seen communi- cations by the officers, and heard it read, but not exactly explain the contents of it. Q. What communication do you allude to now ? — A. That is the communication that came from the executive board asking if they wonld sustain the executive board of district 101, in demanding the. settlement of the grievances — a dollar and fifty cents a clay for all skilled labor and the reinstatement of brother Hall at Marshall, Tex., and a recognition of the order. Q. To whom was that directed which you saw ? — A. To Assembly 3703. Q. Then they ought to have a copy of it in their possession at this day ? — A. I do not know. The same order was issued to every local as' embly on the Gould South- west System. Mr, Outhwaite. I would suggest to you that it would be very important evidence if a copy of that could be presented to this committee. The Witness. I am not able to present a copy of that, because I am not a member of that assembly. By Mr. Parker: Q. The result of this strike has shown that there is at excess of labor in the South- west? — A. Undoubtedly. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 47 Q. What is your idea of tlio policy of enconragiug foreign immigration of worli:ing- meu into tbia country or continuing to encourage it while there is developed such an excess of labor over the demand t — A. I do not understand you. Q. As a laborer do you consider it to the interest of the country to have foreign laborers encouraged to continue to come here T — ^A. No, sir: I do not. Q. You may state, if yon ynah, 'whether that is one of the opinions of the Knights of Labor t — A. They are bitterly opposed to all labor coming over here in a strike. Q. They are opposed also to pauper labor t — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Are they not opposed to bringing other labor aud encouraging laborers to come here, not pauper nor contract labor, but laborers who wiU become competitors with the laborers now here ? — A. They do not discourage it. Q. Is there no objection on the part of the Knights of Labor to the continuance of the surplus and this increase of labor over the demand for labor t — A. Well, they do not know exactly how to get round that. I do not see how they can, only by send- ing a petition to Congress to stop immigration for some years to come. Q. Is it your opinion and that of the Knights of Labor that immigration should be discouraged t — A. I think it ought to be for a while ; that is, especially Chinamen. Q. What would you say as to the encouragement of IriHhmen and Germans? — A. This country is free to all as long as they come over in the right way. So long as •they do not come over under contractors they are welcome. This is America, the land of the free, they claim. Q. You see no objection to an increased supply of labor over the demand by the continuation of emigration from other countries? — A. I do not know that we can object to them. Q. How does it happen that the flag of the Knights of Labor is put above the flag of the United States over your lodge ? — A, I guess there must be something wrong with the man that put that up. Q. There is no purpose in it? — A. Not a bit of it. Q. (By the Chairman.) In case of a peaceable strike, where there is no interfer- ence with the roads or with those who are willing to accept employment on the road, is not the inevitable result to force the strikers away from their own homes ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You do not object to legitimate immigration? — A. I do nof, sir. Q. But you do object to those who are imported here under contract ? — A. I do. Q. And you also object to the Chinese? — A. I do. Q. They do not "homogeneate" with our people. Is that the reason ? — A. Yea, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) You state that the inevitable result of a peaceable strike will be to force men away from their homes aud supply their places with other men from other parts of the country. If so, ought not peaceable strikes to be condemned by the constitution and by-laws of your organization? — A. Peaceable strikes? Q. You say the Knights of Labor are only in favor of peaceable strikes, and that the consequence of a peaceable strike is that the men have to leave their homes, their places being filled by other men. Such being the case, ought not peaceable strikes even to be opposed by your order ? — A. They do oppose them. They oppose strikes at all times. Q. There being a surplus of labor, how do you expect to accomplish the result you desire? — A. By the demand of eight hours as a day's work. Q. Would you do it through strikes ? — A. I would have a strike for eight hours. Q. But if you struck for that purpose with the present excess of iabor your places would be fiUed. How would you interfere with that? — A. I would interfere just so far as we could with moral suasion. Q. But suppose that does not amount to anything ? — A. Well, then, we would have to let them alone. Q. Then what becomes of those who have struck for eight hours ? — ^A. Well, we simply get beaten. Q. You would have to go elsewhere and get employment, would you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The result would be that you would break up your homes and go hunting work. You would leave a certainty for an uncertainty ? — A. That would be the result. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Does labor, in point of fact, find difSculties in getting its grievaoces redressed, as a general thing ? — A. Yes. Q. What was the eftect upon that committee that visited Saint Louis of not being received by Mr. Hoxie when they reached there? — A. Which committee do you allude to? Q. The committee that visited him. Did they return with increased or decreased interest in the welfare of the employer? — A. Decreased. Q. Did you make a careful inquiry to find out whether his business was of the char- acter you indicated or whether it was necessary that he should be absent ? — A. That 48 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■was tie supposition on the part of the boaid,at that timej aud it was the supposition, on my part, that he had purposely avoided us. Q. Are you certain that your supposition id correct ? — A. That is my supposition. Q. Now, ■we have discussed ■with you — and you seem to be a very intelligent witness — ^these subjects, the causes, and some of the remedies, and so forth, of the strikes. There is nndduhtedly a great unrest with the labor of the United States to-day. Have you discussed with your fellow-workmen, with whom yon associate in the shops, and also in the council chamber, remedies for the state of affairs that exist in the country other than the eight hours of which you spoke ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you discussed any remedy which you think Congress might be able by legislation to enact, and if so, what remedies do you propose for Congressional ac- tion t— A. This importation of chetip labor. The abolition of convict labor and the stoppage of the immigration of Chinamen. The committee then adjourned until half past seven o'clock p. m., at which time it met and proceeded in taking testimony. EDWARD B. HOLLIS sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Ar-i you a member of the organization called the Knights of Labor t— Answer. I am. Q. Were you on the 6th of March, and prior to that time ?— A. Yes,, sir. Q. What was your occupation at the time of the strike t — A. I was a machinist by trade. Q. Were you working for any of these railroads known as the Gould system? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did yon participate in the strike ? — A. I went out with the regt. Q. If you know anything of the cause or causes which led to this strike, please state all you know in regard to that matter.— A. It would be necessary, in order to give you a clear account of this, to go back further than any of the other witnesses, perhaps, that have testified. I would want to go back to the strike of March, 1885, and give you the causes of that strike, and the settlement that was made, and how made. As near as I can recollect, in October, 1884, a reduction of wages was made at this place, and I suppose at other places on the system, of 10 per cent. The iirst reduction caused a great deal of dissatisfaction among the men, and at that time there was some little talk of striking among the men. But from lack of thorough organization it was not carried into effect. Again, in January, 1885, there was a still further reduction made, and that intensified the feeling that there was among the men. I cannot say from positive knowledge, but from what I have heard there were three reductions made ia Texas, and the strike first commenced in Texas. It went on for some time, and the feeling of the men on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas and the Missouri Pacific began to grow more intensified and finally led to a strike. The grievances that we asked to have adjusted at that time at this place were that the wages paid prior to the rednc- tion in October be restored, or that that scale be restored to all that had had their wages reduced, and that time and a half be paid for all overtime ; that is for all time worked over ten hours a day, at nights, or on Sundays, aud that a redaction be made in the hospital fees oi 25 cents. These were the grievances that we asked to have adjusted at this place ; and that no one be discharged for participating in the strike. These were presented to our master mechanic here. At first the strike was not supposed by us to go beyond shopmen. Now, there were at that time in- ducements held out to us by several other organizations in the way of aid, so far as they could aid us without striking themselves — as individual members, not as labor organizations, but as individual members of those organizations. They at varions times came through the shops and asked us why we did not strike to have our wages restored, and gave us to understand by what they told us in an indirect way that they would aid us, and in view of that fact, that we anticipated getting aid from them, and as we had been unjustly dealt with, and not being thoroughly organized into a labor organization of any kind, we did not proceed in the manner that strikes are generally conducted. That is, we made no attempt before to have the griev- ances arbitrated. The excitement prevailing in Texas came North and pervaded the men here and at Sedalia and at other places, and on the 15th day of March I be- lieve it was, as near as I can recollect, at 3 o'clock in the afternoon, after a failure to have our grievances adjusted up to that time, we quit work. The strike lasted eight days. During that time the trains on this road did not run. The manner of procedure was to request engineers when at any time they came out with a fresh engine not to go out on it, and in all instances that I have knowledge of our re- quests were complied with. We made Sedalia the headquarters for representatives of the strikers from the various parts of the road, and met there to try and make a settlement with the officials of the railroad company. There were not at any time LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 49 any overtures made to ns that I am aware of towards settlement. Tbe governors of both States were compelled to call the militia out. Q. What States do you mean T — A. Kansas and Missouri. The soldiers at one time •were at Centerville, near Sedalia, but did not come there. The governors of the two States interceded at that time in our behalf, and met with the of^cials and made an agreement with them to settle the strike. They submitted a proposition to the offi- cials of the railroad company, which they accepted and recommended to us as a set- tlement of the trouble. The railroad agreed to give us -the wages that we had re- ceived prior to the reductions that I have mentioned and time and a half for overtime, and that all striking employes should be returned to their several positions without prejudice for having participated in the strike. The agreement that the railroad company came to with the governors of Missouri and Kansas was accepted by us as a settlement of the difficulty. We were never well satistied with it, but at the time we- thought it best to accept that and end the trouble. We thought we might be able- afterwards to get something that might be more acceptable to us in the way of aa agreement. Q. Did not the general superintendent and first vice-president, in his circular, state- that the wages agreed to should not be reduced without giving thirty days' notice ? — A. Yes, sir ; I believe he did say that hereafter the rates of wages was not to bo- cbanged without giving thirty days' notice. But that called to my mind something; that I would like to have said in connection with the first, as to what was done when- wages were reduced the first time. We were notified of the reduction about the mid- dle of the month, and the reduction dated back to the first of that month. Q. Do you mean that you were notified after the reduction had been made? — A. Yes, sir ; about fifteen days after. Q. In other words, for fifteen days you were working on reduced wages without knowing it f — A. Yes, sir. The hospital fees were not reduced at that time. We did not like the words "without prejudice," because we thought it was an evasion of what we had wanted, and could be construed in a manner that would be detrimental to us, and at the same time pretty hard for us to prove that there was an.y violation of the spirit or intent of the agreement. But we accepted it and returned to work. There was, at the time of our strike at this place, some sectionmen that came out on the strike. They are men who get very low wages, and after being out two or three days, not having any understanding with us that there would be anything done for them, they came to us and asked us if we would stay out for their wages to be raised also. They were told by a body of the strikers in the Library Hall at this place that as their wages were low they had better return to work, and that we would see that in the settlement their wages were restored too. Soon after the settlement of this the trouble began anew ; and that is the start of our grievances. In the first place, I would like you to know that wedid not understand the agreement to mean in spirit and intent t'hat it was only those who struck that were to have their wages restored. We thought it was the intention that our demands were to be complied with and that our grievances were to be adjusted, and that all whose wages had been reduced were to be restored ; and from that misunderstanding the grievances began to arise. There we're some trackmen here in the yards at Parsons who were out on the strike who never have had their wages restored. There were men in Texas that did not have their wages restored, but they were not strikers. After we attempted to adjust the grievances then the trouble began. We were told in every case, while we attempted to adjust them, that this agreement only applied to strikers, and in cases where men were hired to fill up the ranks of some strikers that had gone away it did not apply to him either, as he was not a striker. Now, it was not our Intention that the strike was just for those men who were out on a strike at that time. Q. Do you mean to say that the raUroad company gave the preference to strikers who remained in their employment f — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. That is, they restored the wages of the strikers, but declined to restore the wages of those who did not strike? — A. It was the intention that we should use the victory, as we thought it was at that time, to cover the wages of those who had not struck, but the railroad company did not seem to want it in that way, and while we attempted to have the grievance, as we considered it, adjusted, we failed to do it. But I suppose yon are aware of the fact that before this the wages of those who did not strike were restored at some of the places for loyalty to the company. The wages of the men in the shops in Saint Louis were restored for loyalty, and, if I am not mis- taken, on the Iron Mountain road, where the men did not strike. And when we were asking to have wages restored we were told that the men we were asking it for were not strikers. Q. You mean that the principle of loyalty was not applied to all, but just where it materially affected the interests of the company ? — A. They were paid for their loy- alty at & time when loyalty to the company was needed by them. When they were anticipating a strike of the shopmen in Saint Louis, they went into the shop and told the men that if they would not strike they would restore their wages ; and they did 39S4 LAB 3 i 50 .LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. do it. But these other men, wlio did not strike, that were not in a position that was dangerous to the company, the loss of whose services would not have been felt so much as those in the shops in Saint Louis would have heen felt, and therefore they were not adjusted when we a^ked it. Soon after the strike, in May, it became generally the opinion of the men all over the system that a reduction of the force was about to he made. At that time there was, as there is now, a great many men ont of employment, and we thought that it would be better, if the company had to reduce expenses, that we should ask them to reduce the hours in proportion to the number of men that they proposed to let off. And there was still some grievances in Texas of the kind that I have spoken of. Q., Do I understand you to mean by your statement that knowing the fact that the company had to reduce expenses, you preferred to reduce the number of hours that each of you worked rather than have the regular hours at the expense of those who were to be discharged ? — A. We preferred to keep the men at work and work less hours ourselves and get less pay. Q. That is the argreement yon refer to ? — A. Yes, sir. There was a notice posted up in the freight house at Fort Worth of a reduction of wages. One of the meu in the freight house drew up a protest against the reduction, and he took it around and asked his co-laborers to sign it. They did so, and he presented it to the superintend- ent of the division, Mr. Harris, at Fort Worth, and in ten minutes after presenting that to him hs was discharged. That is one of the grievances that we had in Texas at that time. There were at Marshall, Tex., seven men who had been discharged. These men had been jirominent meu in the strike, and, of course, we supposed, and it was uatural for us to suppose, that tliey were discharged for participation in the strike. That v,a8 another grievance that there was in Texas., We attempted to adjust them. There bad also been a reduction in the wages ordered of the track- foremeu aud track-walkers on the Texas and Pacific road ; I believe it was on the Texas and Pacific. Mr. Gumming was superintendent of that road at that time. We thought it best to try and adjust the grievances, and I went to Fort Worth to in- vestigate the case of Mr. Clark, who had been discharged. We found that he was a compteten man, or, at least, his foreman said that he was. We found out that he had worked for the company for a considerable length of time— I think about three years — and all that we could find out about Mr. Clark was that he was a good man. We asked Mr. Harris as to the cause of Mr. Clark's discharge. He told us, in the first place, that he was discharged on account of having to reduce the force, but after some conversation he admitted that ho was discharged for incompetency. He said that he was incompetent and careless. We were not satisfied about that on account of his hav- ing made the statement before that he had discharged him because he had to reduce the force. We failed to adjust that with Mr, Harris, and had to go to Mr. Cumming to get Mr. Clark reinstated. Mr. Cumming investigated the case of these seven men that had been discharged. We were told that they were discharged on account of not hav- ing work suflicient for them to do, nor material sufficient to keep all the meu at work. There were a number of men at that time, as near as I can give somewhere near three or four hundred, and it was necessary to reduce the force. We made the same propo- sition to Mr. Cumming that I have told yon ; that is, we told him that if there was nothing else against them-^and he said there was not — that we would like to make him a proposition, and that was that instead of discharging the men that he reduce the numherof hours in proportion to the number of men that he discharged to make a necessary reduction in expenses. He finally consented to do it. He never made any reduction in the time, however, and when I asked him about the reduction of the wages he said that he could not adjust that, as it came from higher authority ; that it was an order that had come from Saint Louis. There was another matter that I at- tempted to adjust with him. Q. Were thesfr seven men restored ? — A. Yes, sir ; I said they were restored. There was another matter that I attempted to adjust with him, and that was this, as I said before, in order that I should make things understood, althongh you may think it is probably foreign to this inquiry, but I would like to add that it is the policy of cor- porations, wherever they have been defeated by labor in the strike, to defeat the men afterwards in some way or other. I saw that cropping out pretty soon after the set- tlement of our strike, and I said that the scale of wages should be maintained, and in order that the meu should reap the benefit with us, the same scale of wages should be maintained in the shops, and that the new meu should not be made any exception of; and I saw no reason why ho should be hired at the lowest scale that there was iu the shops. Q. Do you mean for the iame class of labor ? — A. No, sir ; mechanics are graded ; say a machinist, one class, the lowest class, will probably get |2..50 a day, the medi- um or average, |2.75, and those who are better still will probably get |'2.90 or $3 a day ; but in all cases th*t I knew of the man that they had hired would start in at the lowest. Q. Of the class to which they belonged? — A. No, sir; if they were men capable of LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 51 <;.iruiEg $3 por clay tliey would pay tliem $2.50. In the department we would be rated, because, as I said, there may be three or four grades in the shop, And a new man com- ing would be paid §2.50 a day. I have always insisted that this was nothing more than 11 systematic reduction of the wages ; as the old men go out new ones come in, and they keep the new ones at the minimum scale. Now, I thought that that was not right. I thought that if a man was worth $3 a day he should get that. The only way that they would get around that was they would say he was not worth it. I con- sider, as a mechanic, I have judgment as well as the officials. While it is not gener- ally supposed that we can exercise authority in the matter, I always thought that we should have jnstice ; and we asked that that be adjusted. We asked for the same rate to be paid for the same class of work, whether performed by the same person or another. We asked that of Mr. Gumming, but he did not adjust that, and, findingthat it was not the intention, we thought we should go ont on a strike in March. We did not suppose the railroad company would have our wages restored to what they were before the reduction of September or October, 1884, and then cut them down a month after the strike. We did not suppose they would do that. They gave us twenty-six days' notice, as nearly as I can recollect, at the time they wanted to reduce the pay. We did not want to resort to a strike, so we selected a committee to go to Texas and from there to Saint Louis and see Mr. Hoxie. Q. Do you remember what month that was ? — A. It was the month of May, 1885. I was not one of the committee that went to Saint Louis. Q. You may state the result. — A. I went to Texas and came back to Parsons, and another man went from Parsons to Saint Louis in my place, as I was needed in the shop. The foreman in the shop here asked me to go to work and let the other man go. The result of that conference was that there were several things that that com- mittee asked to have adjusted. One of the things that we asked was this — that before any one be discharged that he be suspended, and that the charges on which he ■was to be suspended be given notice of in writing and allow him an opportunity to defend himself, and to see whether they were right or not. I believe men were discharged very often for things that we did not think they should be discharged for — for being prominent members of the Knights of Labor — agitators, as they are generally termed by railroads and other corporations, and I suppose by everybody else, and wo wanted to prevent that, and if a man was to Ue discharged there should be something to discharge him for, and that the man should know it. There- fore, we asked that before being discharged that they should prefer charges against himjn writing and give him an opportunity to defend himself. We did not suc- ceed in getting that. Mr. Hoxie would not grant it. He did say that when any •one was discharged and should present his case in writing to the superintendent of the division on ^hich he worked, and if it was found on investigation that he was wrongfully discharged he would be reinstated ; but he did not give us any oppor- tunity of an investigation before being discharged. Then at that time we asked Mr. Hoxie the same as wo asked Mr. Cummiiig — to pay* the same rate of wages to. men who performed the same class of work, and we also asked him that when a reduc- tion was necessary in order to reduce the expenses of the road, that instead of dis- charging the men that he reduce the hours proportionately to the number of men that were to be discharged. Q. Did he not agree to do that in his original agreement? — A. Yes, sir; that is in the original agreement. You will find it there. Q. It was settled that the rates would not be changed without thirty days' notice f — A. This is the reduction of the force. When the reduction of the expenses was made that would cover the reduction of wages, when reduction of expenses was necessary, that instead of discharging the men, as it was customary to do, and especially after the strike, we did not want the men discharged, because the men were discriminated against by railroad companies, and to prevent that -we wanted them to reduce the hours. After some time Mr. Hoxie agreed to that. He did not want to do it at first, but did not offer any good argument against it, however, and finally he agreed to it. We wanted these charges preferred against men before discharged to prevent any 'rouble when men were discharged, especially where there are labor organizations. After a man is discharged we found that he would make complaint that he was un- justly discharged, and it very often happens that he wants the organization to which be belongs to investigate the matter, and if unjustly discharged to' endeavor to have him reinstated We wanted this agreement with Mr. Hoxie to prevent this trouble, but we did not get it, and all these things have remained as grievances until to-day. The section men have not yet had their wages restored. Men iiad been discharged at different places ; and while it is a very hard thing to prove that a man is discharged from prejudice, circumstances surrounding have led us to believe that in a groat many case's they have been discharged for their participation in the strike. Some of them we tave claimed were discharged because they were members of an organization known as the Knights of Labor, and because they were workers in that organization. Now in September of the same year we again asked to have these grievances ad- 52 LAEOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. justed; but we only got tile concession from Mr. Hoxie that no one should be dis- charged when it waS necessary to have a reduction of the expenses, and after getting that we let the others all go. We considered that as we were arbitrating these mat- ters, and got part of what we wanted, we could rest for the time being. In September of the same year the grievance spoken of by Mr. Brannon, in regard to the foundry here at Parsons, was causing a good deal of dissatisfaction among the men. In this connection you will see in what way they could take advantage of us. When it was decided to make a reduction, they asked that it be made proportionately of all men employed, and instead of doing that they reduced the hours, and it made it very hard on them. Of course they were dissatisfied, and they asked that it be adjusted. That foundry matter, together with the grievances that I spoke of before that had not been adjusted, was considered. And then it was decided to send the committee again to Mr. Hoxle and ask him to adjust these grievances, together with the foundry grievance. At that time we asked Mr. Hoxie to give the unskilled labor- ers working on the system a dollar and a half a day, which we considered was not anything but a reasonable request. The statement of grievances was left there with Mr. O'Hara, I think his name is, who is Mr. Hoxie's clerk. He did not know where Mr. Hoxie was at all, and could not find him, The committee staid there some time and came home without getting their grievances adjusted ; and they kept accmnn- lating and have been accumulating ever since. We have had the agreement violated where it was agreed to reduce the hours instead of discharging the men. We have had that agreement violated time and again. They have discharged men indiscrimi- nately, and have not reduced the labor, and have not reduced the hours. In the car department of Parsons, in February, there were seven or eight men discharged. There was no reduction of the hours made, contrary to the agreement, and an open violation of it. And there were at different times men discharged that we succeeded in having reinstated, and thereby got the reputation of trying to run the shop. We would ask to have them adjust a grievance and live up to the agreement that they made with us, and from that we had the reputation of trying to run the shops. There were six or eight men, I believe, at one time discharged at Marshall, contrary to that agreement. Of course we did not feel that the winter time would be the proper time for us to try and adjust these grievances, as the company would be likely to take ad- vantage of the factf that it was winter, and that we would only have to go through the thing again, and go out on a strike without having tbem adjusted, and therefor* we did not go. There was business that called some of the members of the Knights of Labor to th» meeting of the district assembly in Marshall, Tex,, the 15th of February. The busi- ness of that meeting was not to adjust grievances or to make any demand on the railroad company at all. It was purely business of the organization, and in this con- nection comes Mr. Hall. Mr. Hall was a delegate to this district assembly. He was foreman at that time of some part of the car department there, and he asked permis- sion of Mr. Crosby to be absent to attend these meetings, and he was granted per- mission. There was one of our brothers that was with him at the time — Mr. Thor- bom, of De Soto, Mo. He heard Mr. Crosby tell him he could be off on a leave of ah- sence. Mr. Hall told him he might be absent two or three days, and that he would go to the shop in the morning and be there a short time and look around and see that the men all had work, and again at noon, and in the evening if he could. With that understanding he was given permission to attend the district assembly meeting- We were in session two days, and after we adjourned Mr. Hall went to the shop in the afternoon and took some of the delegates there to show them the shops at Marshall. He asked permission of the master mechanic, as visitors were not allowed to go through the shops without permission. He took us through the shop and afterwards attended to his business. In the evening, or that night, he received a note telling him that his services would be no longer required, and that he should call at the office and get his time-check. He went to Mr. Crosby and asked him why be was discharged. Mr. Crosby told him he was discharged because he laid off without per- mission. It naturally created some excitement, and it was considered by a great many men that it was an insult to the members of that district assembly, and an in- sult to the organization of the Knights of Labor on this system of railroad. In the excitement it was so considered. At that time a committee at Marshall went to investigate the reasons of the dis- charge of Mr. Hall. They interviewed individuals who were thoroughly familiar with the matter, and made an effort to have Mr. Hall reinstated. The executive board of the district assembly then made circulars, and issued them to every local assembly on the system or that was attached to the district assembly, giving the minute particulars of the discharge of their brother and all the circumstances con- nected with it, and asked, " Will you sustain your executive board in demanding the reinstatement of Brother Hall, together with the adjustment of other grievancest"— that is, the grievances that were standing. It was almost unanimous all over the district that they would. Now, after receiving that answer — and I want to say that LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 63 this executive board had other business to attend to at Marshall that kept us there — that is, business of the order not connected with any grievances against the railroad company — after we received these answers to these circulars, then they commenced to investigate the trouble. They had some interviews with Mr. Crosby and the officials there at Marshall — I am not familiar with this — but they could not adjust that, and they asked for a conference with the receiver of the Texas and Pacific Rail- road. He did not show any disposition to meet with them, and did not meet with them, but refused to meet them. The executive board asked the citizens of Marshall, through the mayor and the council, what they should do, and they appointed a com- mittee. They met with no better success than our executive board had. The griev- ance was not adjusted, and yon may probably understand that such things as that are calculated to create some excitement among the men, and it did, and the conse- quence was that a strike resulted on the Texas and Pacific Railway, you probably know there was no strike on this road, or the Missouri Pacific, or Iron Mountain road, for several days after the strike on the Texas and Pacific. While it has been said by Mr. Hoxie and the press and by the public that we had no grievances, we considered that we had great grievances, and that our organization had been assailed on the' Texas and Pacific Railroad, and with that railroad in the hands of a receiver, as we have had experience of the same kind before with other roads that had been in tlie hands of a receiver, we knew what it meant. One man is iiardly allowed to speak to another without being in contempt of court, and realizing that fact, together with the grievances that we had to bear, and after taking the vote to sustain our executive board to demand the reinstatement of Mr. Hall, together with the adjustment of these other grievances, the men on the Missouri Pacific, the Iron Mountain, and the Missouri, Kansas and Texas then went out on a strike. It was for the adjustment of all these grievances that I have told you of, and the discharge of Mr. Hall was simply the last straw that broke the camel's back and not the sole «ause of the strike by any means. It had been decided by our district assembly that they should request to have the pay of the unskilled laborers of the company raised to $1.50 per day. That we considered a just demand. Probably I am getting a little fast. Circulars were issued long before that setting forth the fact that these men that labored upon the line were getting less pay than they ought to. We are an or- ganization not based on trade union principles ; but upon principles that are calculated for the elevation of all mankind, and we thought it a duty and not an unjust demand, and that to attain that, if it could not be attained without it, we would go on a strike for that together with our other grievances. Q. Had yon predetermined that before the discharge of Mr. Hallf — A. Yes, sir; there was no time arranged, but it was decided that that should be done prior to the first of May. Q. Do you mean to convey the idea that this strike was precipitated by the dis- charge of Mr. Hall t — A. That is the idea that I wish to convey. We believed that the receivership on the Texas and Pacific Railroad, while it may not be so, but we believe that it is, was to be the prime move in a scheme for the purpose of 'defeating the organization of the Knights of Labor on the Gould Southwest System. We be- lieved that to be so. We thought it was a direct blow at our organization, and there was as much principle at stake in it as anything in it. Q. (By Mr. Odthwaite.) How would the appointment of a receiver defeat or assail your organization f — A. Well, there is something that I have neglected, and I hope you will let me state it right here. And that is this: That in this strike we were de- ceived in some measures by other organizations. We were given to understand, and I will just say, not as labor organizations but as individual members of certain or- ganizations, tibat we would receive some support from them in the same manner that we had in our strike in last March. The engineers told us the same thing — a great many of them did — that while they could not go on the strike, they would be pleased to assist us in any way that they could, and that it would not require any Gatling guns to get them off their engines, and it had been our plan to try to get the engineers to come off their engines, together with the firemen and the brakemen. That was the plan we adopted to carry out the strike. We would request these men — use moral suasion and talk to them — and we had been given to understand that they would get off their engines, and they sent committees to see us and tell us the same thing. We were met by some of the ofBcers of that brotherhood — of the locomotive engineers — and told these things; and they afterwards deceived us. Now, on a road in the hands of a receiver — I think you will find plenty of evidence of the truth of that when yon get to Texas — if a man that is on a strike requests an engineer to get oif his engine, that would be contempt of court. It was practiced on the strike with the Rio Grande, and men lay in jail for requesting men to get off their engines. We believed that it would be practiced on the Wabash road, and we believe that, the same thing would be practiced on the Texas and Pacific, to break down the organization of the Knights of Labor, as they had in a measure done in the Denver and Rio Grande and on the Wabash, the roads being in the hands of a receiver. That was one of the areat causes 64 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. of tlio stiiko on the Missouri Pacific and Iron Mountain road, and we thought it would save the men on that road. Q. Which road ?— A. The Texas and Pacific. That is why I spoke of the receiver- ehip in that way. Q. Then it was the opinion entertained with the union men that the receivership, was for the purpose of defeating the aims and object of the order of the Knights of Labor? — A. It was not so much the purpose of defeating the aims and objects of the Knights of Labor, as it was for defeating the Knights of Laboi; on this system. You understand, I suppose, or at least we do, that an individual approaching an orgaiii- zation of capital has very little chance with them. As individuals we have no show. They are organized, and they are ready at all times to meet us as individuals, because they say to us when we go there, no matter how bad our grievances are : "If yon do not like it you know what you can do." That is the experience of laboring men ; that is why we have an organization ; and that is why we did not want our organiza- tion broken down on the Texas and Pacific. Q. You spoke of certain circulars that were issued, asking if the Knights of Labor would sustain their assembly. Have you any of those circulars ? — A. No, sir. Q. You state that they wore issued in large numbers and distributed. Was that so that individuals might receive them ? — A. No, sir ; one copy would be sent to each. local assembly. The object of this is that we wanted thereby to keep all our district assembly governments as nearly in the members and by the members as we could ; and we adopted this law to do that. If a grievance arises at any place, that the as- sembly attempt to have it adjusted, and if they fail to adjust it locally, that tbey should state the cause of the complaint in writing and send it to the chairman of our executive board, and he would make copies of that — that was his business — and seud them out to all the locals. They would consider it, and it would be brought up before all the members on the system. They knew what the grievance was at Big Springs, or at Saint Louis, or wherever it was, and of the circular that I spoke about only one copy is sent to each assembly. Q. We want to get one in evidence. Was Mr. Hall a delegate to the district as- sembly ; about how many delegates were there to that district assembly ?— A. 1 can- not tell exactly. Somewhere about fifty. I may not be within ten of it. Q. Were they all Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many on the Missouri Pacific road? — A. I cannot tell that. We have a representative system to a district assembly. An assembly has so many representa- tives to BO many members. Q. I only want to get some idea as to whether they represented the Texas and Paci- fic or the Missouri Pacific ? — A. They were from all the roads I spoke of aa in the Gould system. Q. How many were there, approximately, from the Texas and Pacific? — A. Well, I might guess at it and not go anywhere near it. Q. Give US your best judgment as to the number ? — A. There were probably eight or nine, and there might be ten on the Texas and Pacific at that meeting of the dis- trict assembly. Q. Do yon recollect any of them by name besides Mr. Hall ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Give us the names of some of the others ? — A. I am not at liberty to answer that question. Q. It was a public assembly, was it not? — A. No, sir. Q. I will pass that question, and ask you how many of them besides Mr. Hall were discharged for being there ? — A. I do not know of any. I guess we are about all dis- charged now. Q. I mean at the time th.it Mr. Hall was discharged ? — ^A. Well, at that time there was not any, but there was a representative there that had been discharged previ- ously ; and, by the way, it was one of the grievances. Q. I want to know how many were discharged beside himself; why would thoy discharge him and not discharge the eight or ten others that were there, if that was- the reason ? — A. I do not say that Mr. Hall was discharged for being there. Q. You may not have said so, but I have received that impressiou from the testi- mony that has been given and, perhaps, partly from your own testimony ? — A. I said that we thought that he was discharged for that. Q. Well, I want you to show the reason for your thought, if you can give any reason for that thought ?— A. I can give yon the reason for that. Mr. Hall has been what I told yon— a prominent man there in the Knights of Labor— and it is this kind of men that railfoad companies wish to get rid of. Q. You have been a prominent man in the association, from your testimony ?— A. I do not know that I have. Q. You were not,disoharged for attending that assembly and for being a Knight of Labor, were you ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did the Knights of Labor ever examine into that question to see and to satisfy LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 55 themselves as to wlietlier he was discharged for that reason or whether there might have been some other reason? — A. My understanding is that they did. Q. Were you a party to that examination ? — A. I was not. Q. I am requested to ask you what you know of the foundrymen at Parsons, about three, months ago, going on a strike, and if it was on a grievance that lias been con- sidered by the order? — A. I cannot tell you about that strike, for my understanding of it is that the foundrymen struck as members of the Iron Holders' Union. Q. In going to all these places which you and other members of the order have gone to on business of the order, you may state whether passes were furnished by the rail- road company? — A. They were. Q. To how many of your order ? — A. Well, there were a good many that got passes, and some that did not. I do not know how many got them, and I do not know how many did not. Q. In general terms, how many ? — A. I could not make any further statement as to that. ' Q. I did not understand you to say how old you were ? — A. I believe I was not asked that question. , Q. I will ask it now?— A. I am thirty-one. , Q. And how long have you been at the business you now follow, and when did you learn your trade ? — A. I went to work at my trade in 1872 ; that is fourteen years ago. Q. In your order do you claim that all men of a certain trade will work with equal ubilit.v and faithfulness? — A. Oh, no; we don't claim that at all. Q. How do you propose to regulate any of these difficulties ; one man may he only half as competent as another? — A. I do not propose to do that ; I ask that equal pay be given for equal work, either by the same person or by another. Q. Then, if I understand you, you would have different grades of workiugmen ? — A. If one man does the same work as another, he should get the same pay for it. Q. But suppose that men do not come up to two-thirds of an average? — A. I have not found very many unreasonable men in our organization here, and we just asked that we have that done and supposed that we could get justice from the officials of the railroad, the foreman or master mechanic; but they have orders to employ men at the lowest figures, irrespective of their abilities; well, then, we cannot do anything. Q. Then, as you understand, it was not based on any competency, but that they al- ways pay them to work at the lowest figure? — A. Yes, sir. There is another thing I would like to state ; that after the agreement was made between our committee and Mr. Hoxie, he agreed to decrease the hours instead of discharging men. It then be- came a fixed policy of the railroad company not to hire any more men. They would not. hire any more men, and I have found our foreman and different master-mechanics that we had here at Parsons at different times, when they would be asked by men to give them work, say, " We have plenty of work, but I am not allowed to increase the force." Q. I am requested to ask you this question, whether any men were employed just previous to the strike of March 6 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. About how many, or what proportion ? — A. There was one man that I remember asking the general foreman to give him work, and he did put him to work. I cannot just remember how long it was before the strike, but not a great while. My impres- sion is not over a week before the strike he gave him work. There were two boiler- makers hired in our concern before the strike. Understand that the machinei-y on the roads was in pretty bad condition. There were a great many fire-boxes needed at this place, and the company needed some men, but would not employ them. They would generally keep up the force of men and would put one in another's place, and occasionally one man would be slipped in. Q. Any thing further that you want to state ? — A. I do not think of anything further just now. ' Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb. ) Just before the strike did the master mechanic or any other foreman tell you that he needed more men? — A. I cannot remember exactly. Mr. Newall was not at Parsons a great while. But, in some connection, I do not re- member what it was, my recollection is that he told me himself that one of his duties was to make a report of the condition of the engines. If I remember right he showed me a report on paper, and he told me of the number of fire-boxes that were needed, and that it was a pretty bad road to come to, because we were in a pretty bad shape. Whether he told me that he needed more men or not, I cannot say positively. My im- pression is that he said he could work more men, but he was not allowed to hire any more, but was instructed to keep up the force as it was. Q. Were the hospital fees ever reduced? — A. They were. Shortly after the strike they were reduced. Q. The amount which you requested? — A. They werereduced25centson the month. Those that had been paying 50 cents only paid 25 cents. I think that is the way. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) You spoke of an agreement that the company should shorten the tiipe instead of discharging the men when they had not enough work for all. — A. 56 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. No, sir ; I did not state it in that way. I said that when it hecame necessary to rednce the expenses, instead of discharging the men they reduced the number of hours' work in proportion to the number of men that they intended to dischargs. Q. Was there an agreement made to that effect ? — A. There was. Q. With Mr. Hoxie. — A. Yes, sir. • Q. Was it in writing? — A. It was printed. I will just state that they sent it to Mr. Fitzsimmons at Sedalia by telegraph and he had copies of it made and printed. Q. It contained just what you have said ?^A. Yes, sir. Q. Copies of that can be obtained from among your men? — A. Yes, sir! I have had a copy, but I cannot find it. Q. Look at this, and see if it is the one you allude to ? — A. Yes, sir; that is what I allude to. it is as follows : " Saint Louis, Mo., May 25, 1885. " J. W. FiTZSIMONS, "Sedalia: "According to promise made you on Saturday, I advise that we will strictly en- force the provisions of the circulars of First Vice-President .Hayes, dated March 15, 1885. In the shops, and wherever else it may be practicable, we will reduce the hours of wort, instead of reducing the force, whenever the necessity arises; that whenever any employ^ believes that he has been unjustly discharged, he may make a statement of his case in writing to the superintendent of the road on which he has worked, wlo will promptly investigate and reinstate him if wrongfully discharged. It is believed that the interests of the company and the employes are identical, and the manage- ment earnestly desires the hearty co-operation of all employes in the efficient and economical administration of the properties under its charge, to the end that the fullest development of its capabilities may be brought about and work may be given to all under conditions in every way satisfactory. "A. M. HOXIE, "Third Vice-President." Q. Now, the agreement of March 15, 1885, stated that the company was to restore to its striking employes in Missouri and Kansas the same wages paid them in Septem- ber, 1884, including one and a half price for extra time- work and to restore all of said striking employes to their several employments without prejudice to them on account of said strike. That was the clause to which you refer, was it not f — A. Yes, I refer to that. The company construing it, as you understand it, that the language " strik- ing employes " here allowed them to make such terms as they saw fit with non-strikers or subsequent employes. That was carried out. Q. Did not the company claim that ? — A. When we went to adjust Ihese grievances they turiied our attention to the section "those who are now strikers." Q. Then strictly under this, agreement they were not binding themselves to men who did not go out on the strike ? — A. It was just as I said there, and we expected that the company would live up to the settlement in spirit as well as in letter. Q. But you might put one construction upon it and they put theirs upon it, and in the office. Q. Yon went back to obtain employment after Mr. Powderiy had ordered the men back to work ? — A. It was at that time. It did not seem to be in good faith. Q. Your district assembly did not declare the strike off? — A. No, sir. Q. You left when your district assembly ordered yon out, and you were going back without being told by them to do so ?— A. It was simply before that second order was given out, and because there were so many of the old employes going and applying for work. Q. But your grievances had not been redressed, had they ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. And, without waiting, you were willing to go back to your old employment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Was that paper thas has been spoken of shown to yon ? — A. It was not. Q. Were you requested to sign it also ? — A. No, sir ; not a word was said about the paper. BOZILLEL WELLS sworn and examined. By the Chaisman : Question. Were you an employ^ of the Missouri Pacific at the time the strike was ordered ? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did yon go out on the strike? — ^A. I did not. Q. What position did you occupy ?— A. I was nighi watchman. Q. Why was it that you did not go out on the strike if you were a Knight of Labor ? — A. They did not teU me to. Q. Who did not ? — ^A. The executive board for the order. Q. Is it a fact that you were excused by the board from going ont on the strike while the others went out ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Why were yon excused ? — A. Because I was a cripple, Q. Are you still in the employment of the road ? — A. No, sir. 62 LABOR TEOUBLES IN TtlE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. How did you come to leave the company ?— A. They told me they had no more work for me. Q. When did they tell yoa that ?— A. Last Thursday, I believe it was. Q. Was that the only cause ?— A. They said they were told I was not as loyal as I might be. , j. ^-l x ^ Q. Loyal to whom ?— A. He did not say to whom. I suppose he meant the Law and Order League. „ > -r ^ x, j. t Q. Loyal to the Law and Order League or to the company ?— A. Just that I waa not as loyal as I might be. That is all that was said. Q. Was anything said about your being a Knight of Laljor ?— A. He did not say anything about that. Q. Was that the only cause assigned f— A. The foreman told me to report next day to the master mechanic. I went to him and came back, and he told me that the guard did not want anybody there but their own men. Q. What guard?— A. The guard they had at the Missouri Pacific shop. Q. Are they employes of the road ?— A, I believe they are employed by the city; at least I was told they were. Q. Did you take any part in the strike? — A. I did not. Q. Did you perform your duties as watchman during the time of the strike?— A. As well as I ever could. Q. What had you done that might make them believe that you were not as loyal?— A. I do not know. I cannot say, for I had not done anything that I know of. Q. Did not you communicate all the information yon obtained from the company to the Knights oi' Labor on the outside ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. JASPEE WILLIAMS (colored) sworn and examined. By the Chaibmax : Question. Where were you born ? — Answer. In Texas. Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am a section man. Q. On what road ? — A. On the Missouri Pacific. Q. Are you working on that road now ? — A. I was before the strike. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you .a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you belong to a colored organization or a white organization? — A. To a col- ored organization. Q. Were there other colored men working on the road besides you ? — A. Yes, sir ; there were. Q. Did they all go out ?— A. Yes. sir. Q. Have you been working for the road since the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. How long had you been working for the road before the strike took place? — A. About four years. • Q. How old are you ? — A. I allow I am twenty-eight passed. Q. Did you ever work in the water? — A. Yes, sir. Q. For the road ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you receive extra pay for it ?^A. No, sir. Q. Did you demand pay for it ? — A. Of course, I spoke to the section foreman ahont it, and he said he did not know, but guessed they would give us some extra pay. He told us to go to the road-master about it, and, of course, we could get no understand- ing about it from the road-master. Q. Did you go to the road-master ? — A. Yes, sir, we did go to him. Q Whom did the foreman send you to ? — A. He said go to the road-master. He said, of course, he couldn't do anything about it. Q. So you failed to get your extra pay. Is that what you mean to say ? — A. No, sir ; we did not get it. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What is the name of this road-master?— A. Mr. Courtney. ■ Q. What is the name of the foreman ? — A. Peter John. Q. What is this " working in the water," and what did you do ? — A. There was a big overflow that washed the track off the dump, and we section men had to go and get it on the dump. Q. Where did this happen ? — A. Down in the Nation. Q. When was that ? — A. I do not know. I guess it was some time in the latter part of last year. Along about the last of the year ; but I do not know exactly. Q. How many days were you at that kind of work ? — A. I believe it was about two or three days, as near as I remember. Q. How much extra pay did you think you ought to have for that extra work ? — A. I thought we ought to have had time and a half. It was the understanding that yre were to have that time. Q. You said that was your understanding. Had you that understanding with the road- master or the foreman ? — A. The foreman told us after the strike of last year we were to get time and a half for all overtime we worked. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND AVEST. 63 Q. Was this work iu the water " overtime ? " — A. Why, yes ; in cases of that kind, when the track was washed off the dump, you have to he there all the time. We scarcely got anything to eat. Q. Do you meau to say that during this time you worked overtime and you only got regular pay, and that yon did not get time and a half for that time ?— A. No, sir. we did not. Q. You are certain that you did not get time and a half for the overtime ? — A. Yes, sir; I am certain of it. Back last winter, I believe last December, we were taken down iu the Nation to shovel snow. They tried to get men to go down there for |1.10 a day, and men would not agree to go . Well, then the road-master he went around and told the section men to go around and see if they could not get men to go and they would give them time and a half to go and shovel snow. Well, we got several men, and went down, and the agreement was that we were to get time and a half for all the time we were out, and we were out three days, I believe — ^if anything, a little more — and we scarcely got anything to eat at all. We got two meals during the whole time we were ont. Q. Did you get time and a half for the time you were out ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you present any of these grievances to your assembly 1 — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do yon know whether they presented them to the managers of the road or not ? — A. I do not know ; they said they did. Q. Do you know whether these grievances were among those which led to the strike ? — A. I suppose so, they said they were. Q. (By the Chairman.) Who paid your board while working in the water and snow J — A. The road-master ; he got what was bought; I guess the company paid for it. I did not. Q. They paid you ordinary wages and paid the board ? — A. They paid us $1.10 a day. Q. And boarded you ? — A. I did not consider that board. Q. You all ate together ? — A. No, sir ; we did not. Of course I was not with the boss all the time. I did not get but one meal a day, and of course I did not get half enough. Q. Was it customary to furnish board while off with your gang ? — A. No, sir. JOHN W. BUENETT sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. Have you been working for the Missouri Pacific Railroad System lately ? — Answer. Yes, sir ; up to March 5. Q. Did you come ont in the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were you working at? — A. At track work ; section work. Q. What complaint, if any, have you to make ? — A. Well, along about the 3d of July, the last time of the high water here, we were ordered out on the night of the 3d, I believe ; it was the time the track washed away north of the town here down at the stock-yards. The foreman came and told us that he would give us double time for working there that night, and also that he would give time and a half for over- time previous to that. Q. Did you work through that night ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you get double pay for it ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever sue the company for it ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you complain to the Knights of Labor about it? — A. No, sir ; I have not. Q. Did you ever make any complaint to the company about it? — A. I went to the foreman about it. Q. What did he say ? — ^A. He said he would see the road-master about it, and I in- sisted that he should. He went to the road-master, and he told me that the road- master said that he would allow it. Q. Was that the same man that had promised you the double pay, and told you that story. You do not know whether he got that money and put it in his own pocket ?— A. I worked in the wash-out both here and on the river. I worked at this first, and we were ordered away that night, or about 5 o'clock in the morning, and we came in about 8 or 9 o'clock in the evening. We were to receive after this night down hero time and a half for working in the water. They did not say anything about over- time. We were to have time and a half for working in the water. Q. And you never got it ? — A. We never got it. Q. What is the name of the foreman ? — A. His name is Balf. Q. Is'he in the employment of the company now? — A. I think not. Q. When did he leave ?— A. About the 5th of March. Q. Did he go out on the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor ?^A. I think he was. Q. Why did you not take it to the Knights of Labor and get him to explain why ho did not do what he had agreed to do, and have the company agree to it ? — A. I did 64 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. not suppose it would be much use. Once I was working at the stock-yards, and I was paid only part of my time. I went to get a committee abont this, but theyjiever did anything for me, and I supposed it would be no use going any more. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) The committee of yonr assembly do you mean?— A. No, sir. Q. They did not prosecute yonr grievance ?— A. They said they would, but that was the last I heard of it. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Was it not the duty of that foreman, as a brother Knight of Labor, to see that yon had your rights ?— A. I think it would have been, very prob- ably. Q. Did you ever apply to him as a Knight of Labor to see that your wrong or grievance in that respect was righted ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; I have. Q. What did he say or dof— A. He did not make any reply, but only said that he did not see how he could do anything for me. Q. Did not he promise that you should have double time T — A. Tes, sir. Q. What justification did he make for not complying with that f — A. He said the rest had only received fl.lO, and he could not give more time to me than he had given to the rest. Q. Who paid your board at that time ?— A. I paid my own board. Q. All the tinae ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Then it was not customary for the company to pay the board of the men under such circumstances?— A. Well, they paid board to the most of them, but I took my victuals with me. Q. Breakfast, dinner, and supper?— ^A. I ate my breakfast and supper at home, and took my dinner with me. WILLIAM WEITZ sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question, Where do you reside ? — Answer. At Parsons. Q.' How long have you resided here ? — A. This last time, a little over two years. Q. Have you been recently in the employ of the Missouri Pacific road f — A. Yes, sir. " Q. When did you leave that employment ?— A. About the 5th of March, the day before the strike. Q. Why did you leave the employment ? — A. Because there was nothing for us t« do where I was at work. Q. What was your business ? — A. I was working at the stock-yards. Q. Were you discharged ? — A. Not then, I was not. Q. Did you leave voluntarily ? — A. He told us there was nothing to do — that they had no work except, when stock was on the road. Q. Your work is intermittent ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you been re-employed since then ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you made application ? — A. I have made application to Mr. Louis Doak. Q. Have you been re-employed ? — A. No, sir. Q. What reason did he give for not re-employing you ? — A. He told me that the com- ;3any did not want anything to do with this organization, and that they wanted jnen that were free from that organization. He did not give the name of the organizatioD, but said he wanted men that were free from the organization. ' Q. Where are those stock-yards? — A. They are half a mile north of town. (j. Do they belong to the company, and are they operated by them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What organization did he name? — A. He didn't name any. Q. What organization do you belong to ? — A. The Knights of Labor. Q. Do yon know whether he knew you belonged to it? — A. Yes, sir; he induced me to join it. Q. Is he a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Has he been ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) How did he come to get you to join them? — A. Before the strike a year ago they reduced our wages from f 1.60 to |l. 25. We have been trying ever since to get our wages raised, and we failed, and he said that he had tried to got our wages raised without being able to succeed, and that under the circumstances it would be better if we belonged to the organization ; that they might get our wages raised. JAMES EWELL sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. What have you been working at?— Answer. I was in the bridge trade, up to the strike, for the last three years — within two months of three years. Q. Did you go ont on the strike? — A. I quit when the rest did. LABOR TKOUELES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 65 Q. What complaint liail yon of your treatment by the company? — A. I had no spe- cial complaint, except we often traveled all night and got nothing for it. Q. In order to reach the point where your labor was needed ? — A. Yea, sir. In one special case I started fiom Clinton, Mo., and got down into the nation at about half- past four in the morning, went to work at halt-past six, and quit work at about half- past seven that night, and I got nine hours for it. Q. Had you any arrangements for sleeping ? — A. About like a man could have rid- ing on a passenger train. Q. Any bunks or any other arrangement? — A. No bunks, only the seats in the train. We had a car when we traveled on freight at night. It is complained always they would move us so that they would get us at the place they were wanting us at by daylight. Q. Do men at your kind of work do overtime without getting compensation for it in some way ? — ^A. Well, I do not know whether you would consider it work. I lost two nights' sleep and only got one day's pay for it. Q. Did you ever take this complaint to the order in any way ? — A. I did not. I was not a member until about two weeks before the strike was organized. Q. Then this matter that yon complain of was never considered by the order of Knights of Labor ? — A, Not in my especial case ; it might have been in others. Q. Do you know whether it was considered in any general case? — A. I do not. Q. And you never took it to the company and complained about it ? — A. I have Bsad something to our boss or foreman himself; it is very frequently the case that we would be riding all night and working all day. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What are your wages i — A. $2.50 a day for ten hours. Q. You work by the hour ? — A. Yes, sir, by the hour. Q, And in making up the time they credit themselves with the time you were trav- eling ? — A. Yes, sir. In fixing to move we have always to load our tools in our own time. Then in regard to what some one was saying about wages being cut down by suspending any man and giving them less wages than $2.60. After the strike of last March when they hired a new man they hired him at $2.40. ELIAS CLUM sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Were you working for the Missouri Pacific Company when the strike oc- curred? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did you quit work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were jou a Knight of Labor, and are you now ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did you work for the company? — A. For the last four years. Q. Have you tried to get back since the strike ?— A. No, sir. Q. Have you any grievances to present against the company ; if so, what? — A. Nothing but what has been stated heretofore. Q. Have you anything personal ? — A. No, sir, I have not. Q. Have you ever worked over time for the railroad company and not received pay for it ? — ^A. I have. Q. When and where? — A. Well, I cannot tell just where, but very frequently. Q. How much ? — A. I have worked over twenty minutes of a night, if that was overtime. Q. How often ? — A. That was nearly every evening. On several occasions I have been out and traveled all night going to work, and have been out two nights without getting pay for it. JOSEPH H. BUDD sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — Answer. I am. Q. Were you an employ^ of the Missouri Pacific Company f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you in their employment now ? — A. No, sir. Q. When did you quit work ? — A. On the 6th of March. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. I did. Q. Have you any personal complaint against this company ? — ^A. I was a blacksmith helper, and have been working iifteen minutes each day over the regular hours, and 80 have all the helpers. Some of them get $2 per day and part of them $1.75. Q. All equally skillful in their work ? — A. Just the same. Q. What is the cause of the distinction in wages? — A. That is more than I can tell Q. Have you ever presented your complaint upon the subject to the company ? — A, We presented it to the grievance cottimittee, to the foreman, and to the master mechanic. Q. What did he say about it ?— A. He made some promise. That is as far as it went. 308i LAB 3 5 66 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You said you presented it to the grievance committee of the Knights of Labor *^Q. Did they present it to the coinpany ?— A.' They told us they did, and the griev- ance was before the master mechanic. , r it O. When did all this happen?— A. I thinli it was last fall. . , t j-^ O Did you obieot to working this fifteen minutes overtime every day ?— A. I did. O. To whom did you object?— A. We objected to the foreman and master mechanic. Q. What did they say ?— A. They made a promise that they would do so and so if we would so back and make our fires as we had been. . , „, , ^ O. Give the names of the foreman and master mechanic— A. The foreman was James John; the master mechanic is Mr. Newall now ; at that time it was Mr. Smith. 0. Where is he ?— A. I cannot tell you where he is at the present time. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What was this work you did?- A. Buildmg the fires. Q. In the morning?— A. Yes, sir. ttt v j t, Q. You knew that was part of the duty when you were hired?— A. We had been doing the firing. , . . j j. ^t.- j. ,Q. (By the Chairman.; Did the company post any notice in regard to this mat- ter?— A. Yes, sir. . , Q. What was in this notice?— A. It simply said that it had been customary for the helpers to build the fires, and they were expected to perform their duties. Q. By whom was it signed?- A. By the master mechanic, Mr. Smith. Q. Do you know where he is ?— A. No, sir; I cannot tell you. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) I believe you said it had been customary for the helpers to build the fires ?— A. Yes, sir ; it had been performed by them. ALFRED COOK sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. What are you doing for a living ?— Answer. I am not doing anything at the present time. Q. When did you quit work?— A. On the 6th day of March. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor?— A. Yes, sir. Q. How long had you been working for the company at that time ? — A. Well, I had been working for the company fourteen months. Q. In whose plnce had you been employed ?— A. I was employed, but I do not know in Avhose place. I was employed, and there was a gentleman quit a little while after I was there, ami I was put in his place then. Q. Did yon get the same wages as he did ?— A. Not by 75 cents a day. Q. Were you as good a workman as he? — A. I claim to be. Q. What reason did they give for not giving you the same wages ? — A. They claimed that they could not raise anybody's wages. T. W. NEWALL recalled and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Why was Mr. Wells discharged? — Answer. From the fact that we had information from reliable authorities that he was not a man that was safe to have on our xiroperty. Q. What was the character of the information you received ? — A. That he was try- ing to inform himself in regard to some guns that were on our property, and that ne would invariably after leaving the establishment after breakfast go np to hishroth- er's office, or brother-in-law's, and there spend the biggest portion of his time, or at the hall of the Knights of Labor; and I considered that a man who had to keep on duty all night certainly needed some rest, consequently I did not consider him a safe man. That was the reason I discharged him. Q. You have heard the testimony of Wilkinson and McFeely. They both said that you demanded their withdrawal from the Knights of Labor and you would give them employment. — A. I did, sir : and on my own responsibility. Q. Had you any instructions from the company to that effect ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you tell them you had instructions? — A. Never to my recollection ; audi would probably have remembered it if I had. Q. If it is not so that you received instructions from the company, you certainly can tell whether you told them so or not ? — A. I have no recollection of having told them that it was from instructions by the company. Q. If yon told them so it was untrue, was it? — A. Most assuredly it was, as far as the company was concerned. Q. You have heard all the testimony that .has been given in this case in behalf of the laboring men. I do not care to direct your attention to any particular part of the. testimony ; but if there is anything that you wish to rebut here you are at liberty to state it, giving the name of the witness, and what it is.— A. I cannot call to mind anything, six. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 67 Q. (By Mr. Buchanak.) Why did you deem it neceasary to make as a condition in the employment of these men their withdrawal from the order? — ^A. From the fact that so far as McFeely was concerned the foreman of the blaclf smith shop told me that he was an agitator, a man who always kept the shop in an uproar, and it was not my desire to keep a man in the shop that would create this feeling. Q. But did you consider that obtaining his withdrawal from the Knights of Labor would change his characteristics T — A. It would certainly alter hisstanding, as far as the organization was concerned, to take him out. As to Wilkinson, my opinion was that he was a man who had made trouble during the strike. Mr. McFeely said in effect that his application for work was general. I told him if he would withdra^r he could come back to work. Q. Was it a general application or specific application ? Was he to begin on the resumption of work, or did he desire to be taken on at once ? Which way do you un- derstand it f — A. I understood it, when the rest of the men went to work, as some of them had gone at that time. That point showed that he had repented it. Q. (By Mr. Ouihwaitb.) What was the complaint you had against Mr. Wilkin- son? — A. That he had been about during the killing of our engines here. Q. Had you any information of his being present and participating in it directly T — A. I do not know that there was. I was not on the ground when there was any- thing of that kind going on. Q. Your informant might have been mistaken? — A. Very possibly he might have been. Q. (By the CHAiRMAiir.) Who was your informant ? — A. I believe it was Mr. Weller, but I would not be positive whether it was or not. Q. You spoke of Mr. McFeely being a labor agitator. Would he have ceased to be a labor agitator if he had withdrawn from the Knights of Labor ? — A. Well, it would have taken his power away. Q. Would his characteristics have been changed ? Do you mean to convey the idea that if he had severed his connection with the Knights of Labor that he would have been no longer a labor agitator? — A. I mean to convey the idea that his influence would have gone to a great extent. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Here are two men who applied to you for work. They are reported to you as agitators. These men had now quieted down and wanted to resume work; would it not have tended to reconciliation or pacifipation, at least on the part of these two men, if you had received them into your employment ? — A. Pos- sibly it might ; but I told them at the time that this applied directly to them, but not to them as individuals. Q. You made that distinction? — ^A. That is the distinction that I made. I do not know that I made it with Mr. Wilkinson ; I think I made that remark to them as in- dividuals, and not as a class. I have men in the shop that have given testimony here to-day. Q. Then you would have refused employment to these two men even if they had not been in the order, if they had the characteristics of which you speak ? — A. After I got the information I did about McFeely I would not have employed him. I could not have done that without injustice to the foreman. Q. (By the Chairman.) Have you employed any Knights of Labor since the strike? — A. Yes, sir ; there is about sixty present of our force that were the old men. Q.,Do you know that they were Knights of Labor that you employed? — A. Mr. Tuley came back and recLuested to go to work. I had some information prior to the strike that it was an effort on the part of the Knights of Labor to have Mr. Tuley take a position in the office there. Mr. Tuley had been working in the foundry, and was turned over with the foundry force. That was the information that I got. There was a man in the pattern shop that had charge of the patterns, who was working for $1.25 a day. I donotknowwhatMr. Tuley got whenhe was there, for that was anterior to my time. He came back to me and presented the matter before it had been brought up in regard to his being here. When I first came here I told him I would look the matter up and see what I could do. I put him in there at the rate of $50 a month. When the strike came, Mr. Tuley was suspeq^ed from the fact that there was no duty. The foundry shut down. After we got ready to reopen business he came back and asked for his old i)lace, and I told him I could not give it him until he would with- draw from the Knights of Labor. He went off, and came back with the constitution and by-laws, and he said, " I cannot find anything here about withdrawal. The only thing I can do is to get a transfer card," and after that transfer card expired that he would be out of the order. I said, " If yon will get a transfer card and deposit it with me, and give me your word of honor that after the expiration of six mouths you will leave the Knights of Labor, I wUl give you a place." Q. Was that on your own responsibility ? — ^A. That was on my own individual re- sponsibility. Q. The company had nothing to do with that t — ^A. I do not know that they even knew his name. 68 LAliOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By Mr. Btjchanak.) If to-morrow these men tliat have gone out on the strike, ■were to apply to you for positions within your power to give, would you refuse any of them simply because they are Knights of Labor ? — ^A. There are those that I have mentioned. I would not have, and others I would, if I had service for them. Q. (By the (JHAiKMAiir.) What was your reason in the case of Mr. Tiiley ? — A. Just simply that I thought he was a man that had made some trouble there, and that was all. THOMAS B. TULEY, being sworn, made the following statement : About the portion of Mr. Newhall's testimony in which he speaks of the transfer- card, I can only state that I was a member of the organization. I did not consider it humiliating on my part to go to him. He made me this proposition, that if I would get a withdrawal card from the organization my job was ready for me. I told him, after studying it over, that I could not do it. I do not know that any evidence can be brought to bear to show that I caused any trouble. I did not go out when the whistle blew. I was at work there and received an injury working in the round- house, and after sending several letters to adjust the matter with Mr. Brock, the master of transportation, it was agreed that I should not bring suit against the com- pany ; and with the understanding that I was to go into the foundry ofSce I did not do it ; I went back to work, and when Mr. Hanes came back from Sedalia I was made a clerk in the foundry office. Q. !(By the Chairman.) Did you enter into any written contract? — A. Yes, sir; it is now on file in the company's office. Q. A written contract that if you did not bring suit you were to have continuous employment 1 — A. That is my understanding ; I never had a copy of it. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Were you working for the company or for the lessees of the foundry ?— A. I was working for the company, sir. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Do you remember whether that provision was in the con- tract that they were to give you employment until they themselves discharged yon ?— A. Yes, sir ; that is how I understood it. Q. Then, as they have discharged you, where is your grievance ? You say that the contract contains the condition that the company is to give you remunerative employ- ment until it does discharge you. — A. They were to have a cause for that. Q. Read that [handing the witness a blank]. — ^A. (Witness examining the Want.) I cannot remember it now from the time that the contract was made. Q. I will ask you whether the contract you signed, or the release you signed, was- similar to this or not ? — A. I do not remember whether it was or not. Q. If you cannot remember what was in the contract can you testify to what it contains ? The original is now in the hands of the company, I suppose ? — A. Well, I cannot do it. CHAELES H. KIMBALL recalled and examined. By the Chaiemait: Question. There were some dates you agreed to furnish this morning; have you got them? — ^Answer. Well, I was asked this morning to give some dates which I was unable tb furnish with accuracy. It was between the 6th and 11th of March that a large num- ber of locomotives were disabled up at the round-house by reason of portions having been taken away, and certain ones of them dumped into the turn-table pit. It was on the 11th of March that the railroad company called on the sheriff of the county for pro- tection to its property, and it was on the 12th of March that they called npon the mayor of the city to assist them in regaining possession of their property, and at that time we had eighteen special policemen appointed by the mayor to assist them. On the 13th of March the sheriff arrived here with his posse and attempted to move a freight train, and on that day the strikers seized the switch engine and coupled it on to the engine that was to move the freight train and ran it back into the round-house against the orders of the sheriff. It was on the 15th of March that the injunction pro- ceedings were instituted, which I mentioned when I was unable to give the date, and from that time until the 26th tljpre were no freight trains moved from the city. On the 26th of March the first freight train moved from the city from the beginning of the strike, and was guarded by IJnited States deputy marshals. It was about that time that the engines were dumped into the turn-table pit there — one of them at leasi It was on the 29th of March that the mayor issued his proclamation calling upon the citizens to enable him to enforce the law. A proclamation was issued the day before, but it was on the 29th of March that the citizens turned out and attempted to move the train. I neglected to state this morning that at that time the sheriff was present with an armed posse in assisting to move that train, and that there were at least eight of his posse, and possibly more than that, who were armed with double-barreled shotguns and LABOR TKOUBLKd IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 69 were on or near the train to be coupled. It was on the SOtli of March that the passenger train south was derailed; an engine was killed on that day; and it was on the next day that a telegram was sent to the governor for troops. On the 31st the adjutant-general arrived here, and one train was permitted to go out under his supervision; and then there were one or two engines killed on the same day. It was on that day that the ad- jutant-general made his address to the strikers. On the 1st of April, again, an attempt was made to take out a train, and the engine was killed. On the 2d of April the troops arrived, in the evening. On the 3d of April the first train moved out of the city under the protection of the troops. On the 4th of April a preliminary meeting was held or- ganizing the Law and Order League, and trains were moved out then under military guard. On the 5th of April the Law and Order League organized, and some of the strikers were arrested. On the 8th the Law and Order League, at the request of the adjutant-general, furnished a guard of special jMilice and members of the Law and Order Leagne to co-operate with the military in guarding the shops; and at that time all the military had been withdrawn except two companies. There were four companies at first, and two companies were withdrawn shortly after they came here. On the 14th of April the remaining troops were removed from the city. Mr. OUTHWAITE. I wish to ask you whether you know of any threats being made by prominent members of the Law and Order League against prominent members of the Knights of Labor? — A. Well, I do not think that I have heard any threats. I have heard some denunciatory language against members of the Knights of Labor as being responsible for acts of lawlessness that had been committed; but as to any threats being made against them, I have no recollection of any. Q. "You may state whether it was confined to those individual members as being guilty of lawlessness, or directed toward them as Knights of Labor? — A. It was directed toward them as being responsible for the acts of lawlessness that had been committed, not as having being done by themselves, but as having urged it on or aided and abetted in the doing of it; not as against the order as an order, nor as against them as members of the order particularly for being knights of the order. They were denounced as be- ing responsible for these acts of lawlessness. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was there any denunciation that you know of by members of the Law and Order League, except as to acts of violence? — A. No, sir; nothing. The sole purpose and object of our organization was to prevent acts of violence and lawless- ness, and to prevent the commission of those crimes and violations of law that had been committed here right in daylight in our city, or near the city. Q. And if the objects of the Knights of Labor as stated by Mr. Powderly, to prevent strikes and also to prevent lawlessness, had been carried out, you would not have had any of these denunciations of the violations of the law? — A. None of them. At the time of the organization, and frequently afterwards, it was said in our Law and Order League that there was nothing in the constitution or by-laws of the Knights of Labor that would warrant or authorize the lawlessness that had taken place here. Mr. Buchanan. Prominent members of the order have also testified the same thing. The Witness. I understand so. Denison, Tex., Wednesday, May 5. The subcommittee, of which Honorable W. H. Grain is chairman, proceeded to take testimony at Denison, Tex., this day. THOMAS H. FITZPATEICK sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. What position do you occupy on the Missouri Pacific system ? — ^Answer. I am general road -master on the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railroad, north of Denison. Q. Howlonghaveyouoocupied that position? — A. Since the 6th of March. Q. Had you been in the employment of the company before ? — A. I was division road- master for the Missouri Pacific Company for five years, on the northern division of the line. Q. On the 6th of March you were promoted ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you been familiar with the rules of the railroad company in reference to al- lowance of time to the section men ? — A. Yes, sir; quite familiar. Q. Please state what the rule was? — A. Rules for overtime and Sunday work are: we allow the men time and a half, and it depends upon the nature and character of the work how much overtime is allowed for working in water, or high water, up to their knees or beyond that, in working in washouts. I generally allowed them pretty good 70 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. time and gave them whatever I thought was right. I do not know that there is any rule laid down for overtime, but it is generally supposed to be time and a half. Q. By whom is that regulated? — A. The general division road-master. Q. Do you mean to convey the idea that it depends upon the circumstances under which they are at work, and that you pay them in accordance with the amount of water they stand in ? — A. Yes, sir, that is the way it works. Q. It has been testified before this committee by several men who have been in the employment of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, that they had been taken down into the Indian Territory and had shoveled snow and worked in water and washouts, and that they had never received any extra pay for it. Do you know of any such cases? — A. I do not. It certainly cannot be the fault of the company; the company do not restrain their foremen from allowing time that their men make. They never have me, and I have been with the Missouri, Kansas and Texas and Missouri Pacific ten years. When it was the Missouri, Kansas and Texas I was with it five years. Q. Could such cases have occurred without your knowledge? — A. Well, possibly there might. Q. These men stated in substance that they bad been overworked, that they had been worked in water, and in one instance a man had boarded himself, ,and that' he I^ been promised extra pay for this work in advance, and that although the men had complied with the terms of the agreement, when they went to the foreman they would be re- ferred to the road-master, and sent from one to another, and they had never received any- thing extra for what they had done. Do you know of any such cases? — A. I do not, sir. I always look very carefully after such cases. Q. Where were you when the strike took place on the Missouri system, on the 6th of March? — A. I was on my way to Parsons. I arrived at Parsons, I think, on the 6th. Q. Did you see what took place there?;— A. Yes. I was there pretty much all the time. Q. State in substance what you saw there, without going into the details? — A. Well, when I arrived there I found everything at a standstill. JThere was nothing doing, no trains were moving, and the strikers had charge of everything there. They would not allow any trains but mail trains to go out. Q. The railroad company carried the mail on the passenger trains and they did not carry any mail on frei^t trains? — A. Not that I know of, sir. Q. Well, state in substance what took place? — A. I do not know that I can give the dates. We made several attempts to take trains out and they crowded in such masses so that the engine could not be run through them, and on several occasions they stopped the trains and would kill the engines, as we call it. Q. Did you employ any men in the place of the strikers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they interfered with?— A. Yes, sir; they were intimidated by the strikers. Q. What took place ? — A. They would be met on the way to work, or coming from their work, and at their work, and asked to quit and not to work. Q. You do not call simply askiag men not to work intimidation, do you? — A. Well, they made threats in several instances. One man was requested three mornings in suc- cession; the fourth morning he told the section-boss he could not go to work again, as he was aftaid. Q. Who did this — was it done by citizens or Knights of Labor? — A. Knights of Labor. Q. As an organization or as individuals? — A. aI individuals. Q. I presume you are well acquainted with the men who worked on the road in that particular place? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What proportion of them were Knights of Labor ? — A. Among the shopmen and in the machinery department I guess there were nine-tenths of them who were Knights of Labor. Q. Did the other tenth go out?— A. They forced them out; that is, they called them out. Q. Did they go? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you or not recognize any men that are Knights of Labor who were engaged in this work of stopping trains and killing engines?— A. Could I recognize any of them? No; I cannot. Q. Do you ?— A. I do not know them to be Knights of Labor, because I am not one myself; but they were supposed to be Knights of Labor. Q. You do not say as a fact that any of them were Knights of Labor? — A. I do not say so as a fact, because I do not know them, but I guessed that they were Knights of Labor. Q. All of them or a portion of them?— A. Nearly all. Q. Do you know any thing further in regard to this matter that would have a tendency to enlighten the committee as to the causes or extent of this trouble ? — A. Nothing but that we had four section foremen and the Knights called th^m out. The men were per- LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 71 fectly willing to work ; but they had requested them to come out, and they did so. One of them told me he would stay at work, but he was afraid of personal violence. His name was H. Balfe. Q. What did the strikers themselves say wa? the cause of the strike? — A. Most of them said that they did not know anything further than the reinstatement of Hall in Texas; that is all I could get out of them ; that seemed to be the only reason they could assign to me. My men who were called out did not know what they were called out for. Q. Have any of the strikers made a request for re-employment by the company? — A. I had one last night send me a message from Hannibal. He has belonged to the organization, but he did not strike. He was in sympathy vrith the strikers and he failed to get men on his track, and we had to let him go in order to get a man there who would attend to business; and he had made application to go to work again. Q. Did you answer his application? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you tell him? — A. I told him therewere no vacancies and that his serv- ices were not required. There were , no vacancies. We had to put a man there who would keep a crew together. Q. Is that the only application made to you since the strike ? — A. Two of these men who were called out at Parsons made application to mo to get their old places. Q. Did you take them back? — A. Yes, sir; I took one of them back; but he was afraid to go to work there and asked me to take him on the line some pjace else. Q. What was his name? — ^A. His name was Balfe. Q. What is the reason you did not employ the other one ? — A. The other man was prominent in the order, and is not a very good man anyhow. Q. Did you refuse him because he was a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Has the company issued any instructions to you not to employ Knights of Labor as such? — A. No, sir; I never received any instructions of that kind that I know of. Q. Do you know of any request being made by section men before this strike was ordered for an increase of their wages, either directly or by a committee, to you or to any other officer of the road? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Section men are employed under you? — A. Yes, sir; they are employed under me. Q. What are their wages ? — A. The wages run from $1.10 to $1.40. Q. What have they to pay for board? — A. All the way from $14 to $15.50 per month. It depends upon the locality. GEORGE A. WRIGHT sworn and examined: By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Do you reside at Denison? — Answer. No, sir; I reside at Palestine. Q. How long have you resided in Palestine? — A. I was bom and raised there. Q. How old are yon ? — A. I will be forty years old in July. Q. Have you been engaged in business there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what business? — A. In general merchandising and farming. Q. Had you any troubles there on^)he railroad? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What effect, if any, had these troubles upon the business interests of Palestine and surrounding vicinity? — A. It had a tendency to demoralize business. Q. For how long were freight trains delayed running? — A. I cannot say that exactly, . hut for ten or fifteen days. Q. Was any freight received or sent out during that time? — A. No, sir. Q. What effect had it upon your own particular business? — ^A. Well, it had this effect on the mercantile part of the business: I could not get any goods in. I had a better supply than most of our merchants, as I had commenced early in the season, and there- fore I did not snffer as much as the majority of our merchants. Q. It resulted in your selling fewer goods than you would have sold? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Give in your own words, in a brief way, the effect of the suspension of trade upon the business of Palestine generally? — A. It has cut off all trade from the outside except our local trade. I suppose there was from 25 to 40 per cent, less business done during the strike than before. ■ Q. As a farmer what effect had it upon you ? — A. I cannot say that it affected us much in that respect, as farmers generally had got their supplies, or to a great extent they had. They got a good deal of meat and flour and sugar and coffee. Most of them buy on credit, and have to rely upon the merchant who carries this trade for their supplies; consequently we had to cut down their supplies. Q. Where do you get your goods itom mostly? — A. From Saint Louis largely; a por- tion of them from New Orleans, and also from Galveston, Houston, and New York. Q. And they are distributed to what points? — A. Ours is mostly a local business. 72 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You have spoken of receiving your goods from. Galveston, Houston, and New Or- leans. "Was there any interruption in obtaining goods from those sources? — A. Yes, sir; we could not get any on account of the strike along the Missouri and International and . Great Northern EaUi-oad. Q. Are you dependent upon the services of what is called the Gould system of roads for your supplies ftom New Orleans and Houston? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you during the continuance of this strike mingle with the strikers freely, and did you hear them talk about the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the cause given by them in conversation generally as to why they were on strike ?— A. The first I heard of it was I saw men going by the store, and I stopped one of them and asked him what was the matter. He said they told him to lay down his tools, and he dropped them and came out. I asked him again what was the matter, and also others, and they said it was because of the discharge of a man named Hall. Q. Did you hear them allege any other reasons? — A. They came out in a circular in which they stated that that was one of the reasons, and that there were three or four minor reasons; and then they afterwards came out with what they called a list of griev- ances. . G. W. BURKETT sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekek: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Palestine, Tex, Q. And have for several years ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is your business there ? — A^ My business is a railroad contractor generally. Q. Were you there on March 6, vf hen the strike commenced ? — A. Well, I was near there; I do not know whether I was there on that particular day or not. Q. Tell us what was the cause of the strike there. — A. I saw engines coming in from different directions, and when they would get into the Palestine yard the engines would be switched and killed; that is, all freight engines were killed. Q. Describe, in short, how tB&,t was done. — A. Well, I was not there all the time when it was done. Q. Just tell us what you saw there. — A. I saw from fifty to one hundred men get on a train there, and as soon as the engine was got into the yard they would blow her off and do what is generally known as killing the engine. Q. Just how they did it you do not know? — A. No. Q. What was done with the engine ? — A. It was just left right there. Q. It was not run into the roundhouse? — A. I do not know that. Some of the en- gines were inside of the roundhouse and some outside. All the engines that came there with freight trains during the time they had full force were kLUed. Q. About how many? — A. I would not be able to state that, sir. Q. What was done with the freight that came in ? — A. Well, the freight was distrib- uted around the yard there by some men that seemed to be in charge of that yard. It looked to me for a while that the railroad officials had nothing to do with running the yard. Q. Who were the men that seemed to be running the yard? — A. I can not tell yon; they seemed to be a crowd of thirty or forty men. , Q. Were they men that you knew ? — A. No, I do not know that I knew them particu- larly. Q. Were they railroad men? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they strikers ? — A. It is my understanding that they were strikers. Q. Had you any knowledge of your own that they were Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir, I have got no knowledge of that; but it was generally understood that it was the Knights of Labor that had charge of the yard at that time. Q. Were there any acts of violence done of your own knowledge except the killing of engines? — ^A. That is something that I do not know much about. Q. Do you know of any efforts by the civil authorities to stop these disturbances?— A. Yes, sir; the civU authorities took the thing in hand finally and stopped it. Q. Was it the sheriff vrith his posse and patrol of citizens with arms? — A. Yes, sir, we had arms; I had a shotgun there myself. Q. What other arms ? — A. Shotguns and six-shooters, and so on. Q. Any Winchester rifles? — A. I cannot say; I do not know that I saw any of them, or what different sorts of arms they bad. Q. This was a sheriff's posse? — A. Yes, sir. Q. About how many did they have? — ^A. From seventy-five to one hundred and flity; I do not know the number; but there was quite a number of them anyway. Q. Was there any militia called in ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. What weapons did the strikers have, or did they exhibit any? — A. I did not sea any. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 73 Q. And they numbered how many, those that were on duty but whom you cannot say whether they were strikers or not ? — A. I could not say exactly how many there were, but it was a large crowd. Q. What were they doing that you took part with arms to pr^ent them from doing? — A. Well, the company could not move any of their fteight trains that were in the yard, and they wanted to move trains and they called on the citizens to assist them to do that ; ajid I do not know of any cause why they could not if it was not from the strikers, and I supposed that they were the men that prevented the company from moving their trains. Q. When your citizens assisted in this manner, did they then move the trains? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The engineers and firemen went on with their work and the others went out ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did the blockade last there? — A. I do not remember, but about twenty days' or somewhere about that. Q. Previous to that did the sheriff bring out a posse to protect the property? — A. The sheriff had some deputies down there, and I know of my own knowledge that the en- gines wer& killed in the presence of the deputies. Q. Then the sheriff and the deputies were not able to stop the disturbances? — A. Not at that time. Q. But when the citizens came out in force, as you have described, then the strikers fell back and the trains moved? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And from that time till this they have been moving? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And no trains ditched? — A. No, sir; I have heard of none. On the day I came in there I had just got back from Saint Louis, and I had a car-load of mules and wagons there. I had about four hundred and fifty men in my employ, and when I got down to Palestine I found that there was a strike then inaugurated. I went te the head center of this thing for the purpose of seeing one of the leaders of the Knights of Labor, and I said to him, " I have got a great mafay men in my employment, and I would like to know what this thing amounts to. I have got mules and wagons freighted here, and my men must be supplied with something to eat. ' ' He said: ' ' Mr. Burkett, we do not intend to do anything detrimental to your interests." He said: " I do not know the cause of this strike. It is a general order issued from our headquarters, and what it is ibr I cannot say." Then I went over to Mr. Hall, in the office of the superintendent, in regard to the matter, and I told him I had a great number of men at work and was under bond for the completion of my contract for $10,000, and I said to Mr. Hall I would like to know what he knew about this strike, and when it was going to end, and to give me all the information he could. His reply was that these men had walked out of their shops and had not said a single thing to him, and what they were striking for he could not tell. Then I walked back in town and got a promise from the Knights of Labor to unload my freight. I had a car-load of wagons that were Huntsville wagons, that were boycotted, and I got pei^ission from these men to unload these wagons, and he then said to me, " I did not know these wagons were Huntsville wagons." Q. Did you go and unload your mules and wagons, or had you got your mules before ? A. I had got the mules before. Q. So that you pould not get all your freight without you had their permission — A. No, sir. Q. To whom was it that you had to apply ? — A. I cannot tell that, sir, as I do not remember. Q. How soon was that after the strike commenced ? — A. Very soon after the strike commenced; three or four days or two or three days; I forget. Q. Was the freight there on the depot ground? — A. My freight was in the Palestine yard. Q. Did you find men in charge of the yard and cars then? — A. Yes, there were men in charge of that yard, and it was impossible to move a car there without permission. Q. Were they Knights of Labor? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was men that were acting for them that had charge at that -time? — A. Yes, sir. ' Q. And guard has been continued there ever since? — A. Yes, sir. Q. For how long a time? — A. There is a guard there now. I think the company has a guard there all the time. Q. Did the citizens keep guard there for some time ? — A. The citizens kept guard there for a few days, but I do not remember exactly how long. Q. After you got your freight, do you know anything .further in connection with the work about the yard as to what was going on with other men's freight ? — A. There was a committee appointed under which all freight was delivered to the merchants. Q. Do you remember upon what day that was? — A. It was about four or five days after the strikp commenced. 74 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. By whom was that order given ? — A. That order was given by the man that was in charge of that yard. Q. Under the Knights of Labor?— A. Yes, sir; they were. Q. Then they gave the orders to these men who were controlling the freight and con- sented that the citizens should take their freight ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were these tht, men that usually managed the affairs there— railroad officials ?— a. The railroad officials had really nothing to do with that thing at all. They were not running the road at all, and they had no power over the freight there. A freight train came in the^e, and the officials said it was to be put on one side of the track ; they would be told "no," that it would have to be put on the other side of the track. Q. Who did that, and what class of men were they? — A. I suppose it was the Knights of Labor- the strikers. Q. Were there arrests made there?— A. Yes, sir; there were several arrests made. Q. When were they made? — A. I cannot say, but it was some time during the strike. Q. Was it after the citizens assisted the sheriff? — A. The arrests were made after the citizens assisted in moving the trains. Q. Not before? — A. Idonot know of any before. Q. Were these men put under bonds?— A. I think some of them were put under bond. Q. (By Mr. BucHANAif.) What are these contracts of which you speak that you are connected with? — A. In building a branch of the International and Great Northern that I had. Q. You spoke of employing a great number of men. Are there any convicts among those men? — A. There are no convicts among my men. Q. You spoke of Huntsville wagons. Where are they made? — A. They are made in the penitentiary at Huntsville, Tex. Q. Why do you buy these wagons; are they cheaper than others? — A. I buy them simply because I think it is to my interest to do so. Q. You say they are boycotted. What do you mean by that ? — A. That is a term that is used here. Q. What I want to know is what you mean by that allegation? — A. If I understand the meaning it is an organization here in the State of Texas now, and in other States; and when they do not wish to trade with anybody or any concern they usually term it a "boycott," and use it to compel the other side to yield to their wishes. Q. What I want to know is, had.such action been taken as to the Huntsville wagons ? — A. Well, I understand that they have done that with both penitentiaries in Texas. But as far as my wagons were concerned they did not use any resistance to having them un- loaded. Q. Did you attend the citizens' meeting in P alestine some little time ago? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. Were you present with some citizens when one of the strikers made some complaint about the wages that were due them ? — A. Yes, sir; but I do not remember when it was. Q. Was it anything about getting their pay ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was it ? — -A. There vyas one proposition there by one of the leading Knights, who said the company had i^ot paid them, and that the.y had a claim on the company until they got their money, and that if they were paid off th^ had no other claims. That proposition was made before a citizens' meeting in Palestine. Q. What was the name of the man who made that proposition ? — A. Marshall. Q. Does he live in Palestine ? — A. He was then in Palestine. I think he has now left that country. The next day myself and Mr. George Read met on the street, and I asked how much would it take to pay these men off. It was generally understood that about ten or fifteen thousand dollars would pay all of them off. We agreed with Read to raise that money and pay them off, and adjust the matter, and for them to let the trains go on. Mr. Marshall said that he did not Q. (By the Chairman.) Was he present? — A. Not when we were talking on the streets. Q. Did you go to him and tell him that? — A. I did not go to see him, but I believe Mr. Read did. Q. Did you hear him say what you are now going to state? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was this ever brought to the knowledge of the strikers?— A. Everybody understood that we would raise the money. Q. To your knowledge? — A. I do not know; I cannot say. If you ask me what the remark was and what the reply was, it was that Mr. Marshall said this. He says: "If I said that I did not remember. If I said it I had no authority to say it, and if I said it I withdraw my proposition." Now that is his remark on the street. Q. Did you hear him say that? — A. No, sir; I did not. Q. (By Mr. Pakkee.) There were no arrests made to your knowledge until the sheriff with a poi5se of citizens took action in thft matter? — A. No, sir; I do not know of any. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 75 Q. Up to that time no arrests had been made? — A. No, sir; I do not think there had been. Q. Do you know that the Knights of Labor, in taking charge of the yard, as they did, claimed that they were doing it to protect the property and in the interest of law and ordei'? — A. They claimed that they were. I saw a coach there fall of negroes, from twenly-five to thirty of them down in the yard. I do not know whether it was the super- intendent's car or not. And in another coach, in the other end of the yard, there was general headquarters, and they were claiming that they were protecting the company's property. Q. Aid representing the Knights of Labor? — A. I do not know what they were rep- , resenting. I do not know who is a Knight of Labor. Q. What we want to get at is the claim on which they based their action ? — A. Yes; that is what our understanding was. 6. A. WEIGHT recalled and examined. By the CHAIRMAN: Question. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Bnrkett; do you know whether that proposition was ever brought to the strikers or not? — Answer. Yes, sir; I think it was, sir. Q. State your reason for thinking so. — ^A. Mr. Marshall made this proposition to Mr. Bnrkett to settle matters, and said that he would give his word himself for the Knights of Labor that if they had their money that they would not go back there to the com- pany's property, nor let a man interfere with an engine, nor interrupt any business there; that they wanted their money, and that t^as all they asked. I saw Mr. Hunter the next morning and asked him why they did not pay these men the money they owed them. Mr. Hunter is employed as a railroad attorney, and Mr. Grooch is a local at- torney there. Mr. Gooch said these men have not asked for anything but what they are entitled to, and asked Mr. Hunter why they did not pay up and stop this confusion, and he said they would do it. I then told them to go to Marshall and get him to put his proposition in writing, and if he did so we would pay the money. Mr. Gooch went to Marshall about it, and he said he had made no such proposition. Mr. Gooch told him that he had done so. and there were some Knights of Labor present when he said he did not make it. Mr. Gooch came back and said that he denied having made the proposi- tion. Q. Do you know anything of this of your own knowledge ? — A. I do know we offered to pay the money. Q. But what passed between Mr. Gooch and Mr. Marahall, you do not know ? — A. No(» of my own knowledge; but from what Mr. Hunter and Mr. Gooch came and told me. Q. (By Mr. Buchanait.) Were these men employed under the Texas and Pacific or the Missouri Pacific Railroad? — A. They were employed on the international division of the Missouri Pacific. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Did any information come to you that Mr. Marshall de- soled his projHJsition ? — A. Yes, sir; they told me this. They told Mr. Marshall he did make such a proposition, and he said he did make it, but had no authority to make it, and would withdraw it. PETER HUGHES sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Palestine, 'Anderson County, Texas. Q. What business are you in? — A. I am selling groceries there now. Q. About how much stock do you carry? — A. Fifteen thousand dollars to twenty thousand dollars. Q. Where do you get your supplies? — A. Mostly from Saint Louis and Kansas City. Q. Now you may state if there was any interference with your business; how did it arise? — A. Well, sir, we generally try to have one or two car-loads of flour and bacon on the road, so that we can handle them. On the 6th of March, at 10 o'clock, they were handling a car-load of flour, when the men working there stopped, some of them com- ing down the track. I asked them what was the matter, and they told me they had struck. I asked one man that I knew why they had struck, and he said he did not know. Our business went down during the strike, and we had 150 sacks of flour left when the embargo was raised, and we could get more ordered, and it virtually para- lyzed the business of Palestine for at least a fortnight. Q. Do you know of any interference with the trains? — A. At one time, before I went out, I was chief deputy sheriff for Anderson County. Acting under my old commis- sion I was put on duty in the yard. We had several citizens to watch the property; but before that the strikers had taken possession, and we could not get possession of it. 76 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. * The Chaieman. Tou mean by virtue of your old commission? — A. The sheriff called me out under that old commission, and put five men there, and he lold me to avoid having a conflict for possession with the strikers, and under no circumstances to let the men get into an open conflict. There were two or three hundred men on the yard, and we could do nothing with them, so we drew back and gave them their own way. We had instructions not to fight them, and to let them take possession rather than go into collision with them as we had done on several occasions. Q. Well, how did they interfere with the movements of trains? — A. Well, sir, when a fl-eight train came, they would meet it. They would go down, from fifty to a hun- dred of them, and put the train on the side track and kill it, and leave the engine right on the train. Q. You were present at that meeting spoken of by the preceding witness when a proposition to raise money to pay off the strikers was made? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Did the scarcity of supplies affect the prices of goods at Palestine, and did the merchants take advantage of the condition of the stoppage of freight? — A. Our trade is almost entirely a country trade. Our trade was mostly credit, business with the farmers of the country that we carry. We did not go up on our prices, and it did not affect our customers in that way, Q. (By Mr. Paekee). From your dealings with the farmers, do you know the effect of this strike upon the farming community in that vicinity? — A. No, sir; only from Q. As to getting their seeds? — A. No, sir; only as to what I heard them say. Q. What do you know as to injury to perishable goods there? — A. No, sir; I do not know that. I paid not much attention to that. Q. What about this permission to unload goods ?^A. That was only in the begin- ning. Q. How many engines were killed in the yard? — A. I believe there were fifteen or twenty. Q. To the best of your knowledge and recollection these engines were in a killed con- dition at one time? — A. So disabled that they could not be used. Q. (By Mr. OUTHVf AITB. ) Did you converse with many of the strikers after they went out? — A. Well, I suppose I met almost all the prominent strikers. Q. Within two or three days after the strike, and they gave no reason for going out? — A. No, sir; they did not know why they went out. Q. How soon after they went out did you begin to hear the reasons ? — A. I suppose it was a week. Q. What were they ? — A. It was on account of the discharge of a man by the name of Hall, at Marshall. Q. How long after was it before any other reasons were given ? — A. I suppose it was ten or twelve days probably. They commenced issuing circulars, but when it was they got them out I do not recollect. Q. Have you copies of those circulars ? — A. I cannot find that I have any now. Q. How long after they went out was it before the first of these circulars yiaa issued ? — A. About a week. Q. The second one how soon after that? — A. A very short time. There was a citi- zens' meeting and they issued another right after that. FRANK FANNING sworn and examined. By the Chaieman : Question. Where do you live? — Answer. Palestine, Tex. Q. What position do you hold there, if any? — A. I am yard-master. Q. How long have you occupied that position? — A. Since last October some time. Q. What are your general duties ? — A. I have the movement of all trains under my charge coming into Palestine, making up the trains and ordering trains out. Q. You have the general management? — A. Everything is in my charge in Palestine yards. Q. Where were you on the 6th of March? — A. In Palestine. Q. Had you any notice of the strike before it occurred? — A. No, sir; only the boycott on the Texas and Pacific cars, forbidding me to move them. Q. How long before that had the strike taken place on the Texas and Pacific road?— A. I cannot say. The first notice I had on the morning of the 4th I noticed that there were some parties tacking printed notices on the cars "boycotting" them. They were Texas and Pacific cars. I examined the liotices and asked what that meant, and was told that I had permission to set those cars out of my way, butnottoleta car go out of the yard with one of those notices on it. They told me that Mr. Hall had been discharged at Marshall, and they were going to keep every car of the Texas and. Pacific back until they put Mr. Hall to work; and we had to put them in the store yard. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 77 Q. You obeyed their orders? — A. Certainly, we obeyed their orders. We had to obey them. They said they would stop all trains if I let a Texas and Pacific cargo out of the yard, and, to avoid trouble, I agreed, as they had boycotted them. Then they began to come to the office and looking at our bills, to see if there were goods from the Texas and Pacific road in the Missouri Pacific cars, and began to mark them off with chalk, and there were about fifty cars put to one side. They said that not another car.nor pound of freight should be moved until Hall was put back. That was on the 5th, and I put away these fifty cars in my store-away. Q. Were all of them Missouri Pacific cars ? — ^A. All of them, or Wabash. So that we had not a pound of freight left Palestine yard after the 5th. On the morning of the 6th when the local came in it had some goods of the Texas and Pacific, and they came down and marked them boycotted and I had to set that car to one side. That was the morning of the 6th. At 10 o'clock, or about that time, the whistle blew, and as it was too early for dinner I thought to myself there was some trouble : and by that time I saw men going right and left and saw them going to the Knights of Labor hall at the Opera House, about 250 yards from there. About 12 o'clock I saw a big crowd of men coming up the track, and I supposed they were going back to work. They went into the freight-house and then into the round-house and began stripping it. Then there was a blowing of whistles and they pulled the fires and blew the water out of the tanks and disconnected the engines, and such like, and then went on into the round-house. So that stopped the moving of trains at Palestine. It was not long before a train came in, and they took possession of that and of them all as they came into the yard. They climbed all over the train and before it stopped they had it killed. I then went to see this Mack Fox, who was represented as the head of it, and I said to him : " You have got possession of the yards, and I want to make one request of you, and that is that trains coming into the yard you will have the brakes set on the caboose and let them take up the slack so that they will hold the pins, and prevent any drawing of pins. ' ' I did that because I was afraid there might be a fire. If he did that and let the trains stay in that condition we could take the switch engine and clear the yard in a few minutes, running every train that we had in Palestine out. They told me they were going to kill every engine. Q. What do you mean by "taking the slack?" — A. I mean to set the brake on the caboose, or on the end of the train, and that makes the pin so tight that it can not be taken out. They agreed to let that be done. He told me I was under his direction, that I was no longer yard-master, and that I was his assistant. He gave me instructions what to do, and where to put the trains as they came in. When there was a time freight train with meat on it came in, they killed the train immediately after he had stored it away. I called his attention to it that it was a meat train, with time freight, and he said to me, "By God, who is doing this thing, you or me?" A crowd of about a hundred and fifty men were about the train, pulling pins, disconnecting the engine and tender, and killing it. If I had a train coming in, I had to find out where to put that train from them. He would come to my o£Sce and tell me where to put it. There was a train coming in there, I think it was an extra from the south, and he came in and told me there would be an extra train in from the south in a few minutes. Q. How did he know that?^-A. I can not tell. And he told me that if I let that train pass here he would ditch it. Under our orders it is impossible to run the train through the yard without orders. When the train commenced pulling on the grade and before it got into the yard, they got all over it, and set brakes and brought the train to a stand right at the main svntch. A train has to pull down and back into the siding to get into the yard, as the Palestine yard is built in a V. He had threatened that he would go down to the north switch and ditch the train if I attempted to let it go through with- out stopping it, and he and another man went on down that way. Of course, when the train came in, they set brakes and it was impossible to get it back into the yard. That engine was killed. This was on March the 8th. I went on down the yard and met several Knights of Labor, and quite a crowd of them came on down and said that they killed that engine and they were going to kill them all. I would say that there was probably a hunred or more men in the crowd, and they disabled her by breaking bolts and blovring her off. Q. Were you then discharged? — A. No, sir; I had no further work, but came down to see how things were going, and Mr. Fox told me if we attempted to couple in a car with the passenger engine they would kill it; and they went right to the roundhouse to the passenger engine and disconnected it from the tender. Q. How did you get the passenger train out? — A. The foreman and some men had to go to work and put in water and fill it and started the fire. Afterthis it was impossible to get an engine to do any work. I either applied to the master mechanic or somebody to give me an engine to do the work, and I was told that it was impossible to get one. Q. Were his hands on the strike too? — A. Yes, sir; Mr. Wood has charge of all the shops. 78 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you not say that yots had one engine in working order? — A. Yes; but that was the one that was ready for the passenger train. Q. What hands did he have to do that ? — A. I believe it was the roundhouse fore- man and the general foreman. Q. Had they any employ^ under them ? — A. That I cannot say. Q. . Did you make any application to the civil authorities for assistance to prevent this damage to property? Did you go to the mayor of the town? — A. I talked to the sheriff two or three times about getting men. Q. Do you not know that the law of Texas protects the property of corporations just as it does that of individuals, and that where a man is guilty of injuring personal prop- erty or destroying it he can be punished under the criminal law ? — A. That was my un- derstanding of the law. Q. Why did you not go and make affidavit, so as to have process against these par- ties? — A. The master of transportation said that should have been done, and they tried to get protection for the property of the company. The sheriff summoned some men. Q. Were any arrests made ? — A. There were arrests made for trespass. Q. Has Mr. Fox been arrested? — A. No, sir; he is on a hunting or fishing expedition, I think. , Q. Was any effort made by the railroad officials, by asking for protection or to have the law enforced, to prevent all this trouble ? — A. Why, certainly; they had officers there before the strike was over. The deputy sheriffs came over there to protect the property, but it was several days after the beginning of the strike. Before the sheriffs cam<» and tried to take possession of the shops again from the strikers, and during this time, I would state that Mr. Fox and another man, two Knights of Labor, came to me and asked me to place a couple of coaches, one in each end of the yard, for their men to oc- cupy so that they could keep watch on the trains coming in and out. After that I saw they had the superintendent's car placed in position and a lot of men in there with their feet on his desk, spitting tobacco juice out of the windows. I went down and got two other coaches. Q. So far as yon know no affidavit was filed against any of these men for these depre- dations ? — A. So far as I know there was not. Q. You say that the sheriff and his deputies came there a few days after the strike originated ? — A. I believe they did. Q. How many deputies were there? — A. Quitfe a nuraber.of them. There were as many as eighteen or twenty at times, other times thirty or forty, and sometimes aa high as sixty. Q. Did these depredations still continue after the arrival of the deputies ? — A. The engines and trains had been killed, and it was impossible to get any trains to ran. There was a passenger engine blown out before anybody could get to it. There were parties that would slip round and blow them out right in the shops. Q. What is the reason that the sheriffs did not arrest them ? — A. That I cannot say. Q. Were they strong enough in numbers to arrest them ? — A. They did not seem to be. Q. Was there any time when the sheriffs were sufficiently numerous to arrest the men who were injuring the engines? — A. If they had been we certainly should have arrested the first man we saw destroying property. Q. You do not know the reason why they did not? — A. No, sir; I do not. Q. How long after the arrival of the deputies there was it before the citizens came down ? — A. That was four or five days, I believe, after the strike. On the 24th I de- cided that we would do some switching. We came out with the passenger engine, all other engines being- broken up or killed in some way. The engine pulled out under guard of the sheriff himself, and I do not know how many deputies, and we walked down at the head of the engine and stopped at the tank. I gave the engineer a signal to come out, and beckoned to him, and a squad of about a hundred and fifty or two hundred men marched down there. I saw the sheriff warn them back and not to in- terfere with property. The engine kept coming on, and just before it got to the switch one of the strikers, and a Knight of Labor, came up and was standing right near the switch, and threw it back for the main track. If the engine had come onit would have derailed it. There would have been nothing to prevent the engine from running off, and it would ditch the engine. At that time there was another man there, and they held it back. The engineer could not reverse in time, so she came down off the track. Q. Do you know the names of those parties? — A. Jack Goss and Jim Fenn. Q. Where are they now? — A. They both left the country immediately afterwards. One of them came to me and told me he had violated the law and said he had better take a walk. Q. Is he a married man? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What became of his family ? — A. His wife got his check for his time and came to LABOR TBOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 79 have 11 fiied, and asked me to go to Mr. Heriin and have it fixed. I told her that Mr. Herrin himself could not fix it so that she could get the money on it; and in a day or two afterwards she came back to get me to identify her, and I did so. Q. What became of them? — A. I have not seen her since. On the morning of the 26tii I went down to make another attempt with this engine to get up some coal for the passenger train. She had been taken back to the roundhouse by this mob and kUled. The master mechanic told me that he had not anybody to repair her, nor to get the ooal up with. And I had no hands to do coaling for the passenger train. The only rea- son that the master mechanic gave was that it was impossible to get men. Q. Did you not employ anybody? — A. Not in coaling engines. That is out of my de- partment. Q. Did you attempt to employ anybody in your department? — A. To do work? I had nothing to do. The switchmen were under my employ. Q. The engines were all killed? — A. Yesj sir; and there was nothing for me to work with. Q. Why did you not get the master mechanic to get these engines in repair? — A. The reason why I did not ask him was because it was a generally known fact that the engines were so disabled thatthe pieces had to be found before they could run. On the 26th, when I made another attempt to work, a crowd of Knights of Labor came down and took pos- session of the train and mounted it and set brakes and tried to throw blocks under the engine; and finally they did ditch the engine on the side-track. It was pretty hard to switch under such circumstances, and I did not switch very long. Q. Was that the last of the depredations ? — A. That was the last attempt that I made. We had no yard-men until the 29th. That is when the citizens came down and took charge. That was the first time I had control of the Palestine yard, you might say, from the 5th. From the 6th to the 29th I was acting assistant yard-master for the Knights of Labor. Q. What was the result of the citizens assembling there? — A. When the citizens and the deputy sheriffs came down and took possession of the yard we got some of the passen- ger engines out to do this work, and I put on two or three switch engines that day. Q. Who repaired these engines? — A. I think it was the assistant master mechanic and Mr. Bouchard, the general foi:eman, that repaired these engines ; and afterwards two more engines were fixed. Q. It was the officials of the road, then, that did the repairing? — A. Yes, sir. After the deputy sheriffs and the citizens came down and took possession on the morning of the 29th I had no trouble running trains out of there. I began putting in pins and links that day, and shoving the cars together. Twenty-five draw-heads had been removed, over four hundred pins gone, wherever they could take slack on a car. Then draw-head keys were gone, and you cannot pull a car when the keys are gone. Q. How did you get hands to do this work ? — A. I put all the train-men in service as yard-men. Q. The train-men did not go out on the strike, did they? — A. No, sir; they were ready to go to work and I put the train-men to hunting up links and pins. Q. Did you resume the movement of trains? — A. I did, on the evening of the 29th and have been running them since then. Q. What became of the strikers ? — A. They have simply scattered. Q. How many of them are left in Palestine ? — A. If you were to go there and speak to the Knights of Labor I do not think you would find over twenty-five or thirty men have taken part in it. Q. Have any of them applied to you for re- employment? — A. No, sir; because you see my department is the transportation department and it did not strike. Q. Have they applied to the master mechanic? — A. That he can speak of. Q. What is the estimated damage done by the strikers to the road ? — A. That is too hard for me to answer. Q. Approximately ? — A. It was a big damage, but I do not know how much. Q. Has there been any estimate made ? — A. No. In making my report I gave how many links and pins had been lost. That came under my jurisdiction. Q. Every official did the same in his department and a separate estimate was made? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paeker.) You are an engineer? — A. Yes, sir ; I have been. Q. Where did you serve your apprenticeship? — A. On the Texas Central road. Q. What is the total number of engines killed in Palestine ? — A. Do you mean killed in the yard and round-house in the Palestine yards ? I think somewhere about thirty or thirty-seven.' The master mechanic can give you the exact number; but I think it was thirty or thirty-seven. Q. Who were these men who had tacked boycott notices np on the cars before the 6th of March?^-A. They told me that they were Knights of Labor. 80 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And you gave the names of some of them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the reputation of Fox as being a Knight of Labor, or holding a position in that order? — ^A. He was chairman of a committee, or was at the head of it — ^waa master woikmah of the assembly. Q. Did the Knights of Labor recognize his authority? — A. Certainly. I saw him going through the shops when the strike came up and telling the men to lay down their tools; and they all obeyed him. • Q. Daring the strike did they recognize his authority and obey him?— A. Why, lots of times I would have to ask the question of them if we could do one thing or another. And the parties would say: "Do' not ask me; go to Fox." Q. You referred to the headquarters of the Knights of Labor. How was that situ- ated as to the yard ?— A. Well, it was probably sixty to a hundred yards from the yard. It was just one street from the yard. They used to get their men and state that they were prepared to prevent trains leaving there, and I have had men come down and teU me that they said that they would die on the track before a freight train should go out of Palestine yard. Q. This building that opened almost into the yard was their headquarters and the gathering- place of the men to come down to the yard proper? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) How long did this man Fox remain in charge of that yard?— A. Well, he did not post men round there until on the 5th, but on the 4th we had to do a little switching of the Texas and Pacific cars that had these boycott notices put on them. On the 5th he began telling me what I had to do, and on the 6th he told me he was boss, and I had to place trains under his direction. Q. How long did he remain in possession? — A. I cannot say that; but the Knights of Labor kept possession until the 29th.- Q. And he with them? — A. He was with them. Q. Then for twenty-three days after you had received these instructions from Fox as to what to do and not to do he remained in possession there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And, so far as you know, there were no steps taken against him by anybody? — A. So far as I know, there were not. Q. You spoke of strikers and Knights of Labor in your testimony. You seemed to have used the terms as synonymous. Were there strikers that were not Knights of Labor? — A. Well, generally speaking, that I cannot tell. The most of the crowd that left the shops as the whistle blew went to the hall and returned ftom the hall. Q. Do you know whether they were all members of the order or not? — A. I should judge so, by seeing them wearing the monogram "K. of L." on their coats. It was the understanding that the men were members of the order, because they received their orders from Mr. Fox and Mr. Marshall, who was a master workman of the assembly. It seemed that they had three assemblies. Mr.-Fox had one, Mr. Marshall another, and Mr. Eika another. ' These were the three men that posted them, and were master work- men, I suppose. Q. How many of these men that struck in Palestine have been received back into the employ of the company up to this day? — A; I cannot say; there are several of them back. EDWARD J. BOUCHARD, sworn and examined. By Mr. OUTHWAITB. Question. You live at Palestine ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And how long have you been in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Company? — A. Since August, 1881. Q. Where?— A. At Denison untiljnne, 1885. Q. In what capacity ? — A. As machinist and gang-foreman, and at Palestine as gen- eral foreman of the locomotive department. I was transferred there last June. Q. Do you know anything about the fact as to whether the agreement of 1885 has been violated ? — A. I do. Q. So far as you know, was it violated in any way ? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Do you know whether the Knights of Labor called for your resignation at any time ? — A. I do. Q. What was the occasion ? — A. They said that I had discharged some employes with- out cause; that I was a thief: that I was contemptible and overbearing, &c. ; and had tried to override the master-mechanic, and other reasons. Q. What steps did you take when these charges were made ? — A. I was asked if I would appear before the Knights ql Labor. I told them certainly I wouldj that I would do anything to prove that I was an honest man, and I and the master-mechanic appeared before them in their own room, and asked them for the charges. No one ap- peared against me to make any charges, and after some talk they concluded to drop it right there. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND 'W'EST. 81 Q, The request for your resignation was then withdrawn ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Where were yon on the 6th of March ? — A. I was in the shops in Palestine. Q. What did you hear said was the cause for the strike? — A. At 10 o'clock in the morning of March 6th the whistle blew. It was something very unusual, and I started out to find the cause of it. I asked quite a number of men whom I knew were promi- nent men among the Knights of Labor what the cause was, and they told me that they did not know; that they were ordered to strike from headquarters. Q. How soon after they went out did you hear any cause given ? — A. Two or three days. Q. And that was the discharge of a man named Hall ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you if you have heard the general testimony of Mr. Fanning as to kill- ing engines and stopping trains, &c.? — A. Yes, sir, I did. Q. Are those the facts substantially as you observed them ? — A. They are substan- tially the facts. Q. Were any threats made to you ? — A. Yes, sir; numerous. Q. What were the threats made? — A. The first I met a man on the morning of the 7th, I believe. I had fired up an engine as the men had left there, and we had an order from the transportation department to get an engine ready. Myself and another fore- man got the engine ready. One of the strikers came round and asked what the engine was fired up for. I told him we had orders to do so, and he told me, "We will make it your business." I said, "All right." In a few minutes a hundred and fifty men came there, mounted the engine, blew her out, and let the water out of the tank and came to me. The whole body was headed by this man Fox, and he told me: " Mr. Bouchard, you have got to quit this business, and if you fire up any more engines round here we will fix you. ' ' They wanted me to leave the premises, and threatened me if I did not leave. Q. Do you know the names of any of these different committeemen ? — A. I do. A few days afterwards I received a notice signed by K. F. Marshall, of the executive com- mittee, with a request to leave the premises, and a statement that I had no business there, and they thought that affairs about that place could be run without my assist- ance. Q. Where is that letter now ? — A. It is in the possession of Mr. Herron. Q. But you are asked the names of that committee? — A. Fox, EUis, Eehart, Smith, Andrews, and one other, whom I have forgotten. Q. Were you ever a Knight of Labor yourself? — A. Yes, sir; I was a year ago. Q. When did you withdraw? — A. When they brought these charges against me I con- cluded to drop the business altogether. I did not withdraw, but concluded the best thing I could do was to have nothing more to do with it. Q. (By the Chaiemast). Wereyounot suspended for non-payment of dues? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Do you remember the strike of March, 1885? — A. Yes, sir; I do. Q. Were you a leader in that strike? — A. I do not know that I was a leader. Q. Were you chairman of the executive committee? — A. No, sir; I was not chairman of the executive committee. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) You went out on that strike?i — A. Oh, yes. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Wereyounot a member of the executive board? — ^A. I was a member of the executive committee. Q. Did you go out on that strike because you had some grievances? — A. Because my wages had been reduced. Q. Have those grievances been adjusted by the company? — A. Yes, sir; my wages were restored. Q. Have these wages of the men been restored? — A. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowl- edge. I have not heard of any complaint. Q. Has the agreement of the railroad been kept? — A. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowledge. Q. I presume at the time you struck you made a list of grievances? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have they been adjusted? — A. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowledge. Mr. Outhwaite. Look at that letter [exhibiting letter dated March 22, 1886, pur- porting to be from the local executive board of the Knights of Labor]. The Witness. That is the identical letter. The letter was here introduced and read, as follows: Office of Local Executive Boaed, Unity Assembly, Knights of Laboe, . Palestine, Tex., March 22, 1886. Dear Sie: Taken in consideration that the Knights of Labor is now out on a strike and you yourself claim to be a member of the order, and as the company has seen fit to 3984 LAB 3 6 82 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. snspend all other foremen, except the two round-honse foremen, which is sufficient force to run only three passenger engines a day, we, therefore, heg leave to request you to remain out of the shops until the present trouble is satisfactorily settled to all concerned. By order of Executive Board. K. F. MARSHALL, aiairman. P. M. JONES. G. K. SMITH. E. H. HARRIS. F. SCHONAMAKER, Secretary. ' Mr. E. J. BusHAltT. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Do you know these men? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they Knights of Labor? — A. I understood them to be Knights of Labor, cmd understand them to be Knights of Labor. Q. Were they Knights of Labor on the 22d of March ?— A. Yes, sir; I understand them to be Knights of Labor. Mr. OUTHWAITE. When did you last attend a meeting of the order ? A. I think it was some time last May, a year ago. PETER McGEE sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do yon reside? — Answer. At Palestine, Tex. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Com- pany? — A. Nine years. Q. Are you working for that company now ? — A. I worked for them until the 6th of March. Q. Did you go out on a strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. At that time I was. Q. Had you any grievances for which you struck? — A. I do not know of them. AH the grievances I knew of was in connection with the pay. Q. Did you know of that grievance at the time you went out on a strike? — A. Well, yes; from the newspapers is what I knew of it. Q. Were you satisfied with your wages? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you any complaint to make of the conduct of the road toward you ? — A. None at all. Q. Do you know of any employ^ that struck that had a complaint ? — A. No, sir; not that I know of. Q. Did you hear about the September, 1884, rates not being lived up to by the com- pany ? — A. They had always been complied with according to the knowledge I had. Q. Did you hear any complaint by any one who struck that they had not been com- plied with ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you heard any prominent members of the order saying anything about any grievances or any cause for the strike on the Texas and Pacific line ? — ^A. No, sir; I have not. Q. Have yon heard them say whether there were any other grievances ? — A. No, sit; it was all connected with our pay. Q. You have heard of no other reason? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you heard any opinion as to whether the strike was a mistake or not? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the usual language, that it was or was not a mistake? — A. It was that they believed emphatically that District Board 101 had made a mistake in calling these other lines out. That was the expression of the conservative portion of the order. Q. What is the general opinion of the Knights of Labor as to getting back to work?— A. A good many of them would go back. Q. Did you apply to be reinstated ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you reinstated ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you remain in the order after the company reinstated you? — A. No, sir. Q. Why not? — A. I applied for a withdrawal card. They would not give one. At the next meeting they expelled me, with several others, for going to work. Q. What else did they do ? — A. They advertised us in the labor journals. Q. In what way did they speak of you ? — A. As being "scabs." Q. Can you give me the name of any laboc journal in which you are advertised as a "scab" for going back to work? — A. The one that is at Sedalia represented us as "scabs." Q. What is its name? — A. The heading is " The Sedalia Journal. " Q. Did a committee ever visit you after returning to work? — A. Yes, sir. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 83 Q. At night?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Near what time? — A. After midnight. Q. State the particulars of the interview? — A,. I had gone to bed, and I heard some- body. My house is in the suburbs of the town. The gate, I suppose, is about a hun- dred yards away from the house, and I heard somebody halloo out my name two or three times. I went to the door and asked who that was in a loud voice, and they said, ' ' Come out.' ' I felt a little delicate abont going out at that hour of the night. It was ' 4ark at the time, and I did not know what the men wanted. They said : " Come along : we won't hurt you." I asked them again what they wanted. They said they came to see me and to request me to keep out of their shops. I told them that I had been out long enough, and I could not see any j ust reason for remaining out any longer. They' said my going to work was the means of keeping them out. I told them that I did not think so. They then said, "You had better keep out of them shops." I said to them that I could not promise themithat; so that when they saw they could do nothing with me they went away and said that the best thing for me to do was to keep out of the shops. The next morning I went to work, and I never have been troubled with them since. Q. Do you know who the men were? — A. I could detect the voices. You see it was dark. I could not see their faces, but the voices I was familiar with. Q. How did you come to apply for that withdrawal card? — A. Well, amongst the men that were members of the order no member, I supposed, could go to work without probably a little (danger, so I thought if I withdrew from them I would be under no obligations. I applied for a withdrawal card, and it was refused. Q. I am simply asking why you applied for it? Did you apply for it at the sugges- tion of any official of the company?— A. No, sir. x Q. Had any official of the company requested you to get it? — A. No request was made to me. Q. Anything said to you in any way about it being necessary for you to get a withdrawjil card? — A. Well, I was advised by an officer that if he was me he would quit the order. Q. Give me his words? — A. That was all. Q. What did he say about the vrithdrawal card? — A. That is all that was said. Q. I want all the conversation that relates to the withdrawal card? — A. That is all that was said as regards that. Q. Who was that officer with whom that conversation occurred? — A. It was the mas- ter mechanic. Q. Give me his name? — A. It was S. F. Wood. Q. And this was at Palestine? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it made a condition of your re-employment that you should withdraw from the Knights of Labor? — A. No; there was nothing said to the eflfect that I could not go back to work without withdrawing from the order, or anything like that. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) It was your own suggestion ? — A. It was my own idea to withdraw under the circumstances. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You didit thenof your ownliree-wiU? — A. Yes, sir.. Q. At the time you were expelled, were there any charges served upon you ? — A. I was notified in writing to appear at the assembly for violating my obligation, and that was for going to work. Q. Did you appear at that time? — A. No, sir. Q. Was there any charge beside the charge of going to work ? — A. No, sir; that is all. Q. You say that you did not appear there at the time you were cited before the assem- bly. Did you make any written response? — A. Yes, sir; that is so. Q. You and others ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Haveyongot acopy of that? — ^A. No, sir, Q. To whom was that sent? To the assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. It was, as near as I can remember now: "In reply to the notice to appear, there having been charges preferred against us of going to work, we had gone there and had not found the business as we ex- pected to find them and hoped to find them, and if going to work was violating our ob- ligation, we plead guilty; but as regarding that violation we doubted it; " or something to that effect. FRANK FANNING recalled and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. (Exhibiting to witness a handbill.) Do you identify that as one of the cir- culars put np at Palestine? — Answer. I recognize it as one of the numerous circulars that were put out. Q. How long was it after the strike originated before this circular was issued? — A. I do not remember. 84 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. The chairman then read the following circular, which was ordered to he made a part of the record: SPECIAL NOTICE TO MERCHANTS AND SHIPPERS. All merchants, business men, or persons having freight in cars now locked up in the Palestine yards, by reason of the pending strike, should at once apply to the proper rail- road officials for permission to remove the goods, and, after the necessary permission i» obtained, upon proof of same the Knights of Labor will assist in having the freight safely placed in their respective business houses or places of storage, free of charge for labor. K. F. MARSHAL, ' Master Workman, Unity AsaenMy, No. 3744. A. FOX, Master Workman, Victory Assemhly, No. . CHAS. EIKA, Master Workman, New Hope Assembly, No. 3745. Q. Was it before business was resumed? — A. Yes, sir; that was before business was resumed. ^ Q. During the interval between the 6th of March and the resumption of hnsinese?— A. Yes, sir. WILLIAM F. CONVERSE, sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Do you reside at Palestine? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Have you been in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? — A. Yes, sir; as a locomotive engineer. Q. And have been since when? — A. Since 1875. Q. Have you had any occasion to complain of your treatment by the company ? — A. I have not. Q. Have you ever served as a committee on local grievances to adjust differences be- tween the company and the engineers? — ^A. I have. Q. And what satisfaction has attended such attempt at adjustment? — A. I have always settled the differences satisfactorily to both sides. Q. Did you see the methods employed to prevent the movement of trains during the late strike? — A. I did. Q. Were those generally to take forcible possession of engines, forcing the water cot of the boilers, and things of like character ? — A. Yes, sir. • Q. Have you been upbraided or reproached for not joining in the strike ? — A. I have. Q. By whom? — A. By parties of the Knights of Labor. Q. By parties who had struck? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the character of the language used towards you? — A. They simply stated that they thought we were doing wrong as members of the laboring class. Q. Were you waited upon by a committee of the Knights of Labor before this strike occurred? — A. We were. Q. On how many occasions ?^A. On two different occasions. Q. What was the purpose of that committee stated to be that waited upon yon? — A. They wished to ascertain what steps we would take as a body in case a strike was in- augurated by the Knights of Labor on the system. Q. What information was given them in response to that request ? — A. We gave them to understand that we had a contract with the company to live up to; that when we were called upon we would respond for duty. Q. Have you any knowledge of any information given by any engineer to the Knights of Labor which would justify them in relying upon the co-operation of the engineers in the strike? — A. None Whatever. Q. Do yon know anything about incompetent men being retained by the company?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Please state in general terms what you know of it? — A. Well, I knew that there were one or two incompetent men in the service in the Palestine shops who were retained. Q. Belonging to your organization ? — A. Belonging to the Knights of Labor. Q. You are a laboring man yourself? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you not in sympathy with the cause of labor everywhere? — ^A. Yes, sir; as a matter of course. Q. And in every movement to better its condition? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 85 ROBERT W. GIBSON, sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Qnestion. You reside at Palestine? — Answer. Yes, sir; I do. Q. Were you employed in March last by the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? Ifso, in what capacity? — ^A. I was; as a passenger engineer. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the company? — A. Since August^ 1880. Q. In what capacity ? — A. In various capacities — foreman of the engineer department and engineer. Q. What has been the treatment of yourself and other men by the company so far as you have known? — A. Myself entirely satisfactory. Q. And as to other men, so far as you have known? — A. So far as I have known. Q. Haveyoabelonged to the local grievance committee of the engineers? — A. I have. Q. And have had occasion to present grievances? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they received in a reasonably satisfactory way ? — A. In an entirely satis- iactory way. Q. During the strike was your engine interfered with? — A. Yes, sir; on two or three occasions. Q. Describe the first occasion. — A. If I am correct, the first derailment was about the 24th of March. Q. State the circumstances. — A. After my arrival at Palestine the engine was taken to the roundhouse, and it was afterward taken from the roundhouse for the purpose of switching in the yard. After moving round the track the switch was thrown directly in iiont of the engine and derailed it. The next time that she was derailed was on the 27th, I beUeve. Q. Describe that. — A. They had taken the engine from the roundhouse, and the en- gine was derailed by placing obstructions on the track which threw her off the track. Q. At those times was the engine otherwise killed than by being thrown from the track? — ^A. On both occasions she was afterward killed. Q. Do you remember any other occasion of its being derailed? — A. There was not another occasion of its being derailed. Q. Who was it that ran your engine off the track? — A. It was a man who had for- merly been employed by the company — one of the strikers. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor? — A. I presume he was. Q. What was his nama? — A. His name was Goss. Q. Did you understand that he was a Knight of Labor, or had you any understanding about it? — A. I understand he was. Q. Do you know his first name? — A. Jack. Q. Areyouamemberof the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers? — A. lam. Q. So far as you have knowledge, was there any encouragement given to the strike by your body, or members of it, previous to the strike? — ^A. There was no encouragement as to assistance and no definite understanding between us. Q. Was there any promise of assistance? — A. No, sir. Q. So fer as an organization is concerned? — A. As an organization there was no prom- ise given by the organization. I do not know whether there was any given by private members of the organization. Q. So far as you have knowledge or information, was there any given by individuals ■of that order ? — ^A. None at all. Q. I suppose encouragement might have been given by individuals, upon their own responsibility, without your knowing it? — ^A. Possibly so, sir. WILLIAM D. YOUNG sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. Where do you live, and what has been your employment daring several years past? — Answer. I live in Palestine, Tex., and my employment is as an engineer in the passenger service. Q. How have you found this company in regard to differences between the employes and the Missouri Pacific Company? — ^A. I have always found them willing to make con- cessions. Q. How about arbitrating and settling differences? — A. I have never found any trouble in arbitrating differences with them. Q. Do you know of any instances in which Knights of Labor took advantage of their "being members of that order to neglect their duties'? — A. Yes,, sir; I think I do. Q. State the facts briefly? — A. lean state the fact that employes that belonged to the Knights of Labor neglected their work a good deal more than they would have done under ,S6 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WE3T. other circumstances. Whether they took advantage of the organization or not I do not know. Q. Did you ever hear them make any statement as to whether the company would dare to discharge them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did they say ?— A. They said that the company could not discharge them. Q. What do you know about any trouble that occurred about the 1st of March, because an engine had been ordered to Denison for some light repairs ? — A. I know that the order was given for the engine to go there, and that they objected to the engine going. Q. Who objected to its going ? — ^A. Well, I do not know that I can state what partic- ular member it was. Q. What character of men objected ? — A. The body of men known as Knights of Labor. Q. Was the engine sent away or was it retains^ at their request ? — A. The engine was retained at Palestine. Q. Do you know of the discharge of a man named Banes ? — A. I do not know that Banes was ever discharged. Q. Was there any talk of his being discharged ? — A. That was the report. Q. Do you know of any conversation as to his retention being demanded by the Knights, of Labor? — A. I was told by the master workman of one of the assemblies, Mr. Fox, that the company had threatened, or had discharged Banes, from the fact that he was a member of the Knights of Labor, and that they were going to force the company to re- instate him. Q. Was that the man named A. Pox, master workman of Victoria Assembly?— A. Tes, sir. Q. Well, what was the result of that action of the Knights of Labor ? Was Mr. Banes, discharged, or was he retained ? — A. I think the matter was settled by Mr. Herrin. I had a conversation with Mr. Fox and Mr. Banes, in order to have a settlement, and I toldi Fox that I thought it would be a more fair proposition to accept the proposition to put Banes with some other conductor or another division. Q. What did Fox say to that? — A. He said he would use his influence in the assem- "bly to have that done. \^ Q. Do you know whether it was done? — A. I do not know. Q. What do you know about members of the order demanding that the pay-car be kept there, so that they could get their pay out of the company's time at Palestine?— A. They did make a demand of that character. Q. With what results? — A. The pay-car was held over and left Palestine about four hours later than it should have left. Q. The reason they stated was that they were not willing to get their pay in their own time? — ^A. They did not wish to get their money after they had stopped work ; that the time lost in getting the money should come from the company's time. Q. Do you know of any men who were not capable of earning the wages that they did> receive of the company being retained simply to avoid dif&culties between the company and the Knights of Labor? — A. I know of one there — ^Marshall. Q. Was this man Marshall the. K. F. Marshall, master workman of Unity Assem- My ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You say he was not fully qualified? — A. I did not regard him as a mechanic. Q. Was he getting the wages of a mechanic? — A. I suppose so. Q. Where was he employed? — A. He was employed on the passenger repair service. On locomotives at Palestine. Q. For how long a time? — A. I cannot tell you. For several months; probably ai year. "" Q. Whfit do you know about any engineers being threatened if they attempted to run trains? — A. Well, I do not know anything except what I have heard. No one told me anything about it. Only the current conversation. Q. That would not be competent unless it was current conversation among the Knights- of Labor which you heard. — ^A. I saw letters of intimidation. I do not know who the- letter was written by, or whether it was written by a Knight of Labor or not. Q. Do you know anything about threats being made to " doap " the tanks if the en- gineers went out? — A. That was the report. Q. From whom did you hear this report? — A. I cannt say. Q. Were you at Palestine at the time the strikers w'ent out? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What reason was given by them for going out? — A. I could not find that out. Q. Did you hear anything said about the reason? — A. No, sir. I was talking to this- man Fox about fifteen minutes, or probably half an hour, previous to the time thatth^ walked out. I asked him how everything was getting along, and he said everything was going on all right. I walked over to Mr. Harris's oMce and Mr. Harris asked me if I had heard anything new, and I told him that Fox said the strike would be over without any trouble; that they would be able to adjust the matter on the Texas and Pacific LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 87 Q. You speak of trouble and adjusting the matter; what trouble and what matter? — A. I do not know; there seemed to be some trouble. Q. What were you and Mr. Fox talking about at that time? — ^A. About the trouble between the employes and the Texas and Pacific. Q. That was what you were talking about? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekek.) Was this man Banes considered an incompetent man? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. (By the Chaieman.) By whom was he considered incompetent? — A. He was con- sidered incompetent by the conductor he was ruiming with. Q. You say that you considered him incompetent? — A. No, sir; I did not say that I considered him incompetent. Q. Whom did you say that you considered incompetent? — A. Marshall was the man whom I said I considered incompetent. • Q. Was Maishall a locomotive engineer? — A. No, sir. , Q. Did you say he was running an engine? — A. Marshall? No, sir. He was work- ing on engine repairs. JOHN KIMBEOUGH sworn and examined. By Mr. BucHANASr: Question. Were you employed by the Missouri Pacific road at Palestine, Tex. , during the late strike? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did yon suffer any personal violence during that strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was it ? — A. On the 26th I was called to go on my engine and do some switching. There was a body of men, termed strikers, came round the engine and got on to the tank and into the cab. One got hold of me and tried to pull me off my seat. There was another struck me in the collar with a billy. There were so many of them they covered the engine and cut it off below and blew it out. Q. Do you know some of the men ? — A. I know some of them. Q. Do you luiow the man who struck you with a billy on the 24th ? — A. I do. Q. I am requested to ask do you know whether these men were Knights of Labor ? — A. I heard them say they were Knights of Labor. Q. Do you know it of your own personal knowledge? — A. I do not. Q. I am requested to ask further, did you hear those men that led the others to pull you off the engine say that they were themselves Knights of Labor? — A. I did. Q. Had you any knowledge of your own further than that ? — A. I had no knowledge of my own further than that. Q. Did you take any steps to have any of them arrested for that violence ? — A. No, sir. Q. Why did you not ? — ^A. Because I did not think I had any right or business to. Q. But if a man assaults yon, is it not your business? — A. I do not know theparty's name who struck me, and the others, I did not bother them because they only took from me the reverse lever and throttle and threw me aside. Thev did not strike me as he did. Q. Have threats been made against you ?-r- A. There have. The man that threw the switch on the 24th came to me that night and said if I did not stop using that engine they would make me. Q. What was his name? — ^A. Jack Goss. He is a switchman in the yard. SAMUEL F. WOOD sworn and examined. By the Ch aieman : Question. Were you an employ^ of the Missouri Pacific system when the strike of March 6 took place? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What position did you fill? — ^A. I was assistant master mechanic. Q. Yon have heard the testimony of Mr. Fanning and the others who have testified in rejgard to the damage done to the engines, and the general depredations there. What have you to say about those statements ? — ^A. I have to say that they are substantially cor- rect, except as to the number of engines. There were just twenty-seven engines disabled at Palestine by parts of them being taken away and hid and taken off. Q. So that the enginjs could not be used? — A. So that they could not be used. Q. Were the parts all taken away at one time or at different times? — A. At different times. Q. As the engines came into the yard, I suppose? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Was ary violence used to you? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you seek to employ men to fill the places of those who had struck ? — A. Yes, BIT. 88 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you succeed? — A. We succeeded in a few instances. Q. Did you succeed entirely? — A. No, sir. Q. Why? — A. Men were afraid to work. Q. What were {hey afraid of? — A. I suppose they were afraid of violence. They told me they were. Q. Did you witness any acts of intimidation or violence? — A. I saw different parties ronnd^fter the employfe that we had at work. They would not go near them while I was there. Q. What did you see? — A. I saw them talking to them. Q. Did you see them attempt any acts of violence or hear them make any threats?— A. No, sir. Q. Did you hear them make any threats? — A. I had parties afterwards come and tell men they would injure them if they kept on working. Q. pid those parties work? — A. Not afterwards, except in one case. One man con- tinued to work. Q. Did any men attempt to secure employment under you after the strike? — A. Yes, sir. • Q. Did you ask them whether they were Knights of Lahor? — ^A. I knew they were Knights of Lahor without asking them. Q. Did you make it a condition-precedent to their employment that they should withdraw from the Knights of Lahor? — ^A. No, sir. Q. In no instance? — A. In no instance. Q. Did you employ them? — ^A. Yes, sir; some of them. Q. Why were some employed and others rejected? — A. Simply because one reason was that I had no use for tliem, and another reason was that some of them had been connected with acts of violence and had damiiged the company's property. Q. "Was that the only discrimination you made? — ^A. Only as to numbers. We could not employ as many men as we had previous to the strike, because we had not work for them. Q. To your knowledge was it suggested to any of these parties applying for employ- ment that they coulil get it provided they withdrew from the Knights of Labor ? — A. I will state exactly what I told them. They were old employes, and when they came back I asked them this question: " If they had not got along aa well before joining the Knights of Labor as since?" They all said: "Much better." That was the sum and substance of my conversation with them as far as the Knights were concerned. Q. You mean that was the sum and substance of the entire conversation? — A. That was the sum and substance as far as the conversation about the Knights was concerned. WILLIAM H. BOYD sworn and examined. By the Ch airman : Question. What position do you hold on the Missouri Pacific Iia:ilroad Company?— Answer. I am master of transportation. Q. You are a superior officer of Mr. Fanning? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Panning and others in regard to the depre- dations committed on the property of the company during the existence of the strike. State whether or not, as tar as your personal knowledge extends, these statements are •correct? — A. Yes, sir; they are. Q. Have you anything to add to those statements on the subject of these depreda- tions?' — ^A. No, sir; I believe his statement covers all. Q. Do you know the cause of the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do yon know Irom the statements made by the Knights of Labor in your pres- ence what was the cause of the strike ? — A. No, sir; I never heard that they had any grievances. Q. Had you power to employ men in your department? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were there any applications for employment after the strike began ? — A. I cannot remember that there were. Daring the strike we had nothing to do. The freight trains were not running and all our freight men were idle, and of course it was useless to employ other men. Q. I understand Mr. Fanning to mean that your department did not strike? — ^A. No, sir; they did not strike. Q. Consequently you had no reason for employing new men ? — A. None whatever. Not until we resumed business. Q. When you resumed business did your old hands resume their duties?— A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 89 JOHN G. WAPLES sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. D» you live in Denison ?— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are you engaged in business ? — A. I am. Q. How long have you been engaged in busines3 in Denison? — A. Ever since I came here, I believe; ten years ago in June. « Q. Did your business sustain any damage from the strike? — A. That is a very hard question to answer. I do not know that my business suffered more than that I was un- able to get any cars in. Business was so paralyzed that I did not get any in. Q. Then your business must have suffered ? — ^A. In that sense, yes, sir. Q. What was the extent of your business in a year, speaking approximately? — A. 1 do not know how you would want that answered. It varies one year with another. This year, on account of local causes, our business has been lighter than in the past. Q. What effect has the strike had upon business generally here? — A. Well, it neces- sarily depressed business very much. This town is largely dependent upon the trade of the men who work for the railroad here, and the money that is disbursed by the com- pany. A large number of men are employed by the Missouri Pacific Railroad, and when you stop that money you necessarily instantly depress the business of the town and country. A good deal of our trade is a jobbing trade, which was entirely paralyzed during that time, except so far as it could be done by express. Of that Mr. Hanna can tell you, as he is in that line of business. Q. Do you know anything about the cause of the strike ? — A. I know nothing about the cause that led to it except from hearsay. Q. Did you hear any man who is a Knight of Labor state what the cause or causes were? — ^A. I have heard them in conversations at different times say what it was. Q. What did they say ? — A. They said different things at different times and differ- ent periods of the strike. Q. What did they first say ? — A. The first day or two after the strike I asked several of them what it was all for, and they simply said they were ordered to strike, and that if was begun on the Texas and Pacific. I asked a number of them if they had any grievances here, and they said they had nothing to complain of here; but that they were compelled to obey orders. Q. What did they say next time ? — A. Well, the other conversations they spoke of it arising at other places and at different points, and spoke of a list of grievances that were presented to Mr. Hoxie by what is called the Martin Irons committee; and there were discnssions npon this, and they said that the compact of May, 1885, had been steadily and constantly violated by the railroad company in a way that outsiders Knew nothing about and could know nothing about, and that several protests had gone up to the ad- ministration and no attention had been paid to them. Q. Did you assist in the suppression of disorder ? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Did.you witness any of the occurrences at the yards of the railroad company ? — A. As a rule I carefully avoided being present. I was there one time for a few minutes and saw a crowd assembled around an engine that the company were trying to use to switch a coal car. The crowd at that tim«. was orderly,fexcept in speech. I heard the attorney of the road making a speech from the head of the engine and heard him an- nouncing that any who did any damage to that engine would be punished. The engine would go on and do the work, and they were going to do it regardless of any effort that might be made to stop them, and he warned the men that they would be arrested and taken before the district court for contempt. The engine was ready, and so far as I know it proceeded to do the switching. Q. What is the name of the attorney? — ^A. Mr. E. C. Foster. SAMUEL HANNA sworn and examined. By Mr. PaekeE: Question. You have resided here how long? — Answer. Nearly fourteen years. Q. Yon are mayor of the city now? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Your present term commenced when? — A. I was elected on the second Tuesday In April. Q. Where were you on the 1st of March last and during that month? — A. I was con- nected vrith the grocery business and at my place of business. Q. You were here in the city then ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Youmay state the general nature of your business. — A. Oar business is wholesale grocery and provision business. Q. And your place of business is on the principal street and near the railroad cross- ing? — A. Yes, sir; our pl^ce of business fronts Main street, and a side track runs right along the store right immediately on the switch. 90 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Where were you on the 6th of March? — A. I was at my place of business. Q. You remember the commencement of the strike here ? — A. I recollect when the ■whistle blew. Q. Previous to that time had you any notice, ofBcial or otherwise, that there would be a strike? — A. We had notice from the railroad company —I think it was on the morn- ing of the 6th — ^that if we had any freight we wished got out that day we had better get it as early in the morning as possible. Q. Except that, had you any notice or suggestion that there was to be a strike or hzi been? — A. We had. I do not know that we had, but one of the boys told me that the freight agent told him that they were apprehending a strike. That was the day before. We had seen, however, what had happened at other points, getting it from the news- papers, and there seemed to be a feeling of apprehension that we would have a strike. Q. Excepting that, was there any notice or suggestion of a strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Did the parties who ordered or took part in the strike give you any notice?— A. No, sir; not to us. Q. Previous to the 6th of March you had heard reports of labor troubles upon this system for a day or two? — A. Yes, sir; we saw that mainly in the papers. Q. Describe the strike as it began and developed here, in your own way. — A. After the whistle blew a man who works in one of the departments came along by our place iind remarked, "We have all gone out," or " We have all struck." Q. Was anything said as to the cause or reason? — A. No, sir. And from that time on from noon of that day we did not deliver any more freight to the railroad company for some time. We noticed that the switch crews ceased work in the yard and the strike went on. There was nothing we could see of the strike except the cessation of business and the congregation of men in knots on the streets. I am i^ot certain, but I think that thing continued until about the week following. I think it was on the Monday that notices were served by the sheriff. Mr. Foster, I think, made a speech, standing on the engine right at this railroad crossing and read an order of the court. He notified the men that if they disobeyed that injunction they would be transgressing the law, and if they came upon the railroad property they would be in contempt of court. He made them a speech and gave notice that they intended to switch some cars, which they pro- ceeded to do. Q. Did trains commence running then? — A. No, sir; only that afternoon. I am not positive as to the number of days it was until they made another trial. I think it was probably three or four days afterward that they made a trial and started a train. Q. How long was this period that the railroad did no business here? — A. They quit receiving freight on the morning of the 6th, and I do not think that we got out any fteight until about the first of last month. I will not be positive as to the time. Q. No freight was taken away from here from about the 6th of March until the last of March? — A. Yes, sir; that is about it. Q. Was there military assistance required here at any time? — A. Not until after trains began moving, is my recollection. Q. What military had youthen? — A. Well, I did not think you meant after the trains began to move. Q. Was any militia company ever called out? — A. There was a militia company here when trains began moving. Q. Previous to that had the citizens, acting as a sheriff's posse or otherwise, given any assistance in the moving of trains? — A. Only in the capacity of special police that the mayor had sworn in after these injunction notices were served. The sheriff had a posse of his own that he brought here with him and the militia that we had until after the trains began to move. Q. Had you any personal knowledge as to obtaining of this injunction? — A. No, sir; I knew nothing of it until the papers were being served by the sheriff. Q. Had yon personal knowledge or did you witness the sheriff and the men under him preventing interference with engines and trains? — A. I saw the sheriff one day, I think it was the second after the reading of the injunction. A few days afterwards they un- dertook, as I understand it, to make up some trains. Q. About when was that? — A. Probably a week after the injunction. Q. And about what part of the month ? — A. About the middle of March. Q. What is the sheriff's name ? — A. E. D. Douglas. Q. You saw an effort made by himself and the men under him to resume business here. You may describe what yon saw of it. — A. The first that I saw was the swift engine that ran in the yard was standing at this crossing. It had been rumored that the company were going to make an effort to start trains and do some work in the yard; and, therefore, there was a large crowd gathered around the engine. I could not see very distinctly what was going on, but I saw enough of the crowd to know that it was aveiy good-sized crowd. I saw Mr. Douglas, and noticed the men who were on the outside LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTU AND WEST. 91 were pushing up as if tliey were going to get on the track where the engine was stand- ing. Mr. Douglass and one or two of his deputies were standing along the line of the track. I saw him reach his hand over the crowd and take hold of one man hy the shoulder and march him down this hlock, and then go on and get another until he had got about five, and he turned them over to his deputies making the remark, " take care of him." Q. What next occurred? — A. When they took out about five of the men the crowd dispersed. Q. What was done with the engine ? — A. The engineer took hold of it and went t» switching cars. -Q. About how many were there in the crowd that were pressing up to the engine and on to the track ? — A. There were about three or four hundred men. Q. About what was the number of the strikers at this place? — A. I could not give any positive statement as to that, as I have no knowledge about it. Q. You may state what it was from the general information you received. — A. I have heard it variously estimated at from 150 to 175 men. Q. After this exercise of force by the authorities was there any further disturbance here? — ^A. There was a little disturbance. I am not quite certain as to when it took place, but in a day or two, in my opinion, there was an attempt made to kill an engine on the track. That is a term the railroad men use. I did not see that and only heard of it. Q. You simply understand that an engine was killed there ? — A. An attempt to kill. Q. But that it failed?— A. Yes sir. Q. Was there any organization of the citizens to protect property here ? — A. Well, I do not know that there was any organization. Q. Was there any use or public exposure of fire-arms? — A. I did not see that there was anything of that kind. The only public exposure of arms was in the hands of the special police that had been deputized by the mayor or the sheriff's deputies. Q. About what number of men were armed in that way ? — A. I think our regular po- lice, which I believe number six or eight men, and then I believe there were twelve or fifteen special police. I do not know the number of deputies the sheriff had. Q. If there is anything else in connection with the strike which you desire to state yon may give it. — A. I have stated the general facts so lar as my knowledge goes. I will state the effect on the business of the town. Our business was very much disturbed and seriously affected. There were from the 6th of March until the latter part of the month, about twenty-five days, that we had no shipment of goods except by express. We had to supply our customers as far as we were able, paying the difference between regular freight and express out of our own pockets, which, of course, was a loss to us. Q. Yon supply a good many goods to the country around here, and also some to the Indian Territory ? — A. Yes, sir; our trade extends about 150 miles, from Muskogee on the road in the Territory and away down on the Southeastern road; out as far as Benton on the Fort Worth road, and out to Gainesville we ship extensively, and there ship by wagon. Q. And all of these points that you mention are served by this road? — A. Yes, sir; and we have connection with the Texas and Pacific, reaching ont to other places. Q. Were the same difficulties experienced in obtaining goods during that suspension of business ? — A. We had no way of receiving goods by the Missouri Pacific system. We got goods by the Texas Central. We had a number of goods shipped from New Or- leans and up by the Texas Central. Q. This applied to all classes of business, I suppose? — A. Yes, sir. Another cause for the depression in business, in addition to what I have stated, there seemed to be a gen- eral nneasiness and lack of confidence, as we did not Icnow what would happen; and there was a feeling of dread and apprehension; and men who had money did not spend it. Q. About how many people did you say there were in that crowd about the engine at the time of the raid by the sherifi? — A. Between three and four hundred. Q. And how many of them would you judge were strikers? — A. Well, I would have no way of knovring; I cannot call by name twenty of these shop men. There were a great many trainmen and engineers and people of that kind that I saw, and citizens generally. Q. What did they appear to be doing? — A. They appeared to be standing around, looking to see what was going to happen, a great many of them. Q. Then there were not very many engaged in active opposition to the handling of the engine or to the authorities? — A. I cannot say positively. My position was on the out- side of the crowd. I could not see distinctly what was going on right immediately on the line of the road. Q. Was it the fact that when the citizens and the authorities under the sheriff took hold of this disturbaneie of the business and opposition of the strikers resolutely, that it was immediately stopped? — A. During a public meeting I think we had that day M^ Foster liade his speech. I think we had a meeting before he made his speech from the engine 92 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. and some resolutions were passed, pledging the people of the town to support law and order, and I think it was the next day that most of the leading representative houses of the city sent a telegram to Mr. Hoxie asking him to hold out and pledging ourselves to the support of law and order. I have not got the actual wording, but that was about it. Q. And then this effort to move engines and trains followed ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And then the opposition to moving trains was made? — A. Yes, sir; so far as my information goes. • Tliese things came right along one after the other. Q. Was there more than one citizens' meeting? — A. No, sir; only the one when the telegram that I spoke of was sent. I should say that that was not sent by the meeting. Q. That was independent action, and an individual sent it. The resolutions that were passed by the meeting, were they substantially that you would sustain law and order? — A. Yes, sir; we pledged ourselves to law and order, and to do everything in our power to sustain it. Q. And you stopped there? — A. That was the resolution. But the telegram was sent afterward. Q. T^is is a copy of the telegram that you refer to? — A. Yes, sir; this is a copy of it. The Chairman then read the telegram, as follows: Denisos, Tex., March 18. To H. M. Hoxie, First Vice-President Missouri Pacific Bailway and leased lines, Saint Louis: The authentic sentiment of the business men of this community in the present contest between the railroads and the strikers is that the railroads are unquestionably right, and that to yield to the unreasonable demands of the strikers would be a public calamity, as it would be a virtual surrender of the rights of property. There is no stopping-place be- tween the present position of the Knights of Labor and communism, and we hope the railroads will stand firm and let the question be settled once for all. Public sentiment is growing stronger and bolder in its condemnation of the present lawlessness every day. W. B. Munson, Hanna, Platter & Waples, Edward Perry, J. B. McDougall, L. Price, Eppstein & Westheimer, M. C. White, J. W. Blassingame, A. E. Col- lins, J. H. Porter, Meredith & Wright, E. F. Wallace, J. T. Munson, L. Jones, W. C.Tignor, J. C. Feild, Fox & Carey, G-. Burgower, F. Muller, Louis Lebrecht, Geo. Braun, J. A. Hoegelin, T. V. Munson, Chas. K. Ledrick, Owen McCarthy, Daniel Webster, W. J. Hughes, J. H. Nolan, Waterman, Star & Co., J. N. Johnson, J. Weisman&Co., W. Saeger, I. M. Standifer, Guiteau & Waldron, Levi Lingo, G. L. Giersa, Leeper, Lingo & Co., T. B. Hanna & Son, Ed. F. Radeleff, D. White, A. Morrison, F. M. Robinson, Brooks & Harris, John Haven, E. T. Hathaway, Lee & Perry, W. N. Harben, Ed. Zintgraff, O'Dair, McConnell & Co., Joseph Schott, R. M. King, W. T. Cutler, Slutzky & Paltrovitch, M. H. Sherburne, D. A. Cook, J. A. Wilkin- son, J. P. Marsh. Q. (By Mr. Paeker. ) If there is any other matter that you would like to call atten- tion to you may do so. — A. I think I have stated all I know. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) From what States are your supplies drawn ? — A. We draw onr supplies from almost all over the country. Q. From the different States in the Union? — A. Yes; from Maine to California. Q. (By the CHAIRMAN.) How long had the strike been in operation before the first arrests were made? — A. I do not know exactly, sir. Q. About how long? — A. About four or five days; may be a week. Q. Were there any arrests made before the citizens were organized ? — A. You mean were there any arrests made before we sent this telegram ? Q. It is suggested that perhaps you may be mistaken about the time that elapsed be- fore the arrests were made. It is suggested to me that thirty days may have elapsed her« before arrests were made. — A. I do not think that that length of time could have Q. A representative of the Kights of Labor suggests that perhaps you might be in er- ror, and requests me to call you attention to that fact. — A. I have no data with me, but I do not think it could be that long. The strike commenced on the 6th of March, and the movement of trains, I am satisfied, was not that long; I am not positive about the time, but I am positive it was not thirty days from the beginning of the strike; I don't think it could have been more than a week, but I have no data and I do not keep dates clearly. ELDRIDGE G. DOUGLAS sworn and examined. By the CHAIRMAN: Question. You are sheriff and were sheriff on the 6th day of March? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Please state what you know about the strike on the railroad. — A. I can only state LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 9B what I did as an o£SceT, and what I was called upon to do. In the first place I was called upon to come over here to serve some writs of injunction by the attorney of the Missouri Pacific Boad, Col. E. C. Foster. I received the writs on the 14th, and came over on that day and served a few, and for a day or two. I served them all along for a week or ten days, or maybe longer, as I could find the men. After serving quite anumber I was in- formed that they would undertake some switching. Q. What were those writs? — A. Writs enjoining the men not to interfere in any man- ner with the Missouri Pacific Bailroad Company, or going on the ground. Q. Did yon serve those writs as sheriff or deputy United States marshal? — A. I served them as sheriff; they were from the district court of this district. Q. And they were to enjoin and restrain the men who were named in the writs from interfering witii the progress of the company's business. — A. Yes, sir; or going upon the grounds of the railroad system. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Yon may state what action you took, and whatresponse, if any, was made in your own way.' — A. The first attempt that was made — I do not re- member the day, perhaps two or three days after the serving of the injunction — the rail- road authorities informed me that they wanted to do some switching in the yard and wanted me to be on hand. I went to the crossing on Maine street where it was proposed to be done, and an engine was standing there. Colonel Foster, the attorney of the road, got up and made the men a speech, warning them if they interfered it would he in vio- lation of the injunction, and would make them liable, and after that I got np and read the names of the men whose names were in one of these injunction vmts. Q. Had you served them personally before that time? — A. I had served quite a num- ber of them, and after that we backed the engine up, coupled it on and started it out. The only interference I saw was that they crowded up, but no demonstration was made of any kind except handing a note to the engineer by a gentleman that I noticed. I do not laiow what it contained. Q. No effort was made to take the engineer off the engine at that time or to kill the engine? — A. Not at that time that I know of Q. After that day did you see any efforts of that kind yourself? — A. We went ahead and did the switching that day. I came over here a day or two after, and in the mean time I had summoned a posse of citizens and brought them over here. Q. About how many? — A. I think I had in my posse perhaps about fourteen or fifteen men. At any rate somewhere from twelve to fifteen. I received information that there was a demonstration on the part of the strikers to interfere with the engine. We re- paired to the round-house, where I supposed it was, and there was nothing there. I came up the track, and noticed a crowd of men were advancing on the switch engine that was backed up in the yard. I rushed up to the crowd and got between them and the engine and ordered them to disperse. They refused to do so and the engine kept backing up until we got near the crossing in this street. Then they refused to go, and I commenced arresting, and I arrested five men. After arresting that number of men there was an old gentleman that I knew well led the crowd off and left. We had about ten men. The crowd followed the old gentleman. Q. Did yon personally arrest these men? — A. I think I arrested three of them. Q. What did you do with the men? — A. We charged them with contempt of court, »nd also with encouraging riot. Q. Where were they taken? — A. Before a justice of the peace. Well, I say they were taken there; I went back to where my men were. I had rather a wild lot of men. They were a fearless lot of men, and I was afraid that they would get into some trouble, and I went back to keep them down, and to keep them from any rash acts. Q. Were these men yon had in your posse citizens of the county? — A. They were, sir. Q. Tell of any further acts connected with the strike yon saw. — ^A. Well, sir, the next flay after this, to the best of my recollection, I was keeping my posse from the ground at the hotel, and I happened to be over at the passenger depot, and walking back to- wards the crossing I saw water and steam flying considerably. It rather excited me. I thought the engine was going to blow up. I saw a couple of men jump off, and my first impression was that they were the engineer and fireman, but looking still at the engine I saw the engineer in his place, but knew there was something wrong. I took after one of the men, and after running a distance of perhaps 300 yards, and a gentle- man heading them off for me, I got them and brought them back and held them in jail, and then went and arrested the other men. Q. Did you see anything further at a later day ? — A. No further damage that I re- member of from that on. I kept a guard on, and remained about the yard-house myself for a good while; I cannot remember the number of days. Q. Were the five men you arrested tried for the offenses they were charged with? — A. For interfering with this engine thati spoke of, that was switdbing the train, we charged them with a felony, and they are now under bond for their appearance at the next term of the court. 94 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you allude to the five men ? — A. I mean the men that boarded the engine. Q. What about the five men that you arrested, what became of them ? — A. There were two of them who were imprisoned by the district judge for contempt of court; and there was one case dismissed. One has left the country, and one case has not been finally disposed of, that I know of. Q. The one that left the country was finally admitted to bail? — A. He was admitted to bail and forfeited his bond; but the final forfeiture has never been taken. Mr. OUTHWAITE. He forfeits his bond if he does not appear. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) How long did you remain here with your posse? — A. lean- not remember the exact day that I came here, but the posse must have been here 27 or 28 days. • Q. At the expense of the county ? — A. The railroad company, I presume, paid the ex- pense. I do not know of any provision for paying them by the county. Q. They remained that length of time because in your judgment their presence was necessary? — A. Yes, sir; and the judgment of the company. Q. (By the Chaikman.) When you served the writs of injunction, what was said by the parties on whom they were served? — A. There were numerous remarks made about them. Some were that they were not worth a damn, but they would take them; and one of them refused to take it, and threw it down. Q. Were not all the parties armed ? — A. I never found arms upon anj' of them. Some of them had sticks, but there were no arms that I saw at all. Q. Is it true that some of the Knights of Labor brought others of their fellow Knights against whom yon had writs of injunction, to introduce them to you, so that you might serve the writs upon them? — A. It is. I can state that I went to the roundhouse wWn they were in the office of the roundhouse. I went there and served these writs and knew but very few of the men that were in the crowd. I met one of the principal men that I had seen before, and knew very well, and he asked me if there was anything he could do for me. I told him that I had a lot of writs there to serve on the men, that I knew but very few of them, and that of course the sooner I could get them served the sooner I could get away; and he said "all right; I will assist you." He assisted me. I called out the names of theimen, and I suppose thirty or forty of them came up and got the papers. SAMUEL HANNA recalled and examined. ■ By the Chaikman: Question. When you gave your testimony you could not furnish some dates; if yon have them now you may state them. The Witness. The date on which tie injunction was served was the 14th of March; the date on which the arrests were made was the 23d, and the company commenced re- ceiving freight on the 31st. That is the date of the first bills of lading that we have. The Chairman (showing witness a copy of the " Sunday Gazette" of March 21st, and caUing his attention to an account of a public meeting held in the town). Is that a correct account of the proceedings of that public meeting? — Answer. Yes, sir; it is, so far as I have read. The report of the meeting was as follows: "Pursuant to a call signed by a large number of citizens published in the Morning Kews, a mass meeting was held at the Opera House at 10 o'clock, to give expression to public sentiment, relating to the existing trouble between the Missouri Pacific Railway Company and their employfe. The number present has been estimated all the way from one thousand to fifteen hundred. Mr. Lebrecht called the meeting to order and read the call. On motion of Mr. W. B. Munson, Mr. Sam. Hanna was chosen chairman and Judge S. A. Gilbert was selected secretary. Mr. Murray moved that a committee of five be appointed by the chair to prepare resolutions expressive of the sense of the meeting, which was adopted. The chair appointed B. C. Murray, W. B. Munson, L. Lebrecht, John T. Hogg, John G. Waples as such committee. ' On motion of Tjop West, Mr. H. Tone was added to the committee. On motion of Mr. W. A. Tibbs, J. G. West was also added. "The committee retired and in a short time reported the following resolution: " 'Eesolved, That we, the citizens of Denison, here assembled, do deeply deplore the present difficulty ; and while we'do not propose to advise, or obj ect to the course of either of the parties to the present conflict, when their action is limited to legal and peaceful means, we feel it our duty as citizens to discourage every violation of law from what- ever source, and to pledge our most hearty co-operation, with the legal authorities, in preserving order and in vindicating the dignity of the law, feeling t^t all citizens are alike interested in preventing acts of lawlessness, and in every way possible supporting the supremacy of the law as the only safeguard against general ruin.' LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 95 "The resolution was adopted by a unanimous and rousing vote. On motion of Mr. Ed. Perry the meeting a^ourned. "This was the most orderly meeting we ever witnessed in Denison, and, what was very remarkable, no one wanted to make a speech." ROBERT C. FOSTER sworn and examined. By the CHAIRMAN: Question. You are attorney for the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? — Answer. I am, sir. Q. Were you filling that office on the 6th of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Be kind enough to state what you know about this strike, and any legal proceedings which were taken respecting it. — A. I know very little about the- strike, or its cause. After the strike had progressed some little time, as attorney of the company, I instituted proceedings to obtain an injunction in the district court of our county against one hun- dred and twenty-five employes, more or less, whose names were given to me as names of strikers, by which it was sought to restrain them from going upon the company's prem- ises for unlawful purposes. That writ was obtained and served by the sheriff, whom I presume has testified about that. That is the only legal proceeding that was instituted by the company in the name of the company. There were some arrests made at the in- stance of the sheriff or some of his deputies of parties who committed violation of the law in their presence, and these parties, I believe, were put under bond for their appearance in court. Q. Why did you seek a civil remedy instead of instituting criminal proceedings? — A. I preferred it because I regarded it as the better remedy. I thought there were a good many of the men who believed there was no law to prevent them from doing what they were engaged in, and therefore I instituted the civil remedy, knowing that they would first be served with process in which they would be warned in a legal way and by an order of the court restraining them from going on the premises of the company. I pre- sumed they would take legal advice, and it would have the effect of quieting the dis- turbances. Q. And did it have that effect? — A. It helped a great deal, and a good many of the men never came on the premises after they received the writs. There were others who disregarded them and did come, and persisted in their cnlpable course. Q. Were they arrested for contempt? — A. There were a few arrests for contempt; I think as many as five. Q. What was done with the parties?-^A. One of them, I believe, gave bond and for- feited the bond; three of them were tried; two were convicted and one discharged. Another one filed an answer containing a sworn denial of his having been served with process. We discontinued the proceeding as to him, or directed it to be done. Q. Were these trials prior to the resumption of business on 'the Missouri Pacific? — A. The trials were not before resumption. Q. They did not, then, have the efiect of showing what the law would do? — A. Not as a result of trials, they did not. The cases were called prior to the resumption of busi- ness and were postponed as often as twice at the request and expense of the parties them- selves. Q. By whom were they tried? — A. Judge Maltbie, judge of the district court. Q. I see by the "Sunday Gazette" of the 21st of March, 1886, that you made a speech to the strikers from the pilot of engine No. 76, in which you used this language: ' ' Here (holding in his hand a copy of the writ) are the names of 125 employes of the company, men who have left the employ of the company. They are stopping the busi- ness of the community and stopping trains; they have been ordered off the grounds. The citizenship of the country owe it to themselves to see the laws obeyed. I feel that I am talking to Knights of Labor who are friends of law, and I am sorry this engine came down here while you were all attending the publiq meeting, as it had theoppear- ance of an endeavor to take advantage of you. I think this trouble will soon right it self. I think the tinle when things will move smoothly is near at hand, although 1 am not authorized to say anything of the kind. I do say that every man who has respect for law will be very free from violating this writ. The penalty of its violation is $100 fine and three days' imprisonment, and imprisonment until the fine is paid." You used substantially that language, did you ? — A. That is substantially the lan- guage I used. I said that I was sorry that the engine came down there at the time it did, just at the conclusion of a public meeting, because some of them might think that the attempt was made to take advantage of their absence, and I did not want it to ap- pear that the company was doing anything of that kind. The engine had been brought there to accomplish some work for the business men. Q. Where were the men whom you were addressing? — A. They were on the ground, standing around. 96 LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, Q. When you used the language that " you felt you were talking to Kn^hts of Labor who were friends of the law," what did you mean?— A. Well, many of the Knights of Labor of this city are good men, men who are the Jieads of families, who have their citizenship here, whom I know personally and whom I believe to be good men; and I meant, further, to put them a little on their pride by this expression of opinion as to their being friends of law and also to appeal to their pride. Q. Yon were addressing them, then, as a private citizen as well as an attorney of the road? — A. Certainly, sir. Q. You were trying to induce them by moral suasion to stop this trouble ? — A. I warned them of the consequences of the writ of injunction that had been served upon them. The injunction had been issued and served on Sunday and I understood that some of the men had taken counsel and had been advised that, perhaps, being issued and served on Sunday they were of no avail; and I wanted, among other things, to sat- isfy them that if they had been so informed they were misinformed and they were just as effective as if they had been issued on any other day. Q. Where did they obtain that advice? — A. I cannot tell you, sir. Q. You just learned that incidentally? — A. I had been told by some of them that they had been informed, or that there had been an impression among the men, that, per- haps, because issued and served on a Sunday they would be invalid. Q. What effect did your language have? — A. My language is not very effective. Q. You were telling them what their responsibilities were; did they seem to pay any attention to the information that you gave them? — A. They listened to me. Q. Did they disperse ? — A. There was a gathering there of citizens as well as of Knights of Labor and other employ^; there was no disturbance. They pretty generally dis- persed, but some of them remained. When I said to the men I was sorry that the en- gine came down there at the time it did, and that it, perhaps, had the appearance of taking advantage of them, I followed it up with the remark that it was there for the purpose of transferring that car of coal to another position, and inasmuch as it had come there we proposed to do what it came there ibr, and I warned them to make no resist- ance, and what the consequences of interference would be; that we should proceed to do what was wanted to be done when the engine was brought there. When I got through the effort was successfully made to do what was intended to be done. Q. Is it not a felony to obstruct a railroad in the State of Texas by the removal of a rail or the misplacement of a Switch to the endangerment,of life ? — A. Yes, sir. The language of our statute states that it is a felony to remove a rail _ or do any act to track or car by which the life of any person may be endangered; it is not so easily understood as I could wish. I doubt whether it is a felony to remove or displace a railroad switch; that is, by throwing a switch so as- to put a car Irom one track to another. Q. You employed the civil remedy, and the question as to the construction of the crim- inal law did notarise? — A, We preferred to take the civil remedy, as it would be easier, and perhaps have all the necessary effect. The Chaieman. It certainly would be a misdemeanor. The Witness. I think it would be if it was not a felony. 'Mr. Buchanan. It would be a misdemeanor? , The Witness. It would probably come under our statute in regard to malicious mis- chief Q. Then there is a penalty under your State laws for such misuseof a switch resulting in an obstruction ? — A. There is that which is intended. as a remedy. LEVI LINGO sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Wheredo you live? — Answer. At Denison, Tex. Q. And have resided in Denison about how long? — ^A. Probably a year and a half. Q. Are you in business T — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what business? — A. I am hardware merchant. Q. Do you freight to a large extent? — A. Middling. Q. Were you here during the recent strike at this place? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did that have any effect upon your business? — A. It did — in preventing shipping, Ixtth ^n and out. Q. Injuringyour receipt of goods and shipping of goods? — A. Yes, sir. Q. For how long a time? — A. I suppose for three or four weeks. Q. Did pecuniary loss result to you from such hindrance? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You are a business man of this city. Did you see whether other business men were injured by this trouble? — A. All were similarly affected. Q. Do you know of any particular fact connected with this matter that would be of value to the committee, that you are in possession of, which has not been testified to? — A. No, sir, I do not know of anything particular. IiABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 97 EDWARD PERRY sworn and examined. By Mr. Pabkee. I Qnestion. You are connected with the banking business here ? — Answer. Yes, sir; I am cashier of the First National Bank. , Q. Were you here during the strike on the 6th of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may state the injurious restilt of the strike to the business here. — A. Well, it almost prostrated business h^re for a time. It made a great dearth of money. A large amoont of money is paid here to the employes of the road — about |40,000 per mlonth — and I think that that amount was almost entirely absent for the month of April, and for March, which very seriously injured the trade of our grocery merchants. The mer- chants who had been receiving a great deal of this trade had to draw largely on their deposits, which shrunk in consequence, and made a general depression in consequence of the strike. Q. Did you receive any advice of -the strike before it came? — A. No, sir; we had no idea that the strike was going to occur until it actually occurred. Q. Did you find that it affected payments and collections? — A. Very seriously. It has still, and it looks like it will probably have a depressing effect in that line for thirty, sixty, or ninety days before people wUl thoroughly recover from it. Q. Was ail business so affected to a greater or less extent? — ^A. Very seriously so. Q. You may describe any benefits that have arisen to individuals or to the public out of the strike. — ^A. I do not know that the men have had any success in the strike, and I have not heard of any. I believe there are less men employed than there were, and I do not know that they have been benefited by any advance in wages or shortening the time of labor. Q. As far as you can j adge as a business man, the effects of the strike have been disas- trous and injurious in every direction and have benefited nobody whatever? — A. Yes, sir. It has not benefited anyhody, and it has been, in my opinion, disastrous to the men. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You are prepared to endorse the opinion of Mr. Powderly, the general master workman, that strikes should be discouraged? — A. I did not read Mr. Powderly's letter through, but I believe \in organization for protection. Q. Axe you prepared to indorse the opinion that strikes should be discouraged ? — ^A. Yes, sir. It is my opinion that strikes should be discouraged. I believe arbitration would be much better than strikes — a free conference between employer and employed. Q. What do you think in relation to the shortening of hours and the increasing o^ wages where it can be done? — A. The workmen on a farm work from sun-up to stm- down, and I believe that they should be paid all that men are entitled to; but,! do not believe in the eight-hour system. When I was at work I had to work ten to fourteen hours a day. Q. (By Mr. OtTTHWAlTB.) What will he the effect on the business of this place if the men who owe money are not employed by the railroad companies ? — A. From what the merchants tell me, in reference to their inability to meet their obligations, they will lose a good deal of money if these men are not employed. They will not be abletopay their debts, it wUl be impossible for them to meet their obligations, and some of them wUl have to sacrifice their property in consequence. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Would it not be to the advantage of the business community, as well as to the town generally, if the railroad companies could re-employ those men who had not made themsdves obnoxious by the destruction of property? — ^A. I think> BO, sir. Q. I understand yoa to say that some of these men would be compelled to leave the town? — ^A. That is, if they are not re-employed. Some of them have homes and town property partly paid for; and I presume they would have to sacrifice that if they left here. Q. Then is it not your judgment that it would be generally advantageous to the rail- road company, where it needs men, to re-employ the men such as indicated by you ? — A. I think it would be to the advantage of the railroad company; I think so. They have lived here a good while and behaved themselves, and it would be to the advantage of the community if these men can be re-employed and remain citizens here. SAMUEL STAR sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitb: » Question. What business are you in? — Answer. I am a dry goods merchant. Q. How long have you been in business? — A. Thirteen years. Q. Where do you procure your supplies from generally? — A. New York, sir. Q. How much or in what degree was your business injured by the strike ? — ^A. Wdl, 3984 LAB 3 7 98 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH A2JD WEST. sir, during the strike in receiving our goods, to a consideraWe extent ; b/ having gooda detained on the road. We were compelled to take our men who were traveling and sell- tng goods off the road. Q-. You did not get goods in after you ordered them? — ^A. No, sir. ' Q. Do you sell in any other States than Texas ?— A. We sell in Arkansas, Texas, and the Indian Territory. Q. Any in Louisiana ? — A. No, sir. Q. You were prevented from continuing to sell ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may state whether this kind of interference inj nred other branches of business in the city. — A. Well, iudgingfrom the experience we have had in the delay in getting our goods, it naturally would have the same tendency in the same or any oflier line. Q. I wish you would state what branches of business have wholesale establishmente here besides the dry goods business. — A. We have wholesale grocery houses, hardwaie, liquor, wholesale dry goods and commission houses; I think that is all. Q. Have you any wholesale b6ot and shoe house, or are those goods carried with the dry goods? — A. They are carried with other goods. Q. Do you know whether any stores that carry agricultural implements were simi- larly affected ? — A. They were in the same way, as they were not able to receive any freight. Q. What is your opinion as to the general effect of the strike upon this community, whether it was injurious or beneficial? — A. I think it was quite injurious. Q. Do you know of any benefit that came to anybody as the result of this strike? — A None in the least. Q. Did you witness any of the occurrences at the yards during the strike ? — A. No, sir; I was not present at any. Q. If you think of anything yourselt which would be of value to us in making onr report I wish you would state what it is. — A. You asked the question of my predeces"^ sor, Mr. Perry, respecting Mr. Powderly's advice as to the effect of strikes. It is my opinion that strikes injure everybody and benefit none. Q. You have no doubt that the forbidding of strikes would be of benefit both to the employfe and employers and the public generally? — A. I do, most emphatically. Q. {By the Chairman. ) Would a strike be of any effect unless the strikers prevented the movement of freight through the country ? And if when the men turn out of the shops and stop work their places are immediately supplied and the movement of trains go on, would such a strike have any effect as to the adjustment of their grievances? — A. I think it would not. Q., Is there a surplus of railroad labor in this section? — A. I have reason to believe there is, since this strike. - Q. Then if there be a surplus of labor, and the employ& go out quietly and do not interfere at all with the operation of the railroad in the employment of that surplus and the resumption of traffic, does not every strike — every peaceable strike — ^result in dam- age and injury to the strikers alone ? — A. I should judge it does. Q. They would have to move off? — A. Yes, sir. CHARLES W. CLARK sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Denison. Q. How long have you resided here ? — A. Three years. Q. In what employment are you engaged? — A. I am master mechanic. Q. For what road? — A. For the Missouri Pacific and International and Great North- em. Q. Were you in Denison at the inception of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State to the committee what you saw and heard, if anything, about the cause of this strike, and generally what you know about it ? — A. The commencement of the strike was on March 6. On the Sunday I was at Palestine, and I came to Denison. I arrived here on the 3d and went to Alvarado on the 4th, where difficulty was existing, and I found that they were unable to operate our trains on account of an order that was re- ceived there by a man named Brundage, a master workman of the lodge of the Knights of Labor at that point, to compel all trains in Alvarado to stay there. He ^howed me that notice, signed by a man named Golden, at Fort Worth. He showed me a telegram signed by a man named Black, " Hold all trains. Don't allow a wheel to move out of Alvarado. ' ' We had eighteen men employed there, and there was probably in the neigh- borhood of two hundred who claimed to be strikers. I tried to show that it was a mis- take and ought not to be done, but it was of no use. I was informed that we would have trouble over our entire sy-stem in a few days by Mr. Brundage. Q. What reason did he give for the strike? — ^A. He claimed that it was on acconntof LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 99 Bome difficulty that had originated on the Texas and Pacific road. So when I could not do any good there in regard to getting out engines, I tried to fill one out, and they no- tified me to stop and leave the town. I came to Denison on the night of the 4th, arriv- ing here on the morning of the 5th. Everything was peaceable here, and I went back to Alvarado next day. I kind of believed what I had heard there, that we were going to have trouble here. Everything went on smoothly and there were no signs of any diffi- culty. I talked with a great many of the men in the shop, and they said that they had no grievances that they knew of, and some of them made the remark that if there was to be any trouble they would give me ample notice, or something to that effect; but tiiere was n6 notice given. I was at the shop on the morning of the 6th a little while before 7 o'clock. The men all went to work there as usual, and everything worked well up to 10 o'clock, when the whistle was sounded. The men dropped their tools, with a few exceptions, and those who did not drop their tools were notified by the men to drop them and leave. The strikers immediately went out into the yards and commenced tak- ing charge of the engines. They were headed by a man named Joe Gettler, who in- formed me he was appointed to take charge of these engines, the roundhouse, and shops, and that I need not worry myself with the company's property. We were unable to do anything until the difficulties were adjusted. I asked him what the difficulty was, and he remarked he did not know. He told me that the order came here to strike and to hold all trains, and thaj; that was what they proposed to do. They commenced killing all the engines in the shop, by putting out the fires and blowing them ont, and putting them over the table. I went to the men and notified them to keep off the engines and leave the company's property alone. They did not seem to pay much attention to me, but kept on. After they got all the engines stowed away they captured a crew that I had called to go out on the freight north. They told the engineer and fireman to go home; and as others came in they killed the engines. That afternoon they captured the switch engines in the yard and put them over the turn-table also, and after that what ^witching was done was performed by passenger engines and by strikers, men whom I am informed were detailed for that purpose. Every day I made an effort to get an engine out. We filled them up with water and put fire in them. Every effort I made was, of course, useless, as the grounds and yards * were guarded very strongly by strikers. And they finally took all the hose we had and put it one comer of the round-house, and put a guard over it, and kept it there about a week. After that time they made a raid upon the shop by about one hundred and fifty men, and dismantled the stationary engine and also emptied the boiler and let the water out of the high tank. They also cut the hose on a passenger engine so that our trains were delayed'. There were thirty freight engines disabled, and this one passenger engine, by parte of the machinery being taken away, and which had to be duplicated before the engines could be started out. Q. Where is this man Gettler? — A. I do not know, sir. ,Q. Had he been in the employ of the company? — A. Yes, sir; he had been in theem- ploy of the company. Q. Has he left this place? — A. I believe he has; I have not seen him lately. Q. Did he assume to take charge of the yards and give instructions as to what should be done? — A. Yes, sir. He gave directions, and informed me on the morning of the 10th that I was the only officer on the Missouri Pacific that interfered with the Knights of Labor, and that I wanted to go slow and keep off the company's premises; I had no au- thorily around there at all while they had charge. Q. Were yon in the employment of the company, and had he left the employment of the company? — A. Yes, sir, I was; and he had left the employ of the company with the rest of the strikers. Q. Those that were taking charge of the property? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You say that they put a guard over the engines, and a guard over the hose that they put back; what do you mean by that? — A. It was a guard that they put over the hose and prevented ns from putting any new hose on the engines they disabled. Q. Did they relieve each other? — ^A. There was one hundred and ninety-eight of them, and they had three squads, and they took turns about guarding the yard, switches, and round-house and turn-table. Q. Day and night? — A. They were divided up — the one hundred and ninety-eight men who left the service, or left the shops. Q. You say in the morning after the water was let out of the tank you were attempt- ing to prepare a passenger engine. Do the passenger trains carry the mails of the United States? — A. Yes, sir; and that train was delayed four hours, or about that time. Q. Were any reports forwarded to the Department of that fact? — A. I believe there was. Q. (ByMr. OUTHWAITE.) How many men are employed now ? — A. There are ninely- six at these shops; probably 50 per cent, of the number that we had before. 100 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are any of them men who went out on the strike? — A. The majority of them. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Did all classes of labor employed on the road here strike?— A. None but the men who claimed to be Xnights of Labor. The engineers and fire- men were all right. The shopmen all went ont. The engineers axid firemen were loyal to the company. Q. Without reference to what organization they belonged to, please give me the class of labor, or classes of labor, that went out. — A. The machinists, blacksmiths, boiler- makers and their helpers, coppersmiths, passenger-oar men, carpenters, truck repairers, and coal-heavers. Q. The switchmen ? — ^A. The switchmen do not come under my employ. Q. (By the Chaieman. ) Did all of these men you employed have to get a vrithdrawal caid from the order? — A. There were a great many of them that had been in the Knights of Labor. I did not request any of them to withdraw ftom the Knights of Labor, but I asked one or two that made application if they had got tired of working under the orders of somebody else, and told them when they could go to work and would work under my orders I would give them work. Q. Have you ever said to anybody that you had carda of withdrawal &om the Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir; I have them. ' Q. But you secured them in the way indicated by you just now — ^voluntarily? — A. Yes, sir; voluntarily on their part. Q. You did not exact them ? — A. No, sir. iQ. Did you tell anybody that if any Knights of Labor came for work that you would kick them out with a time check? — A. No, sir. I couldn't do that, because they had all got their time checks. I had no time check to kick them out with, because they had got their checks. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN). In re-employing any former employ^ who had not been guilty of violence to the company's property, wotild it make any difference to yon whether he was a member of the Knights of Labor or not? — A. No, sir. All men that were not objectionable, that had not destroyed the company's property, we had no rea- son to refuse them employment. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb). You did take back Knights of Labor ? — A. The major- ity of our men were Knighta of Labor. Q. (By the Chairman). You said that you have ninety-six men employed, or about 60 per cent, of the men that you had before the strike. Do they do they do the same amount of work that the one hundred and ninety-six men did before the strike ? — ^A. We are not doing quite as much, although we are working longer hours. We are working ten hours where we were working eight before the strike, and the men work more cheer- fidly now. Before that when we sent a man to do something he had to go off to see somebody or some committee to know whether he should do it or not. Q. Do you pay them any more wages? — A. We pay them the rate of September, 1885 — the same rate exactly. Q. The same for ten hours that you paid for eight? — ^A. No, sir. The same rate that it was before the strike. Q. You are working them longer hours and paying them more money? — ^A. We pay them so much an hour; if they work more hours they get a little more money. Q. Then one of the results of the strike, as far as the company is concerned, has been to increase the hours of labor and reduce the number of employes ? — ^A. Before the strike we had more employes than we needed. Q. I say that one of the results of the strike, according to your statement, has been, BO far as the management of the company is concerned, to increase the hours of labor and to reduce the number of employes. — A. That is what we have done at this place, sir. Mr. OuTHWAiTE. Look over this blank [showing witness blank form of release for claim arising out of injuries] ; it is a blank release from liability on the part of the em- ployfe who may have incurred injuries in the service of the company before they are re-employed. Do you know of any employ^ of the company who were requested to sign such a contract as that before the strike at any time? The Witness (looking at the blank). That is the release where a person received some bodily injury. I have heard of persons who have been injured signing something of that kind; if they were not going to have a suit with the company they would sign a release of that kind. Q. Do you know why they required them to sign such an agreement as this? — ^A. So that if they should bring a suit against the company they could prove that they had no claim upon the company; in the same way as if a man paid you a hundred dollars, yon give him a receipt for it, and that would end the c^e. If a man got hurt they would allow him time as well as his physician, and pay him two or three hundred dollars, per- haps, for damages. That is the way I understand it. Where the man has settl^ up and the claim dipped, he then signed the release. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 101 Q. State the case that you know. — A. I cannot ative you the dates or names at present; I conld by referring to the books. Q. What I wanted was, did you know any case in which the money was paid and the release signed? — A. I have known a case. Q. What were the circumstances in that particular case? — A. I cannot give it to you at present; I have not got their names or dates; but I have all the names where men have signed a release. The form of release was here put in evidence: [Form 715.] Whereas, on and prior to one was an employ6of the ; — and, as such employd, was engaged — ; and whereas said received certain injnries, as foll&ws, to wit: for which said injuries said does not make any claim of any class or character against said railway company, and admits that his injuries are not the result of any negligence on the part of said railway company. Now, therefore, in consideration of the sum of $1 to him in hand paid, and the farther consideration of re-employment by said for such time only as may be sat- isfactory to said company, said railway company is hereby released from any and all claims that I, said , claimant herein, ever had against said company, up to date, and especially released from any and all claims arising out of injuries specifl(»lly set forth herein. Given under my hand and seal this day of , [SEAl.] Witness: Q. I will ask you this question, which you will answer from your own knowledge, whether these are exacted ii-om employes who have been injured without reference to the question as to whether the company was liable or not? — A. Well, these are signed voluntarily. The men, I know, signed these voluntarily. I did not compel a man to sign anything of that kind. If a man is willing to release the company from all danuige he puts it down in black and white. Q. Do you know of any case in which a man who was unwilling to sign such a con- tract as that didn't get back to work? — A. No, sir. JOHN DOTLE sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekbe: Question. You were in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? — ^An- swer. Yes, sir. Q. Where did you reside in the first week of March? — ^A. In this city of Denison. Q. And remained here during the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was your oficial position ? — A. I was foreman in the car department. Q. How many men did that department employ at that time ? — A. I think it had sixty-five men on the 6th of March. Q. What were the wages paid there — from how much to how much? — ^A. The lowest received $1.25, the next $1.60 (in the coach-cleaning department), $1.80, certain classes $2.00 and $2.40, $2.50, $2.60, and $2.75. Q. How many of these men actively joined in the strike? — A. The entire force in my department, with the exception of five or six. Q. How many do you understand were Knights of Labor? — A. Well, I understand that they were all Knights of Labor except about six men. Q. Was there any intimation given to you of the strike before they were going out? — A. No, sir; there was nothing said to me. Q. You may describe the effect of the strike as it related to your department. — ^A. Well, I can only say that it totally stopped the work. Q. What was done ?— A. On the morning of the 6th of March the whistle blew at 10 o'clock, and every man laid down his tools and walked right out. I was waited on and told by men in my employ that they had appointed certain men a detail to take care of the passenger trains, and there was no other work to be permitted. I told them that I had nothing for them to do; that they were men who were not in the service before, and I had no work for them. Q. How many did they detail ? — A. Two at day and two at night, and at my sug- gestion they put on another one. Q. Did they put on three? — A. They put on .the third man — day and night shift. Q. What became of the other men; did they occupy the shop or interfere with you or 102 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST'. have anything to do with the business ? — A. I can not say that they interf erred -with me or my business, because my business was totally stopped with the exception of the pas- senger trains running. There was a guard there every day of six or ten men, day and night. Q. Who put the guard there ? — A. I can not tell. My understanding was that the Knights of Labor put it there. Q. What did they claim was their purpose ? — A. To guard and protect the company's property; I think they told me that. Q. Did they keep charge of the company's property ?^— A. Well, I can not say that they did. Q. But they had put men there to take charge of it ? — A. They put men there to take charge. I had no responsibility whatever for the men, understand, Q. What did they say about that ? — A. About all that was said, they came to me and said that a detail of men was made to take charge of the business. Q. How long did the custody of the shop remain in these men? — A. I think I may safely answer until the 1st of April. I do not think they dispersed before that time en- tirely; but I wouldnot be positive about that. Q. About the time the arrests were made were you here? — A. Tes; I think that was about the time, after the injunction writs were served; but quite a number of them con- tinued on the premises. Q. Did you then resume possession of your shop ? — A. Well, the shop was closed down. There was nothing doing from the strike up to the 2d of April, and at that time we resumed full charge. I might say I had charge of it before that. Q. With how many men did you resume? — A. I think I started with thirty-six men on the 2d of April. Q. How many of these were your former employes? — A. I think I have eight.new men; the balance are our former employ^. Q. Were some of these Knights of Labor ?— A. My understanding is they were. With the exception of the six men that I have spoken of, the understanding was the others were strikers and Knights of Labor. Q. Did those who were strikers come back at their own solicitation, or at yours ? — A. Mr. Clarke, the master mechanic, told me in the re-employment of men to employ only such men as were not objectionable to the company; and I told them that I would em- ploy them as fast as I could — ^those who were not objectionable to the coinpany. Q. What was what you call objectionable to the company? — A. Men who had taken an active part in the strike, who had taken charge of the company's property and pre- vented them from operating it by preventing trains moving, and so on. Q. How many men do you now employ? — A. I think I have thirty-eight men em- ployed to-day in my department. Q. Have you occasion for more men there now ? — A. Well, I am subject to the orders of my superiors; I cannot say about that. Q. With a full movement of business could you not profitably employ more men there? — A. I presume we could. Q. And will men be employed there to whom there is no objection otherwise than they were Knights of Labor? Would it preclude men from obtaining work if they were Knights of Labor? — A. I do not know, sir, that there would. The men are to be em- ployed regardless of what they were, at the same rate of wages for the same class of work as before the strike. Q. Have your men been interfered with since the 3d of April? — A. They have re- ceived notice to quit several times. Q. Prom whom? — A. From the local executive board of Assembly 3690, aa well as I remember. Q. Have you information of any violence visited upon them for working? — A. I can- not say that I have. Q. Do you know of any interference to these men in your department other than that you have indicated ? — A. I do not know. There has been a great deal of talk. Q. I do not mean talk, but interference with your men except what you have stated? — A. I do not know of any to my knowledge. GEORGE E. BUCK sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. In whose employ are you? — Answer. I am in the employment of the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad Company. Q. How long have you been in their employment? — A. About three years, Q. In what branch of business? — A. In the machinery department. Q. Where? — A. As a locomotive engineer, and as traveling engiileer. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 103 Q. Where were you about the time of the commencement of this strike?— A. I was in Denison. Q. What was the first yon knew of the strike? — A. The first I knew of it they had all qnit work. Q. Had yon heard of its coming before? — A. I heard rumors of it. Q. What did you hear stated as to the cause of the strike at that time? — A. When the strike first occurred I did not hear of any particular cause. Q. What did the men say about going out? — A. At the time that they struck they complained that a man by the name of Hall, at Marshall, was discharged, or something of that kind. Q. Have you heard any statement of grievances ? — A. Nothing particular, sir. Q. What did you see of the actual movements of the strike ? — A. I saw that all trains were stopped and engines were killed, that the water was run out of thSm, the fire palled out of them, and engines run on side-tracks. Q. You are not in any capacity over any group of men, are you ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of any acts of violence that the: strikers did toward the railroad company and its property ? — A. I know that they killed engines. Whether you call that an act of violence or not I do not know. Q. Anything else? — A. They took some parts of the machinery from them so that we could not use them, and took the water out of them. Q. Anything else that you know about this matter, as to the extent of the strike or the cause of it? — A. Well, I do not know anything particular of the cause. I never could find it out at all. Q. Did you mingle among the Knights of Labor and strikers ? — A. Well, not a great deal. I was around here most of the time and around the shop, but I did not go around among them except in the shops. Q. Did you never hear them speak of the vreongs they had sufiered or for which they were striking? — A. I never heard them make any complaint of suflering much. Q. What do you know of ditching a train in Alvarado during the strike? — A. Yes; all that I know is that I was there the next morning after it was ditched. I saw where the spikes had been pulled out of the ties and the rails removed, and the engine was in the ditch. ' Q. Was the engine injured ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Howmuch? — A. Well, I would suppose it would takefouror five hundred dollars to fix it up again. Q. Anything besides the engine off the track? — A. Yes, sir; there were two cars off the track that I saw. Q. Were there any 'persons injured? — A. There were two or three injured. Q. How badly? — A. Well, there was one of them had his arm broke and another had his legs injured and was scalded some. Q. You have no idea who might have done this thing? — A. No, sir; I might make a guess at it. Q. About what date did that occur? — A. I declare I forgot the date of it. Q. How long after they had gone out on the strike was it that it occurred ? — A. It was during the month. Q. Did you ever hear any person make any statement as to why that was done? — A. I did not. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Were the engineer and fireman injured? — A. Both. ' Q. Seriously? — A. The fireman was injured quite seriously. Q. So that he was incapacitated from labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then a man that was earning wages to support himself and family was injured and incapacitated from labor by the ditching of that train ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Do you know about the same time of parties taking pos- session of an engine there and running it down the road and killing it? — A. I under- stood that they did so — ^that they took one from Alvarado to Grand View and killed it. JOHN DOYLE recalled and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. I am requested to ask you, in reference to the rate of wages, whether the men who had $1. 25 are receiving the same wages as that they did in September, 1884 ? — Answer. That was the same rate for the man. I cannot state from memory, as it does not serve me well enough. ^ Q. What I want to get at is whether the men who in 1885 were receiving 11.25 were not in 1884 receiving 11.40 a day? — A. That is a matter that I do not understand. If they were it is not to my knowledge. My understanding is that every man has got the same rate of wages that he was getting in September, 1884. 104 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Were they at the time of this Btrike? — A. Yes, sir ; there has been no redaction in salaries for twelve months. Q. Had you, or had any man, ever made a complaint to you that he was not getting the wages that he ought to get according to the agreement ? — ^A. Not according to the agreement. I frequently have men to apply for an increase of pay, and at times we in- crease their pay. I could cite to you fifty instances of men who have had theix pay in- creased, some of them 45 cents on the day. GEORGE FIEDLER sworn and examined. By the ChAIEMAN: Question. Tour business on the 6th of March was that of foreman of the lonnd- honse?-r-An8wer. The roundhouse and engine-house. Q. You are still in the employment of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. Do you know anything of the cause of the late strike? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Do you know from the statement of any man who was connected with the strike ? — A. Well, yes. I asked several of them. They said a man had been discharged by the name of Hall that was Mred on the Texas and Pacific, and they had some Chinamen on the west end of the Texas and Pacific, and that they were striking on that account. That is all the information I got. Some of them told me it was none of my business. Q. When did they did tell you that? — ^A. On the 6th or 7th of March, if I am not mistaken. Q. Had you any conversation with any of them subsequent to that time on the same subject? — ^A. No, sir; not that I am aware of. Q. They told you on the 6th or 7th of March that the strike was caused by the dis- charge of a man named Hall, and also on account of the employment of Chinese upon the Texas and Pacific?— A. Yes, sir; by the company on the west end of the road. Q. Do you know of any acts of violence that were committed by the strikers at Den- ison ? If so, state what you know of them. — A. On the 6th of March, at 10 o'clock, the whistle blew, and the men all went out of the shops; but few remained, and they were stopped. They immediately commenced taking care of the engines and running them back into the machine-shop. They were led by Joe Gettler and Robert Buchanan and George Wesley. They refused to let the old hostlers handle the engines. They killed engines as fast as they came in on freight trains and put them away. They kept that up all day. At 10 o'clock they took the passenger engine out and switched the mail car to go north, and by evening they had almost all the freight engines that came In kUled. Several came in that night, and they killed them. At 10 o'clock in the morning they took an engine to switch the day mail and passenger coach. Joe Gettler took charge of the passenger engine, and took care of it and did it himself. He asked me what we were going to switch with in the morning, and I told him the engineers of the passenger trains would switch over; and he took the engine and switched out the passenger train and mail-coach himself. They took out every- thing. On the morning of the 9th we had orders to get a freight engine ready to take out a freight train; one hundred and fifty or one hundred and seventy-five men came up there and stopped ns, pulling us away from the engine. They ordered me away two or three times. They put out the fires and disabled the engine by taking out the valve- stand pin. After that I believe they took out a great many more pins, and subsequently they took pins out of all the freight engines. Nearly every day we had to get pins ready, to try and fill the engines up, and put fires into them, but they would always overpower us, take the hose from us, put out the fires, and let the water out of the engine. That movement kept up to about the 21st of March. On the 20th of March the sheriff served injunction writs on fourteen or fifteen of them, and about the 21st of March, I believe, between 12 and 2 o'clock in the morning, they took possession of the shops by a great number of masked men and crippled the stationary engine and the pumping engine, let all the water out of the tank, and let the water out of and cut the hose of the pas- senger engine, delaying the passenger engine for some time. On the 22d or 23d of March we got a switch engine ready and put pins in her and got her filled up to do some switching. On the 23d of March we did the same, and, I think, on the 25th we got the first freight engine ready and ran the first freight train out. We did not have any vio- lent opposition to getting the engines out of the shops after we got the sheriff and his party. Q. Is that all you know of the transactions that took place down there? — A. Well, to a large extent it is. We got one engine brought back there that was ditched at Alvaiada. I helped to take the engineer and fireman off the train when they were brought here. One of them is very poorly, the fireman is getting along very poorly. Q. Are they receiving medical treatment? — A. Dr. Joseph Fox, of Denison, is attend- ing them. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND AVEST. 105 Q. Please give the names of the engineer and fiieman, and the nature of their in- ' juries? — A. The engineer is Sam Baixd. He got his arm broke, and was hurt through the hips. The fireman is W. H. Barnes, and -had both of his legs caught under l£e tender. He laid onder the tender for an hour and forty minutes, with the tender on him. His leg was very badly bruised, and it has broken out on both sides and is run- ning. He had the weight of 48,000 pounds upon him for an hour and :Mrty minutes, besides the steam and hot water he was lying in. The tender was loaded with coal and water. Q. Where are these men ? — A. Here in Denison. I got these statements from the parties themselves. Q. Have they got families? — ^A. Yes, sir; they both have families' Q. Have you any idea who ditched that train? — A. No, sir; I was in Denison when it happened. I have not been out of town since the strike commenced, though I have been ordered to leave town. The engineer told me that he was going around a curve north of Alvarada„and just after getting around it he saw that the rails had been moved 6 inches, making a perfect switch rail of the track. Before he could reverse the engine and stop the train it was ditched. They were ixmning at about 10 miles an hour. They were only three or four rails from the place when he saw that the rail had been moved. Q. (By Mr. Otjthwaite. ) Are passenger trains and locomotives submitted to inspec- tion and examined before each train goes out? — A. The locomotives are. They all come in here and lie here £rom ten to thirty-six hours, and all work is done on them that is necessary. Q. Now, I understand that Gettler said he would take charge of that branch of the work. — A. He told me he would do so, and afterwards he told me the same thing, and told me to leave the place, and I told him I would take no interference from him or any- body else. Q. Had he up to this time taken part in the inspection of the engines ? — ^A. Yes, sir; he was a machinest. Q. If any damage had occurred would he have been responsible to anybody? — ^A- Nobody but himself. He was not in the employ of the company at that time. NEWTON WOODRING sworn and examined. By Mr. BUCHANAN: Question. Where do you live ? — Answer. At Denison. Q. How long have you resided here? — A. Nearly four years. Q. What is your employment? — A. I am switch engineer. Q. And for whom are you employed? — A. By the Missouri Pacific Railroad Com- pany. Q. While upon that engine in March did any one approach you to get oflF your engine? — A. Yes, sir; on the 6th of March, the day of the strike here. Q. Please state what occurred. — A. Three or four men came upon the engine and asked me whether they had to use force to take the engine. I told them I was not much force against four men. The yard-master told me to let the engine stay. I stopped the engine, and they took hold of her and ran her into the shop. On the 7th tins man Gettler and some more men (I do not know the others) had the engine switching the , passenger train up here. Mr. Clark told me to go on the engine and do the switching. I went down to the tank, at the other end of the yard, to get the engine, and asked them for it, and Gettler told me he would give it to me when he got ready. So I came on to the depot and told Mr. Clark. He came up alongside the engine' and told Gettler to turn the engine over to me. Gettler told Mr. Clark he would give the engine up when he got ready, and told me I had better get off, and I did so. Q. Who is Mr. Clark ? — A. Master mechanic of the Missouri Pacific road at Deni- son. Q. And was at that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And Gettler was not in the employ of the company? — A. No, sir; he had left the employ of the company. Q. Was any force used to take you off the engine? — A. Not on that occasion. Q. Was there any occasion on which there was force used? — A. Yes, sir; on the 25th I was bringing the engine'from th e round-house to do some switching, and got about half way up there. Three men got on the engine, and two of them asked me to get oflF. I did not say anything to them, and they asked me to get oflF again, and pulled me down off the seat. One of them got hold of the reverse lever and one of them was at the throttle, and they found they had made a mistake and they got off. Q. Who were these men? — A. One of them was named Muggrove and one Bone. Q. Were they strikers? — A. Yes, sir. 106 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And had no business there at that time? — A. No, sir. Q. They took hold of you by physical force ?-:-A. One took me by the collar and pulled me off the seat. Q. Did you lodge any complaint against them ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Are th^ about town now ? — ^A. I do not know. Q. Were these men that the sheriff saw and arrested ? — A. The sheriff was there, and he arrested them. Q. Have any threats or intimidations been used against you? — ^A. No, sir. GEOEGE PIEDLEE recalled and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Were you ordered to leave the town at any time during the strike? — ^An- swer. Yes, sir. I believe on March 10, about 10 to 2 o'clock, if I am not mistaken, I was ordered to disconnect the shop whistle to prevent an alarm being ^ven to call the strikers to prevept us from working. 1 went out to the stationary engine in company with Mr. Clark, and tried to disconnect the whistle. There was a guard in there, and he gave the alarm to several other parties. Several parties came down there and started the whistle and gave an alarm, and of course they came down there about 150 to 175 strong, and there may have been 200 men, and they told us that we would have to leave town and leave the shop. Joe Gettler stood up and said: "George Fiedler, I want you to quit interfering with this property and working on those engines, and to leave the place, or we wUl make you." Q. He was guardian of the peace at that time ? — A. Yes, sir; he was. He had the master mechanic and superintendent unable to do anything. He had assumed the au- thority to do what he pleased. I told him I would attend to my duties. Mr. Clark spoke up and said the men here were working under his orders. They then told him it was about time for him to leave, and that he was making himself conspicuous as an official and taking a prominent part, and that no ofScer on the Gould system was doing more than he was against the men. . One of the party told him to get out of town or they would fix him. As he did not want to make a personal difficulty with anybody, in pursuance of the verbal order from these men to leave we left. Q. Who was the leader? — A. Joe Gettler; he was the spokesman of the party. WILLIAM E. PEEEIN sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. Were you in the employ of the Missouri Pacific Company during the month of March last? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you any connection with the men who conducted the strike? — A. Yes, sir, I guess I could say that I had. Q. Had you charge of the round-house at any time ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember the time when a party of masked men came there ? — A. Yes, sir; it was March 21, about 1.30 in the morning. Q. Who were there at that time before these men came? — A. Well, there was Mr. Babb, about thirteen or fourteen men, and three hostlers, including myself. ' Q. What was your position there? — A. I was a hostler, drawing hostler's wages, but had charge of the round-house that night-on account of the foreman laying off sick. Q. Give us what was the first you heard of the purpose of these masked men. — A. Well, the first I was sitting in what you call the foreman's office, eating my lunch, *nd saw three men pass the window; and I noted that they were hurrying. They stopped at the door and a moment afterward one of the watchmen came in and walked toward me. I noticed his face was very white. He turned his back and went back. I sup- posed it was two watchmen that had passed the vrindow. I asked him why his face was so white, and got up to see what was the matter, but was told that I could not go, and a man stepped up and placed a club across me and said, " I want you to sit right there and not make any noise. " I wanted to go out and he said, "Sit in there awhile." I made a move like I was going and two more men stepped up to the door, and they said, ' ' We have come here to perform a duty, and we are going to do it, regardless of conse- quences." I concluded to stay inside. Well, looking out, there was a passenger engine standing around the side of the house. It was to go out with the morning train, and was lying there, and from the movements I saw I knew that there were a number of men who were letting the fire out and taking the water from her. I spoke to the man that was near me and tol d him that that was a passenger engine. He said "We know what we are about, and we do not want any information." Well, f, staid there a few minutes, and one of the hostlers came in and said they had the men there near the turn-table. I then approached the man and the two others and told them I wanted to know where the two LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 107 colored hands were aad said may be they are doing something to them, and it flashed over my mind that they might have come to give them a little chastisement. I asked' them where they were and told them I did ndt want them to hurt the colored men, and they said they were all right. I told them I was going, and to take me down to what we called the sand-house, and if they were all right then they could briflg me back. About the turn-table they had a whole crowd of the men, and then they put me in with them and took us to the foreman's office and put'us in there with two or three men to guard us, and about ten minutes after that they all dispersed. Most of us then went out to see the damage. We found that the stationary engine and the pumping en- gine disabled, the water all let out of the big tank, the water let out and the hose cut on the passenger engine and the fires knocked out. Q. Have you described about all that was done there? — A. I believe that was the sub- stance. Q. How many engines were disabled that night, including the stationary and passen- ger engines? — A. Well, engines — I don't .just remember how many. Q. About how many? — A. As near as I can tell most of the freight engines were dis- abled before that time. Q. Did they disable any of the passenger engines? — A. There were six passenger en- gines, and one or two extra engines that were all ready for work, I believe. Q. Were they disabled that night ?^A. There were six or eight engines disabled that were ready for ruiming. Q. How many were there in the masked party? — A. I can not say; but, judging from the crowd I saw, I suppose there were about fifty around the men there at the turn- table. Q. All masked ? — ^A. Well, most that I noticed were masked. Q. Were there men that you knew that were not masked? — A. No, sir. Q. In what manner were they masked? — A. They had red handkerchiefs over their noses, and tied up there round their noses [indicating]. Q. W*e there eye-holes? — A. They were tied below their eyes so that they could see. Q. What did you hear any of them say as to injuring the traveling engineer? — A. I did not hear any of them say anything about it. Q. Did you hear any of them say anything about injuring Mr. Fiedler? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Or any other officer or person ? — A. No, sir. Q. Are there any other circumstances that you know of relating to the strike that other witnesses have not testified about? — A. Not that I remember of, I believe. STERLING M. BABB sworn and examined. By Mr. Odthwaitb: Question. Where were you living about the 6th of March? — Answer. AtDenison, Tex. Q. At what were you employed ? — A. I was night hostler at the "round-house. Q. Tou may state what you saw of the strike. — A. Well, sir, working at night, of course I only saw what happened at night. I heard that rumors were afloat that there was a strike. On the morning of March 6, at 10 o'clock, I heard the Whistle blow, and it woke me up. Of course I had an idea of what was going on, so I did not go around tDl 6 o'clock that evening, at my time to go to work; I saw the strikers had possession of everything. They seemed to assume charge of the engines. The fijes were all knocked out, and the engines standing there, and they seemed to give orders. An engine came in from the north and I got upon her to perform my duty, and one of the strikers told me he was appointed to do that business himself. I told him I did not expect to use any force to handle engines, but that my duty there was to hostle, and I expected to get on the engines; and so I staid on the engine. It was getting dark of nights, and I wanted to put her on the go-out track. He was afraid to injure some of his own men, and he said, ' ' You are ^stid for doing this, and you do this hostling, but I will stay with you and see that you do it, ' ' and I went on and did the hostling the same as I usually do. I went on to work every night, and when I came Mr. Clark would sometimes come and give me orders and these other men assumed the duty of taking charge of the hostlers at night. Mr. Clark was the master mechanic, and this oth6r man was assuming to be the master mechanic. Q. You may state any interference ^ith the property of the company or violence that yon witnessed. — A. Of course the most of the violence was committed on the morningof the 21st of March. I was there, and there were ten watchmen on duty to watch the property and to see that no one molested the property. We had a small hose to fill up the engines with, about 130 feet of hose. I had the hose in the engine filling her up, and I was sitting down in the sand-house and two colored- men who had staid with us thirough the strike they were in there lying down. I was sitting there for the engine to fill up. One of the watchmen said that here was a mob. I supposed there was four or five men. I stepped to the door and four or five men stepped right in front of me. I 108 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. hardly took in the situation at first. It struck me that they were aftei these two col- ored men, and Isaid: "Hold on here, don't take hold of me; keep your hands off me." One man said: "We do not want to hurt anybody," and he said: " We have got all the rest of the boys up at the stable corraled and we do not want to hurtanybody. ' ' I said: ' ' Here, I do not propose to move a step if you are after these colored men ; they are men working for families." They told me that they were not going to hurt anybody, and that the colored men would he protected, and one took hold of each arm and one at the back, and the consequence was I walked on with them, and after they had got us to the •central turn-table one man said: "We have got them all together. Do your duty." Q. Who was that spokesman? — A. He was a stranger to me at the time. Q. Do you know who it was? — A. I have since learned who it was as well as I can ' recollect him on the street; I understand he was the master workman Pfifer. I never saw him before that night. I met and recognized him afterwards. I was standing Within a foot of him and the boys they began to scatter all round. They got their or- ders and each man went to his duty. They began knocking the fire out of the passen- ger engine, and I said, "That is for the morning passenger train; do not knock the flie out of her; " and he said, "Let the engine coming in go through; "and I said, "No en- gine came through, ' ' and he says, ' ' Damn the train, let her lie then. ' ' They went and ' cut the hose and opened the drum-cock and let the water run out and told them it was killed. He then told us he would take us all into the foreman's ofiSce there, and told us to stay there fifteen minutes and that he did not want us to move until that time, when we could go on about our business. He took us in there and stood at the door and after the thing was all over he made us quite a pleasant little speech, and told us that we be- haved ourselves like gentlemen. We then started up for the roundhouse to see what damage had been done. Some of the boys shut off the water in the passenger engine to save water to fire her up again. The damage to the other passenger engines was, they let the water out of them and killed the stationary in the big shop. After we had found the damages, and saw that we could not get the mail train out on time we had to go to work and put hose on that engine as soon as we could get any tank-hose. Q. Was the mail train delayed that morning ? — A. Yes, sir; about four hours. Q. Tell me whether you heard any threats against Mr. Buck or Mr. Fiedler ? — ^A. I heard some. One, I don't know who, said "Where is Buck?" He had been with us, and they said, " We will hang the son-of-a-bitch. " Some one said, " There is Fiedler; let us go for him and give Mm a good ducking in the pond." Q. Was that on the company's grounds? — A. Yes, sir; it was at the company's round- house. Q.- During the time that you have been telling about? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know who it was that said this ? — A. It was said by a party in the crowd, but I do not know who by. Q, Were you present on any other occasion like this? — A. No, sir; that is the last time. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN.) Do you know whether this man Pfifer is in Parsons?— A. I saw him here awhile to-day. Q. You say he was master workman. Was he a master workman in the shops? — ^A. No, sir; he was master vrorkman of the assembly of the Knights of Labor. CHARLES W. CLARK recalled and examined. By the Chaieman : ' Question. Do you know anything of Mr. Angel having lain off two months for refus- ing to sign a release similar to the one that has been read? — Answer. He was injured. I don't know that he laid off on that account. He slipped back on a car frame and fell on a hammer handle that went right into his body and injured him very badly. Q/. Do you know the reason why he did not return to work? — ^A. Because he was not able to work. Q. After he recovered did he go to work? — ^A. After he recovered he went to work as soon as he reported for work. JOHN G. WEST sworn and examined. By the Chaibman: Question. How long have you been employed as an engineer on the Missouri Pacific road? — Answer. I have been on the road fifteen years and have been running an engine nearly eleven years. Q. Do you know anything about this strike? — A. No; I do not know anything but what I have heard. Q. Do yoa know the cause of it ? — A. No, sir; I do not. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 109 Q. Have you, heaid any of the strikers state what the cause was. A. I have heard none of them express an opinion about it at all. Q. Do you belong to what is known as the Brotherhood of Engineers ?^A. I do, sir. Q. Had you any contract or any agreement with the railroad company? — A. We have a contract made and entered into by Mr.,Hoxie, at that time third vice-president and general manager, and the contract represented the engineers on this part of the system. Q. What is the substance of it ? — A. Well, I do not know that I could go to work and explain it. ' The substance of it was that we should perform an amount of work for a certain rate of pay: that is aa near the substance of it as I can get. Q. Since this agreement was made have the company kept it vfith you ? — A. They have. Q. Have you kept it with them ? — A. We have. Q. Did your brotherhood as a body promise the Knights of Labor that if they struck you would give them aid ? — A. It is against the principles of the constitution and by- laws to recognise any other body of labor. Q. Do you remember of any engineers or firemen, either as a body or as individuals, declaring that they would aid the Knights of Labor in the strike? — A. I have not my- self, and I do not know of anybody that made any promise in regard to any matter of that kind. Q. Might it have taken place without your knowledge ? — A. Such a thing might have been done; there are black sheep in every fold. HARRISON EVERETT sworn and examined. By Mr. BUCHANAN: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Denison. Q. How long have you resided here 1 — A. About seven months. Q. What is your employment? — A. I have been working for the Missouri Pacific company since the 19th of March. Q. What were you at work at before ? — A. I was at work at the carpenter's trade. Q. What are yon doing for the Missouri Pacific now ? — A. Helping a blacksmith. Q. Since you have accepted employment have you had any threat made toward you, or any intimidation practiced upon yon ? — A. When I first commenced to work for tiiem two men came to me and told me that I had better quit work, for if I did not I would get hnit. I told them if I did I would lose my job. This was the second day after I went to work. Q. Who are they? — ^A. I do not know. They are not railroad men. Q. What are their names? — A. I would not wish to give their names. On the night of the 34th or 25th eight or nine men came to my house. There were that many, but only two of them said anything to me. Two of them told me that if I would just quit work they would agree that I should have a job when the strike was over. Q. Did you know these men? — A. No, sir; I did not kSow any of these men. They were masked and wore masks over their faces, and had a cloth put over their faces to their eyes. Q. Give the rest of the conversation. — A. I told them all that I had a right to work when and where I pleased; that they had the right to work, if they wanted to, and that I too had the right to work where I pleased. After I went into the house they shot off a couple of guns and then they left. Then, in a night or two or three nights after I had got to work, between nine and ten o'clock, as I was going home, five or six men met me and halted me, but they did not say anything more. I halted and then walked back- ward, keeping my gun on them. Q. Had you a gun with you? — A. Yes, sir; I had a gun with me. Q. Do you carry it yet?— A. No, sir. Q. How long had you had it? — A. For about a week. Q. Why did you have it? — A. Because I was threatened by those fellows. Q. And you had it for the purpose of self-defense? — ^A. Yes, sir; for the purpose of self-defense. Q. These two men that you spoke of coming to you and talking with you, I under- stand yon to say that they were not railroad men? — A. They were not railroad men. Q. They were not strikers? — ^A. They were strikers, but not railroad men at all. They were sympathizers taking part with them. Q. Strikers in spirit, but not in fact? — A. Participated in trying to get men to quit their work. That is as far as they bothered me. Q. Then you do not know that the strikers were responsible for their action or that the Knights of Labor were ? — ^A. They were Knights of Labor, but I do not know their names. Q. Do yon know them to be Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir; I know them to be Eiiighta of Labor. 110 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, JOHN NASSOY sworn and examined. ' By the Chaieman: Question. What was your business between the 5th of March and the 1st of April?— . A. The dray business. Q. Hauling freight for anybody? — A.' Yes, sir; for nearly all the business men and merchants in town. Q. Did you go down to the depot of the Miaeouii Pacific to get any ireight during that time ? Did you get it ? — A. I got one load out of a car, and when I went for the second load they told me to stop. Q. By whom were you told to stop ? — A. I do not know; I cannot tell them by name. Q. Were they strikers or not ? — A. They were strikers. Q. What did they do to you? — A. Well, they asked me who gave me permission to go on the track, and I told them the agent of the Missouri Pacific, and that I had signed for the goods; and they said to me that belonged to those who struck, and that nobody had any right to take anything away. And one time I went on the dray to get to the car and they shoved me out of the car and nearly on the dray, and I took a dray pin to him, and so quick as he saw that I was coming he reached for his hip pocket, and I put the dray pin back and went on. Q. Had you previously gone to the agent to get authority to take the goods? — A. Yes, sir; it was for tlie Waters Pierce Oil Company. Q. You were not permitted by these strikers to take the freight? — A. Yes, sir; they stopped me ? HARTFORD MAGEE sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. You are an engineer and had charge of an engine and were in the employ of the Missouri Pacific during March and up to the strike? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Have you heard the evidence that has been given here as to the injuries of engines and other property by the strikers ? — A. Most of the evidence that I have heard has been since dinner. Q. So far as you saw, were these statements correct? — A. So far as I saw and so fiir as I know, they were. Q. Had you any special experiences? — A. Only in switching the passenger trains. The Knights of Labor had their switchmen and the Missouri Pacific had theirs, and the Missouri Pacific switchmen went along and did the switching, Q. Was that a passenger or ireight train ? — A. A passenger train. Q. Anything further that you recollect different from what the others have stated?— A. Nothing that I know of. Q. Did you lay idle during this strike? — A. The greater portion of the time. Weare paid by the mile, and I only made $26. Q. And are all engineers paid in the same manner ? — A. Yes, sir; the road engineers are. Q. How much do you ordinarily earn when the freight business of the road is act- ive? — A. Well, I paid no particular attention, but I presume $145 a month on the divis- ion I am on, between here and Muscogee. Q. Had you during this month all the service that you could do ? — A. No, sir. My engine went into the shop on the 20th of February and the strike detained her until the 19th of April, when she should have been out of the shop by the 7th or 8th of March. Q. How much wages have you lost on account of the stnke? — A. I presume $125. Q. How many engineers are there employed on the same division? — A. Twenty-five regular engineers and four extra engineers. Q. How much, in your jungment, was the average loss of those engineers by reason of the strike ? — A. Freight men lost everything. They made nothing. Q. They had to lay idle and support themselves and families, without being able to work? — A. Sometimes a passenger man would lay off, and would give a chance for an extra man to make expenses. Q. So that by the good will of the passenger engineers they would sometimes help a brother engineer in that way ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there any assistance given by those who struck to the engineers or any other class of workmen not included in their order? — A. No, sir. Q. And the understanding was that the Knights of Labor in the striking locality ■were aided by the assessments upon Knights of Labor all over the country?— A. Yes, sir. Q. I wish to know whether the Knights of Labor assisted any others of those who were thrown out of employment during the strike? — A. I can only answer that the engineers had no assistance from them. .LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUIH AND WEST. Ill Q. And, so far as you have inibrmatiou, none of the firemen ?— A. None of the fire- men. ' Q. YBy Mr. Outhwaite.) Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Was there not the same relative loss to the classes of railroad employ^ who did not go out on the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then the making of the "interest of one the concern of all" did not apply to the engineers and most of the others who were outside? — A. No, sir. ANDREW A. HARRISON sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. What is your business? — Answer. I am a locomotive engineer. Q. For what road have you Ipeen employed recently ? — A. By the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Q. What experience had yon during the strike ? — A. I came in here on passenger en- gine 151, on March 6, the day of the strike, leaving here at 1.50 p. m. There were some committee men on my engine; I do not know the names of but one of them. Joseph Gettler said they wanted to do some switching with the engine. The yardmas- ter was standing by the side of the engine and I told them he was the man to attend to that. I told Gettler that I would only answer him by saying that it was senseless of men to switch those cars with a passenger in them, and that I could not give up my en- gine to him to do it. The yardmaster ordered me to the house with her, and they went to the house with me. Gettler said, "We want to do some switching with her. The yardmaster is not running this yard here." I said to him, "I am running this engine, and while I am running her under the instructions of the proper officers of this company ' I will not give her to you. ' ' So they left me then and took 26 to do the switching. Q. Did they switch the passenger cars? — A. They set out the passenger and baggage cars. Q. Where the passengers in this train? — A. I do not know; but they would have to couple cars into the train and to couple and uncouple cars with it. Q. What further experience had you with the strike? — A. Well, I remained here most of the time during the strike. The only experience I had, I was present the day when the arrests were made, but I do not recollect the day of the month; it was probably the 25th. Q. You substantiate what has been said by other witnesses whose evidence you have heard? — A. Yes, sir. Q. If there is any other feature of the strike that has not been testified to, please state what it is. — A. I think there is not; I think everything has been testified to. Q. You observed that there was a general loss to the train servers on account of this ' strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. To those men who were not Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know anything of any promises given to the Knights of Labor by any en- gineers, or by the engineers' society, that they would help them in case they had a strike? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Before the strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you lay off during the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you lose anything by it? — A. Well, I have not received anything. I was or- dered off by my organization. That is, the private business organization. Q. That is, so far as you are concerned, did you make the ordinary runs and wages re- sulting from them ? — A. I drew thirty-one dollars and some cents from the company. Q. What ofSce do you hold in the Locomotive Engineer Society? — A. I am chief en- gineer of Local Division 177. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Were all the passenger trains mail trains? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Have you received anything from the company for the time you were off? — A. Nothing definite yet about it. I do not know that I wiU get any- thing or that I will not. My organization will be supposed to reimburse me for my lost time. Q. Were you requested by anybody to lay off and stiffen up the backbone of the engi- neers so that they would not help the strike ? — A. No, sir, not by any officers of the road. Q. Were you ? — A. I was ordered by my division to see that our men were not intim- idated, 3S much as po.ssible; to see when they went on deck that they had others to stand by them. And I made it my business to be there and walk ahead of the en- gine to see that the switches were all right and to protect them as much as possible in the performance of their duty under the contract with the company. Q. What do you mean by the chief of the division ? — A. Superintendent of the divis- ion of the National Brotherhood of Engineers. 112 iABOR TEODBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST- Q. (By Mr. Pabkeb.) Was this Alvarado distoibance ia your district? — ^A. It ia in the jniisdiction of this diyision. Q. Was any investigation made as to the canse of that disaster by the engineeis ot by ■ yourself? — A. Nothing more than the verbal report of the engineer injured. Q. Do yon know, or have yon reason to believe, that that train was ditched or that other trains have been injured on account of the refusal or fiiilure of engineers and fire- men to support the strike ? — A. It would simply suspicion of the engineers. It was suspected that it was done for the purpose of intimidating them; but I do not know anything about it. Q. Was a reward offered by the company to ascertain the names of the parties guilty of that injury ? — A. I understand so, but I have not seen that reward. JOHN G. HAETIGAN sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: -Question. Where do you reside? — ^Answer. At Denison, Tex. Q. How long have you resided there? — ^A. In the neighborhood of ten months. Q. In whose employ? — ^A. In the employ of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Q. In what position? — A. As assistant superintendent of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas division, south of Denison. Q. Would any release given by employes to the company for injuries sustained while in the employ of the company be known to you? — A. I have charge of that. Q. A form of release ia produced here. Is it the form required b.y the company to be signed by the employ^ who have been injured while in the^employ of the company? Have you any other form than the one that has been exhibited here? — A. The form has not been in use for the last nine months. I have here the regular form of claim of Q. Have you considered as feasible any measure that Congress might impose? — A" No, sir; I cannot say that I have. The idea suggested to my mind in a general way is aboutaslhave stated it to the committee; thatis,thatwe have legislation similar to that for the prevention (if interference with the transportation of mails; I am inclined to think that it could be done under that claiuse of the legislation which regulates the mails. Q. If we have powerto enact legislation that would prevent interfering with the carry- ing on of interstate commerce, would that power further compel the carrier to carry on interstate commerce? — A. Yes, sir, I think so; that is, with interstate lines that extend into several States. Q. With reference to this question of misplacing a switch, and doing other damage to railroad property, or any of these acts to intimidate, would they not be offenses under the common law, independent of statulje? — A. I do not understand that there are any common-law offenses in Texas. We have a code, and that includes only such offense? as are defined in the code. Q. Are there no provisions in your code that deal with common-law offenses? — A. No, sir; I may state to the committee that the whole body of our criminal laws are con- tained in our criminal code. The Chairman. There is a special provision that nothing shall be criminal which is not defined in the code. Q. You draw a distinction between local raUroad and interstate railroads. Do yoa consider that railroad is an interstate railroad which is wholly within the territory of a State, beginning and ending in that State, but that still connects vrith other roads run- ning through that State aoA into other States, and that carries freight and delivers it to the interstate road ? — A. I would hardly consider that an interstate road, and yet it might be connected with an interstate road by traffic with other lines. Q. (By Mr. BuchananL) What do you mean by an interstate railroad? — A. A rail- » road running from one State into another State. The Missouri, Kansas and Texas Rail- road line IS a corporation created by the State of Kansas. They came here, and by spe- cial act it is a corporation created by the State of Texas. Q. Which, ia point of fact, is an enabling act? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And is really in the nature of a supplemental charter? — A. Well, in one sense it may be so. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Is it not necessary for the proper protection of railroad em- ployfe that they should have some organization or association so tl\at they can approach the officials of the road with any grievances they think they have, or any injuries they think they have sustained, vrithont being subject to loss of wages or discharge or other penalty? — A. I am not Sufficiently familiar with their wants to say it is necessary. I think it very proper that they should have such organizations. I think the idea is a good one; that the labor interest should have organization whereby they may act in harmony. Q. Is not a man who is at work for a railroad and has a family somewhat at the mercy of his employers, if he owns lots or owns land, unless he has some avenue of approach by which he can go to his superiors in position and have his wants and rights con- sidered? — A. Such person would undoubtedly be to some extent at the mercy of the management; but, at the same time, as far as my observation goes, all those employes have the right to approach the management now, just as well individually as collect- ively. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 115 Q. As to these rights you have not thought of national provisions for them ? — A. WeJl, my observation does not extend beyond my connection with these lines here. Q. I inferred that you had looked more to the State penalties A. My attention has been necessarily more drawn in that direction. Q. Than toward a provision for alleviation or conciliation ? — A. Yes, sir. I should very much like to see either Congress or the State Legislature enact some measures that would open up a way to alleviation, to present this field .of discovery yet unexplored. JOHN J. HARTIGAN recalled and examined. By Mr. Otjthwaite: Question. Have you received a letter under seal from the local aasembly of Knights of Labor stating that protection would be given to the passenger and mail trains ? — An- swer. I received such a communication signed by the Local Assembly 3690, Knighta of Labor. \ Q. Have you a copy of it? — A. Yes, sir. (Copy was here introduced as follows:) ' Denison, Tbx., March 10, 1885. To J. G. Habtigan, Superintendent Miasowri Paeifio Railway, Denison: You are hereby notified that all Knights of Labor of any and all departments of the service are at the service of the company to perform any and all kinds of repairs neces- tsaiy to secure the safety of passenger and mail trains. Subject to the orders of this body. Executive Boabd, L. A. 3690, K. of L. Attest: B. L. Shaw, S. 8. pro tempore. \ . ■WYATT OWENS (colored) sworn and examined. By the Chaibman: 'Question. How long have you lived in Denison ? — Answer. Ever since 1875. Q. Have you worked for the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. Yea, sir. Q. How long ? — ^About seven or eight or nine years. Q. In what capacity? — ^A. The first work I did was on the work train. Q. Were you at work for the railroad company on the 6th of March? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. What were you doing? — A. I was a laborer up in the car department. ^. Were you a Knight of Labor? — ^A. Yes, sir. ■Q. Are you one dfcw? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you belong to the colored organization of the Knights of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — ^A. Yes, sir; I went out on the strike. Q. Why? — A. For the rates of wages. I cannot live on what I was getting — $1.25 a day. Q. Was the only reason for yonr going out on a strike the fact that you were gettnig fl.25 a day and could not live on that? — A. No, sir; it was not the only question; because in 1885 they promised to restore our wages to the September, 1884, rate. To the best of my knowledge, they promised to give ns $1.45 a day. When the pay-car came around they did not pay ns $1.40, and the question was raised; and they said they could not pay that, and that the rate was $1.25 in September, 1884. I told themrthat I was getting $1.40 for the same work, and other men were getting $1.25. Mr. Bailey cut us down to the same as they paid these other men. Q. When was this cut-down in the wages? — A. It was in 1885. Q. . What time in 1885? — I cannot remember exactly what time. Q. Was it not in the spring? — A. Yes, sir; it was in the spring. Q. Did you work froia that time until the 6th of March, 1886, for $1.25?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you not strike during that period of time if you could not live on $1.25 a day ? — A. I thought they would restore our wages according to the agreement. They said they were working on it. ' _ Q. Who said? — ^A. Some of the members; I do not know exactly who said so. Q. Working on what ? — A. Working to get our wages restored. Q. You inean that you were living in hope ? — A. I was living in hope. Q. Did you return to work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When? — A. I do not exactly know when it was. Q. Did you go back when Mr. Powderly issued his order? — A. Yes, sir. 116 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST Q. Ordering, or directing Mr. Irons to order, the men back to work? — A. Yes, aii. Q. How long did you work? — A. I worked five days. Q. When did you stop work? — A. Well, they arrested me. Q. Who arrested you ? — A. Mr. Whiteside; I believe that is his name. Q. What position did he hold? — A. He is Mr. Douglass's deputy. Q. Deputy sheriff? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Upon what charge did he arrest you? — A. For being in the raid upon the shop ttiat night. Q. What night do you mean? — A. That night that the raid was made upon the round- house. They took me and put me in j ail, and they put me in irons and forced me to tell something, and to say something to the jailer. Q. What did he question you about? — A. They tried to make me say I was down there. They went out and staid about fifteen minutes and the jailer was out in the yard talking, and Whiteside told the jailer to chain me down. He chained me down with irons all night, and kept me that way all night. Q. Who told the jailer to do that?— A. I understood the deputy sheriff to do that. Q. Did you resist the jailer? — A. No, sir; I never resisted any at all; I told him ''aU right." Q. How did he chain you? — A. He chained both legs, and by a chain right around me, and I could not do anything but lie down on my right side all night. Q. Did you rest? — A. No, sir; I did not rest a bit. Q. What kind of a jail was it; was it a safe jail? — A. It was a safe jail; built of rock. Q. What reason did he assign for that treatment? — A. I do not know, sir, except to make me tell something I did not know anything about. Q. You were not a convict? — A. No, sir, I am not a convict. Q. Have you been tried? — ^A. No, sir, I have not been tried. Q. Are you out on bond? — A. I am out on bond now. Q. Did Mr. Whiteside come back and converse with you after you were chained? — ^A. He came back the next morning and cursed me around a little. Q. State what he said. — ^A. He said that he wanted to get any evidence that I could give. He said, " I am not after you colored men ; I am after tfiose white sons of bitches. " I told him I did not know anything about it; but that I would tell him the truth, and directly he kept pumping around, and I told him something, and he took me out of there and took the chain off one leg. He would not allow me bond before my trial. He took me from the roundhouse and took me to jaU. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) How long did you stay in that jail with a chain on?— A. From half past 6 to half past 10; and from Thursday to Saturday night I staid in jail and had a chain around one leg all the time. Q. Yon say that you could not live on $1.25 a day; how much family have you?— A. A wife and one child. Q. What rent have you to pay? — A. I have no rent to pay now^ Q. Were you in the employ of the company in September, 1884?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And you got how much then ? — A. I don't remember, but about $1.40. Q. They cut that pay when ? — A. In the spring of 1885, some time. Q. Did you ggree to have it reduced from $1.40 to $1.25, or was it done without your consent ? — A. It was done without my consent. Q. Were you in the strike of 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you strike against that reduction then ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And after the strike was over did you get your $1.40 back again ? — A. No, sir. Q. You never did get it? — ^A. No, sir; I never got it. Mr. Paekke. What was the name of the jailer thatchained you? — A. I do not know his name. Q. Do you know whether he is in town now ? — A. He is jailer now. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Have you made any complaint against him for it?— A. No, sir; I have made no complaint against him. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) I am requested to ask you whether you were ever arrested before? — A. I was never arrested before, and was never in the court-house as a witness. Q. Are you certain that yon were paid $1.40 in 1884? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You signed the pay-roll? — A. I do not know about signing the pay-roll. Q. In September, 1884, you signed the pay-roll for some amount ?— A. I disrememher now. Q. Did you ever sign any papers when you got your money ?— A. I touched the pen. Q. You signed the pay-roll for the amount of wages which were coming to you?— A. I do not remember. Q. Well, did yon make your mark, or do you write your own name when yon get yoni pay at any time? — A. I always touch the pen; that is all I can do. Q. And you afterward got aU the money that was coming to yon ? — A. All that was promised me. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 117 « Q. Did you ever -work without getting your time and a half? — ^A. I never have got time and a half. ,Q. Where were you working? — A. Round about the round-house and car shops. Q. Did you ever gp to your boss and complain about not having received the amount of wages that you ought to get? — A. No, sir; not as I remember of; I cannot remember now. " 0. Had you any talk with any officers of the road about not getting the pay that was coming to you? — A. I told Mr. Bailey that I was not getting the pay that I was paid before; that is, I was not getting $1.40 a day. Q. After that you went to the local assembly of the Knights and complained to them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chaieman. ) Were you not working on the road oii work trains in Sep- tember, 1884, when you were getting $1.40 a day? — ^A. I was working down at the round-house in 1884. Q. Were you not working out on the road in September, 1884, and getting $1.40 a ■day; was that not the regular pay for that work? — ^A. I got $1.40 a day all the time I worked on the work train. MICHAEL J. MURRAY sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. Where do you live ? — Answer. Denison, Tex. Q. How long have you lived here? — A. About fourteen months. Q. How long have you been employed by the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? — A. About fourteen months. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What position do you occupy in that order? — A. I am a member of the local ex- ecutive board. Q. What do you know as to any overtime being made without extra compensation to the men in the boiler shops? — A. In the boiler department, where I worked, I being a member of the executive board, I have had a great deal to do in regard to overtime, &c. That is, the employ^ would complain when they did not receive satisfaction from the officials. There are several cases in which employes of the boiler department, in coming to me, stated that the contract as agreed to was that they should receive time and a half for overtime, and that it had not been lived up to. Where they had to travel on the road to do duty out of Denison they thought that they would receive the same pay for traveling time as for overtime, and they complained that they received five hours' travel for ten hours' travel. They claimed that they ought to receive fifteen hours for ten hours' travel on the road. Q. In the daytime ? — A. At night-time and Sundays. Q. Coming home or going to work? — A. Yes; going to jobs and coming home also. For instance, there is a job in Dallas of repair work. A man would take a little of the stock, enough to be able to repair the job, and then he would go to Dallas and do the work. In case he should travel in the daytime he would expect nothing but ten hours' pay, but when he traveled at night-time he would expect fifteen hours' pay for overtime if he traveled ten; but he only received five. The officials of the road, as I understood, said to me when I went to interview them in regard to it that the master mechanic did not think they ought to get more than five hours, and that they thought that was enough — ^five hours' pay for ten hours' travel. Q. Was that subject ever adjusted? — A. It never was. ' Q. Was it ever adjusted or specifically mentioned at any time? — A. It was mentioned to the officials of the road by some members of our order. Then they came to me and asked me to lake it in hand, and it was before the master mechanic. There was an instance of ■this kind, and I went to the foreman and asked him about it, and he said he was work- ing under the orders of the master mechanic, and he was notallowedto give more than five hours in time for traveling. I then reported to the employ^ who were members of the order and working in my department, and stated that it would be better to have a com- mittee wait on the master mechanic, and if they could not adjust the trouble we would appeal to the district executive board. We failed to adjust the trouble at Denison. I was not on the board at that time, but got on it just shortly before the trouble was set- tled. Our district master workman so informed the committee, and said that he was going to Palestine to visit the superintendent there and see if he could not have it set- tled. He went to Palestine, and returning said to a member of the' committee that he had made the necessary arrangements with the superintendent to pay time and a half foV all overtime over ten hours, a day's work. And of course they expected to get that. I never go on the road myself. I never went but once or twice. I did not want to re- fuse to go and raise any disturbance, so if I was asked to go I would ask the foreman to get somebody to go in my place. I have always got out of going. After oiir district 118 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. master workman had adjusted the trouble with the superintendent in Palestine and lia4 stated that they would get time and a half, one of the employ^ in the boiler depart- ment went on a trip and he received but five hours, receiving but half time. It never was laid in my hands afterward. That was shortly before this strike took place. We had a good deal of correspondence about it. Q. Is there anything more that you know in relation to this matter that caused the strike?— A. Well, as far as the strike is concerned, it has been rumored and testified by other parties that the strike was ordered on account of the discharge of Mr. Hall. I would like simply to say that Mr. Hall's case was the last straw, and that there were a great many other grievances. We had been requested to state if we would sastain our superior oflScer in a demand for the increased pay of unskilled laborers who were receiv- ing a dollar and fifteen cents a day, and ask for a dollar fifty. Q. Are you an officer of that order? — A. I am an officer of the district. Q. These are matters of record, and you have papers showing that there were griev- ances, and that demands had been made upon them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may bring them here this evening. — ^A. Sometimes we received these papers, in secret circulars or circular letters. Whether they would allow the circular letters to be shown or not I do not know. Q. Well, I was going to say that you may bring the circular as to the origin of this strike. — A. I have not got it in my possession ; but the officers of this assembly have it I am not certain whether they have it or not, but all papers of that kind are ordered to be filed. I do not know whether they preserved it or not. y Q. You have not got a copy of it yourself? — A. No, sir. Then shortly afterward we had a report from our board that Mr. Hall, a member of the district executive, had been discharged on his return to the shop after attending the session of the board; but we never expected that there would be any serious difficulty over his case, and in fact it never led us into the strike. The point that we were striking for more than anything else was that we wanted the unskilled labor, such as section- hands, that worked eleven and twelve hours a day, and received but a dollar and fifteen cents a day, to have their ■^ages raised, and after we found that it would be impossible to make terms with the railroad officials or mangers, that we determined we would make the strike. It was on these grounds that we made the strike. Q. As a record of this is kept the transaction was a matter that was in a written com- munication to the company, was it not ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. All these things should be presented to this committee to have their proper ■weight?— A. I do not know whether our secretary has them filed or not; but I presume they could be procured from him if he has them. Q. Were you here during the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you anything to say as to the killing of engines or the other matters which have been testified about here ? — A. As far as the killing of engines is concerned, I know nothing of any of it. I never have been implicated in it. I have never seen one of the engines killed that I remember of. I understand that it is stated that they have killed engines and disabled them, but when it was done or whether it was done I do not know. I have never been on the company's premises even; but the first time I undertook to go therelwasarrestedbyanofficerandwastakentojail. I asked the charges hehadagainst me, and he said it was for unlawful and disorderly assembly, I think he stated. I gave bond in $500, and was released to appear in the court of the justice of the peace next morning. The case was postponed, and then there was an'other charge against me. I could not at that time give bond, and was forced back to jail again, where I staid for the space of about five or six hours, until some of my friends secured bond for me. I was then permitted to go, and I walked away. About two days afterwards I was arrested again by "an officer with a warrant — the first warrant that was ever read to me. I asked him what the charge was, and it was not mentioned in the warrant what the charge was, and I do not remember that he said what the charge was, and I was arrested and sent off to jail again. I staid there for four hours and secured bond to appear, and was notified to appear, as I thought, the first Monday in this month. I did not appear until this last Monday to stand my trial. I entered the court-house with my attorney, and met with some officer there and had a conversation with one or two of them and then left. On my way Aown the street to see a business man there on a little business I was arrested again by an officer who presented me with a $500 bond, charging riot. I asked him if he did not think that charge against me had been made previous to that time. I am perfectly satisfied that he arrested me upon the same charge that I had given him a $500 bond upon previous to this time. When I was notified to appear in the court for a contempt of court I appeared and they failed to make a case against me and I was dis- charged. When I was discharged I was notified that ray case was thrown out of court. Shortly after that I asked one of the officers how many charges they had against me. He said he did not know. I asked him if he could get up any more charges. I think that LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 119 fhe whole thing was to intimidate me as much as possible and pat me in jail as often aa they could. I think they considered me as one of the leaders and merely aimed to hold me by putting me in jail. Q. Where were you arrested the first time? — ^A. I was standing here on Main street. I was one of the five persons that the officer spoke of arresting in his testimony this morning. The case was for disorderly assembly, as he said before the court. The case has never come up, and they stated that they knew nothing about it in speaking of those five that had been arrested on that charge. Q. (By itie Chaieman. ) Did you file an answer to the charge of the contempt of court, in which you contended that yon had not beenserved with awrit of injunction?— A. I had no knowledge that I was served with a writ of injunction. I did not file an answer, only when I was on the stand at Dallas I told my attorney that I gave my bonds, and I said that in fact as far as the case was concerned, that I was never served with an injunction, and if I was served with an injunction I did not think I had violated any laws of the country. Q. Were you sworn in court? — A. I was sworn in court. I cannot remember whether he asked me this question. I do not remember; but I told the district attorney in the private room previous to this time that I was not served, and I also told my attemey; but I filed no answer in writing. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaiie.) Did your attorney for you file an answer? — A. I do not know whether he filed an answer or not. Q. Was not that your defense, that you had not been served? — A. That was my de- fense in the case that I was tried in. Q. Yon stated that the case was thrown out of court? — A. I stated that I did not know whether I was asked this question. Q. Just before you were arrested had you been on the company's grounds? — ^A. I had not. Q. Had you been on the company's grounds at any time when an effort was made to check the movement of trains? — A. No, sir; I was not.^ Q. Have you been on the company's grounds at any time since the strike up to this day? — A. No, sir. Q. Not at all ? — A. Not that I remember of at any time. Q. Would you remember that if yon had been? — A. I have been on the company's grounds previous to the time that the officers came with these injunction 'Writs. I have never beeu there with any particular business, but merely walked through the yards. Q. Ho\jr were men served in the ii^unction matter 1 — ^A. I never saw the officers untU I was arrested, but I understand from some members of our organization that there were officers there before that transaction. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Please tell me the name of the man who was sent out and made a claim for time and half — A. His name was Eosbottom. Q. Name the m^n who worked on section-work for a dollar and fifteen cents a day.— r A. I am not supposed to give the names. It is contrary to the constitution and by-laws of our order to mention the names of members of our organization that way. Q. (By the Chaieman. ) I am not asking yon the names of members of your order but the names of section-men who worked twelve hours a day for a dollar and fifteen cents. — A. I am not very well acquainted with them, aiud I am not well acquainted with their names. I do not know all the employ^ of the shop, although I know them when I see them. I remember of it being spoken of in our assembly-room and a request made to take it in hand. Q. Were any of these grievances complained of presented to any railroad officials before the strike? — ^A. I do not know of that myself. All this business is in the hands of the district board. We have the little local grievances thait we can attend to, but when it comes to a general increase of the wages we cannot act upon it. Q. I am asking about these men who work eleven and twelve hours for $1.15 a day and the men who were sent out and made a claim for time and a half? — A. That has been presented to Mr. Clark, our master mechanic, for adjustment. I do not remember the answer, or when the answer was given, I was pushed at the time and did not have an opportunity to talk about it. Q. Can you give the date when that man was sent out ? — A. I suppose he can state that better himself. Q. (By Mr. Paekbe.) You say that a strike would have occurred if Hall had not been discharged ' — A. Well, I would not be certain about that. I only stated that Hall's case was one of the grievances. Q. Did you understand that a strike would have occurred if HaU had not been dis- charged? — A. To the best of my belief it would. Q. Before what day would it have occurred? — A. I cannot say the date. 120 laboe troubles in the south and west. Q. Did you not understand that th^re ■was an intention to strike by the 1st of Hay in any event? — A. I understood that from the newspapers and correspondence that asked our feeling in regard to the demand for eight hours' moTement. Q. Did you not understand that there was to be a strike upon this system before or by the 1st of May ? — A. No, sir. Q. You never heard of that until now ? — A. I never heard of that. Q. You never heard of any such intention? — A. I did not know of any such inten- tion and never heaad anybody speak of it. Q. Do you not know that it was intended to have a strike this spring?— A. No, sir; I do not. Q. You never have understood that ? — A. 1 never have understood that. Q. Was this matter of grievances in the hands of the local executive board ? — ^A. These grievances — that is, the increase of wages of some of our laborers here in the shop, that has been spoken of several times. One man who testified here this morning spoke of it at one time. Q. Tell us again whether you understood that the local grievances were in the hands of the local executive ? — A. The local grievances were in the hands of the local com- mittee at this time. Q. Had you not understood for some time previous to the report of the discharge of Hall that a strike was expected on this system during the spring or early summer? — A. Well, I did not understand it to be a true fact. Q. Do you know it was in contemplation? — A. No; I did not know7 It was only just mentioned as an outside rumor among the people. They said that that agreement which was made by the company had been violated and that they thought that some day soon there would have to be another strike to have those grievances adjusted. Q. What particular grievances ? — A. This time and a half and this reduction of la- borer's wages. Q. What did the section-men receive per day in September, 1884 ? — ^A. That I can not say. I was not here at that time. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite. ) Do you know that the strikers generally said that this strike was caused by the discharge of a man named Hall on the Texas and Pacific road? — ^A. I have, heard no one man to my knowledge say it was the discharge of Mr. Hall on the Texas and Pacific. Q. Do you know that the strikers did say anything as to what was the cause of it? — A. I do not believe they did. They never got instructions as to what it was for. They never had instructions from Marshall that mentioned it. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Have you ever taken any part in a strike before this one? — ^A. I never have but one time. I was foreman in a small.shop in La Fayette, Ind., and the employ (§s were dissatisfied about not receiving their wages regularly, and I sim^dy locked up the shop. Mr. Outhwaite. Look a^t that (showing a joint letter to John Doyle, foreman of the car-shops, dated Dehison, Tex., March 4) and see if it is an order sent, by your lodge. The Witness. (Examining paper.) Yes, sir; it is. Q. Was its request complied with? — A. Yes, sir. The paper was introduced and read, as follows: [Bed River AsBembly, No. 3690, Knights of Labor.] Denisost, Tex., March 4, 1886. Mr. Jno. Doyle, Esq.j Foremmi Cm-Shopa, M., K. T. S. S., Denison, Tex. : Sib: You are hereby notified that on and after this day all Knights of Labor will re- fuse to repair T. & P. or N. O. & P. cars until further orders. Please don't insist, for we must reAise. M. J. MURRAY, J. P. MACKEY, J. A. ARNOLD, Local Ex. Board, L. A. 3690. JACOB B. PIPER, M. W. [seal.] (Stamped on seal :) Denison, Texas. Founded Maroli 16,1885. Bed Biver Assembly. S. O. MM. No. 3690. Q. You say that was complied with? — A. As far as I know it was until the strike, and we do not know of any instance where any of the employes had repaired Texas and Pa- cific cars after that. Mr. Buchanan. Did I understand you correctly that one of the causes of the strike LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ' 121 was the demand that the wages of the unskilled laborers should he raised from $1.15 a day to 11.50 a day? — A. Yes, sir; that was one of pur grievances. Q, Was that grievance presented to the officers of the company ? — A. That was in the hands of the district executive board, and they stated that it would go. Q. Is it possible for me to find out in any way whether that grievance was presented to the company ? — A. By calling on the district executive board of No. 101. Q. You have said that this was a cause of a strike, and you have gone out on a strike that has led to & great destruction of property, to depression of business, and serious physical injury to many persons. Now, I ask you whether you know that that griev- ance was ever presented to the company before the strike ? — A. That I cannot answer, simply because I am only a member of the local executive board, and this was in the hands of the district board. We received a communication asking us if we would sus- tain them in that demand for unskilled labor to be increased to a dollar and fifty cents. Q. Then yon have no knowledge whatever as to whether this cause of the strike was ever presented to the company for consideration before the strike occurred ? — A. Only irom conversation between members of the board after that time. , He told me that all these grievances had been xtresentedto the company. Q. What is his name ? — A. He did not say whether it was before or after the strike. I do not remember to have asked that. Q. What is his name? — A. George Lyman. Q. Does he live here? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Is he in town to-day? — A. I do not know. Q. Did he state whether he presented it or that he had personal knowledge who pre- sented it? — ^A. He did not say who presented it. Q. When had you this conversation with Mr. Ljrman? — A. This was some week or two weeks after the strike had taken place. Q. Then you struck without any knowledge as to whether this grievance had in fact been presented to the company before you struck ? — ^A . I struck in obedience to demand. Q. Will you be kind enough to answer my question? — A. I can just simply say to that I belong to the organization. (The question was here read to witness). Then you struck without any knowl- edge as to whether these grievances had in fact been presented to the company or not before you struck? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. This matter of time-and-a-half for riding and other work, had you a case of that kind of your own? — A. No, sir; I have never traveled on the road since I have been em- ployed here. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Under the rules of your order what was your duty with reference to the grievances complained of? — A. It was my duty to obey orders given me by superior officials. Q. You do not understand my question. You say you had grievances? — A. Myself? I did not have any grievances. Q. Members of the local assembly presented grievances to yon, did they not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Under the rules of your order what was your duty in connection with those com- plaints? — ^A. It was my duty as a member of the executive board, after these grievances were presented to me, to find out whether they were as stated or not. Q. Did you investigate them? — A. I investigated several of them. Q. What was your duty after you made this investigation ? — Ai It was then my duty to use all the influence in my power to have them adjusted, and if I did not succeed to present them to the district executive. Q. Was it in your power to have them adjusted? — A. Well I do not know. Q. What did you do with the list of grievances that you complained of? — A. They still lie as they were at that time. They still lie, as I have never taken any action on them. ■ , Q. Did you send them to the district board ? — A. Not untU this district board should have them investigated. Q. What was the next step taken in connection with this complaint about unskilled labor? — ^A. Well, it was a subject that I cannot state as to what steps the district board have taken. Q. But the local assembly voted upon the question whether they would sustain the district board if it ordered a strike, did it not?— A. Yes, sir; I voted upon that question. Q. Did the district board order a strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was your duty under the laws of your organization when the district board ordered a strike? — A. To order but all men belonging to our order and to preserve order as much as we possibly could. Q. DidyoufoUow that law of your order ?-T-A. To the best of my ability. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was there any complaint in your hands with reference to 122 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. this question of unskilled labor ? — A. There was not. The complaints that were in my , hands were simply those that were in the shop, where we have men employed here as laborers in the yards, such as the yyipers. I understand we had men receiving $1.40 a day, and after one would quit, or one of them would be laid off or taken to another department, they would hire colored men in the places of white men that were so trans- ferred and pay them $1.25 a day. Some of these colored men were members of the or- ganization, and they asked us if we could not do something for them. This was jnst shortly before the strike took place. We took hold of it, and I think one of the mem- bers of the executive board did something in it. Q. You said you were a member of some board — ^what board ? — A. The local executive board. Q. As such did these complaints aa to xmskiUed labor come into your hands ?— A. As far as that shop was concerned. Q. What did you do with these complaints? — A. I merely spoke about it to the com- mittee. And as soon as we had an opportunity we would investigate and see what we could do. We encouraged them to keep in tUl the district executive board should have time to take action on it. Q. Did you investigate it ? — ^A. I never went into it. Q. Did you send it to the district board? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Give me the date at which these complaints first came into your nands ? — ^A. I can- not give the dates. Q. How long before the strike? — A. I suppose from five to six weeks. Q. Up to the time of the strike you had not investigated them? — A. No, sir. Q. Nor forwarded them to the district board?— A. No, sir. Q. You did not know that the district board forwarded them to the company? — ^A. I did not know whether they did. Q. Then how are you able to say that the laborers' grievance was one of the causes of the strike? — A. This was the unskilled laborers, the unskilled men that were re- ceiving $1.15 a day. That was what was in the hands of the district board. Q. Had any complaint as to that come into your hands as a member of the local board? — A. No, sir. Q. And by you been forwarded to the district board? — A. No, sir. As I said, I had a member or two whose names I could not remember, and I did not think it necessary to speak about the matter. One of them had said that he had been getting $1.15 a day. He asked me what I thought the Knights of Labor could do for him, and I told him that 1 did not know anything about it. Q. And this is all the grievance that you can now speak of, and that is all the action you took?— A. On the ^1.15 to $1.50 a day. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You were asked as to what was your duty. Isimplywanted to know what you did. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Do you know whether this matter was in the hands of the district board by reason o^ complaints that had been made from this city? — A. Yes, sir. The correspondence that we have was that they had it in their grievances, and it was assumed that they were to present it. Q. What was it that you voted on? — A. We voted on that. That we would sustain the executive board in the demand for an increase in th^i wages of unskilled labor from $1.15 9. day to $1.50 a day. Q. Was that before or after the discharge of Hall? — ^A. It was before the discharge of Hall. Q. How long before? — A. I am not quite sure, but I think it was six or seven days. Q. Was there any other complaint except the one that you spoke of respecting the wages of unskilled labor? — A. Nothing at all; only some rumor amongst the boys here. JOHN S. JOHNSON sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Denison, Tex. Q. How long have you resided in Denison ? — A. Nine years. Q. What is your occupation? — A. I am a railroad man. I have followed two occu- pations since I have been in town. When I first came to Denison I followed the trade of a boiler-maker. Q. What did yon work at in Denison for the railroad company ? — A. As a boiler-maker at first, and after that I was employed as a machinist. Q. Were you foreman of the machine-shop at any time during th 3 past year ? — ^A. Yes, sir; on March 6 I was foreman, and had been for fifteen months. Q. Did you go out on the strike with the rest ? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TKOUBLSS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 123^ Q. Did you make application to the company again for work after the strike ? — A. I did, sir. Q. When? — A. When Mr. Powderly issued his circular. I do not know exactly th& date. Q. To whom did you apply ? — A. To the foreman of the car department. Q. Were you put on again? — A. No, sir. ^ Q. What answer was given you? — A. That my name was scratched. Q. Was any reason given for it? — A. No, sir. Q. Had you heen prominent in the strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Had you any reason to suspect that you were thought to have heen guilty ot inter- ference with or destruction of the company's property ? — A. I did not have any reason to do so, hecause I have not done anything to have them think so. Q. Has any charge been made against you? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you applied since then for work? — A. I applied then to Mr. Clark, and he took my name, the same as he did vrith the balance of them. Q. The result of that application you are not yet apprised of? — A. I am not aware of the result of that application. Q. Others besides yourself applied this morning? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you ever been injured while in the employ of the company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was your injury, and when did it occur? — A. About a year ago, as near as I can remember, I had a car-sill fall off the plainer bed, on account of being short of help in the shop. It was crooked, and it fell off and injured njy ankle. Q. How long were you off duty? — A. About eight or nine days it was before I was able to go down to the shop at all. Q. When you came down to the shop what was requested of you ? — A. That evening aiter I had worked, the timekeeper requested me to sign a release for the company. Q. Did you sign one? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you receive for signing it? — A. The release said ' ' in consideration of one dollar," but I never received the dollar to my knowledge. Q. What else did the release say ? — A. That I should not bring any suit against the company. That is all. Q. What was your other injury? — A. Well, I had that finger there [indicating] cut off in the machinery, in the saw-mill. I got my finger too close to the saw and it was cut off. Q. When did that occur? — A. About four months ago. Q. How long were you off duty at that time? — A. Only about four days, because the foreman told me to come down and look after the shop; that I did not need to do much work. Q. Did you sign a release as to that also? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who presented that release to you ? — A. I do not know that I can speak his name; he is the timekeeper. Q. How much did you receive for signing that release? — A. Nothing. Q. Did you intend in these cases to make a cl^im against the company for injury? — A. No, sir. Q. You did not expect to present any claim? — ^A. No, sir; because I did not consider my injuries sufficient to bring a claim for them, and I wanted my job in the shop. Q. Did your injuries result from carelessness of any other employ^ of the company? A. No, sir. Mr. OuTHWAiTE (exhibiting to vntness Claim Agent's Voucher, Form 813). Is that the form? The WiTifESS. Yes, sir; that ig a copy of the release. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN.) That is a copy of the last one you signed? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Did you sign that both times? — A. They both read the same. In some places you have got to state how you were hurt, and who was by, and all those things. Q. Is there a general Idea among the men who work in the shops that for every inj ury they receive while in the employ of the company that they have a; dollar claim against the company? — A. No, sir. OBADIAH OEGAN (colored) sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. I live out here east of town, about the ^ Fourth ward. Q. How tong have you lived there ? — A. About two and a half years. Q. Have you heen in the employ of the Missouri Pacific road ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. For how long? — ^A. Ever since I have been here. 124 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What did you do? — A. I am a laborer in the car shop and handle lumber. Q. When you first went to work what were your wages ? — A. One dollar and forty cents a day. Q. Do you remember the strike of 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were your wages up to that time? — A. Along about September $1.40, and I think it was October $1.25, and running down to January some time when they were cut down to $1.25. Q. And January of what year? — A. January a year ago. Q. They were then cat down to $1.25?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What were your wages at the time of the strike in March, 1885 ? — A. I got $1.25. I believe the strike was in March. In January, I think, they cut us to $1.25. Q. An/i in March there was a still further reduction? — A. I think it was. There were four or five of them, and they cut it down to $1.10. Q. Arid then you struck ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. After you went to work after the strike of 1885, what wages did yon get ? — ^A. One dollar and twenty-five cents. Q. How long have you been receiving $1.25?— A. I have been receiving it ever since. Q. Up to the time of the last strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the last strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you a member of the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you now working for the company? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. When did you begin to work for them again? — A. Three or four weeks ago. Q. About the time Mr. Powderly's letter came out? — A. Yes, sir. <5. Have you been at work for them ever since? — A. Yes, sir.. Q. At what rate? — A. One dollar and twfenty-five cents a day. Q. Did you ever work Sunday work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How often? — A. About every Sunday. Some Sundays I have got a lay-off. Q. How many hours do you work on Sunday? — A. Ten hours a day. Q. What do you get for that? — A. One dollar and twenty-five cents. Q. Do you only get $1.25 for Sunday work? — ^A. I never received any more. Q. Are you certain that is all you get? — ^A. When I work thirty days I get $37.50. Q. Who is your foreman? — A. Mr. Tuley. Q. 'Vfho pays you? — A. I get my pay from the pay-car. WILLIAM H. WINSTON sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. How long have you lived in the city of Denison? — ^Answer. Since 1881. Q. What has been your occupation? — A. That of a blacksmith. Q. In whose employment have you been? — A. The Missouri Pacific Company. Q. Did you go out on the strike? — A. I did. Q. What did you strike for? — ^A. I struck because everybody else struck. I do not know what I did strike for; because I was a Knight of Labor, I suppose. Q. Do you mean that you did not know what you struck for, but just obeyed the or- der and went out? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you attempt to go back to work? — A. I did on Mr. Powderly's order. Q. To whom did you apply? — A. Mr. Clark, the master mechanic. Q. Did he take you back? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Why? — A. I asked him what I had done, and he spoke to Rich and he told him then that "he was too numerous around engine 129; he made himself too officious around 129." Q. Had you been "too numerous" around 129? — A. I was around there all the time while the fun was going on. Q. Did Mr. Clark promise to investigate your case? — A. I saw him next day, and he fiaid to me that he would look over it. I told him I had not done anything. Q. Have you ever heard of his investigating it? — A. No, sir; I never heard of him in- vestigating any; but I went and saw him last .Thursday and had a talk vrith him. Q. What was the result of that talk? — A. He told me if I brought a withdrawal card he could give me a job. Q. What was your reply? — A. I told him I could not, because they were not giving any. Q. Did you tell him he had no right to discriminate against anybody? — A. I told him I did not think it right to deprive me of making a living, and he answered me if I could not work here I could work somewhere else. Q. Have you a family? — A. I have. Q. How large? — A. A wife and two children. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 125 Q. Have you a home in Denison, and do yoa own it? — A. I do. Q. Have yon made the money which purchased that home since you commenced to work here? — A. I have, sir. Q. Did yon go out on the strike a year ago? — A. I did, sir. Q. Have yon applied to the company since this strike has been declared off?— A. I went down this morning and met our men coming from the office, and they said if they were needed they would he called. I did not go around. Q. Are you out of employment, and have you been since the 6th of March? — ^A. Yes, sir. _ Q. Have you any means of living? — A. I have enough to keep me for a little whUe. ' Q. If you do not get employment ttom. this company what vpill be the effect? — A. I will have to leave town. Q. The only reason why you failed to go down this morning was that • you met so many coming away who said that they would be called for when needed. Is that true? — A. Yes, sir; that is the reason, and that was the answer I got from all of them; and I thought it was scarcely worth while for me to go any further. Q. Did you take an active part in the strike? — ^A. I cannot say that I did. Q. Were the wages that you received a year ago after the strike the same as you re- ceived in September, 1884? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Then that part of the agreement was kept so far as you were concerned? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. You say you struck without knowing what you struck for?~A. Yes, sir; I did not know what I struck for, any more than that I struck. I struck because I belonged to the order. Q. Because you were ordered by your superior officers to strike ? — A. Exactly. Q. And you attempted to get back into the emplbyment of the company when Mr. Powderly issued his order, about the last of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And they refused you because you were a Knight of Labor? — A. He did not say that because I was a Knight of Labor then. He said that last Thursday. Q. He promised to investigate your case, then ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And subsequently you applied again ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And then it was that Mr. dark talked about the withdrawal card? — ^A. That was on Monday. Q. What was your reply? — ^A. I told him I could not, because they were not giving anything of the kind. Q. You told him he ought not to discriminate against you? — A. Yes, sir. Q.' Did Mr. Clark teU you he had ten or twelve of these withdrawal cards in his of- fice? — ^A. He told me had some in his office. He told me they were more than twelve months old. Q. Are you anxious to get into the employment of the company now ? — A. I want to make my living. By Mr. Paekee : Q. Have you ever been in any other strikes but these two that you have spoken of? — A. Tes, sir. Q. How many? — A. Three or four, I believe. Q. Have you ever been in a lockout ? — A. Not till this time. Q. What is the difference between a strike and a walk out ? — A. I cannot see any dif- ference between when we strike and when we walk out. Q. What do men who belong to unions and other organizations understand to be the difference between a strike and a walk-out ? — A. Well, sir, I cannot see that there is any difference. I would like to have you explain it to me. Q. Now, as an expert on strikes, I wish to know of you if in your judgment a mere walk-out would amount to anything unless measures are taken to prevent other men occupying the places of the men who walk out? — ^A. Well, I did not prevent any man from taking my place. Q. I am not asking what yon would do, or what was done here, but my question is, wonld a mere walk-out amount to anything unless measures are- taken to prevent other men taking the places of the men going out? — A. It would not amount to anything. Q. What would it have amounted to in this case if you had merely walked out, and no person had interfered with the engines and the movement of trains ? — A. It would just merely amounted to nothing; everything would have gone on if the trains had not ijeen prevented from miming. Q. And other men would have been running the trains? — A. Men could have run the trains had they failed to oppose them. Q. K as capable men were found to run the trains and do the work as were in before, the business would scarcely have been disturbed ? — A. Not at all, sir. 126 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. - Q. Therefore is it not necessary, to make a strike effective, to prevent the use of en- gines and trains by other people? — A. Why, sir, it would not he effective if we did not prevent the use of trains. Q. Did you not know that when.you went out? — A. Well, I did not know hardly; I never thought of that. Q. Do you not now ? — A. I cannot say that I ever thought of it. ' Q. Do you know it now?^-A. It is shown in a different light. Q. Was not the object in killing engines to prevent the running of trains here and to make the strike effective? — A. I suppose it was. Q. You know those who killed the engines prevented the running of trains, do you not? — ^A. I do not know that. Q. You do not know who the individuals were who did it? — A. I did not see any of that. Q. (By Mr. OuTHWAiTE.) What evening was that you alluded to as being around that ■engine ? — A. There was some pushing and hauling going on around there, and I was standing round looking at it. Q. Did some men climb up on the engine? — A. There were three or four men on the engine. I do not know who they were besides the engineer and fireman. Q. Was there not some one besides the engineer and fireman? — ^A. I did not see any more. Q. Was that the time that some men were arrested ? — A. No, sir; I do not know that any men were arrested there. Q. Was anything done to this engine at that time at all? — A. I do not think that they could have done anything. Some water was flying around. Q. That was killing the engine? — A. No, I do not £iow. I believe the engine was ikilled, or something of that kind. I do not think she was living when I got there to see her. Q. That is the fan you were looking at? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You did not take any part in it, as you say? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Suppose you. were to receive employment again, what would "there be in the way of your going next week if another strike was ordered? — ^A. I would like to know what I was striking for. Q. With your present experience, if you were employed by the company you would feel it your duty to go out if ordered ? — A. No; unless I knew what I was going out for. Q. Unless it' presented a just case to your personal judgment? — ^A. Yes, sir. J. EGBERTS STREHOEN sworn and examined. By the Chaiemast: Question. How long have you been employed by the Southwestern system? — ^Answer. Three years the 12th of this month. Q. Are you in the employment of the company now? — A. I was until the 6th of -March. Q. What is your occupation? — A. I am a machinist. Q. When did you leave the employment of the company?' — ^A. On the 6th of March. Q. Voluntarily, or otherwise? — ^A. Because I was ordered out. Q. By whom ? — A. By the Knights of Labor. Q. What ground was assigned for ordering you out ? — ^A. I belong to the assembly, and 1 went out because the assembly went out. Q. Is that the only reason you can assign? — A. That's all. Q. Do you mean that you went out without knowing what your grievances were? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you apply for work afterward? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When? — A. When Mr. Powderly's circular came out. Q. You mean the order instructing Martin lions to direct the men to resume work?— A. Yes, sir; Q. To whom did you apply? — A. C. W. Clark. Q. Is he the master mechanic ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was your application granted? — A. JSo, sir. Q. On what ground was it refused ? — A. That I was a Knight of Labor. Q. Did he say that he could give you employment if you brought a withdrawal -card? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you tell him? — A. I did not give him an answer. I could not get one. Q. To whom did you apply for one? — A. To the board of the assembly. Q. Through what official ? — A. The master workman. Q. And he declined to give you one on the ground that withdrawal cards were not issued? — A. Yes, sir. They did not have them, and therefore he could not issue one. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 127 Q. What was your object in asking for your withdrawal card ? — A. Well, I understood the rest of the men that went back got them, and I did not think I was doing justice to myself unless I made application to go back myself Q. Why did you apply to the assembly for a withdrawal card? — A. Because I wanted to go to work. Q. Did you go back and tell Mr. Clark that you could not get one ? — A. I did. He told me he had withdrawal cards, and I told him I was refused one. Q. Did he still refuse you employment? — A. Yes, sir. Q. One side denied you a withdrawal card and the other side denied you employment without a withdrawal card, and the result was you had to remain idle, was it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What reason did Mr. Clark assign, if any, for demanding a withdrawal card from you? — A. He told me that was his order ftom Mr. Hoxie. Q. Have yon applied to him for employment since ? — A. I believe I did a week ago. I made application. Q. What was his reply ? — A. The same as it was before. . Q. Have you applied since the strike was ordered off? — A. No, sir. Q. How old are you ? — ^A. Going on twenty. • Q. Are you a fcill-fledged machinist ? — A. I have been working very near six years. I have been three years here. Q. What wages did yon receive at the time of the strike?^- A. Two dollars and «eventy-five cents a day. Q. What graders that? — A. As I understand that was machinist's wages, the highest they were paying. Q. Are you married ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Is any one dependent upon you for support? — A. No, sir; I live at my father's. Q. Your difficult is that men denied yon employment on one side and a withdrawal -card on the other. — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are there such things as vnthdrawal cards? — A. I have not seen one, but I was told that there were by different persons. Q. Did not Mr. Clark tell you that he di^ not hire any one except men with families, and he would give you a job aa soon as he put on apprentices? — A. No, sir; he did not tell me that. Q. What did he tell you? — A. I was refused employment. He did not tell me any- thing about families, or anything else about apprentices eitner. ENOS H. PALMER sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. What is your business? — Answer. I was in the bridge department until I resigned. Q. The bridge department of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did you work for them previous to March? — A. It had hardly been a month. I came over here to take charge of the pile-driver and gang on the 8th of February. Q. At what rate? — A. Eighty-five dollars per month. Q. What wages had you received previoudy? — A. Well, I had been at work for thp Texas and Pacific. When I left there I was getting $2.60 a day. Q. Then you came here and went to work for $85 per month? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long had yon been working here ? — A. A month lacking two days — from the 8th of February to the 6th of March. Q. Were your wages reduced during the time? — A. No, sir; I have no grievances at all myself; only those of men that were working under me. Q. You may state what their grievances were. — ^A. I got a telegram to come over here and take charge of the driver. I came over and went to the general foreman's office and was referred to Mr. Hartigan. He told me that he would send me out on the evening train. This was on the 5th, and he gave me a pass down to the gang. He also told me before I went out that there would have to be some reduction in that gang; and I went out and Mr. Billy Moss was there. I was oiit with him on Saturday night and Sunday evening and went ba«k out on Monday morning. A telegram came to me for me to re- ■duee my men, rating one man $2.60 and one at $2.20, and the balance of my gang from $1.50 to $2, as I saw fit. Q. How many men were there under you ? — A. Seven. Q. Did you go on and notify them as to the amount of wages to be paid ? — A. Yes, sir; I did. I think Mr. Billy Moss told me that he received the same telegram on Saturday morning — the first morning I went out with him, and three of the men that were here 'quit. 128 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What wages were they receiving? — A. They were getting |2. 25. Q. What did the other men get ? — A. There were four of them at work. Q. What did you do as to the three vacancies? — A. I got orders if the men did not work for it to wire here, and I did so, and was answered that I would he sent men as soon as possible. Q. Did they come within a day or two ? — A. I think they came the second day after- wards. Q. Have you knowledge from their declaration that they received the same amount that was offered to those men who went out? — A. Of course they received what was of- fered the men that went out, and what I could have offered. They just told me they would not work for that, and I just told them that I could not help jt. Those were the men that went out. Q. And those who did not go out continued at the reduced rates ? — A. Yes, sir; some of them; one at reduced rates from what he was getting before. Q. Have you any knowledge as to what those men received in September, 1884?— A. I caimot tell you exactly. It is a hard question. I was working on this other road, but it was under the same managemeflt at that time. Q. What was there about the rebuilding of a bridge during the strike ? — A. I do not know whether it is necessary to state anything about that or not. Q. Did yon build a bridge ? — A. I helped. Q. When was it injured, and in what way ? — A. It was on the night of the 16th or 17th of March. Q. Where was this bridge? — A. It was just this side of Howard station, the first sta- tion this side of Fort Worth. ' Q. How did the injury occur to it? — ^A. It was burned. Q. How did it catch fire ? — A. I cannot tell. Q. Was it understood to have been set on fire? — A. I was down on the evening of the 17th with Mr. Ray. I heard him say that he smelt coal-oil aiound the bridge when he first went there. Q. Did you assist to rebuUd it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Under whose directions? — A. Under Mr. Schell's. Q. Under whose direction was he at work ? — A. Under Mr. Hartigan's, I suppose. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor then? — A. I belonged to the order. Q. What advice did you receive from the Knights of Labor, if any, as to aiding in re- building that bridge? — A. I went to one prominent knight and told him that a bridge had been burriid. He said, "Go ahead and put that bridge in shape, so that passenger trains can get over. " Q. (By the Chaibman.) What is the condition of that bridge now? — A. I have not been there since we left it on the night of the 17th of March. Q. Hasit been repaired since? — A. That is what I have understood. I do not know that it is so. I have only understood; in fact, Mr. Beatty told me he had been there and drove the bridge since he took charge. Q. Did men who were Knights of Labor work on it beside yourself? — A. I think there were; I am pretty sure there were. Q. How did you come to quit the company after that? — A. Simply because I got a letter from a party that told me that I could get a job from him. I had written to him and asked him for the job. I quit, giving Mr. Schell due time to get somebody in the place. I told him to get a man to go out with the driver to fill my place. Q. Have you quitted the company ? — A. I quit. Q. Have you obtained other employment ? — A. I am not doing anything. I had a promise of another job as soon as I felt like going to it. I staid with the cars until I think about th& 17th of March. I came back up on the 18th of March, and was called by Mr. Schell to send down and drive that bridge, and I told my men to fix up and load their tools, and they told me that " they would not work without orders from the strikers," or "Knights of Labor." I do not know which they said now. Of course I went to the office and reported it. The bridge master asked when they would be ready to work, and I sent the message just as they gave it to me, ' ' When they get orders from the strikers ' ' Then I got orders to arrange for men that would report when called upon in times of emergency, and so I had to send the men's time in, and when I sent the men's time I wrote a letter and told Mr. Schell. He told me to get men, and I went down town. I tried to get men, but could not get them, and then on Saturday evening I came back and reported to Mr. Schell, and he just said: " I will send you men. Order the driver out." I went back and staid with the driver and here together, until I think it was the 19th of March I sent in my resignation. Q. Did not Mr. Hartigan say to you that there were too many high-priced men in the pile-driving gang and that Mr. Clark and the general foreman would try to provide places for those who did not wish to work at low rates ? — A. If he told me so I do not remember it at all. I cannot say he did not; he may have told me so. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 129 Q. (By Mr. Paekeb.) Is there not a surplus of railroad labor in the South west? — A. Well, it seems as though there is. Q. In your judgment if a strike is limited to a simple walkout would it have any marked effect except to injure those who walked out ? — A. Well, in certain departments I think that it would to some extent. Q. In what departments ? — A. In the shop departments. Q. The places of skilled workmen in the shops can be readily supplied? — A. Well, I think they could. Q. Without serious damage to the company? — A. I think they could. Q. (By the Chaieman.) The only parties injured would be the strikers? — A. They are liable to be injured. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What wages did these three men receive that quit work? — A. Two dollars and twenty-five cents per day. Q. What were you authorized to offer them ? — A. I could have put one of them at $2 by reducing those lower-priced men that I had in the gang, and would have tried to keep these men there, because I thought they understood the work and were entitled to it more than green men would be. Q. What kind of work did these three men do that quit? — A. Well, you may say it was general labor work. Chopping, principally. Q. Manual labor which any ordinary unskilled laborer can perform? — A. Of course, but at times they may be called out on a bridge, and as they are used to working On bridges they could do it better than men who had been used to working on the ground. MILO A. JACOBS sworn and examined. By the Chaibman; Question. Where do you live? — Answer. I live at Denison, Tex. Q. How long have you lived here? — A. Since last September, I believe. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you working on the Missouri Pacific system at the time of the strike? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you walk out with the balance ? — A. Well, I came in on Saturday evening of the 6th, and I did not go any more to work after that. Q. You went out a few hours after the others ? — A. I came in in the evening. Q. Did you strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you strike for? — ^A. Because I was only getting a dollar and fifteen cents a day' and working eleven hours, and receiving no over-time for it. Q. How long had yon been working eleven hours a day for a dollar and fifteen cents ? — A. I commenced the latter part of January and worked up to the strike. Q. Did it take you that length of time to find out that you had a grievance? — A. We came in our own time of evenings. Q. Have you tried to get work from the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. Are you employed now ? — A. Not at present. Q. Do you intend to apply to the company for work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you go back for the dollar and fifteen cents and no pay for over-time and work for the company ? — ^A. If I could not get anything else to do I would have to do so or leave town. Q. What good has the strike done you then? — ^A. I do not think it has done me any particular good. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) What were you working at? — A. I was working on the section. Q. Did yon work over- time, or did it take yon the time to come in? — A. Well, it was comins; in. We would work to probably fifteen or twenty minutes, or as late as five min- ute to six, and then would have to "pump in" from 3 to 10 mUes. One evening we got in about half-past eight. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Do you claim that when you work for the company at the rate of ten hours a day, the time for you to come home shall be included in the ten hours? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that the rule? — A. That is my understanding. Q. Is that the rule among section-men that in the ten hours is to be included the time for them to reach home ? — A. I believe it is. Q. And also time for them to go from home ? — A. To put the car on at 7 o'clock and take it off at 6 o'clock. Q. Did you work for this company in September, 1884? — A. I do not remember. I be- lieve I did. The first September I quit, but that has probably been near two years. Q. Were you in the strike of March, 1885? — ^A. No, sir. 3984 LAB 3 9 130 LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What wages do you receive? — A. A dollar and twenty- five cents while I was in the roundhouse and a dollar and forty cents in another department. Q. Did you work on the section asa section hand before this last time ? — A. No, sir. Q. This work that you did previous to March, 1885, was not the same kind of work that you have been doing since? — A. -No, sir. Q. What is the ordinary price for labor round town hoM? — A. They have been paying a dollar and fifty cents on the water-works. Q. (By the Chaieman. ) Did you ever tell the road master that you had been over- worked and that you wanted extra pay for extra work? — A. No, sir; I never did. Q. And yet you went out on a strike on that grievance, and never made any complaint to those who had charge of that matter? — A. No, sir. Q. Why did you not make complaint? — A. Because if I had they would have had an- other man to take my place. Q. How do you know that? — ^A. It was intimated amongst the hands. The hands had discussed it that the foreman could not help working us as he did, and he would have to put on men who- would. Q. You say it was intimated amongst the hands. Who intimated it? — A. It was talked generally amongst the hands that they could get other men, and would put on another man if anything of that kind was done. Q. Did the foreman tell you so? — A. He did not tell me so. He has mentioned it among the crew. Q. Did you hear him say anything like that? — ^A. He has intimated as much as that. Q. What is his name? — A. Frank Maddox. Q. You say that he intimated that if you went to the road master and made complaint about it they would put another man in your place? — A. No; not that at all. That if we did not want to work at a dollar and fifty cents there would be another man on the box in the morning who would. Q. I asked you if you had ever gone to the road master and complained to him that you had been working over- time and demanded pay for it? — A. No, sir. Q. And you went out without ever presenting your complaint to the proper official? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Did you believe that there would be another man on the box unless you refused to work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you tell us why there is such a pressure to work\at a dollar and fifteen cents when the ordinary wages are a dollar and fifty cents? — A. At that time there was not much to do round town, and the water- works had not commenced yet. Q. You mean then that $1.50 was the ordinary wages, but that there was nothing to do ? — A. I spoke of the water- works. I did not mean the wages where working round town ; that is short. Q. (By the Chairman.) What was the reason that you did not complain to the road- master that you had worked over time without pay? — A. I had nothing to do with the load-master. Our foreman was the man over us. Q. Did you make complaint to the foreman ? — A. No, sir ; nothing particular myself He knew that himself It was generally discussed among all of us. Q. Did you demand from him extra payment for your extra time? — A. No, sir. Q. Then you made no demand for extra time? — A. No, sir ; I was not a Knight of Labor, and therefore I did not make the complaint. I was taking care of myself and family. Q. The Knights of Labor were not interested in presenting your grievances? — A. No, sir. Q. Therefore you had to look after your own grievance, and you did not present it to any railroad official that the company might remedy it? — A. I did not. Q. What is the reason that you did not make complaint in regard to being over- worked and not paid for extra labor? — A. Well, because I wanted to hold my job is the reason. I had a famUy to support and had no other job at the time. Q. If you wanted to hold your place why did you walk out ? — A. Because aJl the balance walked out and my sympathies were with them. Q. You say "you wanted to hold your place and therefore you did not complain. What did you mean by that remark ? Do you mean to say that if you had made ap- plication for extra time you would have been discharged ? — A. I did not know who to go to, to the road-master or foreman. The foreman was with us and he could not ad- just our grievances, and if we did not want to work there would be another man there. Q. I want you to answer this question. Do you mean to leave the impression on this committee that if you had gone to the foreman or road-master and asked for extra pay for extra time you would have been discharged ? — A. I do not know that I would hiave been discharged. Q. Then what do ycu mean? — A. I did not think he would grant me anything, and LABOK TKOUBLKS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 131 I thought I had better keep still, .t thought I would not get it, and peihaps would lose my job. ELVIS C. ROBERTS sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Denison. Q. What has been your business for the past year ? — A. Well, air, for the last two years I have been running a grocery up Main street, and during the last four months previous to the strike I was foreman of a gang termed the labor gang in the yard. Q. Did you go out with the men in the strike? — A. I did. Q. What was the cause of your strike ? — A. Well, sir, it was a general order. I did not belong to the Knights of Labor, that is, the railroad Knights of Labor, at this place. I belong to a separate organization known as No. 2638, and had no connection with this Assembly No. 3690. On the morning of the strike I was rolling wheels out of the round- house there into the back shops. At 10 o'clock when the whistle blew pretty near ail in the round-house quit, and they came along and my men and myself are all Knights of Labor, or about three-fourths of them, and they told us to stop work and get out of there, and I, of course, obeyed orders. I thought it was a general order issued. Q. Were you a member of that organization that ordered tbe strike ?-^A. No, sir; I believe not. Q. Then what order did you belong to? — A. To the general executive board. Q. Was it a general order? — A. I supposed so. I did not know anything about it. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. lam. Q. Not a member of any organization that ordered the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Well, I do not know. There are two sections. I do not belong to District Assembly 101, 98, or 17. I have really not been in the assembly for six or seven months, and I do not know which one I belong to. Q. Do you not know under which jurisdiction your assembly is ? — A. No, sir; I do not Q. And you struck before you ascertained? — A. ,Well, yes. I have not ascertained yet. Q. And you do not know whether the assembly to which you belong was in the juris- diction that ordered the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you taken any steps to ascertain ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you not know whether you were ordered to strike or not? — A. I suppose I was; I was a railroad man; I was in the railroad employ and a majority of them went out, Q. Has the district assembly any jurisdiction over an assembly that is not a constit- uent part of that district? — A. I do not know whether they have or not. I never really understood the matter a great deal. Q. Have you made application for work since you struck ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. When ? — A. A little over a week ago. Q. To whom?— A. C. W. Oark. Q. What answer did he make? — A. Well, sir, I approached Mr. Clark. I have done nothing during the strike really, and I told him I did not belong to the assembly that struck, and said that I had not been on the premises. He just remarked, " How the hell do I know what you have done. ' ' It was a pretty rough answer, I thought, but it waa on the premises. I had got a warning not to go there. Once in a while where I had business I had gone around, but I had never done anything and was not afraid. Q. Tell me what his answer was to your application in addition to what yon have al- ready detailed. — ^A. I asked him if I could get my job. He said that he did not want any Knights of Labor. I said: " Mr. Clark, I have not bothered anything, and I have come for business." He said: "There is one way you may get your job; you can go to your lodge andNget your withdrawal card and bring it here." Q. Did you do it? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you make any attempt to get it? — A. I did not think he had axtj right to ask it. Q. Did you make any attempt to get it? — A. No, sir. He seemed to be busy, and I talked with him and he j ust remarked he did not want any Knights of Labor who would act on orders given to them 2,000 miles off. Q. Yon spoke about the injunction writ. Were you one of those on whom the injunc- tion writ was served? — A. Yes, sir. I had never been down town up to that time that the injunction writ was served. Mr. Douglass and Mr. Bayless met me and Baylesssaid to him, ' ' There he is, you had better catch him ;' ' and he hallooed to me, and I rode over to where he was. and he said, " I have got an injunction against you already signed and drawn up." I was not looking for anything of the kind and I said, "Mr. Douglass, I have done nothing. ' ' Mr. Whitesides said that he did not care for the Missouri Pacific ; all he was after was the dollar or the dollar and a half lor serving the writs of injunction. 132 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Was it true that you had not been down from the time of the strike until the exe- cution of the writ?— A. I think it was. The fact of the business was, I have never been about the shops. I may have gone to the depot. Q. And have not been there since except to ask for employment? — A. That is all. Q. Were you rpfused on the ground that you had been guilty of acts of violence?— A. ' Nothing was said about violence, only the remark I made to Mr. Clark right on the plat- form of the stairs. I said, "I have not done "anything on the premises at all," and he cut me off very short, " How in the hell do I know that ? " Q. He put his refusal on the ground that you belonged to a labor organization, did he ? — A. That is exactly what he said. Q. Are you sure of that? — A. I am certain of that. Q. Is Mr. Clark master mechanic of this portion of the Missouri Pacific system?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did not Mr. Clark tell you that he wanted men that would obey him and not Knights of Labor; that wouldobey him instead of the Knights of Labor ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And that when he had waste to work with he would put on the wipers? — ^A. He may have said something to that effect. Q. Did he ? — A. I am not very certain whether he did or not. Mr. Clark said some- thing about putting on help, but he said he did not want any members in his, that when ordered to strike 2,000 miles away they could get on to it at once. Q. Have you a f?.mily ? — A. Yes. Q. How large? — A. A wife and three children. Q. Have you a home? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Any other means ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you dependent upon your wages for support ? — A. No, sir; I do not consider that I am, but I am out of work now. Q. Have you applied for work since the strike has been ordered off, within the last few days? — A. No, sir. I put in my application about eight days ago. I thought that that was sufficient, and did not intend to bother Mr. Clark after he said what he did tome. Q. (By Mr. Ottthwaite.) When he spoke to you in that way about not wanting any Knights of Labor? — A. He did not say that in a loving way. He spoke about orders from 2,000 miles coming to make a strike. Q. At that time you knew that there were already in Mr. Clark's employment any number of Knights of Labor ? — A. Oh, yes, sir. Q. If he told you that he would not give you employment because you were a Knight of Labor, why did you not call his attention to that fact and ask him the reason for mat- ing a difference between you and them? — A. I did not know any reason for it, or that he emphatically denied me because I was a Knight of Labor; but he told me to get my with- drawal card and I could have my job, or a job for me, and turned off. I never told him that I would or would not. We did not talk much about it. He did not seeem to want to talk with me much about it. Q. (By Mr. Pabkee.) What is your age ? — A. Forty-one years of age. Q. What is your native place? — A. Mississippi. Q. What wages were you receiving at the time of the strike? — ^A. I was getting $60 a month. Q. How long had you been connected with railroad work ? — ^A. Well, sir, off and on six years. Q. Have you ever seen any other strikes than this? — A. I was here last March a year ago, but I was not in the employment of the road at the time. Q. Of course you have considerable familiarity with the railroad business as it is de- veloped here? — A. Well, I have some. Q. Had this strike been limited to a mere walk-out of the men who struck would there have been any serious results to it? — A. You mean if they had quit work ? Q. Quit work and gone along without any efforts to interfere with men who wished to work, or do injury to any engines, or stopping any trains? — A. I do not think it would have been seriously detrimental to the men's interests. Q. Could other men have been employed without much trouble to take the places of those who struck? — A. I suppose so. I think so. Q. Then a mere walk-out would have had little effect except to injure the men who struck and their families? — A. Well, as I said in the beginning, I never took any stock in the strike; but I said at the time that if they had the right to strike, they had to stop business. Q. That was your opinion; what is your opinion now ? — A. That is my opinion. Q. If they had the right to strike they had the right to keep other men £ram working and to stop business? — ^A. If they had sufficient grievances to strike for, they had a LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 133 right to stop business. I do not think a man has the right to stop another from work- ing. I do not think a man has the right to interfere with any other man's work. Q. Do you hold that a striker has the right, in order to make his strike effective, to* interfere with the running of trains ? — A. I do not see how he could make it effective in any other way. Q. Do you think a' man who strikes has the right to interfere with the running of trains in order to make his strike effective? — A. Well, sir, you have struck me in that point. I do not think a man has a right unless there is sufficient grievance for it. Q. Suppose the grievances are sufficient to induce the district assembly in its judg- ment to order a strike, then would you feel that the men were justified, in order to make that strike effective, to stop the running of trains? — A. I would, sir; if the ex- ecutive committee ordered them to take charge of the property. Q. Suppose the men taking charge of the property were interfered with, would you justify the killing of engines by the strikers to prevent their being taken to run trains ? — A. No, sir; I do not approve injuring property. Q. But merely taking hold of it and holding it? — A. Yes, sir; I do not approve injur- ing property. Q. Suppose the men assuming to take charge of other men's property and preventing the owners using it were crowded out by civil force; would you consider that the strikers would be justified in killing engines, or using force to stop the running of engines and the use of that property? — A. No, sir; I do not approve injuring property under any consideration, or the destruction of property. Q. And Still you know a great deal of it was done? — A. I am satisfied there was. Q. Would the strike have amounted to anything except to injure the strikers unless that had been done? — A. I do not think it would. Q. (By the Chairman.) Did not Mr. Clark tell yon that he would take your name and when he required your services would send, for you? — A. Yes, sir; about twenty- " five days ago, but I went to Mr. Coles afterwards, and Mr. Coles said there was work to be done. Q. Who is he? — A. He is chief clerk at the storeroom. I told him I had spoken to Mr. Clark about twenty-five days ago, and I believe he told me I had better see Mr. Clark again, or something to that effect, and I spoke to Mr. Clark about it the second time, and he told me he would take my name and would send round after me if he needed me. He asked me where X lived and I told him. I spoke to him two or three times. I have applied to him three times — once in a barber shop, once at another place, and on the 26th I applied to him again at the office. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) In this city the employ& of the Missouri Pacific Company deemed that they had sufficient cause for striking and leaving the employment of the company; they afterwards, according to the testimony, took forcible possession of the property of the company. Do you now justify their taking such possession? — A. I thought I had answered that question. Q. Please answer it again ? — A. Take charge of the property ? Q. And not destroy it? — A. Yes, sir; I do. Q. The employ^ of the Missouri Pacific road in this city understood that they had sufficient grievances to order a strike, or to obey orders for a strike, and leave the em- ployment of the company. They then took forcible possession of the property. Do you now justify their taking such possession? — A. That is to take forcible possession of it and not destroy it ? Q. I excluded " destroying " from my question ? — A. Well, I do not know how else you could strike. Q. They took forcible possession of the property. Do you justify their taking such possession? — A. That is with sufficient ground, with grievances before them I do. Q. And holding those views you have applied for employment by that very com- pany? — A. No, sir; right there I was going to state in the beginning. After the strike was ordered the strikers should take hold of the property so as to keep it from men that are known as tramps, and to keep the company from running it at the same time. We claimed to guard it at night. Q. Do you not know that they took possession of the property to prevent this com- pany using it in the freight traffic of the country ? — A. I know that they did. Q. Do you justify that? — A. I do not justify injuring property. Q. Then you simply justify holding the property ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you justify the employes in preventing the company from using its property ? — A. Well, if it is a general strike, I do. Q. Holding that belief, you asked that company to employ you? — ^A. Yes, sir; I do Q. Would you employ a man that believed he had the right to take possession of your goods if he thought he had a grievance ? — A. I would rather do it than to employ a man to do a thing and then go back on him. 134 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Perhaps that may be the reason the company does not employ you ? — A. I do not propose to "scab." I do not mean the destruction of property, because I have shown it; and all through the strike I have opposed the destruction of property all the way through. By the Chaibman. You understood fully the questions that have been asked you?— A. Yes, sir; I think so. Q. And you have answered them as you desired to ? — A. Some of them I may not have understood right clear, but I think I have understood them. Q. You have stated to this committee that where you think the grievances are suffi- cient to justify it, from your standpoint, the strikers have the right to take forcible pos- session of property and to prevent the company from using it ? — A. Well, twelve months ago they sustained the men in this. They put them back to work; they had sufficient grounds for the strike. CHARLES E. BARTHOLOMEW sworn and examined. ' By Mr. Outhwaite. Question. How old are you ? — Answer. Twenty-six years old. Q. Where do you live ? — A. At Denisou, Tex. Q. How long have you lived here? — A. I have lived here one year and eight months. Q. What have you been at work at for the past year ? — A. I have been at work for about a year and one month for the railroad company. • Q. What railroad company ? — A. The Missouri Pacific. Q. At what work ? — A. Tin and coppersmith work. Q. Did you go out on the strike with the others ? — A. I did not. Q. Have you struck at any time ? — A. I struck a year ago last March. That is the' only time I ever struck. Q. Well, I have a memorandum here; is that in your own handwriting? — A. It is not; but I know who wrote it. Q. Who wrote it? — A. George Osley. Q. I see it sets forth some causes of complaint of the employ^ in the tin and copper- smith department. The first is that employes working in that department, since the contract was signed, have never received the same pay or wages that were paid previous to September, 1884 ?— A. That is true. Q. Tell us all about that ? — A. In September, 1884, the man that was working in my place, the place that I filled at that time, got $3 a day. When I went to work there I was to have the same pay. I made that agreement with the foreman, and then we had a reduction in wages. That was in January. I forget how much exactly I was cut then. Then we had another reduction in March, and it was cut down to about $1.90, and then afterthe strike I only received $2.50 a day. That is the strike of March, 1885. Q. What were you getting at the time of the strike of March, 1885, before the strike ?— A. It was $1.90. Q. And what was it you got afterwards ? — A. It was about $2. 50. Q. Then it got your wages raised 60 cents ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How soon alter the strike did they begin paying you that amount ? — A. I received that amount of wages from that day. / Q. What did you say to those who paid you? — A. I did not say anything to them at all. Q. You did not make any complaint ? — A. No, sir. Q. Why did you not ? — A. I did say something to my foreman, and he said he would see the master mechanic and learn what he would say to it. Q. What reply finally came from the master mechanic ? — A. I have never received any reply from the master mechanic. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At that time ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Of course you took that complaint to the lodge to be considered ? — A. I did not. Q. Why did you not take it there; that is one object of the order, is it not?— =A. Yes, sir. ' Q. Did you ever take it to them ? — A. I did. Q. When ? — A. A month ago. Q. Since the strike commenced? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. To what assembly did you call attention to this fact after the strike? — A. Assem- bly No. 3690. Q. Of course there have been no particular discussion of it since the strike? — A. No, sir; none that I know of. Q. Do you know of any cases where men going from home are only allowed half-timft for riding? — A. I do myself. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 135 Q. What was the extent of that grievance? — A. Well, I went to Beard — I think that is the name of the place that I went to to do some repairing, and when I came back and gave in my time the foreman told me I would only be allowed half-time for riding. Q. What did you give in your time for riding? — A. I do not know. I cannot state any price or any amount of time. Q. How long did it take you to ride down there? — A. It took me about fourteen hours. Q. About fourteen hours to go down ? — A. About six to eight hours. Q. And' the same number of hours back? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ride in the day or night time? — A. I made three trips down there ; twice in the daytime, and I went down and came back twice in the night. Q. When you went in the day did you get full or half time? — A . I only got half-time. Q. Was that in the ordinary hours of daily labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. As to paying your own expenses, what expenses had you to pay ? — A. For board and everything of that kind. Q. Had you a place to sleep provided for you by the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. Had you to pay lodging down there? — A. I had, one or two nights until I got into the convict train, where they made me up a bed and gave me board. Q. Did you bring this to the attention of the assembly? — A. I did not. Q. Never? — A. No, sir. Q. When did it happen ? — A. It happened in September last. Q. You never brought any part of it to the attention of the assembly? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. Tluen here is a statement as to 35 cents a month ibr hospital fees, and the money being retained by the company and a demand that this be discontinued. Tell us about that. — A. Well, each and every month the check comes up short 35 cents, and that money, I suppose, was retained by the company ; and when I wanted to go to the hos- pital, or want anything from the railroad company, they have certain places for them to go and if we cannot go there and if there is anything to prevent us going there we must bear our own expenses. I was sick, and they wanted me to go to Fort Worth. I wanted to go to the hospital just before the strike, but the small-pox was raging in Fort Worth and I did not care to go there on that account, and they would not send me any- where else. Q. Where are their hospitals ? — A. One is in Sedalia, and one in Marshall. Q. What injury had you received that you felt it necessary to go to hospital? — A. I had not received any injury. It was inflammatory rheumatism in the shoulder. Q. That you claim you had contracted in their service, and that entitled you to go to the hospital ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. It is stated that the employ^ were to be paid the same wages that they were paid previous to September, 1884, viz, $-i per day, at the present time receiving $2. To what employes has that reference ? — A. In the tin and copper smith department. Q. That did not apply to yourself? — A. Yes, sir. " Q. I thought you said you were getting $2.50? — A. I was. I said that we were to be paid the same wages as we were previous to September, 1884. Q. This paper states the employes are to be paid the same wages that they were get- ting previous to September, 1884, viz, $3 a day, and they are at the present time re- ceiving $2 a day. Is not that a mistake? — A. I think it is a mistake for $2.50 at the present time. The last work I did for the railroad company I only got $2 a day for it on account of the two hours' reduction in time. Q. Two hours' reduction ©f time, that was at the rate of 25 cents an hour. Then this demand is simply a demand for ten hours' wages for eight hours' work ? — A. YeS, sir. Q. That was never made to the company before, was it ? — A. I do not know that it was. Q. Were any of these grievances brought to the attention of the company by any local assembly of the Knights of Labor to your knowledge? — ^A. Not that I know of. Q. Then they did not constitute any portion of the cause of the strike ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Did you not say that you did not go out on the strike ? — A. I did. Q. You did not go out on the strike because of these grievances or because of a gen- eral order coming from somebody? — A. I did not go out on the strike at all. I was sick before the strike four weeks, and was not able for duty at the time of the strike; conse- quently I could not go out on the strike. Q. Have you any information as to the nature or cause of the strike here ? — A. I have not. Q. And you never heard from any of your fellow Knights? — A. I may have heard a little talk at the time on the street, or something of that kind. Q. From any fellow Knight of Labor? — A. Nothing definite. Q. You have never heard anything definite on that subject at all ? — A. Well, I do not know that I have a very good memory. 136 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you ever hear that it was the refusal of the Texas Pacific Railroad to reinstate a man named Hall, who had been discharged? — A. I heard something to that effect, but I did not believe it. Q. "Whether you believed it or not, did you hear it from Knights of Lfibor at or about the time they went out on this strike?— A. No, I cannot say that I did. Q. Have you heard it from Khights of Labor since they have been upon this strike?— A. Since that I have heard some Knights of Labor (I supposed they were Knights of Labor) say that. - Q. Have you ever seen any reasons assigned for the order for the strike? — A. I saw- one from Martin Irons, along in March sometime, from the general executive board, or- dering the continuation of the strike. That is the only thing I have seen. Q. That was after the strike had been a failure?— A. Yes, sir; Q. Do you know anybody who has been benefited by this strike? — A. Well, sir, I think I can name one or two. Q. What class of citizens has been benefited by it?— A. The grocerymen in town, Cul- ver & Co. Q. They have a good stock of goods, have they?— A. Yes; they get a good deal of trade. They would not sign what the citizens did here, and would not put their names on that paper, and consequently the boys and Knights of Labor, or the strikers, would not patronize any but these. Q. Do you know of any other citizens than these who have been benefited? — ^A. No, sir; I do not. The Chaieman. After the men went on the strike did they deal with these grocery- men? — ^A. They did deal with them. Q. Is not this the rule of the company with reference to the pay of parties sent out on the road: one- half Jime for riding at night, full time for riding through the daytime, time and a half for all work while on the road performed at night, the party keeping his own time, and being allowed extra time to cover expenses of board ? — A. Part of it is, and part of it I do not think is the rule. Q. How much of it is not correct? — A. That half-time for riding at night, I do not think that is correct, at least that is my understanding. I am not positive, as I am not very well versed in the rules of the company, for I have never worked for them but one year and I never expect to work for them again. Q. Full time for riding during the day, is that correct ? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. Time and a half for all work performed at night, is that correct? — A. That is cor- rect. Q. The party is allowed to keep his time, is that correct ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And is allowed extra time to cover expenses, is that correct ? — A. I never received any extra time to cover my expenses that I know of. i Q. You state, I believe, that the hospital fee is 35 cents a month? — A. Yes, that was taken from my check. Q. During the last six months has it not been 25 cents a moiith on salaries from $50 to $100? — A. Twenty-five cents since that. Q. Last year ? — A. There has been more than that taken from my check. It might have been more or less. The check was short. Q. What was your pay per month? — A. I cannot tell you exactly. Q. Did you ever complain of being short in your pay check ? — A. Icomplained once, I think, to my foreman; X am not positive. Then he informed me it was hospital fees, and I said no more about it. Q. (By Mr. Pabkee.) How long have you resided here? — A. One year and eight months. Q. What were you doing in September, 1884? — A. I was working for S. L. Irvine & Co., at Honey Grove, Tex. Q. When did you first go into the employ, of the company ? — A. About the 1st of Feb- ruary, 1885. Q. Were Tou one of the strikers li>Bt year? — A. I was. Q. AVhat was your birthplace ?-^A. Union County, Iowa. Q. When did you recover your health so as to be out? — A. I recovered my health so a« to be out about the middle of March. BURRELL L. SHAW sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Are you a member of the local executive board of the Knights of Labor at present? — Answer. No, sir; not during this term. I waa a member of the last term up tolast July. Q. July of last year? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 137 Q. Difl you present any grievances to Master Mechanic Clark? — A. I did. Q. What grievances were presented ? — A. In the first place I think it was that of a colored man who was laboring in his department; but upon investigation we abandoned it; we found that he had no claim. Q. Did you present the grievances of the boiler- makers ? — A. I did. Q. What wei;e they ? — A. They were stated to me by parties that worked in the shop. They did not give me any individual case, but they told me they were required to travel on the road at half-time, which wa.s contrary to the contract of March, 1885. I pre- sented the matter to Mr. Clark, and he said that that was the usual allowance for men traveling after working hours and that it was all he would pay. I think probably I went to him a second time; I am not positive about that; but after being refused that we referred the matter to Mr. Lovin, who was then a member of the district executive board, and I had a talk with him afterwards. He told me that he had seen Mr. Herrin, and Mr. Herrin had agreed all men should have time and a half overtime. Up to the time I was relieved of that charge, and I did not hear anything more of it. Q. It was adjusted then? — A. That was my understanding. Q. What was the name of that colored man ? — A. I do not believe I can call his name. I do not think he has been on the stand to-day, and I do notthink he was working here at the time of the strike. Q. Were there any other grievances presented by you ? — A. I went to Mr. Hardin one time for a man who worked in the transfer-shed. Q. Did you make any attempt to get the wages of those employ^ who were paid $1.15 a day raised to $1. 50 a day ? — A. I do not think that that was ever submitted to ns. Q. Do you know anything about the pay of unskilled laborers being reduced ? — A. In the car department there were three colored men who had been at work in the m^ chinery department before the strike at $1. 15 a day. My understanding was that they had received $1.40 a day, and that they were in the strike of March, 1885. After the strike was ended these men, I believe, did not get their wages restored. The manage- ment was changed in some way some two or three times in a short time. After the car department was placed in the hands of the master mechanic these men were taken into the gang that was then at work laboring in that department, and they never did get raised td $1.40. The matter was talked about to me as being one of the board, and it was thought that it would probably be best for them to let the matter go as it was, be- lieving that it might not be to their iiiterest to agitate the question, as it might be con- sidered that they were getting higher pay than others for the same work, and I did not undertake to do anything with it. Q. You believed then if their wages were raised it would create general dissatisfac- tion ? — A. To be honest in the matter, I thought that the possibilities were that we could not get a higher rate of wages for them, and I thought it better for the men to continue as they were. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) The claim of the boiler-makers was that theyshould obtain one-third more for time consumed outside of working hours, in riding to and from their work, than for the time consumed in work? — A. Yes, as agreed in the contract. Q. Will you be kind enough to answer me whether that was their complaint? — A. The thing was they received half time for time spent in traveling outside of working hours. Q. They claimed that they should have time, and a half? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And they claimed that that was what the contract gave them? — A. Yes, sir. FEANCIS H. SECORD sworn an^d examined. By Mr. Pakkbe : Question. Have you been eimployed by the Missouri Pacific Railroad at any time; and, if so, how long ? — Answer. For about a year and a half Q. As fireman ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When did you go out of their employment ? — ^A. Well, the last work I did was on the 5th of March; that is, till a few days ago. Q. You struck with the rest? — A. No, sir; I did not strike with the rest; I did not have any occasion to. Q. When did you go out of the employment of the company ? — A. The last work I did, until the 30th of last month, was the 5th of March. Q. Were you fireman down to that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State why you happened to leave the employment of the company? — A. I was not able to go out on my engine. Q. Was it on account of the strike? — A. I do not know whether it was or not. Q. You did not strike, and there was no work that you could do after the 5th of March in your line? — A. I was not called to go out, and consequently I did not go out. 138 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did not you lose your work on account of the stoppage of the engines? — ^A. I cer- tainly did. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor then?— A. At the time of the strike? Yes, sir. Q. Are you now? — A. No, sir. Q. When did you cease being a Knight of Labor?— A. Well, I do not know exactly the date, but it was a couple of weeks or so after the strike that I withdrew from the order. Q. Have you applied at any time since the 6th of March to be employed as fireman?— A. I think it was about the 28th or 29th of last month I went over to Mr. Clark's office and asked him why I could not go to work. We had a little conversation, and he said he would put me to work; and he did so. Q. How long did you remain at work? — A. I suppose I am at work. I have done some work, and have done all the work I have been called to do. Q. Do you know of the master mechanic's saying anything about not wanting Knights of Labor?— A. Well, I believe he asked me if I was a Knight 'of Labor. I told him I was not. Q. Was that all that was said about it?— A. I believe that was the sum and sub- stance of it. Q. Did not Mr. Clark tell you that he did not want any firemen that belonged to the Knights of Labor ? — A. Well, now, I do not know that I remember right. I thought he did, but I will not say positively. Q. What was your native place ? — A. I was born in Connecticut and was raised in Illinois. Q. How long have you been employed on this road? — A. For about a year and a half. EOEEET EOSSBOTTOM sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Did you work for the Missouri Pacific Eailroad at the time of the late strike? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. When did you commence to work for them ? — A. On the 26th day of June, last year. Q. In what capacity did you work for the company ? — A. I am a boiler-maker. Q. Have you any grievances against the company arising prior to March, 1886. — A. Yes, sir; the boiler-makers had a grievance against the company. It was with respect to traveling, in being sent out on repair work. Boiler-makers had been sent out at dif- ferent times and complained about the time they received for it. Q. Tell me your own grievance ? — A. I was sent out three difierent times I believe. The last time I was sent out or the second time I was sent out there was a complaint, as I understand, to the district master workman. He went to Mr. Herrin to adjust the difficulty and returned to Denison. Upon coming around one day where I was-at work he told us that he had been to see Mr. Herrin and that he had adjusted that trouble; that Mr. Herrin was willing to allow time and a half after working hours. Q. Who was it that told you that? — A. N. M. Lovin. Q. You understood that you were to be paid for your own time? — A. Yes, sir. I was sent out about the 2d of March last, I believe, and when I returned I went to make up a report of my time, and I asked Mr. Gosling if there had been any change made with respect to the time that a man got for traveling. He said, "Not that I know of." I said, ''The reason I asked about it is that the district master workman had said he had seen Mr. Herrin, and he had settled the difficulty by allowing time and a half." He said I would have to go into the office and see about. I went into the office, and Mr. Clark was not there. I saw the chief clerk. He asked me when I started out, and I told him, and when I arrived at my destination; and he said they would only allow me half-time for all time traveled. I said they would certainly not ask a man to travel in the daytime for half-time. Mr. Clark came to me and stopped me as I was going through the shop, and said he had been informed of my being in the office and that the chief clerk had made a mistake. He said he allowed half-time for traveling after work- ing hours, single time through^worldng hours. In my traveling I had always put in time enough to make up my expenses. I put three hours in for that. Q. Was any objection made to that? — A. No, sir. Q. How many hours have you traveled outside of working time since you have been in the employment of the company ? — A. I think it was about thirty-six hours. Q. Your understanding of the agreement made with the striking parties of March, 1885, is that they should have one and a half time for overtime, and that traveling in your own case is overtime? — A. That is what I was informed. Q. That is your claim? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any other grievance against the company ? — A. Not at all. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 139 Q. Did yoa strike because of that grievance? — A. I did not strike on account of that grievance. Q. Where were you bom? — A. I was born in England. The Chaieman. On the 2d of March, 1886, did you not go from Denison to Dallas on engine 28? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is the last trip that you spoke of to Mr. Bnchanan? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When you got back, did you ask how much yon would be allowed? — A. I did for the traveling time. Q. Were you informed that you would get the same as the company had been accus- tomed to pay for the past two years ? — A. Mr. Clark told me that he would allow me half time to and from work. Q. And time and a half between 6 p. m. and 7 a. m. ? — A. Yes, air. Q. And extra time enough to cover the extra cost of meals? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You were not satisfied with that, were you? — A. No, sir; that was what I asked. That was what I have received everywhere I have worked previous to that time. Q. You left Denison at 3 o'clock on the 2d of March and returned at 12 o'clock noon on the 4th of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Gone forty-five hours? — A. No, sir; I did not say that. Q. If you left Denison at 3 o'clock on March 2 and returned at 12 o'clock noon on March 4, how long were you gone? Is not that forty-five hours that you were gone, or two days less three hours; is not that correct? — A. No, sir, that is not correct. Q. You left Denison at 3 o'clock on the 2d, did you not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And yon returned A. (Interrupting.) I returned next day. Q. You left at 3 o'clock on the 2d; what time did you get back on the 3d? — A. I got ba(^ — ^I cannot say exactly — but between a quarter and a half after 12. I cannot say exactly the time I gave in now. Q. How long were you at work on engine 28 ? — A. I got there at 10 o'clock at night, and went and cooled the engine down and worked all night. I returned the next Jnorn- ing. Q. How many hours were you allowed? — A. Well, I just cannot say, because I have not got my time-book with me. ^ Q. This statement says you were allowed thirty-four hours, and you said you were satisfied? — A. The statement said I was allowed thirty- fours? Well, I cannot tell ex- actly how much time I was allowed on that job; but that was the understanding between me and Mr. Clark. Q. Did you report the day you got back? — A. I reported it the day I got back. Q. You finally made a satisfactory settlement with the company? — A. Yes, sir; I told Mr. Clark if that was all the company would pay, I would not make any trbuble over it. ADAM FBIEGENSTEIN sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitb: Question. How long have you been working for the Missouri Pacific? — Answer. About two years and a half. Q. Did you get inj ured some time while you were at work for the company ? — A. Yes, sir; last August. Q. What was the inj ury ? — A. I had a piece of lead fall on my foot and badly mash it. Q. How long were you off work? — A. About three weeks. Q. Did you get pay for the time you were off? — A. No, sir. Q. How did that lead happen to drop ? — A. It iiew out from under the hammer. It was nobody's fault and nobody was to blame for it. Q. Then, when you went back to work you signed a release? — A. I did, right after I got hurt. Q. When did you do it ? — A. I think the inj ury was not enough ; but I wanted to get to the hospital and I did not know at the time that I could not get a pass without sign- ing a release. Q. Did you go to hospital? — A. They sent me to Marshall. Q. Did they take care of you in the hospital the time you were injured? — A. I was there one week only. Q. Then they did not pay you the one dollar mentioned in there ? — A. No, sir. Q. Is there anything else you know ? — A. Nothing particular. Q. When did this happen? — ^A. Last August. Q. You did not think this was of sufficient importance to bring it to the attention of the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir; I have never brought it up. Q. It had nothing to do with the strike, then? — A. Not particular any way. 140 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. MICHAEL MURRAY recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You may consider yourself still under oath. Here is a subpoena that was served upon you, Mr. Murray, it reads: " You are hereby commanded to summon Michael Murray to be and appear instanter before the subcommittee of select committee appointed under resolution of House of Representatives, United States of America, dated April 12, 1886, to investigate the causes of the labor troubles on the lines of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company in the States of Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, and Texas, of which Hon. "W. H. Craia is chairman, and to bring with them before said subcommittee now in session at Odd Fellows' Hall, in the city of Denison, Tex., the proposition or resolution upon which the local assembly voted when pledging itself to support the strike contemplated by District Assembly No. 101, Knights of Labor, and which occurred in March, 1886, and also the original, or a copy of the order which was issued inaugurating the strike, and then and there to testify touching matters of inquiry committed to said committee; and he is not to depart without leave of said committee. ' ' Have you done that 1 The Witness. I have done all in my power to secure those papers, but I have not been able to succeed in securing Ihem up to the present time, owing to my not being charged with the care of such papers, as I have not got them myself personally; but I wish the committee to understand that I do not desire to conceal anything; and further I wish to show up everything that is necessary and that will throw light upon the sub- ject being investigated in this case. Q. Where does George Lyman, the secretary, live? — A. In the city of Denison. Q. Did you go to him to get these papers ? — A . I sent to him four different messengers. Q. Is heat home now? — A. He is not at home this evening. I have not seen him . here to-day. He has got a small ranch below here, and I think is on it. Q. Is it not very remarkable that the secretary of the assembly, when he knew that a committee of Congress was coming here to investigate grievances of which the order complains, should absent himself from the city ? — A. If he knew or thought these papers would be wanted he would give them up. If I can find him I wiU do it, and if the com- mittee does not leave before I can secure them I will present them to it. Q. What efforts have you made to secure them? — A. I have sent messengers to those who should receive them, and examined all the papers that are in the office, and have not found any there. I think, perhaps, the secretary has them with him. Sometimes he carries them with him, and other members of the board here may have taken them ailso. I will just say to the committee that in case I can not get them before the com- mittee leave Denison, provided I can get them, I will forward them to any address that you will leave me, or go to Marshall, or send them there. Q. Where does this secretary live ? — A. I do not know exactly where his residence is. Q. You say that you can not find these papers; I will ask you this question : What was the proposition or resolution on which the local assembly voted when it pledged itself to support District Assembly 101 ? — A. There were only three propositions that I re- member of while I was present at any meeting or sjnce, I believe, to the order in Deni- son. The first proposition was: "Will you sustain your district executive board if they demand a recognition of the order ? " The next one was : " Will yon sustain the execu- tive board in demanding for unskilled labor $1.50 per day that are receiving $1.15 a day now?" .The next was: "Will you sustain the executive board if they demand the re- instatement of Mr. Hall?" These three propositions were all that were received. Q. Were they all voted upon at the same meeting? — A. They were not. There were about two weeks' space between the proposition that was voted for $1.50 for unskilled labor; and Mr. Hall's proposition was the last one, I believe. ' Q. Did you vote affirmatively on the first proposition? — A. The vote as to whether we would sustain our executive board is taken by secret ballot, and the ballots sealed in an eiivelope and sent to the executive board. Q. In case the majority of the local assemblies did vote in the affirmative, would the strike have been ordered on the first proposition? — A. Yes; if the district assembly saw fit to order a strike. Q. Did they so vote and order a strike? — A. Not on the first proposition. Q. Did they on the secohd proposition ? — A. Well, you understand the second propo- sition was the $1.50 for unskilled labor. Q. Did the executive board declare a strike on that? — A. No, sir. Q. The third proposition was to sustain the executive board for the reinstatement of Mr. Hall?— A. In case Mr. Hall is not reinstated; that is the last proposition. Q. Did the executive board order the strike upon that? — A. No, sir; it did not. Q. Then how was the strike ordered ? — A. It was from all these propositions. I un- derstand that there was a strike ordered on the Texas and Pacific road and we received LABOR TKOUBIES IN THE SOUTH AKD WEST. 141, notice to boycott the Texas and Pacific, and then on the 5th of March we received a tele- gram to strike on the 6th at 10 o'clock. Q. Upon what proposition was that strike ordered ? — A. It did not state in the tele- gram; bnt we supposed that from that proposition that the vote of the order to sustain the executive board in the demands that they would make was on the three propositions, and that that would go in the strike. Q. Had you any written communications on the subject? — A. I never received any writing or knew of any outside of those communications which were read, that I have spoken of, in making the demands. Q. Then you do not know upon which proposition the strike was ordered? — A. I do not know. Q. You know that they did not order it on the first? — A. They did not at the time we took the ballot. Q. They did not on the second ? — A. They did not on the second. Q. Then must they not have ordered it on the third ? — A. We thought that the proposi- tion for unskilled labor was the main grievance, and that they had agreed upon taking all three propositions and they would make a demand on all. We did not receive any com- munications j ust exactly as to what demands were made by the board. Q. There was nothing ordering the strike except the telegram ? — A. That was all. Q. Did that come to the master workman of the assembly ? — A. It came to the master workman of the assembly. Q. Who is he? — A. Under my obligation I am not allowed to state that, bnt I do not suppose there is any objection. His name is Mr. Ptifer. Q. Where is he ? — A. I do not know. I saw him on the street to-day. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Did you state your birthplace here ? — A. No, sir. Q. Please state it. — A. I was born in the State of New York and was raised in Illi- nois. ' Q. (By the Chaieman.) When was it that the Hall proposition was voted on ? — A. I cannot remember the day. Q. How long before the strike was ordered ? — A. I suppose it must have been some six or eight days, maybe two weeks, before the strike. Q. How long after he was discharged ? — A. I do not remember the time when Mr. Hall was discharged. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) Did you see the telegram ordering the strike ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. How did it read? — A. It just stated, "Strike on March 6, at 10 a. m." Q. To whom was it sent ? — A. To the master workman. Q. By whom sent ? — A. Martin Irons, chairman of the district executive board. The following telegram, received at Fort Worth May 6, was ordered to be inserted in record with witness' testimony: [Telegram.] Denison, May 6, 1886. Hon. W. H. Ceain, Chairman Omgressio/nal Committee: Papers have been destroyed. Will bring minutes of meeting and officer who destroyed paper to Fort Worth, if desired. Answer. W. J. MUERAY. JAMES MALONEY sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Do you know the witness, Mr. Murray, who hfis just testified in this case?— Answer. I have seen him. I never had an introduction to him. Q. Did you see him in the masked raid on the shop on the night of March 20 or 21 ? — A. He passed through the yard about 9 o'clock, I think. Q. The yard of the Missouri Pacific Rairoad at Denison here? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was he doing? — A. Walking along. He stopped and talked with me about a minute. Q. What about ? — A. Something, I cannot remember now. Q. Did he remain there any length of time? — A. He did not remain there above two minutes. Q. Was he there with the crowd? — A. I did not recognize him. Q. Just passed through? — A. He just passed along by my place of work there, and spoke to me; that was about all. Q. Are the people in the habit of going through that way? — ^A. Yes, sir; people {lasa through there. 142 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Was there anything specially suspicious in his movements ? — A. Nothing but pass- ing, just like a person ordinarily does. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Does he live in the neighborhood? — ^A. No, sir; he does not. Q. How long before the masked men came in there was he there?— A. About three hours. He was there about 9 o'clock, and that happened about 2 o'clock— piobably four or five hours afterwards. GEORGE W. FIEDLER recaUed and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Do you know Mr. Murray ? — Answer. Yes, sir. q; Did you see him about the yard of the Missouri Pacific after the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Under what circumstances ? — A. On the morning of the 8th at 7. 30 we tried to get an engine out. Joe Gettler was down there at the time with a guard, and it seems his guard was not sufficient to prevent us from getting fire into an engine. They blew the shop whistle, and the strikers came down at that time, and among them Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray put his foot on the engine step and ordered me out of the engine, in the name of the Knights of Labor. I refused to get off, and he asked me a second tilae to step ofi'. I refused to do so. He asked me by what authority I was on the engine. I told him by the authority of Mr. Clark, the master mechanic, and also by the authority of the railroad company in whose employ I was at the time. Q. Did you see him at any other time during the strike around the yard? — A. I be- lieve I saw him pass through there once or twice. Q. Did you see him interfering with the men ? — A. No, sir; not after that. Q. Was this before or after the injunction papers were served 6n Mr. Murray? — A. II was before the injunction papers were served. Q. Did yon see him interfere there after the injunction papers were served? — ^A. No, sir. I believe he came there and went into Mr. Clark's office. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was it before he had struck and left the employ of the company? — A. When I saw him there and he ordered me off the engine? Mr. Buchanan. Yes, sir. The Witness. It was on the 8th of March, two days after the strike had occurred. CHARLES BAYLESS sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Were you a Knight of Labor on the 6th of March last? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are you now ? — A. I suppose I am; but I think I stand suspended. Q. You have not withdrawn from the order?— : A. No, sir. Q. Are you in the employment of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who employed you ?— A. Mr. C. W. Clark. Q. How long is it since he gave you employment ? — A. He gave me employment on the 31st day of April. Q. How did he come to give you emoloyment ? — A. I went there to get my job. Q. Why did you go ? — A. I wanted to go to work. Q. You had become tired of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did Mr. Clark ask you whether you were a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Did he exact from you as a condition precedent to re-employing you that you should present him with a withdrawal card from the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Or that you should withdraw from that organization ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you go to work on Mr. Powderly's order? — A. I went to work on Mr. Clark's order. Q. Mr. Powderly, you know, issued an order or instruction to Martin Irons to order the men to return to work; did you seek employment under that order, or was that the reas6n you went to Mr. Clark ? — A. I think it must have been that. Now, the order was issued by Mr. Powderly three or four days before I went down there, and the exec- tive board told us to go down and get our jobs. I was told that by a party that went down to the shop. Q. Was it on account of Mr. Powderly's order that you went down and sought em- ployment? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did Mr. Clark give yon employment willingly? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Not demanding, as I said before, as a condition precedent to the employment that you should withdraw from the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 143 C. W. CLARK recalled and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. It has been said by a number of witnesses when they applied to you for work you objected to receiving them because they were Knights of Labor. What have you to say as to those statements ? — Answer. I told them that when they got done work- ing for the Knights, and could go to work for me and by my orders, I would give theyi employment. That if they had not got enough of the strike now, they could continue until they got enough. Q. It has been stated by one or two witnesses that you also said that these were your orders from Mr. Hoxie. Did you so state? — A. I do not know. Q. It has also been said by one or two witnesses that you made it a condition that you would not employ them without you had received their withdrawal cards ? — A. There are some of the men who have been, very prominent throughout the strike and had been very active members of the Knights of Labor. I said to them, "Can you give me any official assurance that you vrill continue at work? If you can, put it down in black and white." Q. Did you say ajiy thing about vrithdrawal cards? — A. Yes, sir. They said they could not get them, and I said I had got them. Q. Had you withdrawal cards? — A. Yes, sir. A man that hpa been on the stand to- night showed me a withdrawal card, and two or three men from Alvarado gave them to me. The man who was on the stand was Mr. Seoord; he gave me such an one. A man by the name of Ed. Morgan, a fireman, gave me one. It contained a statement that he was no longer a member of that organization. Q. (By the Chaikman.J What was on it? — A. It was a piece of white paper with the stamp of the order on it. The seal of the assembly, signed by, I think, the master workman; but I will not be certain. It reads that the man is no longer a member of the organization. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Can you produce one of these? — A. I have not got one with me. It was an official assurance that they were done. Q. And you say it had the seal of the assembly on it ? — A. Yes, sir. The man that testified, Mr. Secord, can testify as to that. The Chairman here asked the sergeant-at-arms to call Master Workman Pfifer and Secretary Lyman, and they did not respond. CHARLES H. LITCHMAN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : The Witness. I simply desire to state that there is no such thing as a withdrawal card in the order. Question. What position do you occupy in the order ? — Answer. I was first general secretary of the order, and I have been a member of every general assembly that has been held. Q. How long have you been in the order? — A. Nine years; I was a member of the first assembly in Massachusetts. Q. By virtue of what authority do you now represent the Knights of Labor in this investigation? — ^A. By special appointment of the general master workman, Mr. Pow- derly. Q. Are yon thoroughly Conversant with the constitution and by-laws regulating the order of Knights of Labor? — A. I speak qualifiedly. I claim to know the constitution and by-laws and general usage of the order thoroughly. Q. And you say there is no such thing as a withdrawal card, as described by vritnesses hereto-night, known to the order? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then this local assembly has eitheir been in ignorance of the constitution and by-laws and rules of the order, or has been vrillfully establishing a rule of its own, ex- ceeding the general jurisdiction, if it has these withdrawal cards? — A. Yes, sir. In the early history of the order, by the general assembly, which was formed in June, 1878, withdrawal cards were provided for. There are none at present, the only cards being traveling cards and transfer cards. The use of a traveling card is to identify the membership in traveling through the country, the member holding the traveling card retaining his membership in his own assembly. The transfer card is used where a member permanently leaves the location of his own assembly and locates in another place, and desires to transfer his membership from the assembly where he was initiated to the assembly of his new location. Q. When was this provision for withdrawal cards abolished? — A. To the best of my recollection, at least two years ago. Not less than two years ago; I think three years, but I wUl not state that positively. 144 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Is it possible that this local assembly might have been acting in ignorance of the fact that this provision for the withdrawal card has been abolished?— A. I do not see how they could. Each local assembly is supplied with the new regulations immediately on the adjournment of the general assembly. Q. If the master workman and secretary of this local assembly were present would they not be able to tell us whether they issued withdrawal cards or not? — A. They have no right to do so under the rules of the order. Q. If the master workman and secretary were present would they not be able to tell us whether they issued withdrawal cards? — A. As has been testified, most assuredly. Q. Have you any information why they are absent? — A. Not the slightest. Q. Does it not surprise you^ while an investigation of this character is proceeding, that they are absent? — A. I have too opinion to express. Q. I am simply asking you if it does not surprise you that they are absent? — A. If I were master workman or secretary I would be here; that is, if I had any knowledge the committee desired my presence. Q. If you were desired or jiot, the fact being that the status of your assembly was being investigated, do you not think you would come? — A. Very likely. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite. ) Is there any form specified for a traveling card and transfer card that you speak of? — A. All traveling' and transfer cards are issued by the general secretary. They are the same in every local assembly of the order, and each local aa- , sembly purchases these as supplies from the general secretary and treasurer. From the sale of them is derived a portion of the income of the general assembly. Q. Suppose a man wishes to withdraw from the order, how could he do it ? — ^A. He pays up his dues and signifies the fact to the local assembly to which he belongs, or he could take a transfer card and allow it to expire. Transfer cards must be renewed every six months, or they become void. Traveling cards are good to the end of the date for which the dues have been paid in advance. FEANCIS H. SECOED recalled and examined. By Mr.' Bitch an an f Question. Did you hand, to Mr. Clark a withdrawal card irom your assembly? — An- swer. I did. 'Q. Signed by whom ? — A. Signed by the secretary. Q. Of your assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Under the seal of the assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. I would like to give that to this committee just exactly as it is. I went to that gentleman and asked him for a with- drawal card. I went to his house. He took his book and looked it through and said, "I do no^see any provisions for giving a withdrawal card, but," he says, it seems to me that there should be some provisions made," or something to that effect. I told him I wished to withdraw, and that I would like something to show for it, and I wanted to pay up my dues and leave the order in good feith and in good standing. He said, , "that is all right; " and he also said, " I do not see any other way only to write you a \ withdrawal card," and also, "I assume this responsibility on my own account; I do not know whether it is right or not. ' ' The committee then adjourned to meet, on call of the chairman, at Fort Worth. FoET Worth, Tex., Thursday, Mag 6, 1886. The subcommittee of which Hon. W. H. Grain is chairman, convened at this place to-day for the purpose of taking testimony, and the following witnesses' statements were taken: JOHN C. BRANNON sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Where do you reside ? — Answer. I reside at Alvarado. Q. What position do you occupy, if any, in that city?— A. Well, sir, I have been mayor. Q. Were you mayor when the strike took place on the Southwestern system?— A. Yes, sir; I was. Q. What county is Alvarado in? — A. It is in Johnson County. Q. How far is it from Fort Worth ? — A. About 27 or 30 miles. Q. On the line of what road? — ^A. On the Missouri Pacific. I do not know what division. LABOR TEO.UBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 145 Q. State what you know about the strike at Alvarado. — A. "Well, sir, I waa called upon about the 29th* of March to place guards around on the railroad property there to protect it, and I did so. Q. Who called upon you? — ^A. The railroad authorities. Q. Did you see anything done there by the strikers? If so, what did you see? — ^A. Wdl, sir, I was standing near the raUroad track at the depot, I think it was on the morning of the 30th, when a freight train fiom the North came in, and it was taken charge of by the men, whom I thought to be strikers, and carried off. Q. To what place was it carried? — A. Well, I learned it was carried to Grand View. Q. Did you see the strikers do anythingwith the passenger trains? — A. I did not, sir. I saw the passenger engine that had been damaged, but I did not know who had done it. Q. Did yon see the strikers do anything with the passenger engine? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Did yon see the strikers take a passenger engine and follow a freight train? — A. I did see some men take an engine and follow a freight train. It was at the side track. Q. What did they do with it?— A. They followed after the freight train that had left there for the North. Q. Did they capture it? — A. I don't think they did. Q. What did they do with the engine? — A. Stopped it about a mUe north of here. Q. How many strikers were there in your town? — A. I am hardly able to tell. Q. Was any violence used there? — A. Well, not to my knowledge. There was mis- chief done about the shop and in the roundhouse at night, bat I was not there. Q. How lai^ a place is Alvarado? — A. 'It has about 2,000 inhabitants. Q. What was the effect upon the business there? — A. WeH, sir, it was very demoral- izing. Q. Is there anything more that you know about it? — A. I do not know of anything. 'leONIDAS D. ANDERSON sworn and examined. By Mr. OdthwaitE: Question. How old are you? — Answer. Thirty-one years. Q. Where do you live? — ^A. At Alvarado, Tex. Q. Are you a member of the order of Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. What were you employed at about the 1st of March? — A. I was agent for the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad Company. Q. When was your first of&cial information of the beginning of the strike on the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad? — A. On the evening of the 1st of March, about 8 o'clock, I was shown an order from the Knights of Labor — it was shown to one of their members — to quit work at 6 o'clock that evening. Q. Canyouremember the language of that order? — A. No, sir: I cannot. Q. Do you recollect whether it gave the cause for which this strike was ordered? — A. I do not think it did. It just read, " At 6 o'clock p. m. on the evening of the 1st quit work." Q. On March 2 were you, as an employ^ of the road, connected with an attempt to move a freight train? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Tell us what occurred at that time? — A. About 7 o'clock in the morning I went to the office, and there was an order to start a freight train south. The yard master told me that the engines were all dead. I went over to the rotmdhonse; but before I went there I saw one of the members of the Knights of Labor pass. I asked him the cause of the strike, and if they were not going to let us move any trains, and he said "No." I went over to the roundhouse and found the foreman of the roundhouse had not got down yet. I went back and reported jill the engines dead except one, and we soon got another order to start the train south. I went to the roundhouse, to the one engine left, and went out to get her, but some seven or eight parties came oat and went to work and killed her. Q. On the 9th of March did the traveling engineer come to Alvarado? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What effort was made at that time to start a train, and what was the result? — A. We got an order to start a train, and the engineer and myself went to the roundhouse. I went to close up the ticket-case, and by the time I got over here some four or five or more men came over, and one of the men told Mr. Buck he would have to leave there. He was there a few days before, and the man said, "You just left a few days before to save trouble and you had better leave now." Q. Who were the.se men?— A. Well, I cannot give you aU the names, but I could give you a few of them. Q. Were they former employes of the road? — A. Part of them were. Q. Were they members of any organization of labor? — A. They were said to be Knights of Labor. 3984 la:b 3 10 146 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What cause was assigned by these Knights of Labor at the time for the strike?— A. All the employ^ that I talked with claimed that they had no grievances themselves, but others had. They never assigned any reason or stated any grievance to me. Q. On Mardh 28 did you make an attempt to move a train? — A. On March 28 we got our engines, fired up a portioii of them, and ran a train in to see what the efiect would be, and after the train came in they got the engine off atid took her to Grand View and killed her, Q. Did you call oh the authorities for assistance?— A. We called on the authoritiea for protection. Q. W'hat success had you in starting trains after getting protection?- ^A. We made no attempt that day. Next day we succeeded in moving our trains, the ' city authoriliea and county authorities protecting us. Q. Was there anytrouble at the roundhouse atAlvarado? — ^A. Well, about the 3d or 4th, or about that time, several shots were fired that were stated to be by a musket, on account of the bullet-holes that were in the roundhouse. Q. You do not know who fired those shots? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know anything about a train that was ditched near Alvarado? — A. I know there was a train ditched. Q. What else do you know about it ? — A. I do not know anything about it farther than that it was ditched. Q. How much damage was done? — A. Well, I would estimate the damage at two'or three thousand dollars. Q. What was the nature of the damage done? — A. The engine was thrown from tlJe track, four box cars had gone down the embankment, the engineer's arm was broken, the fireman's leg was broken and damaged, and a brakeman's face hurt. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN. ) You said these men were said to be Knights of Labor. Haid you any knowledge as to that? — A. I had; several of them told me they were. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Were any pistol-shots fired, before the strike, at the round- house ? — A. I do not remember that there were. Q. Did you ever hear of any? — A. Not that I remember. Q. What was the date at which they went out down there? — A. On the 1st of March at 6 o'clock, or the night of the 2d. GEORGE W. COTTER sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekse: Question. Where do you reside?-^Answer. At Alvarado, Tex. Q. What is your business? — A. I am a merchant, sir. Q. How long have you resided at Alvarado? — A. About fifteen years, sir. Q. Were you there during the time of this strike? — A. I was at home, sir. Q. Did you witness the trouble there? — A. I cannot say that I did. The Missouri Pacific depot is situated about half a mile from the square, and I staid at home, sir. Q. You saw the effects of the strike? — A. Yes, I saw the effects. Q. You may describe the business effects of thestrike upon that town. — A. Well, sir, it created general uneasiness in the minds of the people and a general cessation of busi- ness as far as people could stop their business. It, of course, interfered with the trans- portation of freight. It hurt everybody's interest, but just to what extent I cannot tell. Q. Do you know how long it continued there? — A. Well, sir, about thirty days, I think, the active part.of it. Q. Was the only effect of it in general, so far as you know, the injury to business and to the people? — A. Yes, sir; I do not know that it had any other effect upon people of our vicinity. Q. If you can readily, you may give instances of the injurious effects there or in wlat way it affected the business in the surrounding country. — A. The way in which it did it was by the fact that it unsettled the state of affairs. People did not know what was going to follow, and they let their matters go at loose ends. Then, in the transportation of freight, our business was hurt in that way. For instance, in shipping every kind of merchandise we were hurt; but I think the general trouble was because there was such an unsettled condition of things, and people's minds were dwelling upon that and not upon their business. Q. Are you supplied there by any other railroad than that upon which the strike was? — A. The Gulf, Colorado and Santa F6 passes through our place. Q. Is there any further fact that you wish to speak of? — A. I do not know of any- thing. Q. How did your business there in March, 1885, compare with that in March, 1886? — A. I cannot tell you. My own business was smaller, about one-third, I think. Q. Do you know of any uneasiness or complaint among the men there as to griev- ances? — A. I never heard that there were any. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 147 LORENZO D. MERCER sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do yon live? — Answer. At Alvarado. Q. How long have you lived there? — A. Twenty years. Q. What is your business? — A. I am a real estate agent. Q. Were you at your place of business or residence about the 2d of March last? — X. I was, sir. Q. How near is that to the roundhouse? — A. I suppose I am a hundred yards from the roundhouse. Q. What did you see there that day ?-^A. Well, sir, I saw the work all stopped by order of parties claiming to be Knights of Labor. The men all went out and stopped work. On the morning of the 2d they did not go to work. I did not know what had been done. I saw in the shop and in the yards that the fires of the engines had been drawn and that they were out. Q. Whohadpossessionof the roundhouse? — A. The Knights of Labor had possession of it, so far as I understand it. They claimed to be allowing no freight trains to run. Q. The strikers had possession, and you saw engines disabled? — A. I saw several had been disabled. Q. What, if any, declaration did you hear made by the strikers as to their allowing no work to be done ? — A. Well, they stopped work. I went to.W. E. Brunder, who is said to be their master workman — I am not a Knight of Labor — and asked him what the strike was for. Q. I asked you what were their declarations as to trains being moved ? — A. He said that there was to be no more work done. Q. Did they make any exception as to passenger trains ? — A. They said they should be allowed to run. Q. How were the engines disabled ? — A. The valves were taken out. Q. Did you see an engine captured about the 30th of March ? — A. I saw it as it moved out of the yard north. I s^w it when it moved north. I cannot say who was the en- gineer, or who was aboard of it, but it seemed to be following a freight train that had just gone north. The freight had been followed by the engine to bring back the guards to protect it. When they met it above the road-crossing Mr. Mellen and a few from the yard reversed and came quickly down towards the yard. Just then they abandoned the ■engine and ran to the woods, and I saw other parties get in. Q. Did you recognize them ? — A. I did not recognize them. Q. Now give us your conversation with Mr. Brunder. — A. I went to him and asked bim what was the strike for, what their grievances were, and he said they had none of their own; they had been ordered out. Q. Did he say how they were ordered? — A. He said their order was from the execu- tive board of the Knights of Labor. Q. Did you talk with other strikers? — A. I talked with him further. I told him that there was certainly some mistake. If there were no grievances, he, as master workman, had better order the men back to work again; and he said by next morning at 8 o'clock he would know and understand about it. Mr. Ray also made the same statement, that they had no grievances, and Mr. Clark, the master mechanic, said if they had he could settle it. After a while something was said about this man Hall at Marshall, of his dis- charge being the cause of it; and others said that it had nothing to do with it. Q. Were you absent from Alvarado at any time during the strika? — A. I left here on the 5th of March and went to Denison, and came back on the 6th. Q. Had you any difficulty yourself with any of thfese strikeiB? — A. Some threats were used to me; that was all. Q. Please state what they were ? — A. A few strikers, friends of mine, came to me and told me that they were angry with me for the course I had taken in the premises, and if I was not careful I would be killed, and that it was threatened that I would get my head shot off. Q. What course had you taken? — ^A. I wanted trains to run. Q. You had been outspoken in your utterances that the road should be unob- structed? — A. And that it shonld be operated. Q. Had you done anything or said anything beyond that? — ^A. , Nothing at all. Q. Were any threats made to yon personally? — A. None to me personally. JOHN THEEADGILL sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. How old are you? — Answer. Thirty-seven. - Q. Where do you live?— A. At Taylor, Tex. Q. What official pi^ition do you occupy? — A. I am mayor of the city. 148 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And Tsere yeu mayor during this strike on the Missouri Pacific? — ^A. Yes, sir; I liave been mayor since April, 1885. Q. What effect had this strike upon the business of Taylor? — A. -For about four weeks it paralyzed the business and created confusion. Q. How large a place is Taylor? — A. It is a place of about 2,000 inhabitants. Q. Where do the merchants purchase their supplies? — A. At New York and Saint Louis. Q. Were any of the goods expected at Taylor detained by the strike? — A. Yea, sir. All our merchants had gone East and returned about the time the strike was inaugu- rated, and we were isolated from the 1st of March to the 1st of April. Goods had to be taken via steamer and Galveston and shipped by express. Q. Were you pretty generally acquainted with the men who had been in the employ of the road? — ^A. Yes,, to a certain extent. Q. You may state whether you saw any acts of violence by the employds or Knights of Labor, or any destruction of property belonging to the company. — A. I saw them pre- vent the running of trains. Q. How? — A. By an armed force. Q. Were-any of them arrested and prosecuted? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many? — A. Three. Q. What was the result of the prosecution? — A. On the first case we had a jury, and there was an acquittal. On the second case there was a conviction, and a fine assessed of $7.65 for malicious mischief, by the jury. On the third case the city attorney made a motion to dismiss, with the understanding that no further attempt should be made to destroy the property of the company. Q. What have you to say about engines being killed, as it is termed? — A I onlyhave that from hearsay. I was told by the foreman and master mechanic that they had killed two or three engines. Q. Were you called upon to protect the property of the company? — A. On the loth of March last, about 7 o'clock, the master mechanic at Taylor sent to my house for me to come down to the yard of the Missouri Pacific Railroad in Taylor. I -went down and asked him what was the matter. He informed me that that morning about 5 o'clock he had attempted to get out a train and that his men had been overpowered and the en- gine kUled. He wanted to get out an information, and wanted assistance. I asked him what assistance he needed. He said he had orders to send a freight train south. I asked him if he had an engine and crew that could pull his train. He said he had. I returned to the house and notified the city marshal and summoned a posse of about six men. I took the city marshal and the posse and went to the roundhouse and informed the mas- ter mechanic that I was ready at any time to move the train and give assistance. He told me that his engine was in the roundhouse and ready to move. I went with the city marshal and placed them on the engine and told them to obey the-orders of the en- gineer and let no person, unless with the permission of the engineer, get on the engine. They backed out into the yard. I took the other men of the guard off the engine, fastr ened all the cars, and came up the track going south. A body of men, numbering some- where between fifty and a hundred, employes of the company, and I suppose Knights of Labor, stood on the track in front of the engine. I ordered them to disperse, and told them what would be the result if they did not. They evaded me. They attempted to dally with the train, but we kept them off. They would have stopped the train if it had not been for force of arms. My force staid with the train until it got out of the _ Q. You went out and brought it in, and then started to take it out again? How far did you proceed before you were interrupted ? — A. We were interrupted right in the yard by a flag. They flagged us down, but we were moving through pretty lively, and we did not want them to get on the train. Q. Who did the flagging before you at that time? — A. A lady. • Q. What kind of a flag did she use? — A. A red flag. Q. Yon did not stop but went on; how far out did you get before you stopped? — A. I believe they call it 2 miles. Q. What happened there to prevent your going on? — A. When we got to this side of the New Orleans crossing we found a switch turned. I saw four men walk away from the switch, and one of them motioned the engine down this way [indicating], i We stopped the engine, and I jumped down on the right-hand side and arrested the four men; and just at that time the crowd called my attention over to the other side, and I turned these four men over to one of my men and told him to look after them. I then came out in front of the engine, and as I did so saw about seven or eight men armed with Winchesters over there. I first called on them, "Gentlemen, lay down those arms;" and when I said that they all knelt down and drew their guns, and I said, "Gentle- men, don't," or, "For Christ's sake, don't shoot." I do not remember exactly the words. When I said that they all turned loose and shot, hitting one man right by the side of me. ^ Q. Who was that? — A. Mr. FuUford. He said, "I am shot." I made the remark, " Get to cover," and then it was a pretty heavy little fight for several minutes. Q. How many were shot in that afiray? — A. Three on our side. • Q. Did any ofthem die from their wounds? — A. Amanby the name of Dick Townsend. Q. How soon after he was shot did he die? — A. This was between 10 and 12 ; I be- lieve he died some time next morning. I went right out of town the next morning again with the train. Q. How many of those men firing upon you were shot? — A. I am not able to tell. Q. Have you heard that any of them were shot? — A. One ofthem is in jail here. Q. What is his name? — A. Thomas Nace. Q. Do you know any of the men whom you arrested first? — A. Yes, sir: I know two of them, but I did not know the others. I know their names at the present time. Q. Can you tell whether they lived in the town here or not before that? — A. Yes, sir; one of them. Q. Do you know whether they worked for the railroad and went out on the strike? — A. I think these men that turned the switch worked for the company. They were al- ways looked on by me as railroad men. Q. Did you recognize any of the men who fired" upon you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can you give the names of any of them? — A. I can give the name of one — Hardin. I have known him;for twelve years. Q. Is he in this country now? — A. I cannot tell. Q. Have you seen him since that time? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know whether any effort has been made by the marshals to find him ? — ^A. I think there has; I have made some myself. Q. Had you any acquaintance vnth any of the rest of them, although you may not be able to give their names? — A. I think I would know some ofthem. Q. Aje there any persons here who claimed to be near and to have seen that afEray other than the two parties who took part in it?— A. A man by the name of OUie Bowles was, and recognized some of the same party. He happened to be right close, on a horse, and saw the whole firing. Q. Is he here this afternoon ? — A. I do not know. He can be easily got. He is up at the court-house on that case up there. Q. I am requested to ask you whether you were acting within the city limits at the time of this aflfray ? — A. I do not know exactly whether it is in the city limits. Q. Part of the time you were out of the city limits? — A. Yes, sir; but then I was deputy sheriff of another county. I was deputized in this Alvarado bu^ness. I was deputized down there to move trains. Q. When were you deputized down there ? — A. That was on the 29th of March. Q. Has a deputy sheriff jurisdiction in any county in the State? Has .he a right to preserve the peace in any county or only, in the county in which he is deputized? — ^A. I am not certain about that. Q. Was the only authority under which you were acting as a deputy marshal of Fort Worth and deputy sheriff of Johnson County ? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN TfiE SOUTH AND WEST. 163 Q. Were you also requested by the company to act as guard ? — A. I was employed by the comi)any. Q. Which company ? — A. The Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Q. Can citizens of one ctitmty in this State act as deputy sheriff in another county?^ A. Yes, sir; if they have not been in the county fifteen minutes. EDWARD SMITH sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Question. Are you an engineer ? — Answer. Yes, sir. •Q. Of what engine? — A. Of engine 54. Q. Had you charge of that engine in March and April last? — A. Tes, sir. Q. On March 31 you may tell what occurred. — A. She was thrown upon the yard and killed by the strikers. Q. At what place ? — A. In this yard at Fort Worth. Q. Do you know who those strikers were ? — A. No, sir. Q. What was the result; did they run her back? — A. She was taken back. Q. Did yon try to take her out again? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How soon ?— A. On the 3d of April. Q. And what occurred then ? — A. I got about 2 miles down and had to come back. Q. Why had you to come back ? — A. The switch was thrown and the strikers killed sn officer, and I had to bring him back to town. Q. Was that the time the last witness testified about ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You had charge at the time when Townsend was killed ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who fired first in that affray ? — A. I cannot say, sir. Q. Have you heard the statement of the last witness ? — A. I did not hear the whole of his testimony; I heard part of it. Q. Go on and describe the circumstances briefly as to the shooting. — A. tVhen I got to the crossing the switch was thrown and we had to stop at the switch. Mr. Court- wiight arrested four or five men there. My attention was drawn off for a minute in at- tending to the switch, and at the time the shooting commenced. I eventually got the men that were shot on the train. Q. After the shooting what did the men who were shooting at you do? — A. They re- treated. Q. Which way did they go ? — A. They went east. ' Q. Did they shoot several times? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many shots were fired? — A. About seventy-five. Q. On one side? — A. On both sides. Q. Had your party rifles? — A. No, sir; only revolvers. Q. What had the other party ? — A. Winchesters, I believe. Q. How many shots came from those having the Winchesters, do you think? — A. I -cannot say; there were a great many. Q. What did you see yourself of the fight? — A. I saw a good deal of shootiug going on. Q. How much of that did you see yourself? — A. I sawpretty nearly all of it. Q. You saw the flrst volley they fired? — A. No, sir; I did not see it. Q. After that what did you see? — A. After that I saw them shoot. Q. How were they — standing up or under cover ? — A. They were under cover, and lying on the ground. Q. Anything before them? — A. No, sir. Q. Why did you not see the flrst shooting? — A. I whistled four times to call the breakmen' to throw the switch, and at that time, looking back, my head was turned, and then the shooting commenced. CORT E. NICEWARNER sworn and examined. By Mr. BUCHANAN: Question. Are you a flreman on the Missouri Pacific road ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you called to go north on engine 54 on the 31st of March last? — ^A. Yes, sir; I was caUed to go to Hodge. Q. What happened to the engine? — A. It was killed in the yard. Q. Were you called after that to go south, about the 3d of April? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did anything happen during that trip; if so, what ? — A. We started out and got to New Orleans Junction and were stopped there by the switch being turned and by a shooting affray. Q. What was that shooting affray ? — A. Well, there were several men on the east of the track with Winchester guns. 164 LABOK TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Standing up or lying down ?— ^A. Sitting, about three or four of them, that I first saw; but all lying down when the firing was done. Q. Just tell us what was said and done? — A. I saw that the switch was turned, and the train was stopped. The officers got off and went in front of the engine and arrested four parties that were standing on the New Orleans track, and then struck out in front of the engine across the track, and Mr. Courtwright said something to the parties on the east side, something about throwing up their hands or not to shoot, or something of that kind, and the firing commenced. The answer they gave was to shoot. Q. Who shot first ? — A. I do not know him personally. Q. Which fired first ? — A. The men on the east side of the track; the men who had guns. Strikers and the men on the east side of the track. Q. Have you told any one that Mr. Courtwright fired first? — ^A. No, sir; I have not. WILLIAM EEA sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitb: Question. What official position have you held during the last six months? — ^Answer. I am city marshal of Fort Worth and ex officio chief of police. Q. Were you present at any of these disturbances in the yards of the railroads here in this city? — A. Yes, sir; I was. Q. What disturbances did you see? — ^A. Well, some attempts were made to take out trains, and they would pull the pins and cut the trains in two, and we could not get them out. This was done once or twice. Q. Who did these things? — A. The strikers. Q. How long have you lived in this city? — A. I have lived in the city nine years; in the county, twenty-seven. Q. Are you personally acquainted with any number of the employ^? — A^ Well, sir, I know most of their faces, but very few of their names. Q. What cause, if any, did you hear them give for going out on the strike? — A. I waa absent from the city at the time the strike commenced, and came home about the 20th of March. Q. You may give any other difficulty or difficulties or disturbances which you saw re- sulting from the strike. — A. Well, about all I saw was the disturbance in the yard there. I was not on the train where the shooting was. Q. You may state to the committee what is the general official jurisdiction of marshals and police officers in this city. — A. The statute of the State gives the marshal and his deputies the same jurisdiction in criminal matters as it does the sheriff — to the full limit of the county. Q. To make arrests in the county ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You appointed the deputies that were on the train the day of the shooting out here at the crossing ? — A. Well, most of them that were on the train were sworn in by the mayor of the city. Q. Were they under your direction and supervision? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were those who testified here your deputies ? — A. Yes, sir. WALTEE T. MADDOX sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At Fort Worth. Q. What is your occupation? — A. I am sheriff of the county. Q. Were you sheriff of the county on the 31st of March last? — A- Yes, sir. Q. Were you called upon by the railroad authorities on that day; and, if so, for what purpose? — A. To move out a train. Q. Tell what you did? — A. I went down in the afternoon on the 31st to take out a train, and we did not succeed in doing it. Q. Why not? — A. The strikers took it from us and cut it up by drawing the pins. Q. Who went out? — A. Myself and deputies, Mr. Eea and a portion of the police. Q. How many strikers were there there ? — A. Between three and five hundred men. Q. What did they do? — A. When the train was moving through the yards they were on top of it like so many squirrels; they put on brakes and stopped the train and com- menced pulling the pins. Q. Did they attempt to do anything with the engine? — A. They attempted' to kill the engine. Q. Were they prevented ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How? — A. By the officers drawing their guns and holding them off. Q. You saved the engine by leveling your guns upon those who attempted to inter- fere with it? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 165 Q. Did you talk at any time with any of those strikers about the cause of their strike? — ^A. Yes, sir; I have with some. Q. What did they say was the cause? — A. They gave different reasons. I talked with Mr. Loviu, and he claimed it was on account of the discharge of Hall. Q. Did he make any other claim? — A. He claimed that it was on account of Chinese and convict labor. These were the three principal causes he stated. Q. What causes were alleged by others ? — A. I do not remember. I did not talk with many of them. Q. Were those three causes all alleged in the same conversation? — A.^ No, sir. Q. What happened on April 1 ? — A. We attempted to run out a train on April 1. Q. Did yon do it? — A. No, sir. Q. Why not? — A. The train was on the yard. It was made up that morning. The United States deputy marshal said he would hold the train till we got our force to take the train out, and soon after he pulled up the engine and hooked, it on to the traiu'. The strikers took possession of it and pulled the pins and tried to kill the engine. Q. Did they kill the engine? — A. No, sir. « Q. Why not? — A. We presented our guns to them and held them off. Q. In what condition were those men that day ? — A. A great many of them in a drunken condition. Q. Were they boisterous or peaceable? — A. Boisterous; very much so. Q. Were any pistols drawn that day ? — A. I saw attempts made to draw pistols. One man attempted to draw a pistol ; he was a Knight of Labor. His name was E. P. Blake- ley; he claimed that he was a Knight of Labor. Q. Was he arrested? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. How did he succeed in his attempt to draw the pistol? — A. I think he would have drawn it, but his suspender caught the guard, and he could not pull it out. Q. What did you do ? — A. I told him that I would shoot him if he attempted to get his pistol out. Q. Did he let it remain ? — A. He had it in his breast pocket, and he took his hand off. Q. Did you see any other man make a movement 'of a similar character ? — A. Yes; fifty or more had their hands in their breast and hip pockets; but they did not draw. Q What did they say to you ? — A. A number of them told me they would "killme" or "carve me into pieces," or ''shoot me into pieces, so that my wife would not recog- nize me, if there was a drop of blood drawn." Q. When Blakeley was arrested, was there a pistol in his pocket? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is the law of Texas iu reference to carrying concealed weapons? — A. The fine is not less than twenty-five nor more than a hundred dollars. Q. When did you first obtain control of the yard and track of the company ? — A. The evening, I believe, after we got out the writs of injunction I went down and got charge of the yard. Q. These writs were against the strikers? — A. There were aboufra hundred of them issued. I only served about forty or fifty. i Q. Was any effort made to run a train after that day ? — A. No effort was made that day. Q. Had you any conversation with N. M. Lovin that day? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What position does he hold ? — A. He claims to be master workman of Assembly 101 of the Knights of Labor. Q. What did you say to him about trying to control his men ? — A. I told him if he was a leader he ought to control his men. He said he did not propose to do it; and I told him if I was a leader of such a gang I would resign at once; and he claimed that labor was being made slaves of, and said that if we wanted to fight they were as well prepared for it then as they ever would be. Q. Did he say anything about being made slaves as long as they could stand and fight? — A. They were as well prepared to-day as they would be. Q. What reply did yon give him? — A. I told him I did not think he would shoulder a musket, but that he would stand in the background as he had in this strike. Q. You took possession of the yard on the 3d of April? — A. We took possession on the 2d of April. Q. Had you any further conversation with Mr. Lovin about the men giving you any trouble? — A. I do not remember; 1 may have had; but that is the substance of abovft all the conversation I had with him. Q. After these injunction writs were served was there an ofSeer in charge of the yard ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was the city marshal sent out to Hodge ? — A. Yes, sir. I was in charge then and the city marshal said he would take his force if I would still hold the yard. Q. Did you receive any information that the'train had been attacked? — A. Yes, sir. I was not present. 166 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. X Q. Did you receive word that the train had been attacked and that an officer had been killed ?— A. YeS, I did. I came up at once with a posse and got them armed and went back to the tip. Q. Had you any other trouble after that?— A. No, sir; I had no further trouble Q. Have you received any threatening letters?— A. Yes, sir; I received severaJ; I have none of them with me. Q. Give us substantially the threats that were contained in them ? —A. I do not know that I can remember any particular one. Mrs. Egan, the wife of one of the Knights,, was present and said that a man named Murray had stated that be had seen the hand- writing a thousand times. Mrs. Egan, I am satisfied, was right about it from the con- versation I had with her. The day after she wrote me that this man Murray stated that he was one of the leaders in this difficulty here, and he first started trouble at Denison and had gone from Denisou to Alvarado and back to Fort Worth, and was one of the most active leaders in that difficulty. Mun-ay has been ever since at Denison. She went on to tell me that I was in danger and I had better be cautious, &c. Q. tVas any mention made of the red flag? — A. She said that it was a warning that there was trouble, and I ought to take warning from it. Q. Do you know the lady who guarded the road that day ? — A. She is the lady that guarded it, Mrs. Egan that showed the red flag. Q. Do you know whether she sustains any relation to any organization whatever ? — A. I have heard that she was secretary of one of the lodges. Q. Of Odd Fellows, Masons, or Knights of Labor ?— A. Of Knights of Labor. One- ■who knew her handwriting, a prominent citizen, told me that it was hers. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) In this conversation with Mr. Loviu did he not also say that another cause of the strike was that they wanted the pay of viuskilled labor raised to a dollar and fifty cents a day ? — A. I do not remember. He had a long conversation with me in my office in reference to the matter. Q. This question is handed to me to ask you: Was Blakely a Mason, or an Odd Fellow, or member of any other order that, you know of? — A. Not that I know of. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) How soon after the strike began had you this conversation ■with this Knight of Labor who gave you the cause of it ? — A. Mr. Lovin ? It had been some time; perhaps ten or fifteen days, and may be not so long. I do not remember just exactly. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) What Murray was this that you spoke of? — A. I do not know his given name. I never heard his name mentioned here except as Murray. Q. Was it Michael Murray? — A. I do not remember, sir. Q. Do you know whether he was master workman and one of the leaders at Denison? — A. I never heard of him until his name was mentioned in that letter. Q. Or whether he was a coppersmith ? — A. I do not know what his occupation is. NATHAN A. STEDMAN sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Do you live at Fort Worth? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you lived there? — A. Three years. ' Q. What was your occupation when the strike broke out? — A. A lawyer. Q. Were you summoned by the sheriff at any time during the continuance of this strike to assist in making arrests and prevent depredations? — A. Yes, sir; I was summoned by the sheriff on two different occasions. Q. State what transpired. — A. The first time I was summoned the sheriff had a large number of men, and there was no organization among the officers. The officers were summoned for the purpose of assisting the movement of a train on the Missouri Pa- cific Railway. I was not on the ground at the time of the difficulty that Mr. Maddox. has testified to as between himself and Mr. Blakeley, but it was reported that pins had been drawn from the cars and they could not move the train, and I came back to town. The next time I went down was when a report was dreulated in town that officers had been killed ; that a train had been fired upon by the strikers and one of the deputies killed and two wounded. I met Mr. Maddox or one of his deputies. He informed me that he wanted me to act again, and I obeyed this summons and acted for a day or two afterwards. Q. Did any other citizens go with you? — A. I suppose he summoned seventy-five men in the crowd that I went with. Q. Did ^ou meet with any opposition? — A. None whatever. Q. Had not the sheriffand his posse been on guard at the depot would there have been any trouble, in your judgment? — A. That is my opinion about it. Q. Who were the parties that were giving trouble? — A. They were strikers. At least that is my information, and the current rumor was that they were Knights of Labor.. I do not know that of my own knowledge. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 167 NATHAN M. LOVIN sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Do you reside at Fort Worth? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you resided here? — A. About four years. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. lam. Q. What is the name of the master workman of this local assembly? — A. WeU, sir, there ate five or six local assemblies here; I am master workman of one of them. Q. Who are the inaster workmen of the other assemblies? — A. I do not believe, sir, that I can answer your question. The Chaikman. Is it against your rules togive thenamesof another member of your order? Mr. Pabkee. I insist on the question being asked. I do not know that the law gives BJiy exemption from his answering the question, and! I want it to appear distinctly in his testimony either that he answered or refused to answer. Q. (To witness.) Why cannot you answer the question? — A. It is contrary to the rules of the order. Q. Do you decline to answer? — A. I prefer not to-. Q. Are you sworn not to tell or is it j ust a rule of the order ? — A. Well, sir^ it is part of our law not to give the name of a brother member. Q. Who is the secretary of your local assembly? — ^A. That comes under the same rule. An executive stission was here held, and at its close the examination of the witness continued. By the Chaieman: Q. Then I understand you to gay, Mr. Lovin, that you decline to give the name of the secretary of your local assembly because you say it is contrary to the rules of your or- der? — A. That is what I stated, that is was contrary to the rules of the order to which I belonged. Q. You decline to give the name ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Because you say it is contrary to the rules of your order to disclose the name of a brother member? — A. It is coptrary to the rules to disclose the name of a brother of the order without his permission. The Chaieman. We will excuse you. Q. Are you a member of the executive committee of which Martin Irons is chairman ? — A. I was up to January, but not since then. Q. You stated that you were master workman. Are you master workman of a dis- trict or local assembly? — A. I am district master workman of District Assembly No. 101. Q. Is that the assembly which ordered this strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What part did you take in ordering this strike? — A. I did not take any; it was done by the executive board. Q. Were you a member of the board ? — A. I was not. Q. What was the cause of the strike? — A. There were various causes. Q. Do yon keep a record of the proceedings of your assembly ? — A. I keep a file. Q. Where can be found the proposition upon which the local assemblies voted before this strike was ordered? — A. The proposition in regard to this strike that you spieak of now? Q. Where can be found the proposition in writing upon which local assemblies voted before this strike was ordered ? — A. Well, sir, I expect that the secretary of each local assembly has it on file in his office. The secretary keeps all the written matter presented to the different locals, and in the district assembly the recording secretary has possession of all those documents. Q. Is it the duty of the secretary to keep this record ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And to keep on file all papers that come oflioially to the assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then I presume the Secretary of your local assembly here has that proposition ?— A. Well, sir, I could not be positive; I was not here at the time that proposition came. Q. He ought to have it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And he ought to have the order issued by the district executive board for the strike? — :A. No, sir. The order came by telegram to the chairman of the local execu- tive committee. Q. Are you that chairman ? — A. No, sir. I belong to that executive committee, and I received the telegram at the office myseliV Q. Where is that telegram ? — A. I think the chairman of the board had it. A day or two afterwards he had it in his possession; he said, "We have no use for this now," or something like that; I do not know exactly what he did say, and I think he tore it up. . Q. Was it in cipher? — ^A. Yes, sir. 168 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. At what telegraph office was it received? — A. At the Western Union office at the depot. Q. You say it was destroyed? — A. I think it is. He said he was going to destroy it. Q. What were the contents of it? — A. In English it was: "Strike on the 1st at 3 o'clock sharp." Q. First of what?— A. First of March. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb.) Who was it signed hy ? — A. Signed hy Martin Irons. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Was there any subsequent order in writing confirming that telegram? — A. Not that I know of. If so, I did not see it. Q. The strike took place, then, upon this telegraphic order and upon nothing else? — A. Yes, sir. Of course there had been arrangements previous to that. Q. You anticipated its arrival? — Af. Yes, sir. Q. Was that the only written communication which you received upon the subject of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many propositions had your local assenibly voted on before the strike was or- dered ? — A. Three, I believe; I was not present at the time they voted upon them. I suppose they voted upon these. Q. You were not present at the time when any of them were voted upon ? — A. No, sir; I was not. Q. Were the three propositions voted upon at the same time? — A. No, sir; they were not. Q. How long before the telegraphic order arrived was it that you voted upon the last proposition? — A. I suppose some ten days or two weeks; may be not that long. Q. What was that last proposition ? — ^A. Well, sir, I think it was to know whether the local assembly would sustain the executive board. Q. Upon what proposition or in regard to what? — A. That last proposition was in re- gard to C. A. Hall. Q. By C. A. Hall I presume you mean the man who was discharged by the Texas and Pacific Railroad Company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Where was the dispatch signed by Martin Irons dated ? — A. It was dated at Mar- shall. ■, Q. Do you remember the date of it ? — A. It was on the 1st day of March. Q. When did you strike?.— A. At this point we struck on the 1st. I did not get the dispatch until after 5 o'clock; I think the whistle blew about 5.30. Q. First examine that. [Presenting to witness a copy of letter of C. A. Hall to griev- ance committee of L. A. 4059, dated Marshall, Tex, February 17, 1886, informing committee that he had been discharged; report of said grievance committee as to Hall's discharge, and stating that a demand had been made for Hall's reinstatement before February 25; signed by Robert Hanson, George Bibb, W. E. Dearing; a proposition signed by Martin Irons, chairman of the executive board of Marshall, Tex., asking as- semblies if they would sustain their executive board in demanding a reinstatement of Htfll]. See if that is a correct copy of the proceedings had by the Knights of Labor in connection with the subject-matter. I will state that this was handed to me by Mr. Charles H. Litchman, who is representing the Knights of Labor in this investigation. , The Witness. I will state to the committee I was present when this top letter [indi- cating letter of Hall], was read to this local assembly. I was also present at a conver- sation between Mr. Crosby and Mr. Hall agreeing that he might be absent. I heard the whole conversation. I was also present when the local executive board made their lepoit to the executive board of the district assembly. This is correct. The Chairman (addressing Mr. Litchman). You have no objection to my putting this in? Mr. Litchman. No, sir. The Witness. I was a party present when this conversation between Mr. Crosby and Mr. Hall took place, and I was present when the letter was handed in, though I did not act officially. (The originals, bearing the seal of the order, being introduced at a subsequent point of witness's testimony, the copy presented is not inserted here, and a transcript of the originals will be found at the point in the testimony of the succeeding day where in- troduced. — SlBNOGEAPHEp. ) Q. Were you present when the local assembly to which you belonged voted upon that question of Martin Irons? — A. No, sir, I was not. Q. Do you know whether the vote was in the affirmative or in the negative? — A. Well, I am not, and would not be positive, but I think it was in the affirmative. I did not see the letter that was addressed to the chairman of the executive board. Q. I suppose that as a member of your order you knew what the action was? — A. I am pretty confident, although I do not recollect that I ever asked the qnestipn'of Hm, but I am pretty confident it was in the affirmative. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 169 Q. It requires a majority of the local assemblies to authorize a strike, does it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You said that the recitals in the paper are correct? — A. Yes, sir. The conversa- -tion js not expressed fully. Q. That is the substance of it ?-^A. Yes, sir. Q. Was any application made, to your knowledge, either to the ofScials of the rail- road or to Mr. Ci-osby, for the reinstatement of Hall? — A. That is only hearsay with me. I cannot say positively that it was; only I was informed that it was. Q. (By Mr. Odthwaite.) Do yon know how Hall happened to forget that you were present when that conversation with Mr. Crosby occurred, and did not know that he could prove it by you and Brother Thorburn ? — A. He came up and said that he did not^ know anything about who was present or anything about it. He said that he recollected that Thoiburn was there and one or two were present, but he did not know who they were. Q. You were, perhaps, not well acquainted with him during that time? — A. We were well acquainted, but it was Sunday morning, and there were quite a number of us along, and he did not know who happened to be present when he had this conversation, and the delegates, were fast arriving at the time. Q. Had you any preconcerted signal which was arranged before to be used when the time for the strike came? — A. -That is, when the strike should be ordered? Well, we have our telegraphic communication, which is in cipher, and that was the only precon- ■certed plan in regard to that. Q. (By the Chairman.) That request of Martin Irons'sis uncertain in this, thatitdoes not give the name of the brother. What brother was intended? — ^A. I think Brother Hall's name was on that. Q. His complaint is there, as well as the report of the grievance committee, and I suppose he means Brother Hall? — A. I think his name was on there. Q. Under your rules I presume that a similar copy of the telegram sent to yonr local assembly would be sent to every local assembly in the district presided over by Martin Irons? — A. I think to every local assembly in the district. Q. Is that the way in which business of that character is transacted? — A. That is the law of our district assembly. Q. I understood you to say in the beginning of your testimony that all communica- tions should be filed and kept as a part of the record by the Secretary. Is that correct? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then the original is doubtless in the hands of the Secretary ? — A. Yes, sir. I sup- pose he will be before you as a witness. The Chaieman. You will not give me his name. The Witness. I have a great deal of documentary evidence that I expect to put in, And I did not expect to be called on to testify this evening. Q. (By Mr. Paekbe.) Was it not required that Hall should be reinstated on or before February 25, 1886? — A. That is the way it was understood. Q. Was he so reinstated? — A. No. Q. Did the strike follow that failure to reinstate him? — A. It followed, but not on the 25th of February. Q. When did it follow? — A. On the 1st of March afterwards. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Is there any regulation prescribing the number of days that fih^ elapse before a strike is ordered after a refusal to comply with a demand? — A. None that I know of. Q. Is there any regulation providing for the number of days that shall elapse after a request of this kind is made and the vote is taken before the strike is ordered? — A. No, «iT. This is to authorize and empower the executive board to act and use all their best efforts to arbitrate and settle it peaceably. And they are able to order a strike if they -do not succeed in arbitrating. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You say three propositions were sent to the assemblies and acted upon. Can you produce them? — A. I cannot myself, but I think I can do so to- morrow. OSCAR M. BONNER sworn and examined. By the CHAIRMAN: Question. How old are you ? — ^Answer. Thirty years old. Q. Where do you reside? — A. At Denison at the present time. Q. What is your oecupation? — A. I am a brakeman and extra conductor on the Mis- souri Pacific road. Q. How long have you been in that employment? — A. I have worked for this road about a year and a half. Q. In the same position? — A. As a brakeman. 170 LABOE TROUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Were you called to go out on the extra train on April 3? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Where was that train going ? — A. To Alvarado. Q. Where didHt start from? — A. It started from Fort Worth, went to Hodge and got a train of coal, and started south. Q. Did you find anything wrong about the railroad track after you had left Fort Worth? — A. I found the switch thrown round two miles south of Fort Worth. Q. Did you see any men sitting round there ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you any officers aboard? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the officers do anything with the men? — A. Yes, sir; they got off the train. and stepped up to four men that were on the road on the right-hand side of the track; and there were six men on the left-hand side, five of which had guns and the other a revolver. The officers put the iour men under arrest and then proceeded to arrest the- other men. Q. Then shooting began? — A. Yes, sir. Q. From which side? — A. From the officers' side first. Q. And the other side returned fire? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What caused the officers to shoot? — A. I do not know. Q. Whom did they shoot at? — A. These six men that were on the prairie. Q. Was there any damage? — A. A great many shots were exchanged before any one fell. Q. Did any one fall? — A. The men on the prairie either fell down or laid down. Four fell. Q. Can you tell whether the men on the prairie fell or laid down? — A. It would b»^ very hard to tell. They might have laid down or they might have been wounded. Q- Did you go to the place to find oat ? — ^A. I did not go to the place. Q. Who were these men ? — A. I do not know. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) What was your official position on that train? — A. Act- ing as brakesman. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you then? — A. No, sir. Q. Where did you stand when the firing began ? — A. I was leaning out of the cupalo- of the caboose. Q. Looking toward whom ? — A. Looking at the fight. Q. At the men when it began ? — A. When the fight began ; yes, sir. Q. Just before it began where were you? — ^A. In the same position. Q. How many minutes had you been there before it began? — ^A. It was not over two- or three minutes from the time we stopped. It was a very short time. Q. How far were the men on the prairie from you?— A. About one hundred and fifty yards, as txr as I can guess. Q. Were they standing or lying down when the firing began? — A. When I first saw them they were kneeling, but when I saw the firing they were on their feet. Q. In what attitude were the men that were kneeling ? — A. Kneeling down on one • knee, a couple of them, and the others just squatted, with the guns across their laps. Q. Just kneeling; how were their guns? — A. In their hands. Q. Pointing which way? — A. Off in that way. [Indicating.] Q. They were not pointing the guns? — A. Just in that direction. [Indicating]. Q. Now tell us the steps after the arrests of the men by the switch until the firing be- gan. Give us each little circumstance. — A. They arrested these men on the right side- of the track, put a guard over them, and just as quick as they could, got over. I saw three or four run round the front of the engine, and get down on the other side of the train. The firing commenced almost as soon as they got over. Q. Did you see the men take a shot? — A. I saw the first shot. Q. Were you looking at the men near the train or the men on the prairie? — A. I was looking at the wholp of them. All of them were in plain sight. Q. They were not all in the same direction? — A. Just opposite. Q. One at your left and the other in front. — A. The party in front of the road, in front of me. Q. They were fully in front of those in the prairie too; so that you could see both parties at once?— A. I could see them all. Q. Who was the man who did the first shooting? — A. I do not know. Q. Did you know all the officers there? — A. I did not. Q. Did you know any of them? — A. I knew Tim Courtright by sight. Q. Did he shoot first? — A. I cannot say. • Q. If you saw that they shot first cannot you tell us who shot? — A. That I cannot tell. Q. Then you were not looking at those who did the first shooting ? — A. I was looking-, at them all. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 171 Q. Were you looking at the individual who fired the first shot when he shot ? — ^A. I ■was looking at the officers but not at the individuals. Q. Did the shooting not commence almost simultaneously on both sides? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Broke out from both sides almost at one time? — A. I knew from the report which it came from. Q. Was it not difficult to tell which fired the first shot? — A. I clearly understood which it was. Q. Was it not so close that it was impossible to tell which fired the first shot ?" — A. No, sir. JOHN CONLISS sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. What is your age and where do you live? — Answer. Hive at Denison, and am twenty-seven. Q. Were you called to go out on the extra train on April 3? — A. Yes, sir. Q. From Fort Worth towards where? — A. South. Q. Did anything unusual happen when you got outside of Fort Worth ? — A. Yes, sir. About two miles outside of town there was a switch wrong near the crossing of the Mis- souri and Pacific and the Fort Worth and New Orleans. Q. Did you see any men standing there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many ? — A. There were four on the right-hand side of the track, and then on the left there were men on the prairie. Q. How far were the four men from the track? — A. They were right on the New Or- leans track. Q. How far were the six men from the cars? — A. Exactly 100 yards. Q. Were those men armed ? — A. The six men were ; yes, sir. Q. The officers arrested the four men, did they? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they armed ? — A. No, sir; they did not have any arms. Q. What were they doing ? — A. I cannot tell. Q. What did the officers do after they arrested these four men ? — A. They left a man in charge of them, and three or four officers that got off on that side walked round on to the other side. Q. Was any firing done ? — A. Yes, sir. ' Q. Much? — A; Yes, sir. There must have been a hundred shots, or more. Q. Was any damage done ? — A. Yes, sir; three officers were wounded and two strikers. Q. How do you know they were strikers ? — A. They were supposed to be strikers. Q. Did you know them ? — A. No, sir. Q. How long did you hold the train there ?— A. About ten minutes. Q. How do you know that any of the other parties were wounded? — A. I saw one of them that was wounded. I was looking at him when he was wounded. Q. Where was he struck? — A. In the right arm; right about the middle of the arm. His arm dropped down by his side, his gun fell to the ground, and he staggered three or four steps and then braced himself up. He was the only one trying to shoot at that time, and when he did he shot this man Sneed in the face. He shot after he was hit in the arm. Q. Was it a gun or pistol ? — A. A Winchester rifle. Q. What was done with this wounded man aniong the strikers? — A. I cannot say. Q. Did the officers not go after them? — A. No, sir. Q. What made the firing cease? — A. Some of the officers ran out of ammunition, and they did not shoot any more. Q. Whether the others stopped from the same cause you do not know, do you ? — ^A. The others were walking ofi'. They were walking off the last I saw of them. Q. Who shot first? — A. I do not know. Q. What was done with the wounded officers? — A. They were brought back to Fort Worth. Q You did not 0iake that trip? — A. No, sir; I went in. Q. Did you start out again ? — A. No, sir. Q. What part of the train were you on ? — ^A. I yraa in the caboose. Q. The caboose was right behind the locomotive ? — A. Yes, sir. ANDERSON C. BRANNON sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. Were you an officer on the train that was mentioned by the last witness?— Answer. Yes, sir. 172 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What do you know as to who commenced shooting at that time? — ^A. The parties that were in the prairie. The six men that were in the prairie did the first firing. RICHARD KITTS sworn and examined. \ By the Chaieman: Question. Do you know anything about this shooting? — ^Answer. Yes, sir, I was out there. Q. What was the cause of your being there ? — ^A. I was ordered out there by Mr. ■Garrett. Q. Who was Mr. Garrett? — A. There he sits, sir. Q. What position did he fill ? — A. I do not know what kind of office he has. Q. Was he a deputy sheriff? — A. Yes, sir; I think so. Q. Who fired the first shot in that shooting affair? — A. The strikers, they call them; I- do not know who they were. Q. Were you in a position to see? — A. Yes, sir; I was. Q. Where were you ? — A. About six cars back from the engine. Q. On the ground ? — A. I was in between two coal cars. -Q. Were you engaged in the shooting yourself? — A. Yes, sir; I was. Q; As one of the officers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Your statement is that the other party fired first and the officers returned the fire? — A. Yes, sir. The committee then adjourned until the following morning, at 8 o'clock. Feiday, May 7, 1886. The committee met in the room rented for the purpose, at 8 o'clock, and proceeded to take testimony. JOHN C. BROWN sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: ■Question. Governor, what position do you hold in the Texas and Pacific Railway Company ? — Answer. I am one of th^ receivers ordered by the United States circuit court. Q. When were you appointed? — A. On the 16th of December last. , Q. Who is the other receiver ? — A. Governor Lionel A. Sheldon. Q. Have you entire charge of the business of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I have before me a letter, with accompanying documents, the letter being signed by you, in which you give, first, a statement of the railroad property, and then a gen- eral statement in the shape of an affidavit, or rather answers, to questions propounded by the special commissioner appointed by the circuit judge to investigate these labor troubles. I -wish you would examine them and see if they are authentic. — A. (After inspection of papers.) Yes, sir; these are the original papers which I filed with the com- mittee,; probably my name is not signed to the deposition, which is an impression copy. The Chaieman. The committee have determined to put these in evidence as part of your testimony, so as to save time. They seem to contain a very full and exhaustive statement of the entire subject-matter, and we will have them read. The papers were read, as follows: [The Texas and Pacific Railway, John C. Brofrn and Lionel A. Sheldon, receivers.] Office of Rbceivehs, Dallas, Tex., May 5, 1886. Gentlemen: The Texas and Pacific Railway, with all of its property, on the 16th day of December, 1885, was placed in the hands of myself and Hon. Lionel A. Sheldon, as receivers, appointed by his honor Don A. Pardee, holding court a1> New Orleans for the eastern district of Louisiana. A copy of the order making said appointment and ■defining the duties of the receivers is hereto appended, marked "A." By a proceeding taken in said court on the 9th day of January, 1886, when some ad- verse interests were heard and disposed of, the former appointment of receivers was con- firmed and ratified. The property thus placed in the hands of the receivers extends from New Orleans, in the State of Louisiana, to El Paso, on the western border of Texas, is correctly delin- -eated on a map* hereto annexed, marked "B," the total mileage being 1,487. The prin- * The map is omitted from record. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 173^ cipal machine-shops are located at Marshall, Tex., -with other shops at Gouldshorough, La., and Big Springs, Tex., and smaller repair-shops al Longview, Fort Worth, Baird, and Bonham, in the State of Texas, and at Boyce, in the State of Louisiana, the smaller repair-shops being in the roundhouses at division terminals. At these various shops and roundhouses there were employed ahout 615 men. There were altogether upon the pay-rolls of the receivers about 4,013 men, with a monthly- pay-roll of ?216,822.65. They had in service, in and out of repair, 166 locomotives, 85 ' passenger coaches, 23 baggage, mail, and express cars, 1,166 box cars, 961 flat and coal cars, 558 stock cars, 125 caboose_ cars, besides a number of working, boarding, and wrecking cars. On the line of the road there are 239 stations and 2,897 bridges and culverts. ' The receivers found the rolling-stock in bad condition, and more than 20 per cent, of the motive power unserviceable; the track itself needed many thousand tons of steel rails, there being only 400 miles of steel track altogether, and badly needed five or sis hundred thousand new ties. The regular force under the charge of the superintendent of bridges and buildings, which is included in the number on the pay-rolls above stated, including foremen of gangs, is about 329. There are 169 section-houses and as many section-gangs, aggregat- ing, including foremen, about 1,300 men. We were illy prepared for a strike, and would have conceded any reasonable demand, short of the right to control the road and its force, rather than encounter the evils of a strike, especially considering the condition of the properties and the need it had of aU possible earnings. No grievances were at any time presented to the receivers, directly or indirectly. The only demand made was that we should sign a paper containing: seven distinct articles of arbitration, which the receivers believed would virtually rele- . gate their authority to the Knighfe of Labor, and it was refused. This I believe to- have been the real cause of the strike which occurred on the 1st day of March' last. My deposition was taken by Capt. C. E. Henry, who was appointed special master by his honor the circuit judge, and ordered to travel over the line and take proof as- to the causes and origin of the strike and the incidents thereof; and, as but few of the inci- dents of the strike came under my personal observation, and my information is derived almost entirely from correspondence with subordinate officers, I could state but little as- having occurred under my personal observation. A copy of that deposition is herewith submitted, marked "C." The depositions of A. A. Egbert, general superintendent for the receivers; George- Noble, general agent for the receivers; Mr. Watts, master mechanic of the shops, having his office at Marshall; Mr. Dempsey, foreman of the roundhouse at the time of th& strike; Mr. Anderson, train-master at Fort Worth; Mr. Harris, station-master at Fort Worth, and General W. L. Cabell, United States marshal for the northern district of" Texas, were also taken by said special master and copies of their depositions are also filed for more minute details connected with the strike. The other proof taken by the commissioner, as well as his report, I have obtained permission of his honor. Judge Pardefe, to have copied and also submit herewith for your information. Since the depositions referred to above were taken, I have asked Col. Geo. Noble, gen- eral agent of the receivers, to furnish me a statement of tacts in addition, to some extent, to- what he stated in his deposition, and I submit his communication herewith marked " D. " I have also asked J. G. Harris, freight agent at Port Worth, and T. W. Anderson, train-master at the same point, to furnish me a statement of fitcts, to which I herewith- refer, marked "E" and "F."* I beg further to state that, having seen in the public prints that Mr. Powderly stated that the employes of the Texas and Pacific Eailway had been badly dealt with by that company in matters pertaining to the purchase of lands and town lots by said employ^, and fispe Have any railroad companies in Texas employed convict labor?— A. Yes, sir. I employed convict labor as vice-president of the Texas, and Pacificroad in 1876. and Since ihat time the Texas and Pacific have had, in the dearths of labor, occasion to do so. It is very difdcult to get colored labor in the cotton-picking season. They can go to pick- ing cotton and demand their own prices; and on occasions of that kind we have had to use convict labor. Q. Do the railsoads generally employ convict labor in Texas?— A. I think not, sir. That is mv understanding. I know of but one road, that is the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, that have convict labor, and saw a squad of fifty or sixty men at work on that road. , Q. By what authority have convicts been employed? — A. By authority of the State. Q. J^'hat is your opinion as to the employment of convict labor outside of the peni- tentiary ?— A. The talk about convict labor being in competition with other labor I have always regarded as idle. The proportion they bear to labor in any State is so small. There are two millions of people in Texas, and I cannot see much competition that there can be with fifteen hundred convicts. Q. Would you have it come in competition with honest labor? — A. I would avoiditas far as possible; but I would not propose to keep convicts in broadcloth clothes and kid gloves at the expense of the State treasury. Q. Do you not think that the employment of convict labor is calculated to have a demor- alizing effect on the honest labor of the country ?— A. If it mingles with it, certainly. Q. Do convict laborers mingle with honest laborers on the railroads ? — A. They are kept entirely distinct. Q. Have you given much thought and consideration to the subject of the relations be- tween corporations and their employ^. If so, what character of legislation, if any. State or national, would you recommend for the prevention of strikes and their attending evils? — A. That is a very broad question. I have thought of it a great deal, and very anxiously; but I think, except in some minor details, we have legislation enough, both State and national. The courts are open, and always willing, and very anxious to do foil justice against railroad companies. That has been my experience, and the §m- ployfe of railroads in Texas, Arkansas, or Missouri I have never seen fail to get much more than they could get against an individual. Q. Do you not think that there are certain grievances which might be set forth by the employ^ that are not really subjects for the action of courts, tor instance, the rates of wages? There are matters of contract over which the courts must have no control. — A. That must at last be governed by the ordinary law of supply and demand. If you have a surplus of labor it is cheaper, just as any overplus of grain makes grain cheaper, and I cannot see very well the justice of enacting a law by which railroad companies shall be restrained in their right to fix the rate they would pay a man and of paying their employfe when all the men are not subject to the same rules. The farmer comes in direct competition with the railroad in the employment of section hands. Our ordi- nary laborers, as a rule, are not generally as good as farm hands. They are inferior la- borers; but I do not mean to disparage them. They are driven from necessity to work upon railroads in repairing the tracks. But it is a labor that does not require much skill; and of the colored labor, we have a good deal of it in that department. We em- ploy it in direct competition with the farmer. There is a competition for that labor between the farmer, the contractor, and various other people with the railroads; and there is never a time when good labor of that sort cannot demand better prices from rail- roads than from the farmer. We have not a section hand in our employ to-day that could go to any farmer in Texas and get from him half as much money as he is getting from the railroad. Q. You speak more particularly with reference to the Southern States? — A. Yes, sir; I know very little about the question in the Northern States, only as I have looked- at the statistics. Q. If you employ convicts, do you not make to that extent an increase in the supply? — A. I think not; because convicts must, by the laws of the State, be punished by hard labor and confinement. That is the statute of the State. Unless you repeal that, they must come in conflict with some other labor. Take, ibr example, a State that I am more familiar with. In our State, in 1871 and 1872, it was a question discussed everywhere whether some law such as is in effect in other States should not be enacted to put the convicts to work on undeveloped industries. They were employed at occupations that would not come into conflict with any industry in the State, such- as making hollow- ware, cheap furniture, and cedar-ware, in very large quantities. These industries rame in conflict with no establishments in the State, but their wares were sold, • LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 187 and it became a source of great profit to the penitentiany, instead of being a charge of $185,000, as it had been before. The iirst year it paid thirty-odd thousand dollars into the treasury. Very soon individuals organized and built up those industries themselves, and now the convict labor is in direct competition with the individual labor. That has sprung out of the success of this policy, and so it is of any industry you may begin that is found profitable. Individuals will organize and pursue the same calling, and while the letter of the law is that a convict shall be confined at hard labor, I do not see how yon can employ him without bringing him into competition with somebody else. You may put him on the public roads, and yet there are plenty of men willing to work on the public roads at a dollar a day, and maybe very anxious to do it; and if you put these convicts on the road these men have no chance to compete -with them. Q. (By Mr. Ouihwaite.) Why notput them on thepublicroadsandmake themjust that much better? — A. Then you have the cost of guarding them, clothing, diet, and all such things to be paid out of the treasury, and the competition remains. Q. The State would be benefited by the improvements of its roads, would it not? — A. Yes, sir; I was very partial to that system at one time, and advocated it oflficially. I think it is the best you can do with convict labor. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Is it your legal^ opinion that Congress has the power to con- trol by appropriate legislation, under the commerce clause of the Constitution, the rates of freight to be charged by a railroad corporation for transporting freight from one State to another, and the rates of wages to be paid by said corporation? — A. I do not believe that Congress has the constitutional right to do so. Q. Do you think that Congress has power to regulate the price of freight? — A. No, sir; I do not. Q. Are not all railroads public highways? — A. They are, in a sense. Q. Are they not authorized by law to exercise the right to condemn land belonging to private owners through which their roads may run ? Are they not chartered by either Congressional or State legislation ? — A. They are. Q. Are they not subject to legislation then ? — A. They are, consistent with their char- ters, to the legislation which brought them into existence. I think all our charters except three or four are the creatures of State laws. They are amenable to State legisla- tion only to the extent that the legislation does not conflict with the charters; but I do not believe that the Congress of the United States, under the Constitution, has any con- trol of a railroad brought into existence by the laws of a State. Q. Do you believe that Congress has that power with a railroad that was chartered through Congress ? — A. It depends upon the charter. Q. The Texas and Pacific was so brought into existence? — A. Yes, sir. And then it required a State franchise to allow it to condemn the land for right of way, &c. Q. What is the practical difference in their operations between the transportation of commerce by steamboats and by railways? — A. The transportation of commerce by steamboats is upon the rivers, the lakes, and the high seas. These are acquired by conquest or treaty, or are bought and paid for or acquired by the Government, and are in no sense private property. No one has any private right in those mediums of trans- portation, but on railroads it is different. Although a railroad company has the right under the law to condemn the right of way, grounds for its station-houses, its machine- shops, and other necessary grounds, yet it must pay an assessed value for it. My ob- servation leads me to the conclusion that they pay more dearly for it than any corporation or individual for that character of property. They pay for the track and rolling-stock and all that, including the wages of the employfe; and it is a public highway in the sense that it must transport all the commerce that is offered to it, and it must transport that commerce for a reasonable rate, with expedition and with safety. Q. Are not steamboats governed by the same rules ? — A. Yes, sir, and should be sub- ject to the same restrictions. Q. That is the element in which they operate ? — A; Yes. Q. Is not the only practical difference in the element upon which they operate — that is, the steamboats upon water and the railroads upon land ? — A. That is the chief differ- ence. Q. Could not the railways be subjected to the same rules, regulations, and laws in respect to the qualifications of the employ^ and of their general operations as apply to the instruments of commerce by water? — A. That is possible; and right upon that ques- tion I have believed that the court of admiralty might be taken as a suggestion of a forum to be created in which should be determined all questions between railroad com- panies and their servants and their patrons, just as the court of admiralty is a court in which to hear and determine all questions between masters and seamen and between shippers and consignees on the one hand and the carrier on the other Take it as a sug- gestion, remodel the court, and bring its jurisdiction within easy reach of all parties in- 188 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. terested, so that all questions arising between master and. servant, shipper, consignee, and carriet shall be heard in that court. Q. Would you have these courts established by the States, to regulate State matters entirely, or by the Federal Congress to regulate interstate commerce? — A. If it was necessary, weshould have a constitutional amendment to create these courts. I would do whatever is necessary. While I may doubt the constitutionality of such courts in their application to railroads, yet I certainly believe it would accomplish the end sought better if made constitutional than any means that could be obtained by arbitra- tion. The objection that I have to arbitration is you cannot compel anybody to arbi- trate. You cannot enforce the award of arbitrators, and I have learned to look with very great disfavor upon jurisdictione as quasi jurisdictions, not within the spirit of onr constitution, with no power to execute their own orders. Q. It is urged that one of the fundamental causes, perhaps the principal one, of al- leged low wages arises from the issuance of watered stock to pay dividends upon wh.ch requires a reduction of running expenses, of which labor i^ said to comprise about'60 per cent. Will you please give your opinion upon this subject? — A. I do not think this has anything in the world to do with the price of labor. A railroad company that is in- solvent pays as much to its employes as a railroad that does not owe a dollar, because the watered stock is not a fixed charge upon the property. Q. I believe this subject of watered stock is more talked about than understood. Will you explain it further? — A. It is the issuance of shares of stock that represent no money. We start out with stock at say $10,000 a mile, and at the end of four or five years the directors will get together and say: "We have had no benefit out of this road. We have put the earnings into betterments. We have put up station-houses, and we have put down steel rails, and all tha* That amounts to $10,000 a mile, and we will issue to ourselves $10,000 a mile in stock, the new stock representing betterments we > have put upon the road. " Now that does not represent dollars actually put into the business. Q. Is that submitted to the outside stockholders ? — A. Of course they must adopt it; but the directors devise the scheme, and it is submitted to the stockholders. Q. You think, then, that the question of watered stock does not affect the rate of wages? — A. It cannot possibly do it. Labor must be controlled, and always' will be controlled by the plain question of supply and demand. Q. And yet if you want to pay dividend upon this watered stock have you not to de- crease the running expenses? — A. We cannot get labor. We cannot do it any more than a farmer can go out and employ plowboys at 10 cents a day. Q. It is claimed that in some instances the same persons have controlled the stock in railroads and in construction companies which have constructed said railroads, or exten- sions of them, for amounts paid in stocks and bonds largely in excess of the actual cost. Do you know of any such cases?— A. I expect that is true in a great many instances. How- ever, I have no personal knowledge of just such a case as you put; but I have no doubt it is true. Q. How would that affect the rate of wastes? — A. I do not see that even that would affectthe rate of wages, for at last it comes back to the old question of supply and demands As Governor Throckmorton said, "It depended upon what you want it for, and how bad you want it." Q. What do you think of the question of Government ownership of the railroads? — A. I should regard it as a great misfortune to the Government and to the country. Q. Why? — A. I think the fewer business interests the Government has the better for the Government and the people and the business to be subserved by it. I think tlio patronage of the Government, already too large, has a tendency to demoralization. Q. I am requested to ask you this: Do you intend to say that Congress, which creates a corporation, has no right to control it after it is made? — A. It depends upon the charter. ' Q. You regard this charter in the light of a contract between the Government and a railroad? — A. Yes, sir. Many of these charters, however, are subject to the control of Congress. Q. You regard the decision in the Dartmouth College case as all right? — A. I do. I think it was sound law. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitk.) Will not an effort be made by the management of a road that has issued a large amount of watered stock to pay dividends on that watered stock ? — A. Yes, sir; undoubtedly. Q. Then must they not either tax the commerce of the country to enable them to pay a dividend wrongfully or economize with respect to the labor of the corporation for that same purpose? — A. They will imquestionably do one or both if they can, or as far as it can be permitted, but at last they cannot affect the price of labor, because labor is de- manded by too many other industries. I have no doubt that there are several railroads LABOR TEOUBLES lU IHE SOUPH AND WEST. 189 in this country that have no conscience, that would employ a man at half-price if they could, and charge two prices for transportation if they could; but there is too much com- petition to allow that to succeed to a very great extent. Q. I will ask you whether or not the railroads of Texas are in a pool? — A. There is in Texas what is called the Texas Traffic Association. I believe all the railroads in the State are members of that Traffic Association. Q. Now comes the question of where does competition come in ?^A. Well, there is competition outside of the State that is not controlled by this Traffic Association. There is water transportation of commerce to Galveston that is not controlled by this Traffic Association ; and we are competing all the time with the Mallorji line and Mor- gan line for freight to New York, and Boston, Philadelphia, and many interior places. We get the principal portion of our steel rails shipped from Scranton and Bethlehem by steamship delivered at Galveston, or New Orleans, by barges or by steamers. Q. Let me make it clear. A part of the competition which you have in the State of Texas, or are subject to, is the competition resulting from steamship lines from New York and other points to New Orleans and Galveston ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is not the Atchison and Topeka line in this pool ? — A. No, sir; it is not in this State at all. It does not own a, mile of road in Texas. Q. What is the road running from Galveston to Fort Worth? — A. The Gulf, Colo- lado and Santa F6. Q. Is not that controlled by the Atchison and Topeka ? — A. I have seen in the pa- pers in the last few weeks that there are some new relations between the two com- panies, but I do not know whether it is true. I have seen it denied also. They have doubtless some relations, but I do not know what they are. Q. Is not that line in some close connection, in regard to its traffic earnings, with the Mallory steamship line ? — ^A. Not that I am aware of. The Southern Pacific is in close relations with the Morgan lioe ; but I do not know of any relations the Gulf, Colorado and Santa F^ have. I would say further about the Texas association,! the rates of passenger fare are limited in Texas by law to 3 cents a mile. The freight maximum rate is 50 cents per 100 pounds per 100 miles. No railroad can exceed these rates ; and the object of this traffic association was to prevent those ruinous and dis- astrous cuts which w«re introduced by the Narrow Gauge road — that is, the Texas and Saint Louis — which has now gone into bankruptcy. The association was organ- ized to maintain a regular standard of rates ; not to fix rates, but a general regula- tion of rates. There is not much danger in Texas. There is not a road in Texas that is paying anything on real or watered, and only one paying any interest at all. By Mr. Parkbe: Q. If competition reduces the rates, and wages are affected materially by the amount of earnings, would not pooling tend to raise the wages ? — A. That is true, sir ; one would necdssarily follow the other. If a reduction of rates reduces wages, then the increase of rates, by pooling or otherwise, would have the same tendency to raise the wages. At the request of the committee Governor Brown furnished a copy of the petition for the appointment of a receiver, which is made a part of the record. In the Circuit Court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana. In equity. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, a corporation incorpor-' ated under the laws of the State of Missouri, and a citizen of said State of Missouri, I'g. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company, a corporation created by and existing under certain acts of Congress of the United States. Of sessions. No. 11,181. To the honorable the judges of the United States circuit court, in and for thefiflh circuit and eastern district of Louisiana: The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, a body corporate under the laws of the State of Missouri, and a citizen and resident of said State, in its behalf, as well as of aU other corporations and persons similarly situated that may, by intervention, bring themselves into this suit for the protection of their interests, brings into this honor- able court its bill of complaint against The Texas and Pacific Railway Company, a corporation existing under the laws of the United States of America, and having prop- erties and rights in the States of Louisiana and Texas, under and by virtue of the laws of both of said States, and having at the same time citizenship and domicile, 190 LABOR JROUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. offices and places of business in tbis district, and officers and ageiits Lerein, in tha city of New Orleans, on whom process may be served. And tberenpon your orator complains and says: (1) That the Congress of the United States of America, by an act approved March 3, 1871, created a corporation under the name and style of The Texas Pacific Railroad Company, and by an act approved the 2d day of May, 1872, supplementary to the said original act, changed the style and- title of the said The Texas & Pacific Railroad Company to "The Texas and Pacific Railway Company;" aud by said acts, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company was authorized and empowered to construct a line of railwaji^from a point at or near the eastern boundary line of the State of Texas, near the town of Marshall, in Harrison County, westward to the western boundary line of the State of Texas, to a point at or near a point opposite to-.El Paso, in the Republic of Mexico, and thence westward, as set forth in said act, to the Pacific Ocean, at San Diego, and by the fourth section of said original act the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company was authorized to purchase the stocks, land-grants, franchises, and appurtenances of, and consolidate, on such terms as might be agreed upon between the parties, with any railroad company or companies heretofore char- tered by Congressional, State, or Territorial authority, on the route prescribed in the first section of the act, &.C., and is also authorized to own, maintain, and operate a railroad to Shreveport, Louisiana. (2) That the legislature of the State of Texas, by an act passed May 24, lS7l! en- titled, "An act to encourage the speedy construction of a rail way through the State of Texas to the Pacific Ocean," by its eleventh section authorized the consolidation with the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company, of the Southern Pacific Railroad Com- pany and the Southern Trans-Continental Railway Company, two corporations be- fore that time organized under the laws of the State of Texas, the first of which was authorized to construct a line from the eastern boundary line of the State of Texas, at or near Marshall, westward to El Paso, on the Rio Grande, and the last-named cor- poration was authorized to construct a line from Marshall, in said State, northwardly to Texarkana, and westwardly by Clarksville, Paris, and other points, to El Paso ; and said act of May the 24th, 1871, authorized the Texas and Pacific Railway Com- pany to consolidate with said two corporations, on such lawful terms and conditions as might be agreed upon between the said companies and should be ratified by a ma- jority of the stockholders of each of the corporations so consolidating. (3) That by an act of the Texas legislature, passed November 25, 1871, entitled, "An act ameridatory of and supplementary to an act entitled, 'An act to encourage the speedy construction of a railway through the State of Texas to the Pacific Ocean,' passed on the 24th day of May, 1871," said act of the 24th of May, 1871, was so amended as to require a junction of the said Southern Pacific Railroad Company and said Southern Trans-Continental Railway Company, at a point westwardly, to he agreed upon by said companies; which act was complied with by said twoiast-named companies, by an agreement in writing, filed in the office of the secretary of state of the State of Texas, and dated the 6th day of May, 1872, fixing the point of junction at or near the city of Fort Worth, in the county of Tarrant, in said State of Texas. (4) That on the 21st day of March, 1872, the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company, and the said Southern Pacific Railroad Company, executed and filed with the secretary of state articles of consolidation, in pursuance of the legislation aforesaid ; and on the 30th daj of March, 1873, articles of consolidation were made, executed and filed in the office of the secretary of state of the State of Texas, between the Southern Trans-Con- tinental Railway Company and the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, in pur- suance of the legislation aforesaid, by which said consolidations, the said the Texas and Pacific Railway Company became entitled to and vested with all the rights, franchises, property, and privileges of both the Southern Pacific Railroad Company of Texas and the Southern Trans-Continental Railway Company of Texas, as aforesaid, and was also invested with all the rights and privileges of the Southern Pacific Rail- road Company of Texas, in and to a certain lease, before that time made and entered into by and between the said Southern Pacific Railroad Company of Texas, and the Vicksburg, Shreveport and Texas Railroad Company, existing under the laws of tjie State of Louisiana, in and to that portion of the line of said last-named company ex- tending from Red River, at Shreveportj_ westwardly to the Texas State line; by which said lease the said Southern Pacific Railroad Company had the right to use and operate, for its own exclusive use, the lines so leased, from and until the month of February, in the year 1884, at which said latter date, or soon thereafter, the said The Texas and Pacific Railway Company renewed said lease, with certain modifica- i boundary 1 _ of Texas and its junction with the road of the New Orleans Pacific Railway Com- pany, near the -western boundary line of the city of Shreveport, on the terms and conditions therein stated, and with certain other rights and privileges therein con- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 191 tained, -wbich will more fully appear by reference to the copy of thelease itself, which ■will be filed in this cause. (.')) That by an act of the legislature of Texas, on the 22d day of May, 1873, en- titled "An act to adjust and define the rights of the Texas and Paci6c Railway Com- pany within the State of Texas, in order to encourage the speedy construction of a railway through the State to the Pacific Ocean," the consolidations aforesaid were fully recognized and ratified by the legislature of Texas, and the manner and mode of the construction of its line and railway were fully defined ; and by said act there was donated by the State of Texas to the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company twenty sections of land, of 640 acres each, for every mile of its road completed, in good, substantial running order, in the State of Texas, upon the terms aud condi- tions prescribed in said act ; and it defined the limits within which the lands afore- said should be located, as the construction progressed,, in sections of twenty or more miles. (6) That among other supplementary and amended acts passed by Congress, the one approved June 22, 1874, recognized and ratified the consolidations of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company,of Texas,aud the Southern Trans-Continental Railway Com- pany, of Texas, with the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company, and provided that the road so merged, for the purposes of the mortgages therein authorized, as well as for all other purposes, be deemed and taken to be a part of the said Texas and Pacific railway, and subject to all provisions aud limitations of the act of Con- gress incorporating said company, and of the supplements thereto. (7) The said Texas and Pacific Railway Company organized under the act of Con- gress aforesaid, and accepted the provisions of the various acts above recited of the State of Texas, and completed its line from the eastern boundary line of the State of Texas, near the city of Marshall, westwardly to a point about 81 miles east of El Paso; and it reaches El Paso, by a joint agreement, by the Galveston, Harrisbnrg and San Antonio Railway (known generally as the Southern Pacific Railway), over its line into El Paso ; it also completed its line from Marshall, by way of Jefl'er- son, to Texai'kana, and from Texarkana westwardly, by way of Clarksville, Paris, Boubam, Sherman, and Pilot Point, to a junction with its southern line at Fort Worth, and received from the State of Texas, from time to time, about 5,000,000 acres of land for the construction^ of its line east of Fort Worth. (8) That by deed dated the 20th day of June, 1881, by aud between the New Orleans Pacific Railway Company, party of the first part, and the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, party of the second part, which deed is hereby referred to as part hereof, of this bill, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, by virtue of the fran- chises obtained by its various charters from the Government of the United States, and acquired by the legislation of the State of Texas, and by virtue of the authority conferred by the laws of the State of Louisiana, acquired by and under said name, the railway and all of the franchises aud rights appurtenant thereto, of the New Orleans Pacific Railway Company, a line constructed and being operated between the city of Shreveport, in Caddo Parish, Lousiana, and the city of New Orleans, in- cluding a branch extending to West Baton Rouge, on the Mississippi River ; which lines were encumbered, prior to the said purchase and acquisition, by a mortgage executed by said New Orleans Pacific Railway Company to the Fidelity Insurance, Trust, and Safe Deposit Company of the city of Philadelphia, to secure an issue of 6 per cent, bonds, interest payable semi-annually, at the rate of |20,000 per mile, lim- ited to an aggregate issue of |7, 100,000, of which 16,720,000 are now outstanding. Said mortgage was duly made July 31, 1880, and a mortgage supplemental thereto was made July 1, 1884, aud both duly recorded in the parishes through which the said line passes in Louisiana. (9) That on the 15th day of May, lfc75, the said Texas and Pacific Railway Com- pany made and executed a first mortgage upon the lines of the Eastern Division, being all the lines of said company between Fort Worth and the Loueiana State line, to secure an issue of $8,000 per mile, of gold bonds, due and payable on the 1st day of ' March, 1905, bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, and payable semi- annually (said, issue being limited to 4,193 bonds), on the first days of March and September, and thO'Coupons have been regnlarly paid up to this time. The original trustees under said mortgage were Matthesv Baird and Samuel M. Felton. On the death of Matthew Baird, George D. ICrumbhaar was appointed bis successor, and the present trustees both retide in the city of Philadelphia, State of Pennsylvania. (10) That on the 1st day of June, 1875, said Texas and Pacific Railway Company executed a mortgage upon the property last before mentioned, to secure an author- ized issuauce of bonds aggregating $13,100,000, due the 1st day of June, 1905, and bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, by coupons due and payable in June and December of each year, all of which are now either outstanding or bearing Interest in favor of the sinb"ing fund. The trustees named in said mortgage were Matthew Baird and Samuel M. Felton; said Matthew Baird having died, George D. Emmbhaar was appointed as his successor, and is now acting as snch in conjunction 192 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. with the said Samnel M. Filton, both of -whom reside in the city of Philadelphia, State of Peunsylvania. The two mortgages last above named also embrace and include, by their express terms, the leasehold line between the Texas Siate line and Shreveport. (11) Said railway company, on the 15th day of May, 1875, made and executed its income and land grant mortgage upon all the lands granted by the State of Texas for the construction of that portion of the line called the Eastern Division, lying east of Fort Worth and west of the State line between Texas and Louisiana, being au aggregate authorized issue of $8,908,000 in bonds, bearing interest at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum, payable annually, in Jnly of e,ich year, in currency or scrip, with William T. Walters and George D. Krumbhaar as trustees, both of whom have since resigned, and Charles E. Satterlee and George Gould were appointed and are now acting as trustees in their stead, both of whom reside in the city and State of New York ; and, on the 23d day of March, 1876, said company executed a supplementary mortgage to said income and land grant mortgage, creating a lien upon its railway and the income and profits thereof, east of Fort Worth and west of the Texas State line, as well as the net income of Shreveport leased line, subordinate to the first and the consolidated mortgage above mentioned, of which said supplementary mortgage the said George Gould and Charles E.' Satterlee are now the trustees. Of the bonds an. thorized and issued under said original afad supplementary mortgage, about eight millions are now outstanding, ■with a large amount of interest scrip, in lieu of interest accrued and not earned by the railway company, and consequently not payable in money by the terms of the mortgage. (12) Tidat the said railway company, on the 30th day of January, 1880, desiring to extend its lines westward from Fort Worth, made aud executed its mortgage upon its lines west of B^rt Worth, called the Rio Grande Division, to El Paso — not then incumbered by any lieu — to secure an authorized issue of $15,400,000 gohi bonds, bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, interest payable in February and August of each year to the Fidelity Insurance, Trust, and Safe Deposit Company of Philadelphia, of which bonds there are now outstanding $13,028,000. (13) That on the 1st day of August, 1884, said railway company executed a general and terminal mortgage upon its terminal and other properties at New Orleans aud elsewhere, including the Gordon coal mines and lands aud tracks, supposed not to be covered by any other mortgage, said mortgage covering the entire jjroperty of said defendant company from New Orleans to El Paso, to secure an authorized issue of $0,500,000 of bonds, called terminal bonds, due on the 1st day of October, 1905, bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, due and payable on the 1st days of April and October in each year, and of which authorized issue there are now outstanding, or held as collateral for the payment of other debts, bonds amounting to nearly, if not quite, $3,000,000. (14) In addition to the indebtedness above named, the said railway company is in- debted to the State of Texas, on account of a special school fund loan to its prede- cessor, the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, about $167,642, bearing interest at thg rate of 6 per cent, per annum, in currency, the interest and sinking fund payable in May and November of each year, and which said amount is a' statutory lien upon said property, formerly owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, and of a dignity anterior to any of the mortgages aforesaid upon the part of the property of the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company. (15) That the defendant, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, is now the owner of about 1,487 miles of completed road, of which there is in the Eastern Divis- ion, between Texarkana, Shreveport, and Fort Worth, 5:!2 miles; in the Rio Grande Divison, between Fort Worth and El Paso, 619 miles ; and in the New Orleans Divis- ion,'between Shreveport and Gouldsborough and New Orleans, 336 miles ; that the funded indebtedness of the said company, under the several mortgages hereinbefore referred to, is as follows : Bonds issued under the first mortgage of June 1, 1875, and a charge upon the East- ern Division, $3,784,000, exclusive of the balance of issue now held by the sinking fund. Bonds under the consolidated mortgage of June 1, 1875, a second charge upon the Eastern Division, $9,316,000, Income and land-grant bonds, a third charge upon the Eastern Division, and a first charge upon the laud grant of the company, about $8,300,000. Bonds issued under the mortgage of January 20, 1880, and a first charge upon the Rio Grande Division, $13,0^8,000. Bonds issued under the mortg'age of July 31, 1880, and a fii'st charge upon the New Orleans Division, $6,720,000. Bonds under the mortgage of August 1, 1884, and a first lien upon certain terminal properties, aud a general lien upon all theproperty subject to prior inortgages, issued and outstanding as collateral, about $2,624,000. LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 193 That your orator, the Missouri Pacific Kail way Company, is the owner in its own right of 995 miles of railroad, mostly located in the State of Missouri, and extending ■westwardly and northwestwardly from the city of Saint Louis to Kansas City ana Omaha; that in addition to the lines of road owned by it, in its own right, your ora- tor is the lessee, or by ownership of the stock or traffic arrangements, controls or op- erates 3,564 miles of road belonging to other companies, exclusive of the lines of the defendant company, ■which will be hereafter referred to. In said 4,559 miles are in- cluded the lines of the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern Eailway Company and its branches, extending from Saint Louis sou thwestwardly to Texarkana and other towns iu Arliansas, in all the 923 miles ; the lines of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railroad Company, extending southwardly from Kansas City, through Kansas, the In- dian Territory, and Texas, in all 1,386 miles ; the lines of the International and Great Northern Railroad Company and its branches, extending from Laredo, on the Rio Grande, northeastwardly through Texas, iu all 825. miles; the Central Branch of the Union Pacific Railway, in the State of Kansas, in all 388 miles. Since 1881 the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, by an arrangement made between it and the Missouri Pacific Railway Company, by which the lines of the Texas and Pacific Eailway Company were to be, and in fact, have,been operated, in conjunction with the Missouri Pacific and its leased and operated lines, under the belief that such operation would be for the mutual benefit of both companies, and that if any deficit should occur in the operation of the Texas and Pacific line, the complainant, the Missouri Pacific Eailway Company, would advance the amount of same on the faith of the earnings of the Texas and Pacific Company, to be repaid out of such current earnings ; but said earnings proved wholly insufficient for the purpose, and up to September 30, 1885, the date of the last account stated between the two companies, your orator had advanced, in the payment of operating expenses and interest on account of the Texas and Pacific Eailway Company, the sum of $1,688,015.79, of which the sum of $1,130,- 783.60, is represented by four promissory notes bearing date the 1st of December, 1884, payable on demand, and the balance of $557,143.19 is the balance stated in account current of September 30, 1885 ; since which time said indebtedneas-has still further in- creased to the date of filing hereof. (16) The detail provisions of all said mortgages will fully appear by reference to copies of said mortgages herewith exhibited and made a part of this bill of complaint, and marked Complainant's Exhibits Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, respectively. (17) Your orator further says that all the rollUng-stock, equipment and appur- tenances of every kind and character, owned by the said defendant company, are cov- ered by the said mortgages herein set forth, afid made exhibits hereto. All of which locomotives and cars form part of the general equipment of said railway company, which said railway company is, in fact, and under the laws of the State of Texas, and its charter by the laws of the United States, one single and indivisible railroad, except in so far as the mortgage existing upon the property of the New Orleans Pacific Eailway Company may be a lien upon the equipment that belonged to and consti- tuted part of that line of railway before its purchase by the Texas and Pacific Eail- way Company. (18) Besides the large indebtedness of said railway company, secured by mortgages as aforesaid, it owes a large floating debt to the complainant, some of which are debts created and|inourred for labor, meterial, repairs, and operating and^managing expenses necessary for the conduct of its business, exceeding one million and a half of dollars. (19) Your orator, further complaining, avers, that for several years past, said com- pany's expenses have been so large that its surplus has been insufficient .to pay the current interest on the mortgage bonds aforesaid, as it matured ; and that the neces- sary maintenance and repairs of its property have been neglected in a false policy of abortive efforts to pay the interest upon its bonded debt as it matured ; and while its current interest amounts annually to nearly $1,900,000, exclusive of the income and land grant bonds, its net receipts will not, for the current year last past, nor the pres- ent year, equal $1,000,000 per annum, so that a default, without borrowing money for the purpose of paying maturing interest, is inevitable. (20) Your orator, further complaining, says that itis accreditor of the defendant com- pany for large sums of money from time to time advanced, and up to the present time continually, at defendant's request, and for the purpose of protecting it against de- faults, at various times, for proper equipment and improvements, that were neces- sary to be made in order to operate the road, as well as for necessary supplies, monthly payment for labor and current repairs, without which the defendant railway com- pany could not have maintained its property in a condition for its operation ; and, besides this, has advanced money from time to time to pay the current interest, which the said defendant company was unable to meet, in consequence of a deficiency in its earnings. Said sum, so advanced, will amount to $1,500,000. • The defendant company requested these advances and loans from time to time, and they were made by your' orator on the promise of said defendant company, and reliance by your orator, to pay the same out of its current earnings ; and the same were made in protection of 3984 LAB 3 13 194 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. the corpus of the property, and in the interest of the holders of the various securities of said company, and on the faith and promise of said current earnings. And your orator farther avers that the same was in equity and good conscience, and is, a charge alilie upon the income and the property of said railway company. But the said de- fendant company has neglected and failed to pay said balance, or any part thereof; hut, instead of so doing, has been applying its earnings to the payment of large amounts of interest falling due from time to time, in the vain effort to avert a default in the payment of its interest. The only security your orator has for the payment of these advances, in addition to its said equitable lien thereupon, is a collateral of 12,000,000 of the bonds of said defendant company, known as the terminal bonds, and more particularly referred to in paragraph 13 of the bill, which bonds are secured by a general mortgage, covering the entire property of said company. And your orator is thereby a lien bondholder on the said entire property and premises of said defendant company, and that, without such relief as is herein sought, said bonds will be greatly depreciated in value, and no adequate remedy for the protection, security, and payment of the same. That the trustee, in the mortgage securing said bonds, is the Fidelity Insurance, Trust and Safe Deposit Company, a citizen of the State of Pennsylv^inia, which is out of the j urisdiction of this court ; but it will be made de- fendant to this bill, if it appears within this jurisdiction, or as soon as the same can be done under the practice of the court. And your orator further avers that the defendant company has no property known to your orator upon which it could levy an execution, even if it should recover judg- ment, except the property aforesaid, which is subject to mortgages in amount as much or more than the present value of the property. (21) Tour orator further avers that the roadway of said defendant company is in bad condition, and needs a large amount of steel rails to replace iron rails already worn out, and needs an expenditure of large sums of money to replace bridges, which have for a long time been used, and which are of wood, and most of which rest upon wooden substructures ; in fact, from the best estimates that your orator has been able to have made by engineers and other experts, the road-bed of said railway of the de- fendant company cannot be put in first-class condition without the expenditure of such sums as will still further disable it from paying its fixed charges; and with its property mortgaged as it is, up to if not exceeding its full value, it is wholly im- practicable to incumber it with any further liens, as the securities thus issued must be sold at ruinous discounts to realize cash. (22) Your orator believes, and so avers, that the railway lines aforesaid of the de- fendant company, if put in first-class condition, would, without doubt, have an earn- ing capacity and a traffic that would enable said company to pay off its entire float- ing indebtedness, and at the same time meet the fixed charges created by its mort- gages without difficulty ; but that it is essential, to reach this result, that the whole of its property should remain intact, and not be segregated; but that if the three separate divisions of this property should be foreclosed under the divisional mortgages resting upon each, which your orator believes and fears will be done, that its value ■would be so impaired as to cut off entirely the possibility of the payment of the float- ing indebtedness now existing, or any part thereof; but that if said railway shall be administered under the orders of the court, as a whole, and placed in good condition, it might be saved from foreclosure entirely, and satisfy the equitable indebtedness ^ thereon to your orator and all others. But if this desirable result should not be re- , alized, yet it is almost certain that after the property shall be improved, as herein suggested, and then sold as an entirety, and under proper proceedings, your orator believes that the proceeds of the sale would be ample to discharge all incumbrances created by said liens and the whole of the floating indebtedness of said company; but that, to reach this result, it is essential that said railway be retained in a condi- tion of unimpaired efficiency by the expenditure of a necessary portion or the whole of its revenues, to improve its road-bed and maintain its equipment. (23) Your orator further avers that the whole of the floating indebtedness before mentioned has been incurred within the last few years, and much of it daring the current year, and up to the present time, and that a very considerable portion of it was for new rails and ties to maintain the road in running order, and a portion, as before stated, was advanced]to pay current interest, and other portions to pay current wages of employes of the company. (24) Your orator believes, and indeed has no doubt, that unless restrained by the interposition of this honorable court, the current earnings-of the railway company, and all of its available, valnable resources will be appropriated by its officers to pay current interest on its mortgage bonds, in order to prevent the trustees of the various mortgage bonds from entering upon and taking possession of the properties ; and your honors can readily see, from an inspection of the mortgages aforesaid, that if said propeirty is taken possession of by the various trustees in the divisional mort- gages, it will he segregated into three several parts, although the property of the same corporation. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE , SOUTH AND WEST. 195 (25) Your orator further avers that it is remediless, uudsr existing conditions, for the collection of what is due it, except through the interposition of this honorable court, in its power to appoint a receiver of the whole property aforesaid, whjoh said receiver shall he authorized to administer said property, under the orders of the court, so as to insure the safety and utmost efficiency in the earning capacity of said lines, by an application of the current earnings thereto, and to apply, under the orders of jihe court, the balance that may remain, to the payment of your orator's debt, and such other claims as may be similarly situated, or so much thereof as to the court may seem equitbale ; and that the said receiver have under his administration the whole of said line, and maintain it in good condition and until such time as the rights of all parties can be heard and determined, and the property placed upon a basis of meeting all the just and equitable demands against said company. (26) Your orator avers that it is not only the interest of this complainant, but of all other creditors of like grade, as well as a matter of vital interest to all of the lien creditors of defendant company, that a receiver should be appointed for the purpose of administering said property as an entirety, and not permit the same to go into the hands of the trustees of the divisional mortgages, and thus segregate the entire property of the said company. And your orator is advised, and therefore avers, that the trustees of a majority of the mortgages upon the line of the defendant company acquiesce in the appointment of s.uch receiver, believing that the sacie will be to their common advantage and benefit ; but that unless such appointment is made said trustees will respectively proceed to take active steps for the assertion of their legal rights to possession of the separate parts of said road or to foreclosure immediately on default in the interest on their bonds, which default will certainly take place at the approaching maturing thereof. Wherefore your orator, showing that it is a creditor of the Texas and Pacific Rail- way Company to the amount of $1,688,015.79, and additional sums, to date not yet definitely ascertained, and that the same is an equitable lien on all the earnings of said company and all its. property, and is secured by the said two millions of bonds issued under the said general and terminal mortgage, and that the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company is an insolvent corporation, owning 1,487 miles of road, with mortgages thereupon to the amount of $43,340,000, the interest whereupon it is unable to meet; that the line of road is out of repair and in so dangerous a condi- tion that the said company cannot perform its duties as carrier with safety, expedi- tion, and convenience to the public; that judgments have been obtained against said corporation under which the assets are liable to levy and sale ; and whereas your or- ator has no adequate remedy at law, comes to your honorable court and prays that your orator have leave to make all of said trustees in tbe several mortgages herein- , before named defendants hereto, on their coming into the jurisdiction of this court, or in accordance with the practice in equity of said court, or that they have leave to become parties hereto in assertion of their rights and interest, and that all persons holding claims of like character with your orator may appear herein for their inter- ests, and on the hearing o^ this cause for equitable relief, as follows : First. That your orator be found to be a creditor of the Texas and Pacific Railway ■Company, and the amount of the indebtedness to your orator be fixed and deter- mined and its lien upon the earnings and the property of the Texas and Pacific Rail- way Company be declared. Second. That the amount of all claims upon the lines and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company be determined, and the priority and extent of their lien be declared. Third. That your honorable court, by a master commissioner, or such other officer as you may deem proper, shall cause to be sold the railroad, franchises, and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, for the purpose of satisfying the claim of your orator and the other creditors of the company, as their interest may appear. Fourth. That a receiver be appointed to take into his possession, custody, and con- trol aU the property, rights, and franchises, money, books, accounts, lands, and prem- ises of every kind and description, of the said defendant company, or to which it has right in Louisiana and Texas, and wherever situated, and to manage, operate, and maintain the lines of the said defendant company, with authority to employ such agents and servants as may be necessary to preserve the property of the defendant company, and keep it open as a public highway for the transportation and carriage of passengers and treight by steam power, as aforesaid, and for the proper perform- ance of, and discharge of, its business as a, railway company. Fifth. That an injunction issue, temporary until hearing, and perpetual thereafter, enjoining and restraining the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, its agents, serv- ants, and employes, and all persons or corporations in any manner claiming under or through the said Texas and Pacific Railway Company, from obstructing or in any wise interfering with the receiver appointed by your honorable court in possession of the railroad and property of said company. 196 LABOR TEOUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST, Sixth. General aud other relief as may be appropriate in the premises. ' May it please your honors to grant to your orator the writ of subpcena to be di- rected to said defendant, the Texas and Paciric Railway Company, thereby command- ing it, at a certain day, and under a certain pain therein to pe mentioned, ^personally to be and appear before your honorable court, and then and there full, true, direct, and perfect answer malie to all and singular the premises, oath thereto being waived, and further to stand to, perform, and abide such further order, direction, and decree therein as to your honors shall seem meet. And your orator will ever pray, &o. W. P. BALLINGEE, Solicitor and of Counsel for the Missowi Fadfic Railway Company. Eastern District of Louisiana., City of New Orleans : I, William W. Finley, on bath state that I am the agent of the complainant, the Missouri Paciiio Railway, in the preceding bill ; that I have heard the said bill read, and know the contents thereof; and that on my best knowledge, information, and belief the allegations therein contained are correct and true. Aud that I am authorized to make this afSdavit. W. W. FINLEY. Sworn to and subscribed before me this 15th December, 1885. [seal.] T. McC. HYMAN, Piled December 1.5, 1885. Deputy Glerk, Petition of William T. Walters and W. T. Walters ^ Co. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company versus > No. 11181. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company. \ No. To the honorable the judges of the United States circuit court in and for the fifth cirmit and eastern distriot of Louisiana : ■ The petition of- Wdlliani T. Walters and W. T. Waters & Co., of Baltimore, Md., respectfully shows to your honors : That heretofore, on or about the 15th day December, 1685, the above-named Mis- souri Pacific Rail way Company, as complainants, filed their bill in equity against the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, as defendants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, and that thereupon, on the following mentioned day, to wit, on the 16th day of December, 1885, in accordance with the prayer of the said bill, John C. Brown and Lionel A. Sheldon were appointed tempo- rary receivers of the property of the said defendant, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company. That, inter alia, the relief asked bjr said complainants is that the amount of all claims upon the lines and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company be determined, and the pro rata extent of their lien be declared, and that the said railroad, franchises, and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company be sold for the purpose of satisfying the alleged claim of complainants and the other creditors of the company as their interest may appear. That your petitioners are, and have been for a long time, owners of the stock of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, to the par value of $415,800. Petitioners further say, that the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, defendant, do not intend to defend the said action, but have appeared in open court and by their answer openly admitted all the facts set forth in the said bill of complaint, and have acquiesced and agreed to the relief ak,fced by the complainants in their said bill, and that they do not intend to contest or defend said action, although requested so to do. And peti- tioner is further advised and believes that the defendant is not indebted to the com- plainants in the. sum mentioned in the bill, nor in any other sum, and that the claim sued upon is not a valid one in law or equity. Your petitioner further states, that he is advised and believes that it is his 4uty and interest to intervene as defendant in said suit and to become a party thereto, to the intent that he may present to this honorable court his rights, interests, and equities in the premises, and to be heard as to the disposal of the property of the de- fendant, and that unless your petitioner is allowed to appear and set forth his defense, LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 197 and be heard in this suit, great injustice will bo committed, and his rights in the prop- erty hazarded and sacrificed. Wherefore, upon the facts aforesaid, and upon the bill aforesaid, your petitioner prays this honorable court that ho may be made a party defendant in said suit, that your petitioner may be allowed to appear as defendant in said suit, and answer and demur to said bill in behalf of himself and all other persons similarly interested, and to take such other and further action as defendant in said suit may be advised, and that your petitioner have such other and further relief as may be j ust. And your peti- tiiner will ever pray, &c. WALTEE D. DENEGEE, Solicitor for petitioner. JoHU R. Dos Passos, Baynb & Dfnegre, Of cowneel. United States of America, Eastern District of Louisiana : Walter D. Denegre, being duly sworn, says that he is attorney for the above-named petitioners, William T. Walters and W. T. Walters & Co., and that he has read the foregoing petition, knows the contents thereof, and the same is true, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to these matters he believes the same to be true, and that the said WiUiam T. Walters and all the jnembers of the iirm of W. T. Walters & Co. are absent from this State. WALTEE D. DENEGEE. Sworn to before me this 8th day of January, 1886. T. McC. HYMAN-, ' Beputji Cleric. Filed January 9, 1886. ORDER. This petition may be iiled, but no action will be had thereon. Petitioner's right, on showing that defendant has a defense which it refases to make, to apply to defend the.interests of stockholders is reserved. DON A. PARDEE, Judge. Entered and filed January 9, 1886. Petition of Henry S. Marlor. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company versus )■ No. 11181. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company. To the lionorable the judges of the United Slates circuit court in and for the fifth circuit ani eastern district of Louisiana : The petition of Henry S. Marlor, of Brooklyn, of the State of Connecticut, re- spectfully shows to your honors : That heretofore, on or about the 15th day of December, 1885, the above-named Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company, as complainants, filed their bill in equity against the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, as defendants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana ; and that thereupon, on the following- mentioned day, to wit, on the 16th day of December, 1885, in accordance with the prayer of the said bill, John C. Brown and Lionel A. Sheldon were appointed temporary receivers of the property of the said defendants, the Texas and Pacific Eailway Com- pany. That, inter alia, the relief asked by said complainants is that the amount of all claims upon the lines and other property of the Texas Pacific and Eailway Com- pany be determined and the pro rata extent of their lien be declared, and that the said railroad, franchises, and other property of the Texas and Pacific Eailway Company be sold for the purpose of satisfying the alleged ctaim of complainants and the other creditors of the company as their interest may appear. That your petitioner is, and has be'en for a long time, the holder and owner of bonds issued by the said defendant, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, and known as the land-grant and income bonds, which said bonds are a lien upon certain lands of sai,d company, and also upon the eastern division of said road, to the extent ■of $320,000, which said land-grant bonds are particularly referred to and set forth in the bill filed herein. Your petitioner further shows to the court that the trustees of 198 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. said land-grant mortgage are Charles E. Satterlee and George Gould, who both leside in the city and State of New York, and who, as your petitioner is informed and be- lieves, refuse and neglect to appear in said action and to defend the same, but who, on the contrary, have expressly acquiesced in the action of the complainants herein, and will not and do not intend to interpose any defense to the said action, although requested so to do. And petitioner is further advised and believes that the defendant is not indebted to the complainants in the sum mentioned in the bill, nor in any other sum, and that the claim sued upon is not valid in law or equity. Your petitioner further states that he is advised and believes that it is his duty and interest to intervene as defendant in said suit, and to become a party thereto, to the intent that he may present to this honorable court his rights, interests and equities in the premises, and to be heard as to the disposal of the property of ihe defendant ; and that, unless yoilr petitioner is allowed to appear and set forth his defsjse and he heard in this suit, great injustice will be committed and his rights in the property hazarded and sacriticed. Wherefore, upon the facts aforesaid and upon the bill aforesaid, your petitipner prays this honorable court that he may be made a party defendant in said suit, that your petitioner may be permitted and allowed to appear as defendant in said suit, and answer and demur to said bill inTiehalf of himself and all other persons similarly interested, and to take such other and further action as defendant in said suit maybe advised ; and that your petitioner have such other and further relief as may be just. And your petitioner will ever pray, &c. WALTER D. DENEGEE, Solicitor for Petitioner. John E. Dos Passos, Baynb & Deneghb, Of Counsel. United States of America, Eastern District of Louisiana : Walter D. Denegre, being duly sworn , says that he is attorney for the above-named petitioner, Henry S. Marlor, and that he has read the foregoing petition, knows the contents thereof, and the same is true, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged ou information and belief, and as to these matters he believes the same to be true, and that the said Henry S. JIarlor is absent from this State. WALTER D, DENEGEE. Sworn to before me this 8fch day of January, 1886. T. McC. HYMAN, Deputu Cleric. Filed January 9, 1886. ORDER. Ordered that the petitioners, through their solicitors, be allowed to enter appear- ance in this case, and that this petition be filed, with leave to file billsof intervention, if so advised, but to stand without other action or order until it shall appear to the court that the trustees of the mortgage securing petitioners' bonds neglect to defend the rights of all the bondholders represented by them, or until it shall appear that petitioners have some equity not common to the majority of bondliolders. The clerk will notice petitioners' solicitors and advise them by printed copy of or- ders as passed in the case. DON A. PARDEE, Judge. Entered and filed January 9, 1886. Petition, of William T. Walters. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company i ' versus \ No. 11181. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company. ) To the honorable the judges of the United States circuit court in and for theffth circuit ani eastern district of Louisiana : The petition of WUliara T. Walters, of Baltimore, Md., respectfully shows to your honors : That heretofore, on or about the 15th day of December, 188.5, the above-named Missouri Pacifio Railway Company, as complainants, filed their bill in equity again* LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 199 the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, as defendants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana ; and that thereupon, on the fol- lowing mentioned day, to wit, on the 16th day of Decemher, 1885, in accordance with the prayer of the said hill, John C. Brown and Lionel A. Sheldon were appointed temporary receivers of the property of the said defendant, the Texas and Pacific Rail- way Company. That, itiier alia, the relief asked by said complainants is, that the amount of all claims upon the lines and other property of the Texas and Pacific Rail- way Company he determined, and the pro rata extent of their lien he declared, and that the said railroad, franchises, and other property of the Texas and Pacific Rail- way Company he sold for the purpose of satisfying the alleged claim of complainants, and the other creditors of the company, as their interest may appear. That your pe- titioner is, and has been for a long time, the owner and holder, for himself and in trust, of bonds issued by the defendant, the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, known as the New Orleans and Pacific bonds, to the extent of two hundred and sixty- four thousand, which said Now Orleans and Pacific bonds are particulaily referred to and set forth in the bill filed herein. Your petitioner further shows to the court that the trustee of said mortgage is the Fidelity Insurance, Trust, and Safe Deposit Company, of Philadelphia, Pa., and who, as your petitioner is informed and believes, refuses and neglects to appear in said ac- tion and to defend the same ; but who, on the contrary, has expressly acquiesced in the action of the complainants herein, and will not and does not intend to interpose any defense to the said action, although requested so to do. And petitioner is further advised and believes that the defendant is not indebted to the complainant in the sum mentioned in the bill, or in any otlier sum, and that the claim sued upon is a valid one in law or equity. Your petitioner further states that he is advised and believes that it is his duty and interest to intervene as defendant in said suit and to become a party thereto, to the intent that he may present to this honorable court his rights, interests, and equities in the premises, and to be heard as to the disposal of the i^joperty of the defendant; and that unless your petitioner is allowed to appear and set forth his defense and be heard in this suit, great injustice will be committed aud his rights in the properly hazarded and sacrified. Wherefore, upon the facts aforesaid and upon the bill aforesaid, your petitioner prays this honorable court that he may be made a party defendant in said suit, that your petitioner may be allowed to appear as defendant in said suit, aud answer and demur to said bill in behalf of himself and all other persons similarly interested, and to take such other and further action as defendant in said suit may be advised ; and that your petitioner have such other and further relief as may be just. And your peti- tioner will ever pray, &o. WALTER D. DENEGRE, Solioiior for petitioner, John R. Dos Passos, Bayne & Dentsgre, Of Counsel. United States op America, Eastern District of Louisiana: Walter D. Denegre, being duly sworn, says that he is attorney for the above-named petitioner, William T. Walters, and that he has read the foregoing petition, knows the contents thereof, and the same is true, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as tp these matters he believes the same to be true, and that the said William T. Walters is absent from* this State. WALTER D. DENEGRE. Sworn to before me this 8th day of January, 1886. • T. McC. HYMAN, ' Deputy C terk. Filed January 9, 1886. OEDEK. Cirdered that the petitioners, through their solicitors, be allowed to enter appear- ance in this case, and that this petition be filed, with leave to file bills of intervention, if so advised ; but to stand without other action or order until it shall appear to the court that the trustees of the mortgage securing petitioner's bonds neglect to defend the rights of all the bondholders represBUted by them, or until it shall appear that petitioners have some equity not common to the majority of bondholders. The clerk will notice petitioner's solicitors and advise them by printed copy of or- ders as passed in the case. DON A. PARDEE, Judge. Entered and filed January 9, 1886. 200 LABOR TEOUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST, Petition of Thomas Denny f Co. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company ) versus > No. 11,181. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company. > To tTie honorable the judges of the United States circuit couH in and for the fifth circuit and eastern district of Louisiana : The petition of Thomas Denny & Co., of the city of New. York, respectfully shows to your honors : That heretofore, on or about the 15th day of December, l^^BS, the above-named Missouri Pacific Railway Company, as complainants, filed their bill in equity against ■the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, as defendants, in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana; and that thereupon, on the fol- lowing mentioned day, to wit, on the 16th of December, 1885, in accordance with the prayer of the said bill, John C. Brown and Lionel A. Sheldon were appointed temporary receivers of the property of the said defendant, the said Texas and Pa- cific Railway Company. That, inter alia, the relief asked by said complainants is that the amount of all claims upon the lines and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company bo determined and the ^ro rata extent of their lien be de- clared, and that the said railroad, franchises, and other property of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company be sold, for the purpose of satisfying the alleged claim of complainants and the other creditors of the company as their interest may appear. That your petitioner is, and has been for a long time, the holder of two hundred and fifty thousand of the bonds of the Texas and Pacific Railway Company, known as the Eio Grande Division bonds, which said bonds are particularly referred to and set forth in the bill filed herein. Your petitioner further shows to the court, that the trustees of the said land grant mortgage are the Fidelity Insurance, Trust and Safe Deposit Company, pf Philadelphia, Pa., and who, as your petitioner is informed and believes, refuses and neglects to appear in said action, and to defend the same; but who, on the contrary, have expressly acquiesced in the action of the complainants herein, and will not, and do not intend to, interpose aiiy defense to the said action, although requested so to do. And petitioner is further advised and believes that the defendant is not indfebted to the complainant in the sum mentioned in the bill, or in any other sum, and tliat the claim sued upon is not a valid one in law or equity. Your petitioner further states that he is advised and believes that it is his duty and interest to intervene as defendant in said suit, and to become a party thereto to the intent that he may present to this honorable court his rights, interests, and equities in the premises, and to be heard as to the disposal of the property of the defendant ; and that, unless your' petitioner is allowed to appear and set forth his defense and be heard in this suit, great injustice will be committed and his rights in the property hazarded and sacrificed. Wherefore, upon the facts aforesaid, and upon the bill aforesaid, your petitioner prays this honorable court that be may be made a party defendant in said suit, that yonr petitioner may be allowed to appear as defendant in said suit, and answer and demur to said bill in behalf of himseli and all other persons similarly interested, and to take such other and further action as defendant in said suit may be advised ; and that your petitioner have such other and further relief as may be just, and your pe- titioner will ever pray, the 16th I was notified by the receivers that the strikers and other lawless men and Knights of Labor were threatening to bum the bridges between the Brazos River and Baird, and that they were driving off the employes of the road at different places, and that they asked for protection. I went at once to the different points on the road, and placed a strong guard at Gordon, Strawn, Ranger, and Baird, which I thought was sufScient. On the morn- ing of the 21st of March the engineers, brakemen, and conductors on what is called the Rio Grande division, west of Fort Worth, became alarmed, owing to the number of strikers and other lawless men between the Brazos and Cisco, called on me for pro- tection, and stated that unless they were protected they would have to give up their engines and trains. 220 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. I immediately organized a large force of special deputy marshals, twenty-four of the number being mounted men, to guard the coal-chute at Gordon, the water-tank at Aledo, Strawn, and Tiffen, the bridges at the oaBon and other places : to attend trains between the Brazos and Eanger, and to examine and patrol the road from Bra- zos to Gordon and from Gordon to Eanger ; to prevent these lawless men from flagging the engines, tearing up the track, and burning the bridges, and to protect other prop- erty of the company. Q. Was the employment of deputy marshals necessary, in your judgment, to pro- tect the said property from destruction ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Give total number of deputies and time employed to protect said property f— A. The employment of deputy marshals was absolutely necessary to protect the prop- erty of the company from destruction, also to protect the Uves of the employes who were willing to work, the property of citizens being>transported as freight to different (towns and cities in the State, and the lives of passengers traveling through> the ■country ; to prevent the burning of bridges, round-houses, cars, and depot buildings ; to prevent the destruction of the water-tanks and pump-houses from one end of the lino to the other, and putting a complete stop to the commerce of the country. I am fully satisfied that the employment of deputy marshals saved the property of the road from the east line of Kaufman County and from Bonham to the western line of the northern district of Texas from being destroyed, especially the round-houses and depot buildings at Fort Worth, and the water-tanks at Denton, Aledo, Strawn, and Tift'en, the large wood trestle bridges across the canons and gulches at different' points in the Eio Grande division, which, if burned or destroyed, would completely stop both travel and traffic west of the Brazos for months, and cost the company thousands of dollars to rebuild. Their employment saved thousands of dollars worth of property for the company, and the lives of many citizens ; put both passenger and freight trains to moving from one end of the line to the other ; protected the commerce of the country ; restored «oni3deuc6 in the employes of the company, and enabled the section men to work with- out molestation or hindrance, and enabled the ofiScers, switchmen, and other em- ployes in the yards and mechanics in the workshops to perfbrm the duties required of them. ' To do this and carry out the orders of the court, I have employed fourteen regular deputy marshals and about one hundred and sixty special deputy marshals at differ- ent times, and posted them at Brookstan, Bonham, Sonthmayde, Whitesboro, Den- ton, and Eoanoke, on the Trans-Continental Branch ; Fort Worth, Aledo, MiUsaps, Brazos, Gordon (coal chutes), Strawn, on main line Texas and Pacific ; the large wood bridges at the canons, and other places between Strawu and Eanger; the water pumps at Tiffen, and at the round-houses and shops at Baird, on main line Texas and Pacific. The time employed has been from the 12th of March to the pres- ■ent time, the number each day depending on the necessity for protection. The greater number of the special deputy marshals were discharged on the 6th, 8th, 10th, and 11th of April, leaving now on duty about twenty-three specials and four regular deputy , marshals. Whenever I deemed it necessary for immediate protection I would also commission ofBcials of the road. Q. Was any of the property disabled, injured, or destroyed during this time, and, if so, the best of your knowledge and belief, by whom? — A. On the 13th of March I found 13 engines disabled and unfit for use at Bonham, Tex. , the freight trains un- coupled and most of the coupling-pins taken away ; at Abilene, one engine had been ■disabled ; at Aledo, Tarrant County, the pumper had been shot at, bufiets fired into the tank, the hose cut, and the pump injured by a party of strikers and Knights of Labor. On the 14th of March five men, named Andy Haley, W. J. Haley, James Taulby, W. P. Thayer, and George Tuttle, were arrested for contempt and obstructing the marshal in exorcising the duties of his office. On the night of March 17 a bridge north of Fort Worth was burned, supposed to be accidental; my belief is that it was «et on fire by strikers and Knights of Labor. On the night of the 18th of March the bridge 6 miles north of Denton was burned, and was the work of strikers and Knights of Labor. On the 18th the coal-heavers at Denton were ordered to leave, and were not allowed, to give coal to the Texas And Pacific engines ; they were reported to me as striking Knights of Labor ; such is my belief. I at once went there and placed Deputy Marshal Joe W. Eeoord and five special deputy marshals to protect the coal-heavers and water-tanks. ' On the 18th threats were made to burn all the bridges between the Brazos and Baird, which made it necessary to station special deputy marshals as guards to pro- tect them. , On the 21st one engine was badly injured and completely disabled by a striker and Knight of Labor at Strawn. About the same time the water-tank at Strawn was fired into, the hose cut, and the water let out. On the same day trains were flagged, the ■engineers ordered off and threatened with death if they did not leave the employ of the road west of Strawn. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 221 On abont the 2lBt, near Sparta, the tiain was flagged and the engineer ordered to leave the engine with a threat of death. On the 22d of March sectionmen working on section near Mill Saps were threatened and driven oflf. On the 23d of March Timothy Higgins was arrested for abnsing and trying to intimidate employes at Fort Worth. On the 24th of March the men at work at a bridge near Eastland were driven off by Knights of Labor and would not return to work until a guard was sent. On the 24th of March a Knight of Labor by the name of Fortner at Gordon placed a train of powder 35 feet long through the freight depot, where coal oil and other combustible matter was, and set fire to it, evidently with the intention of burning the depot at Gordon. On the night of March 24 logs and railroad ties were piled up on the track four miles east of Strawn, in order to wreck a passenger train, and were discovered and removed a short time before train was due. On the 24th of March, between Sparta and Brazos, rocks were piled upon the track of the Texas and Pacific. On the 24th of March a striker and Knight of Labor, near Strawn, made the flagmar. lower his flag and forced him and his two brothers, who were at work on the section, to leave their work and the company. On the 26th of March, a few miles east of Aledo, in Tarrant County, an engine blew up, killing the engineer and firemen, the engineer being killed instantly. Nothing could be found out as to the cause. My own belief is that there had been something put into the water-tank of the tender by some strikers at Aledo as the train came by. I have not been able so far to get any positive information as to the cause, but my conviction is as stated above, as there were a number of bad andlawless men there at that time, composed of strikers and Knights of Labor. The employes of the road at Bonham and the sectionmen between Bonham and Savoy on the west, and Bonham and Brookstan on the east, were ordered off by strikers and Knights of Labor and not allowed to work. Deputy marshals were sent there as guards to protect the bridges and sectionmen near Brookstan ; they are on duty there now. Deputy marshals were sent with party on the west of Bonham to protect employes and sectionmen between Sherman and South Mayde, who had been threatened by strikers and Knights of Labor and most of them driven off. On the 26th of March, at Bonham, a man named Charles Barton abused and threatened and tried to intimidate sectionmen at work on section near and west of' Bonham. On the 27th of March Charles Wilson displaced a switch on the Texas and Pacific Railroad at Denton in an attempt to switch a passenger train ; sentenced to five months in the county jail. On March 27 Dick Gordon was arrested at Fort Worth for throwing stones at a switchman, an employ^ of the Texas and Pacific road, while switching cars ; sentenced to three months in the county jail. On or about the night of April 1 two rails were taken up on the Transcontinental branch of the Texas and Pacific Rail- road at Fort Worth. On or about the morning of AprU 2, a large mob, numbering some two or three hundred, composed of strikers — Knights of Laibor — too& possession of the switch on the Transcontinental branch of the Texas and Pacific Railroad at Fort Worth, in order to force a passenger train on a side track from which the rails had been taken up, for the purpose of wrecking the train. The deputy marshals in charge, with great trouble and difficulty, drove the crowd away, took possession of the switch, allowed the train to go on the proper track, and thereby saved both life and prop- erty from destruction. On April 2, at Aledo, two men, named Sam. Asberry and J. C. Newberry, were ar- rested for intimidating employ^, the pumper and sectionmen. On the 7th of April Ed. Thoronton and three others were arrested for intimidating employes and forcibly taking charge of the company property. On the 9th of April Sam. Martin was arrested for interfering with property of the Texas and Pacific. On the 10th of April W. M. Mace and F. P. Lowe, T. R. Anderson, E. Bishop, and Robert Erwin were arrested for interfering with Texas and Pacific property, trying ■ to displace a switch and to wreck a train at Fort Worth. Bishop and Lowe each sen- tenced to three mouths in county jail ; Erwin was discharged ; Anderson and Mace are under bond. On 12th of April Perry Thompson was arrested for throwing stones at the caboose of a moving freight train near Strawn. On the 12th of April attempts were made at Sonth Mayde, west of Sherman, to drive isectionmen off and prevent them from working for the Texas and Pacific Railroad. On the 17th of April Ed. Donahue tried to take forcible possession of a switch to lorce a train on a track at Forth Worth where the rail had been taken up. On April 19 Pat Wallace was arrested near Denton for threatening employes of the Texas and Pacific Railroad and trying to force them to leave their work. On or about the 22d of April iron was piled upon the track of the Texas and Pacific 222 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Railroad, about 2 miles west of Weatherford, which came very near throwing the pas- senger train off the track, and injuring the track in other respects. On the 25th of April William Wallace was arrested for threatening employfe of the Texas and Pacific on the 19th and trying to force them to leave their road work. On April 25, west of Strawn, at Tiffen, a party of armed men destroyed the pipe leading to the water-tank and filled the pipe with rags, sticks, &o., making a total of 24 arrested under this writ. W. L. CABELL, Marshal Northern District Texas. State op Kansas, County of Dallas : Before me, D. A. Williams, notai-y public, in and for the county and State afore- said, personally appeared W. F. Morton, Thoa. E. Geiren, M. W. Witt, Henry Hack- ney, and J. T. Tooley, who each npon oath say that of the matters and things set forth in the foregoing pages, those that are stated as coming within their own knowl- «dse and observation are true, the rest they believe to be true. ^ W. P. MORTON. THOS. E. GERREN. M. W. WITT. H. HACKNEY. J. T. TOOLEY. Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 3d day of May, A. D. 1886. D. A. WILLIAMS, Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas. W. F. MORTON sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhtwaite : Question (handing witness the statement of Marshal Cabell just admitted). That ■purports to be an indorsement of yours and some others as to the ofllcial acts of ths marshal. Have you examined it ? — Answer. I have a few minutes ago. Q. What have you to say as to the statements being correct? — A. They are correct 'SO far as we are advised. Q. The facts stated in what relates to the different dates are true? — ^A. Yes, sir. THOMAS H. GERREN sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. You were one of Marshal Cabell's deputies were you not? — ^Answer. Yes, «ir. \ Q. You have examined this paper J [Exhibiting statement of Marshal Cabell just introduced.] — A. Yes, sir. Q. It purports to bje a statement of the official acts of the marshal and his deputies during the strike. Is it correct so far as it relates to the section that you had charge of t— A. It is correct up to the day it was given, to the best of my knowledge. Q. And the statements contained therein are true to the best of your knowledgel — A. Yes, sir. JOHN L. MANNING recalled and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite. Question. Can you give the names of the men arrested and imprisoned at El Paso during the strike and the offenses with which they were charged! — ^A. They were charged on the writ of assistance issued by the Federal court. I have not the writ, as it is on file at the office at El Paso at present. There were four arrested oil that writ and ten or twelve on another writ. Q. State what was the substance of that writ? — A. It was a bench warrant issued by Judge E. B. Turner, of the western district court, for the arrest of thirteen parties -charged with intimidation and general interference with the road. There were also capiases issued for trying to disturb the administration of justice in the United States district court. About thirty are in that. Q. How many fugitives are therefrom justice? — ^A. I have made seventeen arrests altogether, and I suppose there are probably twenty fugitives from justice, but I can- not state exactly, as there have been several arrests made upon this bench warrant is- sued the 6th day of April who are now out under bond. They Were arrested and gave bond in the sum of $1,000 each. Q. Do you know of any of the former employes of the road being arrested at Toyah ? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. For what ? — A. They were implicated in intimidation, in the killing of engines, and turning switches. One of them was arrested for turning a switch in front of a LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 223 fteight train that -was ordered to run tbrough Toyah without stopping. He changed the switch just before the train got to it ; but a wreck was prevented by one of the former employ^ changing it before the engine got to it. Q. How many arrests were there made at Toyah? — A. There were three arrests -made. Q. What became of the charges against the parties T — A. One of the men has been acquitted and the others are serving sentence in the county jail now. They were tried at the last term of our El Paso court. The following was introduced as evidence : Official inatructions to d^utie$, Instructions to special deputy marshals commissioned by S. p. Jackman,United States marshal western district of Texas, at Big Springs : These commissions have been issued to persons named in them for the purpose of adding the marshal in executing the commands of a certain writ of assistance and pos- session, issued out of the United States circuit court for the western district of Texas, hy the Hon. E. B. Turner, judge of said court, on the 6th day of March, 1886. In order that the power and authority of such special deputies may be fully understood, it is necessary to refer to the commands of said writ, in which it is ordered that the marshal and his deputies enter in the shops and premises of the Texas and Pacific Railway and disperse and eject from said premises all persons unlawfully assembled ■or coUeoted tjierein ; that they restore to the receiver of the road quiet and peaceable possession and use of all property of said railway company. These commands it is your duty as much as mine, each and everjr one of you, to see •carried out in spirit and in letter. Tou are empowered to resist with force, if neces- sary, any attempt to interfere with or injure the property of the company, or the run- ning of trains, and to that end and that alone you are authorized to bear arms while your commission is in force, but if you go beyond the legitimate performance of your •duties, as indicatsd above, either by threats, force, or show of violence, you will stand upon the basis of any other law-breaker. If any resistance is made to the legitimate exercise of your authority under these •commissions, you will identify the parties and report their names at once to me at El Paso, Texas, with the names of witnesses. Such interference with your authority is a serious offense against the laws of the ^United States, and will subject the offender to indictment and imprisonment in the i)enitentiary. S. D. JACKMAN, United States Marshal. The committee then took a recess for dinner. On the leassembUng of the committee they proceeded to take testimony. JOHN Q. HARRIS sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaitb : Question. Have you examined that paper [handing paper to witness].. It sets forth jour evidence before a commissioner of the court. Is it substantially correct f — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are the statements therein sworn to by yoa substan tially correct f — A. Yes, sir. The statement was here read and admitted, as follows : Statement before Commissioner. Question. Please state your fall name and occupation. — ^Answer. J. G. Harris, an agent for the Texas and Pacific Railway and the Missouri Pacific Railway at Fort Worth. Q. How long have you held that position ? — A. Well, I have been an agent over ten years, but have been at Fort Worth a little over two years, since February. Q. Please state what you know feonoerning the strike on the Texas and Pacific that ■occurred about the 1st of last March. — ^A. Well, on the 1st of last March I was out at the compress, and had just finished loading 200 bales of cotton, and had signaled the switch engine to come over and pull them out ; the engine came up and coupled on; then I heard the whistle blow, and it kept on blowing for a long time, and by that it attracted my attention, and then I saw the switch engine cut loose from the train and back into the round-house, and then I saw men running from the warehouse and ftom different portions of the Texas and Pacific property to the round-house. I in- quired what was the matter, but at first couldgetno intelligent answer. Ithenwent over to the warehouse and found that my warehouse laborers with some five or six -clerks had suspended work. I called the foreman of the warehouse and asked him what 224 LABOR TROUBLES IS THE SOUTH AND WEST was the matter. He said there had been a strike ordered hy the executive board, Knights of Labor. I then asked him what was the matter, and he said he did not know. I then asked him if they had any grievances, and he said that they had none so far a» he knew, but that they had been ordered out, but he would advise me in the morning whether they would return to work or not. On the morning of March 2d he came around and said they had been ordered out, and that they would quit work. I had 25 laborers and 5 clerks ; they went out under that strike. I had other Knights of Labor directly under me in my office, who were ordered out repeatedly, but re- fused to obey the order, they being a more intelligent set of men. They claimed the order for the strike was unconstitutional and unwarranted, and they remained at work during the entire time, and are at work still. On the morning of the 4th, act- ing under the instructions of the superintendent, I reorganized my labor force in the warehouse, and had no trouble in doing so. Q. Did you fill their places with other men !— A. Yes, sir. Q. Were these men Intimidated after they went to work f— A. Yes, sir; a mob of ' 200 or 300 people gathered on the warehouse grounds, but I ordered them off, and they gathered on the street near the warehouse and jeered and used pretty hard laugnage towards the men. Q. Did you regard this quitting on the 1st of March and subsequent conduct of the men who stopped work as peaceably quitting the employ of the railway f — A. No, sir ; they hung around, and even some of them come around yet, but they are very guarded in what they aay. Q. Have the receivers or any ofScers under them failed to keep any agreement or promise they had made with employes since they took possession of the property f — A. I don't think they have. Q. Did these strikers give any reason at any subsequent time for going outf — A. Some of them said it was to assist the order at Marshall to have one Hall, who had been discharged, reinstated. Q. Did you witness this throwing of eggs? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you see any instances of intimidation or threats? — ^A. Well, some of the strikers would congregate around where the new employes were working, and would use such language as would leave the men to believe that they would receive bodily harm if they continued in the service of the company; I myself have been assaulted on the street about my work, going to and fro, by men whom 1 believed to be Knights of Labor, callios me hard names, &c. And further. Knights, of Labor, I beli«ve, came to my premises and pulled up some young trees. Q. From the conduct of a few weeks after $ strikers, did you consider their war- fare to be against capital, or was it really against other labor not connected with their order I— A. I think you might pass that jointly ; they did not want to have other men working while they were not, but also meant to give a stroke at capital. Q. Did men apply to you for work immediately after the strike, and if so, on what conditions? — A. Yes, sir; they asked to be protected. On the 4th I organized my tbrce with thirty-five men and four clerks. They asked to be protected, and that their positions to be permanent, provided they should prove satisfactory, which was promised. Q. You had no difficulty in replaoipg the men who had quit ?— A. No, sir; I had plenty of applicants foi the various departments ; I put up a card that I had as many men as I needed, so that I would not be bothered with applications. I had as many as four times the applicants for positions as I needed. By Mr. Outhwaite : Q. Were you living here at Fort Worth at the time of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you acquainted with many of the strikers ? — A. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. Did you meet many of them about that time ? — A. I did. Q. What cause, if any, did they give for going out on the strike ? — A. Some stated that they did not know what ; others on account of Mr. Hall being discharged at Marshall. Q. Were any other reasons-given ? — A. None to me, sir. Q. When the strike of March, 1885, was settled, did you not state that you were glad, as it gave you |15 more per month ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. Have the cheek clerks ever received the wages paid prior to September, 1884? — A. They have not. • Q. What difference has there been ? — A. From about $5 per month. Q. Did you ever complain to the officers of the road about this ? — A. I received a communication from one of the clerks, Mr. Read, representing, as I understood it, the Knights of Labor element among the men employed by me, asking for a restoration of those wages. .. Q. When did you receive that communication; how long before the strike f — A. This was along about last August or September, I ^ink. LABOK TEOOBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 22^ Q. What was the reason the wages were not restored? — A. Mr. Camming, the gen- eral superintendent, replied to me that the business of the road would not justify an increase of wages at the present time. Q. Do you know whether there was any agreement that these wages should be re- stored to any former price or not f — A. I 6,0 not, unless they were included in the agreement made between Mr. Hoxie and Mr. Hayes during the strike in 1885. Q. Was there a reduction of 35 cents per day ordered in 1885 on all freight hand- lers!— A. May, 1885? No, sir. Q. About that timet — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you receive a telegram from Mr. Keller, superintendent of the Eio Grande division, to send in his pay-roll at a dollar twenty-five, or at the rates previous to March, 1885 ? — ^A. No, sir. There has been no effort made since the restoration of wages under the Hayes agreement, in March — I think it was, in 1885, so far as my force is concerned — there has been no effort or instruction made to reduce them. I had an order la May to reduce the number of men employed, and at that time I let out six men, reducing the force from twenty-four warehouse laborers to eighteen. Q. Is there any difference in the amount of work done now and that done just be- fore the strike, taking the same number of men ? — A. Well, sir, I think there is a con- siderable difference. Q. Is it much in fa vor of the company ? — A. The men I have now employed do more work. Q. You mean by that they do more work than the same number of men did bafore the strike? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know any reason for this ? — A. No, sir ; except that they seem to go along as though they meant to do some work. I get as much work as ever. We could put through the house, when trade was extra, about three or four thousand dollars a day, and we are now putting through the house, without much of a rush, fifty -two or fifty-five hundred dollars a day. That is the amount of freight earnings. Q. Is not that a result of the character of freight? — A. Not necessarily. It is the same class of freight we handle from one day's end to the other. Q. Then, in your opinion, it is /the result of a diflierence in the spirit and diligence of the men ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you not state to John Lehahn, about the 3d of May, that yon had rather have Jamison and six of his men than all you had employed? — A. I do not know; I do not remember to have had any such talk with him, and I think it is generally agreed that the present force is more efficient than the one we had. SAMUEL F. JUDD sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite : Question. Is this paper the testimony given before the commissioner of the court [handing it to witness] ? Have you examined it ? — Answer. I have, partially. Q. As far as you have examined it, is it correct, and are the facts stated in there true ? — ^A. It is, except in the place where it states that I had held that position two years ; it should be " three." Q. What position did you hold at that time ? — ^A. I was general yardmaster. Q. What cause did the men give for going out at the time of the strike ? — A. I asked my men why they quit me without notifying me. They said they were ordered out by Ihe Knights of Labor, and could not work any more. Q. Were any other reasons given ? — A. They did not give me any other reasons, ex- cept that they were ordered to stop and that they had no grievances at all, and wished to stay at work. , Q. Who was it told you that a man named Lovin had ordered the men to stop ? — A. Mr. Starr, my chief clerk, came in my office, threw his keys down on my table, and said he could not work any longer. I asked him what was the trouble, and he said they had received lan order to strike, and he asked me to go and see Mr. Lovin and see if he could not settle the matter. I spoke to Mr. Lovin, and he said " No, sir." The statement was here introduced and read, as follows : Statement before Commissioner. Q. Please state your name and occupation. — A. S. F. Judd, general yardmaster of the Texas and Pacific and the Missouri Pacific yard. Q. How long have you occupied this position ?— A. I have been with the company three years the coming of next August. Q. Please state what you know from personal knowledge concerning the strike that occurred on the Texas and Pacific Railway about the 1st of last March ? — A. Well, at 5} o'clock the whistle of the round-house blew and the men walked out. This was the 1st day of March, 5i o'clock. All the shopmen and yardmen went out. .^<184. TAT! R Tn 226 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. State how many, about.— A. I had sixteeB switchmen, four car-markers, one yard clerk, and one switch lamplighter. Q. What reason was given then for quitting work?— A. They would not give any reason ; they said they were ordered out by theKnights of Labor, by a man named Loving. Q. Who is this man Lovin?— A. Well, he is a carpenter in the repair-shops of the Texas and Pacific Railway. Q. Did they remain around the property and shops of the railway company ?— A. Well, not on the Texas and Pacific side ; a few of them came around the next day, and I asked them why they did not go to work and what their grievances were; they said "No, sir; " and that they had no grievances. That was what I asked my own men. Thiey said they had been ordered out and had to quit, and then went away. Q. Did they express a desire to return to work ?— A. Some three or four of them did; they said they did not want to go to work, but had to. Q. Have you been able to fill the places of these men who went out by others f— A. Well, we could have filled them all, but it was several days before the new men would go to work, I think through fear. Q. Through fear of who ? — A. Through fear of the strikers ; they went so far after the men went to work to call them all sorts of names and everything that they could think of. John Connors assaulted one of the men— Mr. Ramsey- and struck him three times. Q. While Mr. Ramsey was at work f— A. Yes, sir ; he was in charge of an engine. Q. Did these strikers continue to hang around the yards ?— A. Yes, sir. Yon see I have charge of the Missouri Pacific and Texas and Pacific yards, and they hung mostly around the Missouri Pacific. Q. Did you consider that peaceably quitting the employ of the company? — A. I did not consider that peaceable at all. They did not seem to want anybody else to work when they were not working themselves. Q. Did they use opprobrious epithets ? — A. Yes, sir; they called God damned sons of bitches, and told them that they were not men, &c. ; also called them scabs, and that they would " do them up," and even tried to keep them from gettingboard. They also throw eggs one day in the yards ; they threw two or three hundred eggs at the men who were at work, and hit two or three of my men and called them names. Q. Did I understand you to say that you -^ould have had no trouble in filling the places of these men who quit work had it not been for those hanging around there iutimidating the new men ? — A. We would have had no trouble in filling the places of the men had it not been that the men were afraid of going to work. My men were afraid even after they had commenced work in the yards, on account of this. Q. How long did this state of affairs continue ? — A. About two weeks they kept on bolliering us, until we got the marshals here— Mr. Cabell and his men ; then they kept away, but would stand outside and yell at the men. Q. Did this intimidation, yelling, and throwing eggs at the employes come from the employes who had quit work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there any property destroyed, switches turned? — A. There were switches turned, engines killed, one yard engine No. 49. It was a Missouri, Kansas andTexM engine, but was in charge of the Texas and Pacific, who had her over two years, and is just the same as their own engine. Q. One day there was some firing in which several persons were hurt and killed. Did you see anything of it ? — A. No, sir. Q. How far was it from where your are ? — A. It was about 2 miles south of the yard. Q. Was there any shooting on the property of the Texas and Pacific Railway? — A. No, sir ; not that I know of. There might have been stiay shots fired at night, and I believe there were some fired from a hack that drove by the yards. We tried to take a train down to the junction, and we were attacked by three men on our way back, and the switches thrown, so that we would run on the side-track. Q. Do you know the names of these three men ? — A. Charlie McGee was the man that opened the switch ; the other two men were only with him. Q. Had these three men been in the employ of the railway and quit ? — A. YeSj sir. Q. Did you talk with them ?-^A. I did j they told me I could not get by tb at switch. I told them that they were interfering with the United States court, and finally they agreed that they would let me go if I would not use the Missouri, Kansas and Texas ' engine. If we would not have been on the lookout there would have been a wreck, as that spur holds six cars, and there were three cars on it, and after we once had got on we could not have stopped at all, as the going down was a very heavy grade. Q. What is the reason that these men were not arrested ? — A. I do not know ; I re- ported the matter when I got to the depot, and I think the officials at Dallas were notified. Q. About what was the damage committed here, in your estimation ? — A, Well, I LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 227 should tiiiuk between $8,000 and $10,000 would be very low: more likely between $10,000 and $20,000. Q. Are you quite sure that these men who threw eggs, turned switches, and threat- ened the men with violence were Knights of Labor ? — A. I could not say, but it is , what they claim ; they say they are Knights of Labor. Q. Immediately after the strike, did men not connected with the railroad apply for work I — ^A. Yes, sir, they did ; they applied the second day. Q. What were the conditions on which they would go to work? — A. If we would give them protection so that they would not be huit. Q. Did more men apply than you could nsef — A. Yes, sir. LEVI L. KELLERasworn and examined. By Mr. Octhwaite : Question. What position do you fill on the Rio Grande division ? — Answer. I am division superintendent. Q. Where is your office ? — A. At Big Springs. Q. Where were you on the 1st of March, when the strike occurred? — A. At my office. Q. You may state whether during the strike the killing of engines, damaging of engines, and the side-tracking of trains occurred, and what intimidation, if any, was practiced upon employes? — A. Yes, sir, there was. Q. How many engines were killed? — A. Two engines were killed, and there were some ten or eleven disabled. Q. How many trains were side-tracked ? — A. They side-tracked one train at a sta- tion called Mansfield, and it lay there about ten days. Q. flow long was treight traffic interrupted on the division from Colorado City to Toyah f— A. From the 4th to the 10th at Toyah ; at El Paso from the 5th to the 10th, and freight service was resumed fully on the 10th. Q. How many employes were under your charge ? — A. There was about 800 on the entire division, including all services. Q. How many went out ? — A. About 350. Q. How were you enabled to resume traffic ? — A. By the assistance of the deptity United States marshals coming to Big Springs. They arrived there at 2 p. m. on the 9th. Q. Before they came were any men taken from their engines ? — A. Some got off and were said to be crowded off. Q. State what you know about an attempt to wreck a train at Toyah. — A. We had a train of time-freight consisting of oranges and dry fruit from California, and we were advised from Toyah that there would be an attempt to side-track that train at Toyah on the morning without allowing it to come on. I issued an order for the train to run through Toyah without stopping, and run through at such a rate that people could not get on it. They arrived about 6.50 in the morning running about 30 miles an hour." When the parties saw that they were not going to stop, after flagging them down, one man named Joe Humes ran to the switch and threw it, with the intention of wrecking the train. This proceeding was witnessed by Mrs. Penn, wife of our yard-master, and she yelled to her husband and he ran and threw the switch back. Q. Were both men former employes of the company? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they both members of any organization? — A. Well, Humes was said to be a Knight of Labor. Q. How about the one who threw the switch ? — A. He was also a member and master of their order, I understand. Q. Have you any personal knowledge of either one of these men being members of that order? — A. Not any more than any man outside of the order would be able to have. Mr. Penn himself told me he was. Q. Did you receive a telegram in April or May, 1885, in regard to the reduction of wages of freight hands at Port Worth? — A. And other places ; I think I did. Q. From whom? — A. I received a message from Mr. Cummings, general superintend- ent of the road. Q. What was it to do? — A. The message he sent me, as, near as I recollect, was not to reduce the pay from $1.50 to $1.25. It was not done ; it was not reduced. Q. How many Chinamen have you working on the division of the Rio Grande? — ^A, We have about 125 now. Q. State if there is any reason why these men should be employed other than the cheapness of their price? — A. They are no cheaper. There is no labor in that country. We have to import all our labor over this section for our entire division. In fact there is no labor to employ along the line of our road except what is imported over this roafi after we get out 140 miles from here. 228 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. State whether or not it is easy to retain lahor out there?— A. Well, no, sir; it is a little difficult to hold white labor out in that country. Q. Is there not the same difficulty to hold Chinese labor?— A. No, sir; we have no difficulty with them. ^ n t, • Q. What is the objection that seems to b6 made by white men or colored men laboring tiiere?— A. It is an uncivilized part of the country. We have had no colored men on that part of the division ever since I have had charge, now two years. On the Galves- ton. Harrisburg and San Antonio road they use Mexican labor on that part of the road. They cannot keep white labor. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You say that there is no white labor out there, and the Chinese are not indigenous to that section? — A. They are imported. Q. By whom? — A. I do not know; they were there when I caAe there. Q. How long since? — A. Over two years. Q. You found them there at work at that time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you mean that the Chinese will remain further beyond the outside boundaries of settlement than either white or black labor wiU? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How do you account for that? — ^A. Simply because they do not mix with the American people. Their desire is to keep by themselves. Q. But has not this whole country been settled by white men advancing beyond the boundaries of settlement? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You say they are not cheaper than black or white labor. Are they paid the same rate per day? — A. Yes, sir; they are paid $1.15 a day. Q. Do you know anything of their habits of life? — They live about as well as I do. Q. Have their own boarding house ? — ^A. There is a cook house and sleeping house for them at each section, distinct from the section house. Q. Do you say that it is impossible to secure white or black labor for the purpose of working that portion of the road? — A. I do not say it is impossible, but it would be very hard to keep them there. Q. But has that been tested by actual experiment? — A. They had white labor on that division when the road was first built. Q. The road was built by white labor? — A. Yes, sir; we have section bosses that are white. Q. (By Mr. Outh^aitb.) Have any white laborers applied for these places occupied by Chinamen? — A. No, sir. THOMAS FIELDING sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Are you master mechanic at Big Springs? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Had you notice of the strike at the shops there? — A. Not more than ten minutes before it occurred. Q. I will ask you the manner in which the strike was inaugurated ? — A. I was ap- proached by a machinest named Graham who was working in the shop. He is a mas- ter workman of the Knights of Labor Assembly No. 1250. On the 1st, ten minutes pre- vious to the men going, he came and told me that they were ordered out on a strike. I asked him what had occurred, and he said they had to go out on the road. I asked him what were the grievances, and what they wanted. He said they had no grievances of their own, but that they had been ordered out. I asked him what was the cause of it, and he said he did not exactly know, but that it was on account of the discharge of a man by the name of Hall, at Marshall. •< Q. And they went out, leaving the shops without any one to run them ? — A. The ma- jority of the men went out and left about half enough for me to get along. Of course they did not bind themselves by the order and did not feel that the order affected them, but that was very few. Others that felt inclined to stay with us were threatened in such a manner that they were afraid to stay. Q. Give the number that left your employment ? — A. I cannot state exactly, but should judge in the neighborhood of seventy-five. Q. This man that you spoke of being a master workman in the Knights of Labor, how did you know that ? — A. Erom having dealings with him in previous grievances, when he represented hiipself as the head of the committee; and of course it was an acknowl- edged fact that he was a master workman, and his name had been published as such. Q. What is his name ? — A. T. C. Graham, I believe. Q. Give, in a general way, what damage they did to the property. Did they kill any engines ? — ^A. Yes, sir; they killed engines and disabled them. Q. How many engines were killed? — A. Disabling is different to the kUling. They disabled seven one night, and one the night afterwards, about eight. That is all I had to report. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 229 Q. After these men left the employment of the company did they take possession of the property ? — A. They took possession, but remained away until the evening of the 3d. Q. What did they do then? — A. Then they prevented the freight trains going. Q. Did they return and take possession of the property there? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And how long did they remain in possession, untU what happened? — A. I saw them there from 9.30 p. m. to 2 a. m. the night of the 3d. Q. Then whiit occurred ? — A. Then they prevented freight trains going by pulling links and pins. Q. When did this taking possession of the property by them occur and how was it terminated? — A. It was from 10 p. m. of the 2d. In the morning they stopped that train going out and then came to the roundhouse and disabled seven engines. Q. How long did they remain in possession of the property ? — A. They came there on the night of the 3d, and then on the night of the 4th; the same occurrence happened between probably 11 p. m. and 1 a. m. of the night of the 4th. Q. How was this state of things terminated? — A. It terminated in them disabling engines at that time. Then we had to close down business for four or five days, and did not attempt to do anything untU the marshals came, which was about the 8th or 9th. Q. The United States marshal and his deputies came there? — A. Yes, sir; he and his deputies came. Q. They took possession of the property ; and until they came was your traffic entirely interrupted? — A. It was entirely interrupted. Q. Was there any interference with the employes by strikers? — A. Yes, sir; if yon can call it interference to intimidate men. Q. What did they do ? How were men in the employ of the company interfered with by the strikers ? — A. Well, by using threats at their boarding-house; teUing them it was not safe for them to work; that the men who would work would be hung, and telling them what would be done if they did work. Q. Was there any interference with the men working at the coal chutes? — A. Yes, sir; but that did not come" exactly under my jurisdiction; I know that they were threat- ened that they would be killed, and some of them threatened to leave. Q. How many trains were stopped' and side-tracked at your place? — A. Well, there were only two trains stopped at Big Springs. Q. What was the number of cars in each? — A. About fourteen in each. Q. Can you approximate the number containing perishable freight ? — A. I cannot tell, but probably six or seven. Q. Do yon know how long trains were detained? — ^A. Some six or seven days. Q. You succeeded in moving trains out because assistance was given yon by the United States marshal and his deputies? — A. On account of the protection given by them. Q. And without such protection was it possible to move your freight? — A. No, sir; I do not think it was, and we tried it. By Mr. O0thwaite. Is the rate of wages which was paid before September, 1884, fully restored at Big Springs? — A. Yes, sir; so far as I am able to know or judge, and I was there during both of those periods before and after. Q. Is it not true that the failure to restore the September, 1884, rates h»s been a con- tinual source of annoyance out there? — A. Well, there was some annoyance attached to that. I believe that might be the fact. I was made master mechanic of that division last July, and some men did complain that their wages had never been restored. I took the matter up with them and conferred with these men that were Knights of Labor, as they had a committee sent to me, to arbitrate the matter. I took the names and notes of everything I could and I got the company to advance their wages, which was perfectly satistactory to them. Q. Where were you bom?— A. Manchester, England. EDWARD H. MOORE sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Were yon the engineer running engine 571 on the 2d of March? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. While getting it ready to take out of the yard at Toyah, were you ordered off the •engine? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you decline to leave it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you pulled off the engine forcibly by the strikers? If so, what were the names of the' parties? — A. I was puUed off; I recognized three of them— Holmes, Bradley, and Wells. Q. Were they Knights of Labor? — A. They were with the strikers; I do not know whether they were Knights of Labor or not. 230 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did the strikers put the engine in the roundhouse and kill her?— A. Thiey ran her up on the turn-table track, dumped the fire, and killed the engine. The fire had been knocked out of other engines. Q. Were you trying to leave Big Springs on the night of the 3d of March with train No. 315 and engine No. 556 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they prevent you? — A. Yes, sir; they broke my cab light, and said it was dangerous to go out. Q. What time of night did this occur? — ^A. I think about 9.55 or 10.15. Q. Were the parties masked or otherwise? — A. Masked. Q. Did you receive any warning not to go out? — A. Nothing, any more than one ap- proached me and requested me not to take the train out that night. I told him the reason I was going out; and that I was going out if my engine went out. Q. Was that all the warning you received to desist from work ? — A. I was told ihai it was dangerous to undertake to run the train. Q. Can you state any other acts of intimidation or violence that took place on the line? — A. Nothing that I saw further, that I was connected with. FRANK B. BATEMAN sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. What is your position on the Rio Grande division? — Answer. I am a con- ductor. Q. Were you so employed at the time of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you run with Moore, the locomotive engineer ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have heard his testimony; do you corroborate his statement? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you commissioned as a deputy United States marshal ? — ^A. I hold a com- mission. Q. Did you take charge of the train service- on the 2d of March; and, if so, by whose orders? — A. By the order of Mr. Keller. Q. And you came in communication with the railroad company's men? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any special statement to make in regard to intimidation on the line dif- .ferent from what we have heard? — A. No, sir; I believe not. JOSEPH A. CARROLL sworn and examined. By the CHAIRMAN: Question. You live at Denton, and have lived there how long? — Answer. Thirty odd years. Q. What was the general conduct of the strikers at that point? — A. There were not many strikers there. It is not the end of a division. It is only on the main road. One act of violence was the burning of a bridge north of Denton, just in front of the south- bound passenger train at night. I have been informed that there was no doubt it was the work of an incendiary. During the time of the strike a great many engines ran into Denton for protection, and we put extra police on the yard at the time. I do not remem- ber the number, or that any special act of violence was done there at the time, except, perhaps, that three parties were understood to have attempted to remove some fish-bars. Q. What was the efiect of the strike on the business of Denton? — A. It completely prostrated the trade, and caused the stoppage of one- mill that had a capacity of 200 barrels of flour a day. The general manager told me he had orders for thirfy car-loads of flour countermanded on account Of his failure to ship. The shipping over the road was entirely stopped and the wheat and grain buyers were compelled to suspend business altogetiier. Q. Then in your opinion it affected the producers of the country just as much as it did the business men? — A. The heaviest loss was on the farming community. Q. You have no idea of the general amount of losses on account of this strike at Den- ton? — A. Grain depreciated very considerably; and the grain market has not recovered since. We have a good deal of corn there we cannot hope to ship west because the grass has now come; and, therefore, the market is dead. This is a heavy loss to the farming community. WILLIAM S. PARKER sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Had ahy labor troubles begun about Denton before this strike ? — Answer. Yes, sir; about a month before. Q. State all you know about them ? — A. The first labor troubles that commenced there was about a month before the strike. I was building there at the time, and the Knights of Labor organized a lodge there, and they boycotted me. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 231 Q. What have its eflFects been on the railroad company. We have no right to inves- tigate the matter as it aflfected individuals? — A. Then about a month after I saw the Knights on the railroad track stop. They stopped work on the yard and on the coal chate. Q. That was when the general strike was ordered? — A. About that time; and about three or four weeks since they tried to turn a switch and throw a train off the track. They stopped the working of the coal chnte. Q. And disarranged the business of the company ? What was the effect upon the trade and commerce of the country ? — A. It was generally demoralizing. CHARLES A. WILLIAMS sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. You live at Denton? Are yon connected with any business there? — An- swer. I am, sir, and have been trying to improve property there for the last four years. Q. Will you state the effect the strike has had at Denton upon the merchants and farmersof the country? — A. Business is almost entirely paralyzed. Corn, off wagons, fell 20 per cent., and it was almost impossible to sell hay. The mills shut down and merchants could not get near all their goods. Q. Do you mean that its effect was disastrous to the trade of Denton and paralyzed the business of the county and all the country tributary i hereto, whether as a distribut- ing or as a receiving point? — A. Yes, sir. LEVI L. KELLER recalled and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Was the oU- house burned at Big Springs? — Answer. Yes, sir; and between $5,000 and $6,000 worth of property consumed. It was in the evening at 7.50. It was just getting dark. Q. Have you any idea who did it? — A. I do not know. I wish I did. I have in- formation that it was set on fire. , Q. (By Mr. Oothwaite.) Was there no chance for it to occur by accident? — A. Hardly. It contained oil, waste, and paints. Q. Was not there a chance for spontaneous combustion ? — A. Why, I do not know whether that occurs very often or not. But, in this case all the evidence went to show that it was set on fire. We had some evidence that a man was inside of the oil-house about ten minutes before it was set on fire. MILTON W. CUNNINGHAM sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. At the time of the strike you were storekeeper and timekeeper on the Mis- souri Pacific Railroad, I believe? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. You had worked for the company since June, 1884 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you in the employment of the company during the strike of 1885, and did not strike? — A. No, sir. Q. You did not strike with the men in March, 1886? — A. No, sir. Q. On the 8th of April, I understand, yon were discharged, and you received no com- pensation from the company for labor done from March 10 to April 8, 1886? — ^A. No, sir. Q. What was the reason you did not get your pay ? — A. 1 do hot know. Q. You were in the employment of the company and labored for them in that tlAie? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why did you not receive payment? — A. I have no idea. I only drew the amount for ten days' work. Q. You did not go out on a strike ? — A. No, sif. Q. Whom are you at work for? — A. W. H. Radfold, at Alvarado. Q. Did you present your complaint to the company through any of the officials? — ^A. The only thing I complained of was that I did not get my pay. I had no complaint until then, and then I presented it to C. W. Clark, and have never heard from him yet. , He never replied. Q. Did Mr. Clark state to you if you were not a Knight of Labor you would have been held there ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did he mean by that? — A. I do not know. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you ever been a member of the order ? — A. No, sir. Q. By whom were you discharged? — A. I was relieved on the 8th. * Q. Had you done anything ? — A. I had carried my work on irom the strike, and had done everything I was requested or asked to do by the foreman. 232 • LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. This is an independent personal grievance of your own, and you are not connected with the Knights of Labor? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. "Were you discharged without cause? — A. "Well, I had done everything that was required by the foreman, and he had nothing against me, and made no complaint. Q. Had the company work for you to do? — ^A. Yes, sir; the foreman said he had. I was working under the direction of the foreman. Q. How many hours were the men compelled to work? — A. They worked eleven honia up to November. Q. After that? — ^A. They worked ten hours. Q. "What were your instructions? — A. I had to mark the time on the book on the orders of the foreman. In marking it, each day's work the time was made as ten hours. Q. "Was any extrapay given for work done on Sundays? — A. There was to the machin- ists and blacksmiths, but not to the other hands. Q. "What time was it that these arrears were not paid you? — A. Oh, I just received pay for March — for ten days in March. Q. How many days did you work? — A. Every day and part of some of the nights. ,1 am foreman at nights. I worked thirty-one days during March. f MARION C. "WADE sworn and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Do you live at Alvarado in this State? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see a letter written by C. "W. Clark, master mechanic, to Mr. Frazier, the foreman at the roundhouse? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the substance of the letter? — A. The letter was to the effect that he could employ men if they were not Knights of Labor, and if they were Knights of Labor and would withdraw he was to get their withdrawal card and place the same in the hands of the agent there, for they would be certified to the company. Q. Do you know Mr. Clark's handwriting? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know his signature ? — A. Mr. Frazier told me himself it was written by Mr. Clark. He received the letter himself. Q. Was Mr. Frazier an officer of the company? — A. He is foreman of the roundhouse, and he showed me the letter and allowed me to read it. Q. Was he in the employment of the company then? — A. Yes, sir; he told me it was from Mr. C. W. Clark. Q. Do you know of any farmers against whom injunctions were issued? — A. I do. Q. Do they live in town? — A. No, sir. Q. Were they Knights of Labor? — ^A. They belonged to the order. Q. Did the railroad run through their land? — A. The railroad ran through one of the men's land. He lived 4 miles from town. Q. Had they anything to do with the strike? — A. No, sir; I did not see that they had anything to do with the strike. JAMES C. CHILDEESS sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Were you in the employment of the Missouri Pacific Eailroad at the time ■of the strike? — ^Answer. •Yea, sir. Q. Had you been in the employment of the company over two years before that? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you worked any overtime for which you have received no pay ? — A. I did. Q. Did you make application to the officials of the company for payment for the over- -time? — A. I did not make special application. It is called for by the agreement. , Q. Did you make special application for it? — A. I have not. Q. How did the company know that you had worked overtime? — A. Well, they have required us to do it there. Q. lAnd you expected to do that without notification? — A. It was agreed that we should have pay for overtime. . Q. You took it for granted if the foreman worked you over time you would get paid ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. But as you did not get it you did not make application for it? — A. No, sir; the agreement was that we were to get paid ; and I expected to get it. If I had not, I would not have worked. Q. You did not catch the idea that I suggest. Did I understand you to say that you did not tliink it necessary to make application as long as you worked for the company, ■or that they should pay you without making application? — A. No, sir. Q. You say that the railroad company did not fulfill its contract made in March, 1885. In what respect ? — A. They agreed to pay us overtime — one and a half time. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 233 Q. In how many instances did you work that you did not get paid for your over- time? — ^A. As far as I am individually concerned, we were at work often. Q. How many times? — A. It was a frequent business. Q. How much would the company owe you if you were paid for all the time you think you are entitled ^?— A. About $200. Q. For the time you were employed over time at the rate of time and a half? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. During all this time you have made no complaint? — A. I drew my check, and I made several complaints to my time-keeper there. Q. Was he the man that was responsible? — A. He was the man to whom we looked to have our time rectified by. Q. Do you know whether he ever referred it to the superior officials of the road or not? — ^A. I do not. Q. Did you tell any officers of the road you had worked about $200 worth of over- time during the period of two years, and that you had received no pay for it? — A. From the 15th of March, 1885, after that agreement was made, the time was sent up the first month in that way, and was not paid. Q. Do railroads in this State, other than the Missouri Pacific, pay that rate, and did they at that time? — A. They do; the Santa F6 does for one. Q. Is there any discrimination in the pay for the same work on the Missouri Pacific? — A. There is. Q. Do men in the same class receive different pay ? — A. They receive different pay at different points. Q. What was the reason for that? — A. I do not know. Q. Was that complaint presented to the railroad company ? — A. It was. Q. What was the reason given? — A. I do not know that we received any reply in re- gard to it. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. I. am. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor then? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you complain to the Knights of Labor? — A. I did. Q. In the regular official way ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the grievance committee act on your complaint? — A. They did. Q. What was the effect of the presentation of your claim? — A. I did not receive any satisfaction at all. Q. To whom did they make a presentation of it? — A. To some of the head officials, I suppose. Q. Do you know the fact that it was presented to the company and ignored ? — A. Yes. Q. When was that? — A. It was last June that the grievance was first made. Q. (By Mr. OdtSwaite.) Who was timekeeper? — A. Mr. Cunningham. I wish to state there that the first month after the agreement was made in March, 1885, the over- time was sent up to headquarters, and they sent back word that they could not allow any overtime. To work the men twelve hours a day and allow them ten hours for it. Mr. Cunningham told me that himself. I went to him about it. Q. Whom did you get that word from? — A. It was sent back to the timekeeper. Q. Did he show a statement in writing to you, or was that a verbal statement ? — A. He marked the time every day ten hours; but I worked twelve, and they allowed me ten hours' pay for it. CHARLES MATTEEN sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Where do you live ? — Answer. I live at Fort Worth now. Q. Did yoa work at Alvarado in 18S6 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did you work there ? — ^A. Fifteen months. Q. What was your business ? — ^A. Section foreman. Q. On what road ? — ^A. The Missouri Pacific. Q. How long were you in the employment of the company ? — A. I commenced in April, 1885, and was discharged March 10, 1886. Q. Did you engage in the strike of March, 1886 ? — A. No, sir. Q. Why not? — ^A. I had permission from my assembly to stay at work. Q. For what reason ? — ^A. To go over the rosid and see that the road was in good order. Q. Did your local assembly permit you to remain at work and go over the road and see that it was in good order for passenger trains? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you discharged ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who discharged you ? — A. J. M. Gaunt, road-master. Q. When did he discharge you ? — A. He told me I was a Knight of Labor, and it was reported I took part in the strike. 234 LABOR TSOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. i Q. How could that be when you were in the employment of the company while the Btriers were out ? — A. I do not know how. He wanted me to go to work; I told him I could not get any men ; that men would not work, and I could not fix the road my- self. Q. Did he discharge you then? — A. No, sir, it was not then; it was ahout four days afterward he laid me off. Q. Have you made application for reinstatement? — A. I do not want reinstatement as long as they discharged me for being a Knight of Labor; if they do not want to take me back of their own free will, I do not want to go. I am not doing anything. Q. Have you a family? — A. I have a wife and two children. Q. Have you anything to depend upon besides your wages? — A. I have not. Q. And do you prefer to remain idle rather than, apply to the company? — A. I am looking for work. I did apply to the company once — about the 20th of March — ^the time this strike was ordered off, the last of March. I told them I was ready to go to work. I applied to the division road-master. Q. When you were denied employment what Was the reason given? — A. Upon the ground that I took part in the strike, and as a Knight of Labor. Q. And you say you did not take part in the strike? — A. They laid me off and took my box, and did not say anything about discharging me. Q. Substantially, as I understand it, your testimony is that you were discharged with- out any notice or cause; that you did not go on the strike; and that when you went to seek reinstatement you were denied employment because you were a Knight of Labor, and that no other cause was assigned? — A. They never told me anything else. J. M. GAUNT sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. What position do you hold ? — Answer. I am division road-master of the Eio Grande division. Q. Has the place of Mattern been supplied ? — A. I cannot tell. Q. How was it that he took part in the strike? — A. He said it was reported that way, but that he had not taken any part in the strike. Q. Did he try to get men to work, or did he just simply quit? — A. He said that the men who had been working for him would not go to work until the strike was over. Q. Did you go to anybody else ? — A. I went to two or three, but they would not work. Q. You do not know whether that work was done by the man who succeeded him ? — A. It was done; that is what I was informed afterwards; but I do not know who did it. JOSEPH P. SMITH sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. You may state what official position you were holding at any time recently in the city Of Fort Worth. — Answer. I was mayor of the city of Fort Worth during the month of .March and until the 15th of April. Q. I ■vrill ask you to tell whether the police force was sufficient to control or disperse the strikers who were interfering with the movement of trains. — ^A. They were not. Q. State what the general effect of the strike was on the commerce of the city and county. — ^A. It was quite disastrous; I think almost paralyzed the commerce of the countiy. Q. Have any estimates been made as to the actual loss in money ? — ^A. I have not made any estimates, and I have not conferred with any one who has. Q. Mention what branches of the wholesale business are conducted in this city? — A. The 'implement business, dry goods business, hardware; they do quite a wholesale trade. Q. These men get their supplies from what part of the world? — A. I think that they get them from Saint Louis, Kansas City, New York, and New Orleans. Q. Were their obtaining supplies retarded by the strike? — A. I so understood it from the merchants themselves. Q. To what towns from this city are such goods distributed ? — A. They are distributed by the Missouri, Kansas and Texas, and Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fi\ west over the Texas and Pacific; east and north over the Texas and PaiCific. Q. Is there any commerce with Mexico from this point? — A. To some extent. Q. You state your force was inadequate to suppress the disturbances during the strike ? — A. The last day of March or 1st of April I was compelled to commission ten extra police- men. Prior to that, however, Mr. Cabell, who is United States marshal, had twenty- three men when he was here, but he only seemed to have control of the Texas apd Pacific. About the last of Marct or 1st of April I commissioned ten special policemen, and they LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 235 were under the charge of Mr. Eea, the «ity marshal, for the purpose of protecting the Missouri Pacific traffic moving iu and out of the city. On the third morning a train was moved on the Missouri Pacific, going south. It was waylaid about 2 miles south of the city. Two speciscl policemen whftm I had commissioned were seriously wounded, and one of them has since died. Policeman Townsend died. Sneed was seriously wounded, and Fulford, a regular policeman, was dangerously wounded. Q. You may state what farther effort you made by appealing to the governor for troops? — ^A. After that occurrence I went down to the Union Depot here, and I saw there was a great crowd about the depot. Then I issued a proclamation and appointed 75 extra policemen to protect the property of the city and the raUroad companies here. Later in the evening, probably about 7 or 8 o'clock, I telegraphed to Governor Ireland, stating in effect that we were threatened with serious trouble and that I thought the presence of the military would save us from an ugly riot. At 9 o'clock I received a, telegram from him authorizing me to call upon Captains Cook and Houston, at Dallas, for two companies. I did so about 11 o'clock that night, and they were here probably by 2 a. m. The next morning the Adjutant-General, Mr. Keen, came in, and troops arrived from Houston. By 10 or 11 o'clock that morning we had dispersed the crowd from about the Union Depot. Prior to that time it could not be distinguished who were the rioters and who were not. Q. What number of troops were here? — ^A. Somewhere toward two or three hundred. Q. What was the general effect as to restoring order? — A. They had the effect to re- store order very promptly. Q. Were yon acquainted with many of the strikers? — A. I knew a few by sight, and some of them I knew their names; but I was not personally acquainted with them. Q. What, if any, general statement was made as to the cause of the strike by them? — A. I saw no man who had any grievance of his own, or who alleged any misconduct to- wards himself on the part of the company, or of the several railroad companies. There was a general allegation of inadequate wages, especially to the section-men ; but I saw no section-man who was complaining about his wages, and heard no complaint of the sort. Q. What authority had the city police to go 2 miles out of town? — A. Well, sir, they had this authority: It was three-quarters of a mile, or over a mile from the depot to the city limits, and I take it that the policemen in taking a train out of town had authority to take it beyond danger. The defense' is endeavored to be made for murder and am- bush, because they thought the policemen had no business there. I considered it their duty that they should go one or five mUes, and that it would not make any difference. Q. Does the position of policeman invest a man with authority co-ordinate with the county? — ^A. Well, sir, I never thought of that. I think that they would have author- ity to protect property and apprehend criminals in any portion of the county, or out of the county. That is my opinion of it. I would state that I advised the marshal and police that they had authority to protect the property, and advised them not to go out- side of the county line; that they had no authority to go to Alvarado, or that far. But anywhere within the county they could protect tJie movement of trains and the parties moving them. JOHN T. SUTTON sworn and examined. By Mr. OUTHWAITE: Question. I understand yon are the ^igineer of 6S6, on the train which was ordered to run through Toyah without stopping?— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. That was the train before which a switch was thrown, and then thrown back again? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom was it thrown? — A. I cannot say; I have heard the name since. DANIEL J. LIGON sworn and examined. By Mr. Otjthwaite: Question. Where were yon at work for the Texas and Pacific road during the month of March ? — Answer. I was hostler at the Big Springs roundhouse. Q. What are the duties of that position? — A. To take the engines into and out of the house. Q. What do you know of any attempts to interfere with the movement of trains at the tim6 the strike began or afterwards? — ^A. Well, I was there on the night of the 4th of March, and saw about two hundred* masked men come there that night and cripple several of the engines. Q. How many engines? — A. I do not know; but about six or seven. Q. What else do you know about stopping the movement of trains? — A. I only know that they disabled these engines. I do not know of any movement to stop trains. 236 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE^ SOUTH AND WEST. Mr. Buchanan. Were these engines that had been disabled oidinarily used in the movement of freight trains? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) What occurred on the 8th of March in this connection?— A. On the 8th — I think that was the night that they came in and disarmed the guarda and disabled the stationary engine. MAETIN B. LLOYD sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. How long have you been a citizen of Fort Worth ? — Answer. Since 1869. Q. What business have you been in ? — A. I have been a banker part of the time. Q. Were you living here during the recent strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Just state to us generally the effect that it had upon the business of the city. — ^A. It paralyzed trade to a large extent and stopped the movement of freight in and out of the town. Q. The distribution of goods and the receipt of goods was almost prevented ? — A. The movement of freight was almost stopped. Q. Have you ever heard any estimate made in dollars of the amount of damage that the strike did to the town ? — A. I have not. Q. Have you any estimate of the wholesale business done in Fort Worth ? — A. I have never figured it, but it iS very heavy. Q. This strike resulted in paralyzing business for a certain length of time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Generally what was the effect besides upon the peace and quiet of the commu- nity ? — A. The people were terrorized. Q. Was there any feeling of uncertainty ? — A. Yes, sir; and of unsafety. ' Q. What branches of wholesale trade are conducted here? — A. Well, sir, every branch, dry goods, groceries, hardware, agricultural implements, and flouring miUs. Q. Whence did they receive their supplies? — A. From New York, Saint Louis, New Orleans, and other points. Mr. Buchanan. And they are distributed to what points? — A. To many parts of Texas, some to Colorado, and some to Mexico. WILLIAM F. LAKE sworn and examined. By Mr. Outhwaite: Question. Are you in the hardware business here? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you been in that business? — A. Ten years. Q. How many other firms are there engaged in the wholesale hardware business in this city? — A. I think there are three others that do some jobbing. Q. Did you ever make any estimate of the amount of the wholesale hardware trade done in this city? — ^A. I have made an estimate of the amount of business done; but I do not recollect what the amount is. Q. Can you give us an approximate opinion; if so we would be glad to have it?— A. It is somewhere near $450,000 or $500,000 of hardware, not including implements and machinery. Q. You receive this hardware from what States ? — A. Most of my hardware is from agents in New York, and is manufactured in different parts of the country; heavy hard: ware at Pittsburgh, Pa., and Nashville, Tenn. ; stoves from Louisville, Ky. ; and stoves and mantles from Cincinnati, Ohio, and Saint Louis, Mo. • Q. State whether receiving goods was interfered with by the strike, and for about how long. — A. The receipt of goods was, interfered with very materially for thirty days or longer. Q. It has been testified here that very many persons were terrorized over by the strikersi You may also state whether that was the case in regard to yourself — A. I do not under- stand in what way. They made threats to me; I waa told they threatened to bum my place of business and threatened to kill me. Q. For what reason or cause? — A. Because I had expressed myself pretty freely in re- gard to it. Q. Did you express yourself favorably or unfavorably to the cause of the strike? — A. I was very much opposed to the strike. Q. By whom were you threatened? — ^A. I was told that one man of the name of Mil- ler — they said his name was Miller — made that .threat respecting me. Q. Were any threats made directly to you? — A. There were none. Q. Did you receive any authentic notice from any of the Knights of Labor that if ^on did not change your course in regard to the strike certain persons would not deal with you? — A. I was notified that I was going to be boycotted. i- tioned, and injure persons? — A. I consider a strike as a crime, sir. Q. Now tell me how the farmers of this vicinity were affected by the strike? — A. I do not know that the farmers have been affected very much, and they did not seem to be interested. They generally sympathize with the strikers. Q. Were the crops mainly in before thcstrike began ? — A. No, sir; not in this part of the State. Q. Were they not troubled in getting seed and their implements, and things of that kind? — A. I do not know that I can find a single instance of that kind. I have not heard of a single instance. Q. And you do not know of any instance where they were prevented from shipping their property away ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you say that you are opposed to all strikes? — A. My remark was that I was opposed to strikes on general principles. I may say that I believe strikes, as far as the ultimate cause is concerned, are failures. The strike of 1885 here was really necessary, but strikes, so far as the permanent benefit to the workingman goes, are not a benefit to him. Q. Who has been benefited, if any one, by this strike? — A. I do not know of any benefit that has resulted from it. Q. You know that the tradesmen and dealers and merchants and the railroads have been largely injured by this strike? — A. Yes, sir; they have been injured to some extent? I am satisfied of that Q. Do you know that the fund out of which the wages of the men are paid is made np largely of the freight- money paid for the carrying of freights? — A. Yes, sir; I am satisfied of that fact. Q. Now, will yon tell me what right a party of men employed by a railroad and paid out of this wage-fund contributed by the freighters have to strike and throw the busi- ness of all these people into confusion without any notice and without consultation? — A. I think it ought to be a matter of last resort. Q. Onght not there to be notice to all parties interessted before a strike should be in- augurated ? — A. 1 am sure that would be better. ' Q. Now, what are your ideas about arbitration? — A. Well, sir, to leave the corpora- tions in the 'ireseiit condition I believe it would end in a failure. ■LABOR TEOOBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 247 Q. Yon think that, as a theory in ad,jnsting the differences between employers and employes, they woulrt be unable to arbitrate? — A. They can arbitrate, but to keep the contracts would be the trouble. Q. Is there any other method of conciliation that would be effective? — A. Not under the existing institutions of the country; I believe not, sir. Q. Now you have a general belief that all these things are out of joint? — A. I may say so, to a great extent. Q. And that they might be a great deal better if properly managed? — A. It is im- possible under the present system of the country. Q, Yon told me yon were a Knight of Labor. — A. Yes, sir. Q. What position-do you occupy in the order? — A. I am master workman of district 78, in the State of Texas. Q. Who was your predecessor ? — A. Mr. Martin J. Hayes. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb. ) I wish to ask you, Mr. Farmer, whether in your opinion the terms of the Hayes agreement are definite and distinct enough for there to be no possible difference between the employers and the employ^ as to its meaning; in other words, as that agreement so clear and distinct that there should be no trouble in con- struing it? — A. Now, I do not know about that; I do not know that I have examined that agreement. Q. Is it not possible that there is room for the two opposing constructions, which seem to have been given out ? — A. You mean the Hayes agreement in 1885 ? Mr. Outhwaitb. Yes. The Witness. Oh,.yes. I have no idea but both of those parties understood that very well. Q. Do you think they both understood it in the same way at the outset? — A. I do not suppose there was much disagreement, from the fact that nothing grew out of it. Nothing grew out of it, as far as my understanding of the two parties goes with respect to that agreement. Q. Is it your view, then, that there has been a willful violation of it upon one side or the other ? — A. Really what I know of it is what I have learned, some of it here to-day and previous, that part of that agreement was never fulfilled on the Gould Southwest system. I have heard that charge made time and again. Whether it is positively true or not I have no knowledge personally. I heard men swear it; that is all I know. Q. Did you not yourself examine the contract for the purpose of determining whether it was susceptible of the one construction or the other ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Where is your farm? — A. It is in Van Zandt County. Q. How many acres are there in it? — A. About thirty acres in cultivation. Q. Do you employ any help upon it ? — A. I have one man employed for wages and there is another man on the farm. Q. How is the other employed ? — A. I have the balance rented. Q. What wages do you pay that man whom you have employed ? — A. Fifteen dollars a month and his board. Q. How many hours does he work? — A. It is hard to tell that. Sometimes twelve, sometimes eight, and sometimes less. Q. What will it average through the summer time ? — A. Well, I suppose it will not average over ten hours. ' Q. In point of fact do not farmers in Texas work more than an average of fourteen hours in the working season during the summer ? — A. Well, it would be hard to say. Q. Do not many of them work filteen and sixteen hours ? — A. Yes, sir; I have worked fifteen hours many a day. Q. You favor co-operation ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you practice co-operation with the man you employ ? — A. In what respect ? Q. Do you give him a share of the profits of the farm ? — A. When I pay him $15 per month he gets the bigger part. Q. Then you think $15 is quite a large share of the profits ? — A. In good wages it is. Q. Had it occurred to you that the same might possibly be the case with other em- ployers? — A. Well, yes; I think so, sir. Q. Might it sometimes be the case that laborers will receive compensation that would really be larger than if they received an interest or share in the profits ? — A. That is pos- sible, sir. Q. In asking these questions and a few I desire to ask following I do so with a desire to elicit all the facts and informp,tion I can get. Will you indicate to this committee any legislation of a Federal character which you think would tend to alleviate the dis- tress in the country and to restore good feeling between employers and employes ? — A. Yes, sir; I think I may name some that I think would effect that end. I think that the national banks of the country ought to be abolished. 248 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Anything else?— A. Then I think that the Government ought to issue currency "withoxit the intervention of banks. Q. ^ Anything else ?— A. And that the Government should control the public highways •of the country. Q. Do you mean the railways? — A. I mean the railways and the telegraph and tele- iphone. And I believe that there should be a law so arranged as to prevent the accumu- lation of such large fortunes in a few hands. Q. How would you regulate that? — A. By a graduated income tax, if a law of that -character could be framed. Q. Would the tax not be paid and the fortune be accumulated less the amount of tax paid? — A. Then I would have a direct tax upon property; what is known as an ad -valorem tax. Q. Do you not know that such tax exists in a large number of the States in the Union to-day? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not know that a graduated income tax exists in England ? — A. I do not. Q. That all property is taxed according to its value?— A. No, sir; I have not read of «uch a law. Q. And that the same result is reached here where there hfis been no graduated in- come tax? — A. Not that I know of; but I think that the views I advocate would bring satisfaction to the people. I think that there should be a great deal more money issued -and prevent interest having to be paid on so much. Q. Would you prohibit interest upon money ? — A. I think a law to that effect would "be unnecessary if we were supplied with money enough to do the business that the coun- try needs. Q. However, you would by law prohibit the charge of interest on money? — A. I do aiot think there is any necessity for paying -interest. Q. You say that in your judgment the Government should own the railroads ? — A. "Yes, sir. Q. What reason applies to the Government operating railroads that does not apply lalso in the ease of a large corporation connected with the raising of coal, and the'mauu- lacturing of iron or the manulacturing of agricultural implements or anything else? — A. "When you come to that question of the coal products of the country it is one of the great- •est monopolies in the country. •Q. You saw what the strikers did at the McCormick works in Chicago? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you have the Government own those works and run them ? — A. That is a -question I have never thought positively about. Q. You would put the coal mines under the control of the Government ? — A. Yes, -«ir. I would put all these mines under the control of the Government. ■Q. And then you would extend the operations of the Government over all large tranches of production? — A. I think that is the only thing that will bring perfect sat- isfaction. Q. And then every one connected with the transaction of this business will be a Gov- ernment oflBcial ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And put them under the General Government and the supervision of Government ■officials ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you have that ownership State or national ? — A. Well, on account of the in- -ierstate commerce, it seems that the national ownership would be the proper ownership. Q. Would you have that ownership State or national? — A. In the railways I would anake it national. As to the coal companies, that could be controlled by the State. Q. Would you have farms operated under the Government? — A. No, sir. Q. Why not? — A. Because the property is in an individual and questions of specula- tion do not enter into that, and on the ground that it is not practicable. Q. Do you not know that in the far Northwest there are large tracts of land on which wheat .is raised by the aggregation of capital? — A. Yes, sir; I read it in the papers. Q. Why on the same principle might not they be included in that Government owner- .ship and control? — A. They might be broken up. Q. Can they be broken up except by purchase by the Government or being taken physically by the Government? Would you recommend either ? — A. I do not know "whether I can answer that question satisfactorily. Q. I will now call your attention to a feature that this investigation shows, to wit: a great destruction of property in the way of killing engines, ditching freight trains, and •the serious injury of employes of the road, as in the case of the train from Alvarado, i;he deprivation of others of employment, of interference by the use of threats, &c. I understand from your testimony heretofore given that no such acts of violence meet your approval? — A. No, sir. Q. The pj-inciples of the order do not lead to such acts, but on the contrary inculcate' •directly the reverse? — A. That is my understanding. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 249 By Mr. Outhwaite. What is your theory and suggestions as to the manner in which the government should obtain possession of the railroads? — ^A. Well, it may be done by purchase. ' Q. Suppose the owners refuse to sell. You would recognize the right of a man to own his property? — A. I would suppose that Government would take them under the laws of eminent domain. Q. Please state what -legal right they would have to take the road? — A. The right that lies in the institution of the Government — the best interests of the people. Q. That does not give me any information as to whether they would agree to your sug- gestion, and take possession of them without compensation? — A. Oh, I think not, sir. I think that where there has been an actual investment in a road the company ought to be paid for the actual money expended. Q. Who would determine the amount of the value?— A. A commission might be ap- pointed and testimony collected as to the real iiivestments in the road. Q. Have you considered in this connection the fearful danger there would be to the liberties of the people by increasing the office-holding class so immensely as it would be increased by making all employes on railroads directly officers of the United States? — A. I have thought of that. Q. Do you consider that there would be great danger in such a scheme? — A. Well, it would be ovring to the form of the laws of the country. If the law was so arranged that there should be something like what we call "civil service" on the roads, and no man's politics be questioned by the Government, I do not see how it would have an injurious effect. By Mr. Bcchaxan. Your theory is that the Government should acquire, either by purchase or by condemnation under the right of eminent domain, possession of all the railroads in the country? — A- Yes, sir. Q. By whom would the purchase-money of this right be paid — by the people of the country? — A. By the Government — by the people. Q. The Government is simply the incarnation and the concentration of the power of the people of the country? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And then your desire is that the farmers of the country should be taxed to buy the railroads? — A. Taxed to buy them? Q. They cannot be purchased without compensation. How would the means be pro-- vided? — A. It might be by taxation, of course. Q. And that taxation would fall upon every one of the producing class, would it not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And how would you, in fact, pay the purchase-money — by the issue of bonds, or in ■what way?— A. I would enlarge the circulation to a very great extent. Q. Would you advise the issue of bonds for the purchase of these roads ? — A. Never. Q. Would you advise the issue of greenbacks for the purchase of these roads? — A. To some extent. Q. What would you do for the remainder of the purchase-money? — A. It might not be reasonable to take all these roads into the hands of the Government at once. It might take some time to do it. Q. Under your theory how rapidly would yon be able to do it? — A. Just as rapidly as there was ability in the Government to take charge of the roads. Bonds might be issued for them. Q. Have yon made any calculation of the amount that it would be necessary to raise for the purchase of the railroads? About how much would it be? — A. I do not know. Q. Would it take more than the national debt was at the close of the war? — A. It Tvould to purchase the railroads. JOSEPH JAMISON sworn and examined. By tie CHAlEMAlf : ■ Question. Do yon live at Fort Worth? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. You were foreman of the freight-house of the Texas and Pacific Eailroad. Are you in that poaitiou now ? — A. No, sir. Q. When did you leave it and under what circumstances ? — A. On the 2d day of March I left it on account of the agreement of the company, made on March, 1885, being broken. Q. What agreement was that? — A. That my wages should be restored to^what they were prior to September, 1884. Q. Were they restored? — A. No, sir. Q; They never were? — A. No, sir. Q. And you quitted on that account, did you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was a telegram sent to reduce wages in Fort Worth in May, 1885 ? — A. I think rthere was. If I remember right there was one sent and it was contradicted the same day. 250 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What were you paid prior to September, 1884?— A. Ninety dollars a month. Q. What were you paid after September, 1884?— A. Eighty-five dollars. Q. A reduction of ?5 per month ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there any reduction in the hours of labor 1 — A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever claim the extra $5 ?-^A. I have asked for it several times from ova agent, J. J. Harris. Q. And did not receive it? — A. No, sir. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A, Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever make complaint to the local executive board or committee of griev- ances? — A. The executive committee took an active part in trying to get them restored. Q. But you did not receive the old wages? — A. No, .sir. Q. Did you not stop work in consequence of an order to quit, issued on the 1st of March by Martin Irons? — A. No, sir; I did not quit on the 1st of March. Q. Did you go out on the strike on an order issued by Martin Irons? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaitb. ) I would like to know why you did quit ? — A. The strike was ordered, but I was not ordered out by Martin Irons. / Q. That is not very clear to my mind. — A. I did not belong to Martin Irons's district, , Q. Would you have gone out at that particular time if that order had not been is- sued? — A. No; not at that particular time. Q. (By the Chairman.) Did lir. Harris, after the strike of 1885, get an extra $15?— A. Yes. He said that will raise me $15. The yard-master was there at the time, and. he said how will you send in your pay-rolls; and he said, I yrill send in my rolls at the rate plrior to September. The yard-masters got their wages back, and I did not get mine. Q. When were your wages cut down from $90 to $85; what date? — A. I do not re- member the date. Q. Was it before September? — A. I do not remember exactly the date. Q, Was it before the agreement of March, 1885 ?— A. It was before the strike of March,. 1885. Q. When were your wages reduced from $90 to $85 ? — A. Some time before Septem- ber, is my recollection. Q. Then why is it that you say you went out on the 2d day of March because your wages were reduced below what you were receiving in September ? — A. I say that our wages were to be restored to what they were prior to September, 1884. Q. Do you mean that by the agreement of March, 1885, your wages were to be re- stored to what they were before September, 1884? — A. Yes, sir; back to $90. Q. Were they restored ? — A. They never were restored. Q. Did Mr. Harris not try to get you to put on your pay-rolls a negro who worked at Mr. Harris's house ? — A. He asked me several times, himself and his chief clerk, Q. A man who did not work for the company at all? — A. He would average two honis- a day. Q. Did he work for the company? — A. He was paid by the company. Q. Were your wages cut down before September, 1884 ? — A. Yes; they cut us before- September, 1884. Q. Why then did you strike ? Did you not receive the wages you were receiving in September, 1884 ? — A. My wages were cut down twice. They were cut down from $85 to $80. Q. When was that? — A. I do not remember the date; and they were restored to $85, if I recollect right. • Q. Your wages were put to what they were in September, 1884, were they not? — A. !No. , Q. What did you receive before September, 1884 ? — A. I received $90. Q. When were they cut down from $90 ? — A. I do not remember the exact date. Q. What month ? — A. I cannot say. I know I was receiving $90 prior to September. I did not keep my own time. Q '^ByMr. Paekkr.) Did you receive $85 in September ?— A. No; I received $90' prior to September; I do not know how long. Q. Were you receiving $85 in September, yes or no ?— A. No, I believe. Q. Was it $80 ?— A. It was $85. Q. It was $85 that you were receiving in September? — A. Yes. Q. After that you were cut down to $80? — A. I was not cut down to $80 after that. I will explain it, if you will give me a minute. My wages were |90 prior to Septem- ber, and then cut down to $85. ' Q. (By the Chairman.) When? — ^A. Just after September. Then when the agree- ment was made after the strike came out on the road that all employ&s should be re- stored to their wages prior to September mine were never restored to what they wer» prior to September. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 251 Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Was not that agreement that you should be restored to youi •wages "in" September? — A. It reads "prior." Mr. OuTHWAiTB (reading from the Hayes agreement). The language of the agree- ment is this: " Whereas the undersigned, representing the two States above named re- spectively, anxious to restore harmonious relations between said company and its em- ployes, and to restore to the public the unobstructed use of said Une, recommend and request said company to restore to its striking employes in Missouri and Kansas tho same wages paid them in September, 1884." Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Your grievance was based on your understanding that it was "prior," was it? — A. My grievance is that they did not restore it. They put the agent's time back. Mr. OUTHWAITE. Here is a telegram on that subject. "What are you going to pay track-foremen on and after to-day?" This is September 3d. "Sixteenth of March," probably 1885, "AU are restored to September pay." Not to pay "prior," but "all are restored to September pay." This is the telegram of Mr. Hoxie. JAMES C. HOWELL sworn and examined. ' By the Chaieman: Question. How long have you been a railroad man — Answer. About thirty years or a little over. Q. What has been your occupation? — A. Foreman most of the time on the track; in the construction of new roads, and road-master part of the time. Q. Boad-master during the last six years? — A. Part of the time during the last six years. Q. On the International and Great Northern and the Texas and Pacific? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have yon been forced to trade with certain men as section foreman to keep your position? — A. Yes, sir. I have been forced to trade with certain storekeepers that were^ supplying the railroad men to occupy my position. Q. Who forced you? — A. The railroad company. Q. Through whom? — A. The officials, the road-master. Q. What was his name? — A. Mr. Pat Eowan, who has been general agent for the road, for several years. Q. Is Mr. Pat Eowan on the International? — A. He is on the Texas and Pacific road at Marshall. Q. Who else? — A. Well, it was the same thing on the west end of the road, let m& say Q. Just confine yourself to the Texas and Pacific. — A. On the Texas and Pacific it was just Pat Eowau and Mr. Nelson West; but that has been several years ago. Q. What road ? — A. On the Texas and Pacific road. Q. Any others ? — A. Mr. Irvin on the Texas and Pacific road; Colonel Noble here- was superintendent. Q. Any other person? — A. Well, I forget the name of the road-master on another division where I was on where that was the case. Q. In what way did they force you to trade with certain men ? — A. It was a rule oa the road that those men must be supplied by these houses that were furnishing goods. Martin Hennessy furnished goods for the International road, Q. Do you mean to say that you were forced to buy your individual supplies from, these stores? — A. I mean to say it in this way, that if I did not trade there for my sup- plies for the boarding-house — ^I boarded the men — I could not stay on the road. That was the way of it, and there are many men that I know of who have bought goods- and paid l^eir own money, and have been removed from a place because they would not buy their goods and pay that money to these stores. I will state two instances- where two men who worked for me on the International road were discharged because they would not trade with Mr. Hennessy and Mr. Cronin. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite. ) How long ago has that been ? — A. I left there last March. It was some time previous to last March. Q. (By the Chaiemau'.) How long previous? — A. It was a short time before that. Mr. Copeland, on the section, and Mr. Bob Eeynolds bought their goods at Palestine,, and they had been getting their goods at Taylor. Mr. Hennessy came down to see- them, and he said that my men should buy from him, and he would pay me 25 percent, a month on my grocery bill if I would have my men buy their goods from him. Q. Who is Hennessy ? — A. He is a merchant at Palestine that supplies the road. ,Q. Was he an officer of the road?— A. No, sir. He was the only man who could shijk- goods over the road to the section. Q. How was that? — A. Mr. Herrin is present; he can tell you. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite.) Did yon ever see any rules in writing to that eifect? — ^A. Yes, sir, I have secu them in printed forms, but I do not know that they were in writ- 252 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ing. I will take it back that they should not buy their goods only from Hennessy. It ■was that the goods could only be shipped to the section houses by Hennessy. Q. Who issued this instruction? — A. It came from the road-master. Q. Who was the road-master? — A. R. P. Scott. Q. Did the road-master compel you to do that? — A. No, sir; he asked me to do it. Q. What was their object in that?— A. I will tell you. It was a money-making scheme of the officers of the road, in my opinion; and that is one of the causes of the great dissatisfaction among the railroad men of this country that have been heard this year. I have been an honest man, and you cannot find a black spot on my character. Q. Then you refused the 25 per cent? — A. I did so, as certain as I am sitting in this -chair. You wUl find right down at Marshall the same thing. It was carried on there -very freely. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Do you mean to convey this idea that this road-master per- sonally got a commission from the merchants for the purpose ofinfluencing your trade? — A. That has been the general rule for five years. Q. (By Mr. Outhwaite. ) Who do you know was driven off the road ? — A. Mr. Rey- nolds on my division Mr. Cronin discharged; I would not do it, and I said I would not ■discharge him. He also told me about this man Copeland, and I told him I would mot •discharge him, and he sent a man out there and made me. Q. (By the Chaiemast.) Did you make any complaint to anybody about this, or did - you submit to it? — A. I submitted. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Was Reynolds removed for not buying his goods from Hen- nessy? — A. Yes; that was it. When I put a man in his place I told him I was not dis- ■charging him. I told him he was a good man and I was not discharging him; that a man had been sent out and I had to put him on. Mr. Reynolds came to me and I told him I could not help it, and I did not stay there a very long time afterwards. Q. ^By the Chaieman. ) Were you working on the day the strike occurred ? — A. I went on the strike and quit the section. Q. Did you say that Hennessy has a corporation store ? — A. That has been written on it. It was some marks that I saw on the goods from there. Q. Was this scheme of these men for their own personal benefit, without knowledge •of the superior officera of the company ?^A. Now, I cannot say whether it was or not. It was done; I know that. Q. Do you mean by the company's store that the company owned it or had an interest in it ? — A. It was simply this, that the company would not have men on the road that would not befriend it. Q. Have men been taxed to keep np the hospital and been discharged when they needed the hospital treatment? — A. I saw one from the International road that sat here jesterday evening refused; and I know of several cases, but I cannot recall the names of the parties, that have been connected with the road herein time past at difierent places, and I know of several men discharged for asking to have hospital service — some men that worked under me that did not get their service in time and left. Q. How many instances of that kind do you know of? — A. I cannot remember, but several of them during the time I have been with the company. Q. Were your wages reduced prior to the contract of 1885 ? What were you receiving in September, 1884 ? — A. I was getting $55 a month. Q. When were your wages reduced? — ^A. I was rfeduced when I went to work on the Texas and Pacific road in April, 1885. Q. Did you demand restoration of your September wages ? — A. I did, sir. I told that to the Knights of Labor. Q. Did you get any notice of any reduction ? — A. Yes, sir; I got notice. Q. How much notice? — A. I was notified that my wages would be |50 a month. Q. What notice did you get of the contemplated reduction ? How many days' no- tice ? — A. I got notice from the road-master as he passed over the road that my wages would be $50 — foreman's wages. Q. How much notice did you get of your reduction; how many days' notice did you get before your wages were reduced? — A. Well, I will explain to you so that I can be plain. He says "foreman's wages" (sealed up in a little note in an envelope and drooped to me on the section) — ' ' foreman's will be from this date [I do not recollect the ■date] S50." Q. How many days' notice did you get of the reduction ? — ■A. I do not understand it. Q. How many days' notice did you get before they reduced your wages? — A. Well, sir, I believe it was probably a week. It was just before the close of the month, and the -month closed on the 27th. Oh, I understand you now; excuse me, it was ten days. Q. Did you not make it part of the agreement in the employ meut of men under you .as foreman on the Texas and Pacific that they should board with you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Wljy? — A. Because if we went out from town I did not want my men to be scat- LABOE TROUBLES IN TIfE SOUTH AND WEST. 253- tered, and it was done so that I could have them together to repair the track where the rains came and washed out. Q. Did you not leave the road and go to work on another before the rate of wages were diminished? — A. Yes, sir; I did. Q. How long had you been on the Texas and Pacific when the wages were reduced? — A. Two or three weeks; a couple of weeks probably before I got notice of it. Q. Were you notified at the beginning of the next month that your wages would be- reduced? — A. At the beginning of the month after I first went there. Q. Do you keep the St. George Hotel in town? — ^A. Yes, sir. y. Did you keep it while running a section ? — A. Down here? Yes, sir. Q. Did you not make a certificate for a section man to go to the hospital who was not on the road at all? — ^A. I never did. Q. Did you not send for the hospital wagon? — A. I sent for the hospital wagon for- Mr, Jackson, a fireman that was boarding with me. I never saw any of my certificates, as you call them, go to any hospital save for railroad men and firemen. Q. Were you discharged at Trope without cause? — A. I think I was, sir. Q. What cause was alleged? — A. Because I was favorable towards the strikers. I. hoped to see them get their wages adjusted, and what was right and proper. Q. Were you discharged at Fort Worth without cause? — A. I do not think I was dis- charged at Fort Worth, as my time did mot go into the time-office. I j*st quit when, the strike came up. I did my duty while I was there. Q. (By Mr. Buchan Aisr. ) I understand you to say that you made it a condition in. the employment of section men that they should board with you. Am I correct? — A. Yes, sir; that they should only be at one place on a section. Q. How many boarding-houses did yon keep while in the employ of the company? — A. I was moved about considerably, but only kept one at one time. Q. And when you' required these section men to board with you as a condition of em- ployment what rate did you charge? — A. Half a dollar a day while they were there ;. when not there I did not charge them anything. They went away on the Saturday- night. BENJAMIN B. HAEEAPP sworn and examined. By the CHArBMAN : Question. Please state where you live and are employed ? — Answer. At Gouldsboro. The men employed directly under me on the 5th of March strvick. The whistle was- blown by some one in the shop, and soon all the men began washing; and I asked what the trouble was. « At 2 o'clock in the afternoon, after dinner, they came around agam, saying they had no grievance, that the strike was caused by a man at Marshall being: discharged, by the name of Hall. I then questioned the committee awhile, and asked: them if they had any personal grievances, and they said they had not, which they ex- pressed in writing to me. Q. What position did you hold? — A. lam master mechanic On the 15th we at- tempted to run a freight train, and while the engine was standing on the side-track some one disabled it. On the following morning an engine started from the roundhouse, and some one attempted to disable that one early in the morning. Q. Did you resume the movement of trains ? — A, Yes, sir; on Wednesday morning, we ran a train out under the protection of the marshal and his deputies. Q. The city marshal ? — A. The United States marshal. Q. Had you any trouble after that? — A. A train was stopped by a number of men and backed into the station again, and after some little trouble it was allowed to pro- ceed. The committee then waited on 6ov,emor Sheldon, who told them they could, make a memorial and go before the court, and one of the committeemen asked Governor- Sheldon to instruct me not to employ mew men. He instructed me to employ men, which I did. One of the men afterwards told me he had been threatened by some of the old employ^ who had worked in the shop^ I hired quite a number of mpn ; but I could not keep them until there was a detachment of deputy marshals sent there to pro- tect the property and the m^n while at work. Q. Was this part of the general strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Yon are filling what position ? — A. The position. of master mechanic of the New- Orleans division of the Texas and Pacific. JOHN TAGGAET sworn and examined^ By the Chairman: Question. Were you a hotel keeper on the Texas and Pacific railroad before the strike broke out? — Answer. No, sir; I was not. Q. What were you? — A. I was a private citizen here when the strike broke out. Q. Did you keep a hotel ? — J^. I kept a boarding-house after the strike^ 254 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND "WEST. Q. Did you keep any boarders who were called "scabs ? "—A. Yes, sir; I did. Q. Was anything done to make them leave, or to prevent you keeping them? — A, They tried to make them leave. A committee waited on me first as Knights of Labor, and told me they were sent there by the Knights of Labor to request me not to keep these men that went to work after the strike. Q. How do you know these men were Knights of Labor ? — A. I do not know, only that they said they were Knights of Labor. Q. What were their names? — A. One of their names I do not know at all. One was •Charles Diner; the other I do not remember his name; but I know the old gentleman, who lives in town. They said they were sent there by the Knights of Labor. Q. Did you agree to turn them off?— A. No, sir; I did not. Q. Was anything else done ? — A. Afterwards they came to me again and requested me ■to quit boarding them, and I told them that it was a meat and bread case with me; that I was not in the strike, and I had made arrangements with the officials of the road to board these men, and that I was doing, and was going to continue to do it. That was at the first time I saw him, and I told him I would see him next day. One ofthe com- mittee was my own son. Q. What more occurred ? — A. I got notice next day to leave the house. Q. Did you leave ? — A. I asked the owner the question why he gave me notice, and iie said it was'for keeping these "scabs." I did not leave. I^have always paid him the rent. Q. Did anything further happen ? — A. They first went and boycotted the butcher where I was buying meat, and he Refused to sell me, and I sent from one to another and Q. Do you know of any switch, previous to this strike, being left open in that vicinity? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you see how it .was unlocked? — A. It was unlocked with a key. The west switch had the lock battered, but this lock was all right ; it was perfect. AMOS H. WATTS sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Question. What is your official position connected with the railroad ? — Answer. I am master mechanic of the Texas and Pacific. Q. How long have you occupied that position ? — ^A. Fourteen months, Q. Where were you in March last ? — A. I was at the city of Marshall. Q. When did you go to Marshall ? — A. I went to Marshall, I believe, in July a year ago. Q.' In what condition did you find the working force here then? — A. It was in a bad condition. Q. What as to discipline? — A. In regard to the discipline I can say that it was very bad. Q. What was the cause or occasion of it, if you know ? — A. Well, I think one of the main causes was the way the company had settled the strike of IdSo. They gave the men too much power, so that men in positions over them could not handle them as they ought to. Q. So that they acted somewhat independently ? — A. Yes, sir ; they could. They had too much power entirely. Q. How did they develop this power ? — A. From the talk I had with the foreman, if any little thing went wrong in regard to any matter the foreman could not discharge the men but what there would be a committee wait on the foreman and then on the master mechanic, and they yv^ould want to know all about it ; and if that did not suit their ideas, they would want the man reinstated. Q. If you should direct that a man do a certain kind of work that he was not doing, did they interfere with that? — ^A. Yes, sir. They had an organization of what was known as grievance committees, and if you changed one class of men ofl:" from the reg- ular routine work they would wait on the foreman about it. We have a certain class of labor at $1.15 a day and another class of labor that gets $l.Si5aday. The Knights of Labor would not allow the lower class of laborers to work at the better class of work unless you paid him that laborer's wages, even if you only wanted him for fif- teen minutes or so. Q. If for only fifteen minutes' time they would require that he should be paid the wages that the others were getting? — A. They did not want' them to do any of that bind of work. Q. And interfered if you did so use them?" — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the repair work or any department of work under your charge made more expensive by this course of action ? — A. Well, that would be a pretty hard matter to tell, because really the stock used and everything combined so that it would be al- most impossible to tell that. Our costs were running very heavy during the year 1886. Q. Would a man do more or less in a given time undei this condition that yon speak of thau they would have done if you had controlled the shops ; as if they were your private property ? — A. I think the same number of men would have done a third more work. Q. If you could have controlled them as in private business? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the habit as to leaving work and laying off ; did you find any such custom that was unsatisfactory ? — A. Well, in regard to that, since this organization has started, when men wanted to lay off they generally left andsaidnothingaboutit. Q. Since which organization started ? — A. The Knights of Lai lor. Before that we had very strict discipline and did not allow a man to lay off without he had leave. Q. Do you know a man named Hall? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What are his initials?— A. C. A. Q. What Is his name in full? — A. I cannot tell that. Q Was he under you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was his position ? — A. He was foreman of the freight shed, but was directly under t he general foreman of the car department ; of course he was under me. Q Do you know of his being promoted at any time? — A. Yes, sir. Q. luomwhati— A He was promoted out ot the coach-shop; he was a coach- Duilder. Q. Did that involve a change of pay? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How much ? — A. I think he was getting |3 a day in the coach-shop, and the fore- manship pays either $90 or $100 a month. LABOR TJROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 287 y. So that it increased bis pay to that extent ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Upon what ground did you promote him, or for what reason ? — A. He was pro- moted by order from the general superintendent. Q. Who was he »— A. Mr. W. C. Cumihing. Q. Was he promoted to a vacancy ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was his predecessor ? — A. His predecessor was a man by the name of Ogle. Q. How came he to leave the place ? — A. The Knights of Labor had him removed for incompetency. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. He was removed under a charge of incompetency and Hall was promoted to take the place of a man who was discharged for incompetency on a charge made by the Knights of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What as to Hall being qualified for the place ? — A. According to our books Mr. Hall was not as competent as his predecessor ; that is, from the figures on the books. Q. Is thereanaccount keptshowingtheaveragecost of rspairstocars? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The amount of work done on them and the cost of putting them in running order? — A. Yes, sir. Q. According to that report was the cost of repairing cars increased or diminished after Mr. Hall's appointment? — A. It was increased. However, I do not remember the figures exactly. But I think with Mr. Ogle the average cost per car was $52 and some odd cents, and with Mr. Hall $68 and some odd cents. Q. Let me ask, when Schofield was foreman in 1884, what was the average amount spent per car ; was the amount under Schofield, $33.56 f — A. It was either $33 or $35 and some odd cents. Q. And when Mr. Ogle was in charge, was it $52.48? — A. It was $,52 and some odd cents. Q. And during the time Mr. Hall had chargel, was it $68.58 ? — A. Yes, sir ; in that neighborhood. Q. Will you look at this [exhibiting paper], and tell us what this statement is ? — A. That is a comparative statement of the cost of repairs during the administra;,ion of Schofield, Ogle, and Hall. » Q. Is it correct? — A. I should judge from the figures that it is correct. Of coarse I cannot tell whether it is correct. I expect it is figured out to the same thiug that I made it. Q. What was the cause of the strike ? — A. The cause of the strike was the discharge of (J. A. Hall. Q. Do you know any steps which led to his discharge ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State them. — A. Well, I suppose it is just as well to begin at tbe beginning. I was at Texarkana, I think a week before the strike, audi sent a message to the general foreman, Mr. CroBby,whomIhad been telling to have a water tank put up at the Taylor shop, ^nd also to get a car ready for the tank as soon as possible, because they needed it very badly. I was going over the road for three or four days. Alter I returned to Marshall, the general foreman met me and told me had discharged Mr. Hall. I I asked him what was the trouble, and he told me had discharged him for incom- petency and neglect of duty. The ni-xt thing that I knew anything about it was that I had a committee wait on me. They did not wait on me^they sent a commu- nication to me in writing with the seal of the lodge attached to it. Q. Can you give the date of the discharge? — A. I think it was about the middle of the month — about the middle of February, or somewhere along there. Q. Have you that communication ? — A. Yes, sir ; but I have not got it with me. I can get it. In that communication they stated that if there was no further reason for the discharge of Mr. Hall they wanted him reinstated. I did not reply to the com- mittee, from the fact that they went over my head and interviewed Mr. Crosby, and I thought as long as they had taken the case to Mr. Crosby I would let them settle it with him. I thinlt it was three or four days after that that a gentleman came to my office and demanded to look over my books. I asked.him who he was. He told me he was Martin Irons, chairman of the executive committee. I told him that if he was chairman ofthe committee he could speak to me only on paper; but if it was necessary, I would have my clerk give an affidavit to the tiguri-s given in the com- parative statement of work done by Schofield, Ogle, and Hall. He then left me. The next thing I knew the whistle sounded at 3 o'clock and the men all went out ou strike. Q. Three o'clock of that day ? — A. Three o'clock on the 1st of March. Q. Did any one come to you with Irons ? — A. Well, there was no one ; that is they did not make themselves known. I saw one or two with him, but, of course, Mr. Irons did the talking. He was the spokesman. Q. Had you ever seen Mr. Irons before? — A. I had never seen him before. Q. Did he represent himself as chairman of the district assembly 101?— A. I think he told me that he was chairman of the executive committee. I do not think that he said he was chairman of district 101, Q. Had you any further communication with Martin Irons? — A. No, sir. 288. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Were any papers presented to you by him or left witli you or read before you?- A. No, sir. Q. You have told substantially all that transpired between him and yourself ?— A. ■yes, sir. Q. Was there any communication or conversation between yourself and Hall in the premises?— A. I do not think Mr. Hall has spoken to me since the strike. Q. Do yon know of any other grievance existing at that time except the discharge of Mr. Hall ? — A. No, sir ; if there was any it was not known to me. There was noth- ing that I know of. . _ Q. Are the men paid the same wages for the same work in the shop since the re- ceivers were appointed as they were before they were appointed f — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many were on your pay-roll at the date of the strike, the average number on your whole roll ? — A. My roll at that time would amount, from New Orleans to El Paso, to over twelve hundred men. Q. How many of those struck ? — A. I cannot tell you exactly. Here we had at Marshall 404 men outside of the engineers and firemen. Q. How many of that number struck? — A. I have with me a comparative state- ment, and I can give you exactly what our force was the 1st of March and what it was on the 7th of May. Q. You may tell us what that statement is. — ^A. It is a statement showing the num- ber of employes in the car department at Marshall March 1 and May 7, and also in the motive car department for the same period. In the car department, on the Ist of March, the total number of men was 177; on May 7 it was 156. Out of that 156 52 are old men that worked prior to March 5, and have returned. Q. You mean that they were strikers? — A. Yes, sir. And we have 21 less men now in the car department than we had prior to the strike. Q. Have you as many as you need ? — A. No, sir. In the motive department, on March 1, we had 221 men; on May 7 we had 190. Out of the 190, 100 are olJ men, which leaves our force 31 less than it was on the 1st of March. Q. Do you mean that the 100 were strikers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. So that you have now 346 men against 398 men before the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How does your present output ot work compare with that before the strilte?— A. We are doing 30 per cent, more work than before the men went out before the strike ; that is, the men work that much harder. Q. Now, as to men who may be wanted in the shop. Will you make any distinc- tion between Knights of Labor and other men ? — A. I have never asked a man what his religion or politics were, or whether he belonged to an organization. Q. Have you any instructions on that subject as to whether you shonld take Knights of Labor or not in your employ ? — A. We have only the intructions that we shall not take men back to work who have made themselves objectionable to the company. Q. For what reason were these men objectionable ? — A. They were objectionable, I was told. I never asked any questions in regard to it. I do not know what the ob- jections were to them. Q. You do not know what their acts were that made them specifically objertion- able ? —A. No, sir ; I did not, because thoy did not come directly under my notice. Q. Except these specified men, are you as ready to employ men who are otherwise satisfactory, they being Knights of Labor, as others ? — A. Yes, sir. It does not make any difierence with me. Q. Have you had any instructions as to employing or not employing Knights of Labor ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanax.) Yon produced a statement before the committee purport- ing to be a comparative statement of the cost of car repairs in the C. A. Hall case; in it an account is given of the number of men employed, the cars turned down, the hours worked, the money paid, the average cost per man, the average hours per ear, and the average money per car, under the administrations of James Schofleld, W. J. Ogle, and C. A. Hall. The time given for Mr. Schofleld is November, 1884. Do you know how long a time is included in that statement as far as Mr. Schofleld is con- cerned? — A. For the month of November. Q. Was that statement made by yon ? — A. It was made iiuder my direction. Q. In the time stated for Mr. Ogle is that one month, and which month? — A. It is one month ; I think one of them was covering October and one November. Q. And what month is taken for Mr. C. A. Hall f — A. I thinli his was October ; but I will not be positive about the months. Q. I would like to know what period of time they were made up for, and also whether those periods were periods when the same class of work was done in the oar department? — A. Of course I do not know that; I cannot say. Q. How many men have you orders not to take back ? — A. I think it is about 60. Q. Have you a list with you? — A. No, sir. Q. Can you give me the names ? — A. No, sir ; but I have a list at my office. Q. Is it a printed list? — A. No, sir; it is written. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 28^ Q. Do you make a weekly report to the general superintendent of all men dischargecT for cause f — A. We mstke out a monthly report. I think in the last few days we sent a daily report up to the present time. Q. Was not the list of men discharged thus sent to each point on the road with instruc- tions not to employ them without permission from the master mechanic's office?— A. Not in my jurisdiction. No, sir ; 1 do not carry any malice toward any one. Q. I am speaking of men you report for discharge for cause. Is not that forwarder to each department of the road? — A. It used to be, and it has been done away witb since I have been here. Q. Since what date has that been done away with ? — A. Ithink that was about four months ago. I cannot tell you the exact date. One of my clerks says it was Jan- uary 27. Q. Did you ever receive any such list of men discharged for cause from the Missouri Pacific Road ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. At any time ? — A. No, sir ; not during my administration. Q. Have you 'seen any such list of the Missouri Pacific? — A. No, sir. The period that the comparative statement was made for was James Schofield, in November, 1884;; W. J. Ogle, June, 1885 ; and C. A. Hall, October, 1885. Q. Why were they taken at different months of the year ?— A. I do not know that. Q. Did you give any direction to select the mouths most favorable to those men. and most unfavorable to Mr. Hall? — A. No, sir; I only told the clerk to make me » comparative statement. Q. How many months had Hall been employed in that capacity ? — A. Hall, I t^iink^ was promoted either in August or September. Q. And remained there until March 1 ? — A. No, sir ; until Februar/ 14 or 15. Q. Did you know the time taken for Hall was a month so close to the time of hi» promotion ? — A. I did not know. Q. Would it not have been fairer to take a month later, when he had become accus- tomed to the work ? — A. I do not think it would have made a particle of difference- He had the same men there. Q. While that statement shows the amount of money per car, &c., it fails to show the character of injury to the cars in any one of these administrations. What is the^ fact as to that being the same or not during the three administrations ? — A. Well, I do not think there is much difference in the bad-order cars from one year to another. Q. What class of cars are they? — ^A. Box- cars and coal-cars. Mr. Hall's, during his. administration, was mostly coal-cars. Q. What does that statement show as to the degree of efficiency in that shop under Mr. Hall's administration' compared with the others ; is it in favor of Mr. Hall or against him ? — A. It is against him. Q. Do you know of anything in the making up of that statement, or of any item that goes into the statement, which is unfair to any one of the three persons named in the statement ? — A. I do not know. I think not. The statement is made up with- out that intention toward any one. Q. How long will it take you to prepare a statement in an official shape giving Mr. Hall's last montli ? — A. I cannot say how long. Clerks are like all tradesmen in tbiB country ; they do not last more than four or five months, and the man who made that, comparative statement has left here. Q. But the regular books from which the statement was made up, I presume, aj:a here, and might not another clerk with equal facility make out a statement for the period I mention ? — A. He probably oonld ; but it will take a lot of time, and we havei not much time to fool with such statements as this. Q, Was it fooling to get out this statement ? — A. I only got up this statement. Q. How long would it take to make up a statement as to his department and theo cost of it during the last month of his employment or the previous month ? — A- S should judge, if they could find it in the books, it would probably be done in about three hours. Q. Was October Mr. Hall's first month in those shops ? — A. I cannot tell positively y but I think that it was the previous month that he took hold. Q. What about the rate paid for overtime ? — A. The men all get time-and-haJf for overtime. Q. And for Sundays ? — A. No, sir. Q. Has the shop turned out more work since you have been here than ever before In a corresponding time and with equal iands ? — A. During my administration ? 1 would rather somebody else should speak of that rather than myself. Q. I ask you as a matter of fact ? — A. I cannot answer that, because I haye nevec figured up what the rest of the men have done. Q. Did"your force not turn out about an engine every eight days before the strike ? — A. We turned out about eight engines a month over the whole system. In these- shops I do not think we turned out over three in a month. We put out about threo engines a month. That Is, we generally did. 3984 LAB 3 19 290 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And since the strike how many ?— A. "We have only turned out three engines since the strike. And the way that is reported would be that there were engines handled in.the round-house since the strike. Q. Without going into detail, would that explain the discrepancy ?— A. Since the strike we have not had the force of men that we had before the strike. Our engines were run down duriug the strike and we had to get the engines out of the round- house which only wanted slight repairs and round-house work. I do not know how many engines we turned out, but we turned out a great many during the strike. It would be safe to say that we have turned out fifteen engines since the 1st of March, with considerable repairs done to them. Witness was instructed to make out a comparative statement of the cost of work in the departments under Mr. Hall's administration during the last or preceding month before his discharge. A comparative statement which was testified to is as follows: JAMES SOOFIBLD, NOVBMBEE, 1884. Number men. Cars turned oat. Hoars ■worked. Money paid. Average oars per man. Average hoars per car. Average money per car. 38 44 6,977 $1,476 80 lA 168a $33 56 W. J. OGLE, JUNE, 1885. 26 •29 6,842 $1, 521 95 lA 23511 $52 48 C. A. HALL, OCTOBER, 1885. 34 29 9,124 $1, 988 90 in 31*41 $68 58 [Witness subsequentl y handed in the following letter and statement, which is placed here, so that com parative statements may Ije together. ] Marshall, May 10, 1886. Congressional Committee : Gentlemen : I have the honor to submit attached statement of cars turned out of Marshall freight-car repair shop P ebrnary 1-14, 1886, inclusive, during Mr. C. A. Hall's administration. The clerk who kept the car accounts during this period is not in service, and I cannot testify to its absolute accuracy. Yours, truly, A. H. WATTS, if. M. STATEMENT. Marshall, May 10, 1886. Number of freight cars turned out of freight-car repair shops at Marshall, February 1-14, 1886 22 Number of men employed February 1-14, 1886 40 Number of hours worked February 1-14, 1886 5,016 Total of freight repair-shop roll, February 1-14, 1886 $1,183 87 Average cost per car turned out February 1-14, 1886 $50 63 LARKIN T. DEMPSEY sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. What position do you hold on the Texas and Pacific f — Answer. I am general foreman of the motive power department. Q. Did you hold that position prior to the Ist of March f — A. No, sir. Q. Were you employed by the company at that time, or when T — ^A. Employed on the road, do you mea,n ? I think I have been on the road since about lb77, or along about there. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 291 Q. When did you take the position you now hold? — A. During March — about the 1st, hut at any rate during the month of March. Q. Just state the cost and amount of work done in March, 1886, and the amount ■done in the preceding year ? — A. I cannot answer that question, because I was not at the head of the department where the record is kept. Q. Have you examined your testimony before the special commissioner ? — A. yes, «r. Q. You state in that that you think from the number of hours worked and the wages paid there was a difference ? — A. You mean during the year ending March, 1886? Q. During the year ending March, 1886 ? — A. Yes, sir ; that is a fact. Q. What was the cost of this work?— A. I cannot tell exactly all the coat. Q. What reason did you assign for the difference? — A. Well, sir, there seemed to be a great deal of demoralization among the men and a great deal of neglect of duty. Q. Did you ever have committees wait on you in reference to ofiicers of the com- pany or grievances ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were their demands reasonable or unreasonable, from your standpoint ? — A. I Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was a man by the name of Hall one of them t— A, No, sir; he was not. He applied for a commission and 1 refused to give it to him. Q. Did he apply for a commission t — A. Ves, sir. Q. At the time you appointed these special policemen did you administer any oath f — A. Yes, sir. • Q. Do you remember -what that oath -was t If so, repeat it.— A. It was that they ■would faithfully and impartially perform the duties devolving upon them as officers of the law and as special policemen of the city of Marshall. Q. At the time you appointed these men did you arm them ? — A. I did not. Q. Were they armed ? — A. I did not see* any of them armed. Q. Did you make any inquiry as to whether they were armed or not ?— A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. You say you did this under advice of the principal citizens of Marshall. Did the principal citizens of Marshall advise you to appoint striliers on this police force ? — A. They said nothing about that. I told them who the men were and that I thought we would appoint some of them. Q. You say that the reason you appointed them was they were willing to serve with- out pay and owing to the bankrupt condition of the city. What do you mean by the "bankrupt condition of the city" ? — A. There was not a dollar in the treasury, and we were several thousand dollars in debt. We had no money to spend on a police force of that kind. Q. Was there any particular excess in the number of tramps about Marshall about the 1st ^of March? — A. There were a great many of them about that time. Q. At the time of the strike was there an unusual number of tramps in Marshall ? — A. Yes, sir ; I think there was. Q. Now give me your best estimate, on reflection, as to whether there was any un- usual number of tramps in town about that time ? — A. I had made no estimate, Q. Had you any special police during the month of February ? — A. No, sir ; I think we had not. ■ Q. What proportion of the citizens draw their living from the company's property in this town ? — A. I should think that at least one-third of the men here worked for the railroad. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) What is the voting population of your city ? — A. At the last election I think it was 950 votes. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Your population being about what? — A. We claim about 8,000 ; I think it is 7,000 or 7,500. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Were these special policemen assigned to any particular duty or place of duty ? — A.- They were assigned, they were told , to prevent any violation of law auywhere in the town, but their particular duty was to prevent any disturb- ance of or any interruption to the property of the company. Those were the instruc- tions given them. i Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was any special instruction given to them to prevent the resumption of trains or interfering with the running of larains ? — A. No, sir ; by no party that I know anything of. The advice that we gave them was not to interfere with any one. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Then it would take this shape, that upon application .to the council, two of whom were Knights of Labor, you appointed strikers to take charge of the company's property to prevent any person from interfering with the legal use of the property ? — A. To prevent the illegal use of any of the property. Q. That was the state of it ? — A. That was the state of it, and it was done in good faith, with a view of protecting the property. Q. And you selected strikers, under the circumstances, in preference to taking other people? — A. If you gentlemen will allow me to explain a little, I will tell you how we stood. The company and the city of Marshall are in litigation about these rail- road shops here, and about the offices, and we considered we had a contract with the company by which these offices could be kept here, and also the shops. Bonds had been issued to a considerable amount for that purpose. . The offices had been moved, and we thought it had been done illegally, and we had an injunction suit pending. We were afraid that the shops would go away, too, or be burnt, and we thought it best to protect the property, because we wanted to keep the shops here. We know that these shops are the support of this town, and therefore we wanted to protect them, and that is why we appointed the policemen. I had the greatest confidence in the men we appointed to protect the interests of the railroad as well as the town. I think the evidence you will have before you will show that everything was protected while we had charge of it, and that everything was turned over to the United States marshal as far as the town was concerned. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) This town of Marshall has a special interest in preventing the destruction of the company's property and especially the shops ? — A. Yes sir ; and that ia why we appointed men whose entire interests were here in Marshall ; and 80 far as possible they owned property here. 300 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By Mr. Pakkbr. ) Did these special policemen make reports as other special police men arc required to do ?~A. The city marshal makes a monthly report ; he was the officer in charge of them. ' The committee here took a recess for on^hour, and after the recess proceeded to take testimony. GEORGE N. BIBB sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You have examined this paper*[indicatingj ; is it a copy of the original - sent to Mr. Watts, master mechanic of the Texas and Pacific, and of which he speaks in his testimony ? — Answer. Yea, sir. Q. The names signed to it are George Bibb, Robert Haiison, W. L. Bearing, J. H. Little, and D. H. Leach. Will you please state whether these gentlemen were mem- bers of the Knights of Labor at the time that this communication was signed f— A. They were a couimittee from Assembly 4959. Q A committee of the Knights of Labor of this assembly at Marshall ?— A. Yea, sir. Q. Is this a correct copy ? — A. Yes, sir. The paper was then read as follows : [Sanctuary of Old Eeliable Assembly No 4959.] Marshai,i,,Te^., February 18, 1886. A. H. Watts, M. M. : Dear Sir : We, the undersigned committee, are instructed to submit the following to yorffor your action. Please inform us as early as possible what you will do in the matter. We, the undersigned committee, waited on Mr. Crosbie, G. P. C. D. , and asked him his reason for discharging Mr. Hall, and by what authority he discharjged him. Mr. Crosbie replied that he discharged him on his own responsibility for incompe- - tency and absent from shop without leave. This committee can prove by a, reliable witness that Mr. Hall was granted leave of absence by Mr. Crosbie. Mr. Crosbie de- nies having had any conversation with Mr. Hall on the matter. This committee is willing that Mr. Hall's competency shall be tested by the company's books, compared to his predecessors. Unless more satisfactory reasons can be shown for Mr. Hall's discharge, we are instructed to demand his immediate reinstatement. ' GEO. BIBB. ROBT. HANSON. W. L. BEARING. J. H. LITTLE. D. H. LEACH. RICHARD B. REAGAN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Mr. Reagan, have you examined this copy of thetestimonjrtaken by Mr. Henry, a special commissioner appointed by Judge Pardee to investigate into the cause of the strike ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Is it correct ? — A. Yes, sir. The Chairman. I will read it, then, as part of your testimony, omitting the ques- tions. If there is anything in it that you desire to modify you will so state. Thft Witness. I will change it as you go on if it is necessary. Siatement iefore Commissioner. "My name is Richard B. Reagan, and my official position is that of United States marshal for the eastern district of Texas. There are about 240 miles of the Texas and Pacific Railway in the limits of my district. In my capacity as United States marshal I took charge of the Texas and Pacific Railway property in my district by virtue of a writ of assistance. United States circuit court, No. 16, The Missouri Pacific Railway Company i)«. The Texas and Pacific Railway Company, ' Signed W.E. Singleton, clerk eastern district of Texas,' said writ instructing me to protect all property of said rail, way and to aid and protect the receivers in oijcrating the fame. I took oflScial charg- of said property on the IsJth day of March, 1886. The employment of deputy marshals was in my judgment absolutely necessary to protect said property from destruction. The number of deputies employed for this purpose from March 12 to date has ranged from fifteen to eighty, the latter being the highest number employed at any onetime, and has been diminished and increased at different times as necessity demanded. "There are employed in my district at present ten deputies at Marshall and three at Texarkana, these being the ordinary force employed by me. Machinery in the shops at Marshall was disabled by parts being taken awav and hid: ensriues at Texarkana LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 301 ■were disabled and injured ; a passenger car was derailed near Marshall ; two bridges were burned within the limits of my district, all of which I believe have been done by the striking employes of the Texas and Pacific Railway and their symi)athizer8. Q. (By the Chairman.) I will asli you here why you say that you believe that these depredations were committed by the strilsing employes of the Texas and Pacific or their sympathizers f — A. Well, from the circumstances that presented themselves to me at the time it was done. Q, What were those circumstances f — A. Well, by the crowd that came standing around and the threatening disposition of them to do every crime that they could to prevent the running of the road. The Chalirman resumed reading as follows : " In the early part of the strike a connecting link of an engine being repaired was taken from the Marshall roundhouse, and was returned about April 1, by one Frank Norman, a striking machinist ; a part of a lathe in the machine-shops at Marshall was taken away and returned about April 15, and returned by one Eioljardson; about 10 o'clock on the night of March the 14th, the bridge at the east end of Marshall yards was discovered on fire about the center, and the fire was extinguished by my deputies; no engine had crossed this bridgafor some hours, the nightwatchman had inspected it a short time before and saw no signs of fire ; and paper partly burned was found stuffed in the timbers of the bridge, as if used for kindling. This bridge was undonbtedly set on fire by the strikers ortheir friends. On the morning of March 17, a passenger car of train No. 305 was derailed at a bridge 1^ miles west of Marshall ; on personal investigation, I found that the spikes on the outside of the rail had been drawn by a crowbar (the marks of the crowbar on the ground near by showing where it had been dragged), and that the nuts had been taken from the bolts of the fish-plates at the end of the rail with a wrench, as the fish-plates and bolts were found under the bridge, and the threads of the bolts were intact and the fish-plates unbroken, which would not have been the case had the rail been misplaced by the action of the wheels passing over it. This work I believe to have been done by striking employes of the Texas and Pacific Railway. On March 18, bridge 71:!, about 8 miles west of Marshall, was burned, causing delay of trains from four to six hours. This bridge I believe to have been set on fire by strikers, as no engine had passed over recently enough to j ustify the belief that it had caught from falling coals. On April 8, bridge P63, SJ miles east of Mineola, was burned, delaying trains from nine to eleven hours. This bridge was about 16 feet high and burned from the bottom, being, in my mind, conclusive evidence tliat it was set on fire, as any fire falling from an engine would have burned from the top, there being a stream of running water under the bridge which would have extinguished coals falling below the upper works. At Texarkana engines 509, 524, 659, 662 were held in the Iron Mountain yard on the Arkansas side from March 6 until March 26, and were disabled as follows : The water had been let out of the boilers and tanks of all of them ; the tank hose on engine 509 was cut and destroyed ; the throttle levers of engines 524 and 662 were taken off and hid. This work was known to have been done by striking employes of the Texas and Pacific Railway, but as they had remained on the Arkansas side at Texarkana, and therefore out of my jurisdiction, their arrest has been impossible. In the latter part of March three colored strikers attacked the house of a colored employ^ in the Longview roundhouse, breaking the windows and throwing coupling pins and links into the house. These men were arrested, tried, and two of them sentenced to .jail for a term of four months, the third being dis- charged. Up to the present time there have been twenty arrests made foa intimida- tion, contempt, and violence. Of these ten have been convicted, four discharged by the court, and five are now under bond to appear at the next term of the United States court, or at such earlier time as they or tlieir attorneys may be notified. About the 20th of March. obstructions were placed on the track at two places between Mineola and Terrell, for the purpose of wrecking trains, but were discovered by the engineers in time to prevent damage." Q. (By the Chairman). I see that you give a statement here, in various parts of this testimony, as to the depredations committed upon the road and upon its prop- erty — tlaat you believe these acts have been done by the strikers and their friends? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you be kind enough to say why you believe these acts were done by these men ? — A. I was not present, of course, but from all the indications, and the informa- tion brorfght me, I believe that it was by them. - Q. State the character of actions indicating it. — A. These people stayed around me and taunted me and my men for ten or fifteen days during the time this was going on. Q. You concluded from these facts these men or their friends had burned the bridges ?— A. Yes, sir ; I presumed it. , Q. Could it not have been done by tramps T— A. It could have been done by tramps^ and it could have been done by citizens. 302 LABOR TEOUBLE,S IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Are these the only reasons which you assign for believing it ? — A. I have no other to assign it to. ^.i, j. ^i, x i, j Q. In one case you speak of the depredations in which you say tbat tne water Had been let out of the tanks and boilers, and you say that this work was known to have been done by strikers ?— A. They were captured ; they were over the line outside of our jurisdiction, and we could not reach them. ' The switch-yard at Texarkana is in Miller County, Arkansas. Q. Ton received information, then, from individuals who said that they had seen these men do it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You do not know that they were Knights of Labor?— A. They said they were; my men that were present said that they were Knights of Labor. Q. Your deputies?— A. Yes, sir. They cannot cross the line to do anything; they could only go to the line, and they had no authority across it. Q. Now, you say that you made a personal investigation of the derailment of the car. Will you state all 'the facts which you know in connection with that derail- ment, which are not included in this statement ? — A. Well, I do not know that I can state anything further. I went on the ground to look at the situation ; I went out there ten minutes after it happened. I got on the engine and ran right out to the scene, and I picked up the bolts that had been taken out of the fish-plates, and the threads were not at all injured. It showed on the outside of the rail where something had been set on and a prize had been made on the ties, and these nuts pressed on the ends of the ties, and they were all thrown up. That is all I know about it. Q. Was the engine derailed ? — A. No, sir ; the engine made its way across and broke loose from the tender and passenger coach, and ran right up to the bridge and within 2 feet of going off the bridge, when it checked up. Q. What was that bridge over ? — A. Over a ravine IJ miles out. Q. How far would the fall have been ?— A. About 16 or 12 feet, or 10 feet. Q. What time of day or night did this occur? — A. Just at daylight. Q. Did you go into the car ? — A. I did not. Q. Was it a freight or passenger train ? — A. It was a passenger train. Q. Were there passengers aboard ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you any personal collisions with any of the strikers ? — A. Well, sir, I was accosted on frequent occasions, and by one man called Bailey, until, I get worried, and until I thought it became persona! to me. I did not come to this town for that pur- pose, but when it comes to that I saw I would have to protect myself when I was traveling around. I did not come here to insult anybody or take any insults from anybody, and it was done so frequently and repeatedly that I told him it was a mat- ter that would have to be settled between me and him. Q. Who was Bailey ? — A. One of these strikers ; one of these committeemen. Q. N. Bailey, member of the general executive board of the Knights of Labor ?— A. That is a man here in this place ; I understand he is one of those men. Q. You do not mean Bailey from Ohio? — A. No, sir ; I mean one of those local as- sembly men named Bailey. Q. What was the nature of the insults which you say Bailey offered to you ?— A. ' Every time he would meet me he would ask who I had arrested and who I w;as going to arrest and all about my business generally^ in an offensive way. I cannot recollect' every word he used. His manner showed that he intended to insult me, and his man- ner showed that if I had not been an officer he would not have done it but once. Q. Was any information conveyed to you by any person that threats had been made to shoot you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was the person that informed you ? — A. It was a man by the name of War- ren Read, a member of the Knights of Labor. Q. Where does he live ?— A. At Tyler. Q. Did he tell you who had made these threats ? — A. He told me it was a man by the name of — I cannot call it ; he lives in this place. Q. Had you ever had any difficulty with the man who threatened to shoot you f— A. No, sir ; I have never had any difficulty. Q. Did he give any cause that was assigned by the party who had threatened to shoot you ? — A. He said that me and Governor Brown there, Mr. Hoxie, and Jay Gould ought to be killed, and if they could kill me out of the way and Governor Brown here, it would be a good thing. I do not know the man, but he has been on the yard there ; I think his name is Durklee. Q. Did you ever draw up your men in line to protect the railroad property from the strikers? — A. I did at the roundhouse here.. The men were going to out down a flag that we had raised and drive me out of the shop, and when the news came to me I fixed myself so that it could not be done. Q. How many men had you? — A. About forty. . Q. All armed? — A. Well armed at that. Q. Did they come ? — A. They did not come. Q. Who gave you the information? — A. I do not recollect who it was now. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 303 Q. Who sent the word ?— A. Some of these men ; I do not know any of them. Q. Do you not remember who told you t — ^A. I do not recollect now who it was that notified us. We were notified by several people and my men were. I knew from the circumstances which were going on, and this man who told me said the thing had been talked in the meeting and on the outside. I kept my men on the railroad ground all the time, and when I would pass from the telegraph office down in front of the grocery house down there they sneered at my men and me, and I had a good deal of trouble to keep down difficulties on the road. Unless things were changed I thought I would not be able, to do it ; but I did not propose to come nere and create difficulty. I was sent here to protect the property of the company, and I would have used any means if I had been attacked to do it. Q. Were there any notices hung in the yard? — A. Tes, sir; hung in the yard and sheds within fifty steps of the track. Q. Notices to whom ? — A. I do not know ; I looked at it from the railroad grounds. I never went off then ; I staid right on my own ground. Q. Did yon see any violence either to man or property, any engines killed, or other acts of violence? — A. I was not present at the time when that was done; no engine was killed here at this place Q. Was there any act of violence perpetrated in this town, as far as yon know, by the strikers or their friends ? — A. There were threats used against us and the men; they threatened the men around the works. Q. Was there any destruction of property in Marshall T — A. None after I came here ; none after 1 had the men on the ground to protect the property. Q. What force of men did you find employed in the shops of the company! — A. It was very few ; I do not recolleot. Q. The shops filled up alteryou came, did they? — A. Yes, sir, gradually from time to time ; eVery day or two men came to the shops. Q. When did you stop' guarding the property? — A. lam guarding it to-day with ten men. Q. When did you cut down your force ? — A. From time to time ; at different times, jnst as I thought I needed men to guard certain places that I wanted to gaard. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) How long have you resided in Texas? — A. I cametoChero- kee, Tex., in 1857, and have lived there ever since. Q. You stated that you had ten men- at Marshall, and three at Texarkana, and they were regular deputies. Do you mean by that if there was any probability of any trouble you would have more? — A. The three men are kept at Texarkana to keep anybody there from cutting the water off. Q. Then they are retained there because you apprehend trouble? — A. They are guarding that water and generally about the roundhouse. Q. And they are kept there because it is deemed necessary to the safety of the company's property ? — A. Yes, sir; that is what I am keeping them here for. Q. Both of these forces are really special forces? — A. Yes, sir ; they are men I have employed specially. Q. By wbom are these deputies paid? — A. Paid by the railroad, sir. I say the railroad — ^it is paid by order of the court. Q. But you do not know whence the funds come — from the Government or from the estate in the hands of the court f — A. The accounts are sent to Dallas and audited there and the attorney sends the money to me. It is my understanding that the rail- road is paying for it. Q. When you first came here with your force of deputies, who did you find in charge of the railroad property ? — A. We did not find anybody ; but after I came here there was a force of these strikers that had been employed here, but I did not see anybody about the works, and it was two or three days afterwards that a gentleman came down to me and told me what had been done about special police. Q. Did you find any of them about the works ? — ^A. I did not find anybody about the works. Q. You say that no engines were killed here, and no damage done to the property after you came here ; was there any damage done to property before you came ? — A. Some links, and one thing and another, had been taken from an engine, and part of a lathe taken away , but it was brought back and placed there after I came. The piece that disabled the lathe was brought back. Q. After your arrival ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Brought back by whom ? — A. Richardson is the man's name. Q. Is he connected with the company? — A. He had been in the shop, but went out of the shop on the strike. Q. The removal of that part rendered that lathe useless? — A. Well, I do not know anything more than what the men in the shop say — that it could not be used without it. None of our men know anything about machinery. Q. Then as to the information that you had that a posse of forty special policemen 304 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. were guarding the property ? — A. I was informed that they were ; I found that there was a large number of armed men around this town. • Q. Do you mean scattered around the town, or on the company's works?— A. Yes, sir ; on the company's works. Q. (By the Chairman.) How long after the strike was it before you took possession of the company's property ?— A. I took possession on the 12th of March. Q. Who was guarding the company's property when you took charge ?— A. Nobody that I saw. Q. Did you hear any complaints against Knights of Labor previous to your taking charge ? — A. Oh, yes ; you could hear all sorts of complaints through the country. Q. Can you account for the violence that took place immediately after your taking charge ? — A. I do not know ; but there was a great deal of excitement around about the works and we had to keep a very careful watch. Q. Do you know of any men being brought from New Orleans to work in the com- pany's shops T — A. Yes, Sir. Q. Have they been threatened with violence ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. How late ?— A. Well, sir, up to the last two or three days ; it is a pretty regular occurrence ; as they walk to the house or go to the post-office they are accused and abused. I am in the street but very little. They came and complained to me. When I was going to leave I had some flags put up at the shops and the telegraph office. These men heard that I was going to leave and they came down and said to me, "If you are going to leave we cannot stay here," and as the property had gone into the hands of Jay Gould they were not willing to stay. I then told them that I would stay and protect them as long as tUe receivers and .Judge Pardee thought it was necessary; and X hung that flag up there, and it is hanging there to-day. Q. If it were not that your presence was needed here would you still remain ? — A. No, sir; I would not remain; I would leave here because I have got other business. I have one court at Galveston aud another court in two months. I cannot go away. What would I have done to have gone and left this property and let any destruction come on it ? Whenever the court and receivers say they are satisfied I would be willing to go, and be willing it should be this evening. Q. Sometliing was said about dogs attempting to track the parties who burned the bridges and derailed the coaches. Do you know anything about that ? — A. Yes, sir; I saw the dogs start from the oar. The dogs belonged to a gentleman here and were in charge of Mr. Mundane. They took the trail and went west and then crossed the track and were coming in town. They had been out a week, and when they got here in this road their feet were bleeding and they could not go any farther. It was a great misfortune we did not have them that morning; if we had we would have got the man that moved that rail, for they never fail. I want to say here about tliis question of bloodhounds, I have never seen a bloodhound in Texas. These dogs are common fox-hounds trained to follow men. Q. They are not regular bloodhounds ? — A. No, sir ; they are these long flop-eared dogs, the only ones that I have ever seen trained to follow men. Q. (By Mr. B^jchanan.) A statement has been made in some of the public prints that these dogs traced the trail around back to the company's property. Is that true ? — A. That is not so. That is a story got up in this town by men in this house, and it is not so. That is all I can say about that. L. S. THORN recalled and examined. By the Chairmatst : Question. Had you any conversation with the strikers to the effect that these mat- ters were not to be settled peaceably ? — Answer. If it was not settled in forty-eight hours it would be settled with guns and bayonets. Q. Was that an oral statement ?— A. Yes, sir; orally by a striker. Hager is the man's name. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And a striker ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How do you know he was a Knight of Labor ? — A. Because he told me he was. Q. Does It necessarily follow that a man is a Knight of Labor because he says so f Have you any other evidence of that ? — A. He was an employ^ of the company, and went out with the other employes. GEORGE M. BIBB recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you a Knight of Labor? — Answer. Yes, sir. _ Q. Examine that and see if you recognize it [showing witness a paper].— A. Tes, LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH XND WEST. 305 Q. Were you authorized to write that officially? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who wae G. M. Tamsit f — A. He was foreman of the blacksmith shop at the time I sent that to him. Q. This is in your handwriting ?— A. Yes, sir. The letter was read as follows : , [Sanotnary of Old Beliable Assembly 4952.] Mabshall, Tex., 4, 7, 1886. G. M. Tamsit: Dear Sib ako Bkotheb: By order of the general executive board, indorsed by the executive boards of 101, 93, and 17, a strike is to be effected. The general executive board will give you all the assistance In their power. You are hereby requested to quit work or you will be expelled from the order. Yours truly, [SEAL.] GEORGE N. BIBB, B. S. Mr. Bibb, who is recording secretary of Assembly 4959, being shown three docu- ments, said that they were official orders, all of them being in his hand writing, and they were read as follows : [Sanotnary of Old Beliable Assembly Xo. 3058, Enights of Labor.] Mabbha^l, Tex., 4, 7, 1886. W. M. Bishop : Dear Sib and Bbotheb : You are hereby notified to quit work, by order of the ex- ecutive board, or be expelled from the order. [SEAL.] J. G. BROWN, B. S. Q. Mr. Bibb, you state that W. M. Bishop was in the employ of the Texas and Pacific Railroad ? — A. Yes, sir. [Sanctuary of Old Beliable Assembly Ko. 3058, Enights of Labor.] Marshall, Tex., 4, 7, 1886. S. F. Allen : Dear Sir axd Brother : You are hereby requested, by order of the general exec- utive board, to quit work or be expelled from the order. [SEAL.] J. G. BROWN, B.S. [Sanctnaiy of Old Beliable Assembly, Ko. 3058, Enigbts of Labor.] Marshall, 4, 7, 1886. S. Kellbt: Dear Sir and Brother : You are hereby n otified to quit work, by order of the general executive board, or be expelled from the order. [SEAL.] JOHN G. BROWN, B. S. GEORGE M. TAMSIT sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Examine that [showing him letter above introduced] and see whether you received it ornot. — Answer. Yes, sir, I received it. Q. Do you know Mr. Bibb's handwriting ? — A. I do not. Q. That is the seal of the Knights of Labor ; is it of this assembly t — A. I think it is. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir, not now; I was at that time. Q. Did you cease your connection with the order ? — A. That ceased my connection, as it says, '-quit work or be expelled.?' Q. You did not quit work ?— A. No, sir. Q. And you consider yourself expelled ? — A. I do. Q. Are you acquainted with S. Kelley, W. M. Bishop, and S. F. Allen ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Were thoy Knights of Labor ? — A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Did they receive communications like yours ? — A. I do not know. Q. Did they quit work about the 7th of March ?— A, I cannot say; I do not think they did. 3984 LAB 3 20 306 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) Were you working at this place at the tlmeof the strike t— A. Yea, sir., Q. Did you go out on a strike? — A. ^o, sir. Q. Did you remain at work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is your trade ?— A. I am a blacksmith. I quit work on the 4th and re- mained out four days. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Did you go out on a strike ?— A. I did not go out on the Ist of March, Q. When did you go out f— A. On the 4th. Q. Did yon go out on the order of Martin Irons when you did go outf— A. fhere was nothing for us to do in foreman's duty. Q. You stopped because there was no work for you to do, and not because yon Were a Knight of Labor and had gone on a strike ? — A. Not at all. JOHN A. LAEKIN sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Where do you reside ?— Answer. At Bonham, Tex. Q. Are you in the employ of the Texas and Pacifio ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you been so employed ?— A. Thirty-six months. Q. What position did you hold at the time of the strike?— A. I was division road- master. Q. How many section foremen had you before the strike ?— A. I had fourteen, Q. What orders did you get from the ^general road-master in reference to the dis- eharge of foremen ?— A. I got a telegram from Mr. Grove stating that any foreman that did not get men was to be discharged, and I was to try to get a foreman who would try to get men to go to work. Q. How many of them got gangs and went to work? — A. Ten of them got gangs and went to work. Q. What did the other four do?— A. The other four would not get them, and I told them to quit. They could leave if they did not get the men. Q. Did they fill up the gangs, or what was done ? — A. We put men in their places. Q. Did these men get section men ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. what have you to say in reference to Thomas Quinn ? — A. That man I told the same that I told the balance of them, that he would have to get men or quit ; and he told me that he could not get any men, and said that he would not try any more. I told him, "I will have to put a man in your place," and he said, "the man that took his place would find that it would not be healthy for him." Q. What reply did you make ? — A. I told him I would take the risk on that. Q. Did he say that in an emphatic manner, or otherwise? — A. He jnst told me square out the man who would take his place would find it would not be safe for him. Q. You did put a man in his place? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you have any conversation with him after you put a man in his place? — A. Yes, sir ; I came down in a couple of mornings after that, and asked him if he would get out of the house and vacate it, and do so as soon as he could ; that the man I had given charge of the section would have to have the section-house to put his men in. Q. One of the company's houses? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, what did he say? — A. He told me he would not get out, and he also said, "I will get even with you and Mr. Grove, the general road-master, for the way you have schemed on me and put a man in my place." I told him that would be all right; we would run the risk of that. Q. These section-houses belong to the company and are on the company's right of way?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you know as to the practice of intimidation ? — A. Well, there were some parties there at Bonham. I hired two or three foremen at Bonham, and there were two or three parties that told the foremen that they could not run that section and take the foremen from their boxes. They cursed me, and told my clerk to tell me that they could not stop in that town, where there were so many Knights of Labor. Q. What was that trouble at Bonham yard ? — A. There was something to be done, and I got the foremen and two or three men to work one afternoon, and I was work- ing there, and some parties hallooed to us to get away from there, and as quick as the foremen saw me they said they did not think it was safe to work there. Q. What circumstances have you knowledge of occurring about the 14t.h of March in reference to a foreman named Jones? — A. Jones, I hired him to take charge of the Bonham yards. 1 told him I wonld pay him l|70 a month for a few days until I looked around aud got him a section where there was a section-house and could give him a gang and start him out to work, and about the time he started away this party, by the name of Joe Dalby, told him he could not live in that town and ran that section. Q. What was the effect on Jones ? — A. He left ; he said would not work there. LABOR TEOUBLKS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 307 Q. What have-yon to say in reference to occurrences to EicUard Major and others on the I5th t — A. I hired Major and Yarbrough and William Hagen to couple up and coal some engines that Mr. Grove and Mr. Griffin instructed me to get np, and this Dalby followed them down to the yard and said a few words to them and they left. Q. Was Dalby alone f— A. No, sir ; there were three or four with him. Q. What -were the wordsf — ^A. They called them " sons of bitches," and told them that they could not stop there and work in that town. Q. Did they threaten any violence ? — ^A. They said they could not work ai^ound there and live' in that town. Q. Were these men undertaking to run the town 1 — A. Which men ? Q. Dalby and his crowd ? — A. From the start they were making they were going to mu one end of it. Q. Has he been arrested ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Has his trial come off? — A. 1 cannot tell. Q. At the time that the officers started to get out trains were you present ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What occurred? — A. There was one man np on the engineering and somebody made a remark to him, bat I did not hear it, and I do not recollect what it was ; bat I saw him jump off the engine, and state that he was not going out on that engine while that crowd was around. Q. Did Robert Taylor endeavor to get them back on the engine ? — A. Yes, sir ; and Mr. Grove, and the general road-master and myself. Q. Give the result. — ^A. Taylor when he saw this fireman get down off the engine, turned round and said to him, if he was a fireman he would stick at his post, and if he did not he ought not to get a position in the United States. Q. What language was used toward him by the crowd ? — ^A. They said he could not use that engine or fire and live in that town. Q. Was any offensive language used? — ^A. They called him a "son of a bitch" two or three times. Q. Was any threatening language used other than what yon have told ? — A. Noth- ing that I recollect now. Q. Did he receive any offers of protection, and if so from whom ? — A. An officer was sent on the engine with him. Q. Do you mean a deputy marshal ? — A. Yes, sir ; two or three of them. Q. And then the engine was run ? — ^A. YeSj sir. PATRICK ROWAN recalled and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Do you know about the derailment of a passenger train ? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Where did it take place? — ^A. Just about a mile and a quarter from Marshall, here, on the Texas and Pacific. Q. State how it was caused. — A. On that morning I gotnp pretty early and went down to the train-dispatcher's office, and they told me that No. 5 was wrecked thia morning. Q. Did you go out and examine the place? — A. I went out there on the switch en- gine with some of the United States marshals. When we went out there I looked at the place very closely, and found the fish-plates taken off, the spikes pulled and lying on the ends of the ties, and showing plainly that they were pulled by a claw-bar. It showed that they had some work in pulling them, as some of the wood was at- tached to the back of the spike, which was natural when you pull a spike oat of good timber. Q. Did you see anything else there which would indicate that human hands had caused that derailment? — ^A. Well, sir, by the way the fish-plates looked I am sure of it. One of them was thrown down under the bridge, and the other one showed, or it looked like it had been wedged in between the rails, so that the wheel hit it and bent it. It held one of the. rails from the other. Q. What is a fish-plate ? — ^A. That is what joins the rails together and splices it with four bolts and nuts. Q. Holds them together where they join ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How far was this from the bridge? — A. Just on the bridge. Q. On the bridge ? — A. The engine was on the bridge, but the nnrailed coach was not on the bridge. The moved rail was close to the bridge. Q. Was that passenger train due there at that time f — A. I cannot say ; I believe it was due about that time. Q. About what time was it that that train came along ? — A. About 4.35 or 4.40 ia the morning. Q. Do you remember the day of the month ? — A. Well, I made a memorandum of it but I have forgotten — the 17th of March. Q. Was that after the marshals had taken possession ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 308 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. CHARLES ROSS sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Qaestion. Were you in the employment of the company previous to the arrival of the deputy marshals ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor. — A. No, sir. Q. Had you been In the employment of the company previous to the strike f — A. Yes, sir. Q. You did not go out on the strike, then t^— A. No, sir. Q. Were you abused by anybody for working in the shops f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom?— A. Walter Hunt. Q. Who -was he ? — A. A man who was employed by the car department of the Texas and Pacific Railroad. Q. Had he gone out on a strike ? — A. I believe he had, sir, to the best of my knowl- edge. Q. Do you know whether he was a Knight of Labor or not f — A. I do not. Q. What place did you fill ? — ^A. Yard-master, Q. Was there anybody in your yard but yourself and Mr. Grove, general road-master, at that time ? — A. No, sir. Q. What threats or abuse did he use toward you ? — A. He said that he understood I was doing the work of two or three men and stated that anybody who would do that work under the circumstances would suck a nigger's privates. Q. Did you say anything to him in reply f — A. I went away from him ; I did not care what he said. I was in the discharge of my duties, and proposed to do it. Q. Did he say anything further to you ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchahak.) How long have you been in the employ of the Texas and Pacific ? —A. For about ten years. DAVID HODGE sworu and examined. By the Chairman : Question. What place did you hold on the Texas and Pacific at the time of the strike ? — ^Answer. I was a machinist's helper. Q. How long have you been in the employment of the company ? — A. About four years. Q. Did you strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you threatened by any strikers ? — A. Yes, sir. ' Q. What did they say ? — A. They came up to the house and cursed me and abused me for working. Q. What were the names of the parties ?— A. I know twoof the names, Jean Angelo and Hamline. Q. Did they interfere with your remaining at your boarding-house?— A. Yes, sir. Q. In what way ? — ^A. The feUow that was running the house told me that I would have to leave ; that I was going to have trouble, and I would have to leave. , Q. Did you leave ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the man who told you to leave have arms ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did any committee go to the boarding-house ? — A. He told me that a committee did go there. Q. Did you go to another house ? — ^A. Yes, sir. ■Q. Did you obtain board there ? — A. No, sir. •Q. Why were you refuse4?— A. The man who kept it said all his boarders were Knights of Labor, and if he took in any man that was working they would all quit. Q. Where did you go then t— A. To Mr. Smith, an employ^ of the company. ■ Q. Are you boarding there now ? — A. No, sir. Q. Where are you boarding now ?— A. I am boarding down at the New house. \4. Why did you not remain boarding at Mr. Smith's ?— A. There was a gentleman came there and threatened him that if he did not make me leave there they would make it hotter than hell for them, and they left the same night. Q. Are you now in the employment of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In the same position? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Where do you get your meals ? — A. At the New house. Q. Isthat aboarding-hoQse? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Kept by whom ?— A. Mrs. McVeigh. Q. Did anybody draw a pistol on you? — A.' Yes, sir; at the boarding-house on Saturday night, after the 1st of March. Q. Who was it ? — A. It was Quinn, because I was working down there. He told me as soon as we get down back there " you cannot get a, job anywhere," and I told him that was my look-out, and he said, " you are a scab, then," and called me a " damned lying son of a bitch," and drew his six-shooter on me, and one of the parties ran and took it from him. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 309 (Q. By Mr. Buchanan.) Did yon have him arrested ?— A. Yes,sir. Q. Has his trial come off? — ^A, No, sir ; I believe it comes off in September. Q. Was he a special policeman t — A. He said he was there to keep us " poor sons of bitches at work down there quiet." JOSEPH NIGHT sworn and examined. By the Chaibman' : Question. Did you go out to call an engineer on his engine f — ^Answer. Tes, sir. Q. What was your business in the employment of the company t — ^A. I was a caller. Q. What is that t — ^A. Calling engineers and firemen. Q. Calling them for engines to go out and notifying them to come and go to work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did anything happen to yon that night ? — A. Yes, sir. A fellow hit me and knocked me down. Q. What for ?— A. I do not know. Q. Where did it happen? — A. Down there in front of Peel6's restaurant. Q. Did he say what he knocked you down for f — A. He ran after he hit me. Q. That might have been on account of some personal trouble between you and him t — A. I do not know him ; I never saw him before that. Q. Do you not know him when you see him ? — ^A. I know him when I see him ; I do not know his name. ^ Q. Was he in the employ of the company ? — A. I do not know. Q. Do you know whether he was a striker or not t — A. No, sir ; I do not. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) How old are you? — A. Seventeen. Q. Was this a grown man that struck you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Would you know him now if you were to see him ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you made any complaint against him ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know the reason why he struck you? — A. No, sir. Q. You were on your way back from calling the engineer? — ^A. Yes, sir; about half- past 6 in the evening. PATRICK O'CONNER sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you in the employment of the Texas and Pacific Railroad, and if so in what capacity ? — Answer. I work in the locomotive department. Q. Are you an engineer fireman ? — A. I am a hostler. Q. Do you know anything of any interference by Henry Stewart (" Frenchy") t — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. When did it occur ? — ^A. It occurred on the 10th of March. Q. While the strike was going on ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did Stewart strike ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did he go out on a strike ? I do not know who Stewart is. Who is Henry Stew- art ("Frenchy")? — A. There he is [pointing to a man in the crowd]. Q. Did he go out on the strike ? — A. That is my understanding. Q. Was he at work on the 10th of March ? — A. Not that I know of, sir. Q. Tell us about this interference. — A. Well, I went down to the roundhouse one day and Mr. McGrew told me to take Q. Come to the point. You were directed to do a certain thing ? — A. To bring the passenger engine up to the depot, and one of the Knights of Labor jumped on the engine and commenced cursing me. Q. Was that at Marshall ? — A. Yes, sir ; there, down at the depot. And he said he was " a man." And I told him I did not know but what he was, and he said "God danm you, you are no man." I said, "all right; but get off this engine." And Frenchy jumped on and said, " I will arrest you, sir." I told him I was not afraid of him or anybody else. So they got off and the engine went up. Q. Well, was it " Frenchy " that interfered with you? — A. No, sir; it' was two of them. Q. You say that a Knight of Labor got on and had this talk with you and com- menced to curse you on the engine ? — A. Yes, sir ; there was a fellow came on the engine and I told him to get off, and "Frenchy" jumped up and says, "I will arrest you." Q. Arrest whom ? — A. Arrest me, Q. What was the name of the Knight of Labor who told you that ? — A. I think his name is Williams, and I told him that was "all right." I told him I was aa good as he, and I told him to get off the engine, and then "Frenchy " jumped on and said, " I 310 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE isOUTH AND WEST. ■will arrest you." I told Mr. "Freucliy" that I was uot afraid of him or anybody that would take his part. , Q. Is " Frenchy" a Knight of Labor ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he a policeman? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) One of these " special policemen f " — A. That is what he said he was; that is him right here. Q. (By the Chairman. ) How do yon know he is a Knight of Labor— A. He told me. Q. What was his occupation ? — A. He is a fireman.l WILLAED H. FOOT sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Qnestion. Do you work for the Texas and Pacific road now t — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. When did you commence ?— A. On the 7th day of March. • Q. In what capacity f — A. I commenced as hostler. Q. What are you doing now f — A. I am a machinist in the machine shops. Q. Had you any difficulty with any one after commencing to work with the com- -pany? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was it f — ^A. They tried to prevent me working there, and threatened to shoot me and hang me. Q. Who ? — A. I suppose they were Knights of Labor. Q. Do you know they were Knights of Labor ? — ^A. I do not know that they were ; they only took their part. Q. Do you mean strikers, former employes? — A. They were strikers. Q. Had you any trouble at your boarding house ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. When ? — A. I went to the house one night and I was met in the hall by a crowd of them, and I was told that I could not get any supper there ; I asked the proprie- tor, the landlady, what was the matter, arid she told me that she had been requested by the Knights of Labor not to let me board there. Q. Were you compelled to leave ?— A. Well, they said I would have to leave, and she said I could not board there, and I left. Q. What did they say to you about taking another man's place ? — A. They asked me why I had taken another man's place. Q. What did you say ? — A. I said I supposed there was somebody before you, and they said they did not want any supposition about it, and made some insulting re- marks on the management. Q. Did they make any demonstrations of violence? — ^A. Well, a day or two after that they said it would cost me my life if I went back there to work, and another time, as I was quitting work, a man in effigy was hung on the streets, and they said, "You will be there next." Q. You went to look after another place to board; did any one follow you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Tell what occurred. — A. Four of them followed me, and on the way they picked up another one and they hallooed for me to halt, once or twice. Q. Did you halt ? — A. I did on the second call and then fired off my revolver or pistol. Q. How often did you fire ?— A, Once. Q. Did they fire on you, or try to do so? — ^A. No. Q. You stopped ; what then ? — A. Yes ; I went to back away from them, and at last they came to a standstill and went on preaching their business and that they had come up town to take care of me — and give me a good licking, I suppose. Q. I simply want what they said. What did they say would be the consequence if you continued to work in the shops? — A. They said if I went back there to work it would cost me my life. Q. What did you tell them ? — A. I do not know that I made them any answer at all, as I remember. ^ Q. What did they say to you about your coming to them and telling them yon wanted work ? — A. That is when they surrounded me. They said if I was any man at all, I would come to them and they would have taken care of me and not let a man go to work. I told them itwas time enough to do that yet, and they could do itright away. Q. What did they agree to then ? — A. They agreed to give mo my supper and a place to sleep and a breakfast and a couple of doflars to get out of town. Q. (By the Chiarman.) Did you accept that proposition? — A. I took part of it ; all but the money. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You took your snpperf What became of them after that ? — A. I staid with part of them till about 13 o'clock ; then I went in the next Toom to sleep. Q. What happened in the morning? — A. After I got up in the morning I went to LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 311 the roundhouse and told Mr. Dempsey. He told me he wanted me to go to work at Texarkana, and J went. Q. What happened to you on the way t — A. I believe they would not let the train in. Q. You came back to Marshall, and then what happened? Had you any trouble ? — A. After I came back they abused me a great deal. Q. — What sort of abuse have you been subjected to since you have been in these shops ? — ^A. More than I have ever taken before. When I would pass them on the streets there would be three or four or a dozen of them on each corner. Some of them wonld say, "There goes that damned rat ; I wish I had a gun ;" or they would say, " There goes a son of a bitch; he ought to be shot ;" or something else like that. Q. Has that occurred more than once when yon were passing on the streets ? — A. Tes, sir. Q. About how frequently has it occurred t — A. Every time I met them. Q. Up to what timet — A. About three weeks ago was the last I heard anything irom them. Q. Where did yon live before you came here ? — A. My home is in New York. Q. Are you still in the employ of the company as a machinist ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) When did all this happen f— A. From March 7 up to about three weeks ago. Q. When was the first of this ?— A. About the 10th of March, I think, and ended about the 10th of April. MIKE Mcdonough swom and examined. By the Chairman: Question. Are you employed by the Texas and Pacific Company ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you at the time of the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Are you now employed by the company ? — A. I have been employed by the com- pany since the strike. Q. When did you go to workf — A. On the 7th of March. Q. What place had you with the company? — A. I went down to take charge of the coal shutes. Q. Do you know anything about a German employed there being beaten ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who beat him, and why was he beaten t — A. Well, he was going home at night, after his work, and he was met on the street by a crowd of boys, half-grown boys, that had been at work in the shop ; they beat him and kicked him. One of them drew a knife and cut him, and he then got away from them. Q. Were you there, and did you see any of this t — A. He told me in the morning when he came to work for me. JOHN KEAUSS sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Were yon employed by the railroad company after the strike f — ^Answer. I went to work for the company on the 9th day of March, I was employed by this company for several years, but I left here and went on to the Missouri Pacific Bail- road ; I came back on the 9th of March. Q. What place did you hold on the 9th of March ? — A. I worked at the coal shutes. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Were you one?— A. No, sir. Q. Were you asked to quit the employment of the company by any one? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you threatened by any one f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Tell us all about it. — ^A. I went up town one night, and five young men saw me across the street, and I did not want to pass by them, and I went around so as to avoid them, and as I went between one man and the fence he gave me a kick; I turned around and saw what was going on around there, and a man pulled a knife on me, and I jumped back. He called me " a son of a so and so," and others came up and took him away. I did not have anything to defend myself with against that crowd. Q. What had you done to these people ? — A. Nothing that I know of. Q. Were they strikers ?— A. I cannot tell you ; I think they were employed in the shops. Q. What did they say to you ?— A. Well, they just called me " a son of a so and so." Q. Did they say that they were beating you "because you were employed by the company ? — A. No, sir ; they did not say a word of any kind. Q. They just beat you, then, without previous notice ? — A. Without any notice. Q. Only one of them assaulted you ? — A. Only one. Q. And the other four took him ofl'?— A. They took him off. Q. How long had you been in town ? — A. I had only been a few days in town. 312 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. GEORGE W. RIDDELL, sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you in the employme"nt of the Texas and PacLSo T— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you been in the place you now occupy ? — A. Since the 23d day of March. Q. Are you a Knight of Lahor ?— A. Yes, sir, I was ; I have not heard that I have been expelled, but I suppose I have been expelled. Q. Where did you come from to work on this road ? — A. I came from Dallas. Q. Did you take the place of some striker f— A. Well, I do not know whether I did or not. Q. Do you know anything about intimidation or threatenxng language or threats being made against any of flie employes of the company f — A. The day we left Dallas there was quite a number of Knights of Labor and strikers ou the platform at DaUas, and they used threatening language towards us. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) When did you arrive here?— A. On the 23d day of March. Q. Was the United Stages marshal then in possession t — ^A. He was. JOHN P. JOHNSON sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You were engaged as a pumper on the Texas and Pacific road, and have been about two years. Were you a Knight of Labor when the strike broke outf— Answer. Yes, sir ; I was. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor now ? — A. I do not think I am. Q. Did you go out on the strike? — A. I did not until I was called out. I did on the 9th. Q. Who called you out on the strike ? — A. A committee waited on me. Q-. Who constituted that committee ? — A. I do not know. Q. Do you not know the names of the men who called on you f — ^A. A man named Preston was one of them. Q. Do you know the others ? — A. I know them all, but not by name. Q. How do you know that they were Knights of Labor f — A. I met them in the hall. Q. What did they say to you ? — A. They asked me to stop work. Q. Did you tell them, you would ? — A. No, twice I did not; I refused to stop. They waited on me three different times. Q. The third time what occurred; did vou strike then? — A. Yes, sir; I did. Q. Aud you did stop ? — A. I did. ' Q. Have you been working there since then ? — A. I stopped off for eight or nine days. Q. What did you stop for i — A. Because I was asked to do so — told to do so. Q. Why did you go back ? — A. I did not mean to stop work ; only I asked permis- sion to lay off for ten days. Q. Asked permission from whom! — ^A. Mr. Gilsey, superintendent of the bridge division. Q. Did he give you permission to lie off! — A. He did not, but his assistant foreman gave me permission to put a man in temporarily so that when I got ready I should get my job. Q. Was that done ? — A. It was. Q. So you pleased both sides ? — A. I suppose so. Q. Had you any grievance against the company ? — A. No, sir. Q. , Did they always treat you well ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you voted on the proposition to assist Martin Irons ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was that proposition voted on by the assembly?— A. No, sir; not that I know of. I have not been in the assembly more than twice this year. Q. Had Martin Irons any authority to declare a strike unless the local assemblies all over the district voted for it ! — A. I do not know. Q. Did you go back after your leave of absence had expired ! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you ever intimidated ? — A. No, sir. Q. Ever threatened ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) While you remained at work on the company's work, did you see anything of these special policemen that had been appointed for the purpose of protecting the property ? — A. No, sir. Q. Who was in charge of the company's property from the time of the strike until you quit work? — A. I think the railroad company. Q. It has been testified that forty special policemen were sworn in for the protection of the company's property. Were they around the property ? — ^A. I cannot say. Q. Would you have seen them if they had been there in such numbers ? — A. I do not know. Q. Were any of them around your shop or yard ? — A. No, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 313 ANGEL R. PRICE sworn and examinea By Mr, Pakker: Question. When did you commence -wotking for vhe Texas and Pacific road f — Answer. On March 17. Q. Were you then and had you been a Knight of Labor ?— A. No, sir. Q. What work did you do ? — ^A. I went to work for Mr. Crosby, repairing cars. Q. At what else did you work ? — ^A. I was transferred to the paint shop and worked there. Q. Were any threats made against you, or was any notice to quit given to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may describe what was done. — A. As I was (coming back from the post- office, where I had gone to get my mail, I and a couple of other men who were with me met eight or ten of them. Q. Eight or ten of whom ? — A. I do not know who they were. Q. Were they men or boys? — A. Men. Q. Did they talk with you f — ^A. A few first ran in before us and halloed " rats ! " and all the others began to hallo " rats! " and then threw rocks at us, and called us " sons of bitches" and " scabs," and made other remarks. Q. What further ?— A. That was about all. We just kept going on, and they kept following us, as far as I saw. Q. Did the stones hit any of you ? — A. One of them hit me on the heel. Q. Were any other threats made to you, or was violence used upon you ? — A. Not at that time. Q. At any other lime ?— A. Yes, sir. On Sunday evening, about sis, eight, or ten days before that. Q. About what was the date when this matter occurred as you came from the post- office, that you have described ? — A. That was about the 24tli of March. Q. And this was about a week earlier? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Go on and describe it. — A. I had been sent ontto do some work, and in coming back I met Tom Preston, and another gentleman with him. Tom Preston just re- marked, " Hallo, Bob, you have been out at work ? " and that other fellow opened his knife and said, " Yes ; you are a G-d d d scab and a son of a bitch ; " and I took it and did not say anything to him. I knew Tom Preston; he had never said any- thing. Q. You did not know whether he was a striker? — A. Yes, sir; I knew Tom Pres- ton was a striker, but the man who did this I did not know. LAFAYETTE BUTLER sworn and examined. By Mr. Pabeer : Question. You reside at Marshall ? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you here at the time of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you strike also ? — ^A. I was quarantined at that time, and for a week after- wards. Q. And when you came out of quarantine, did you strike ? — A. The shops were not running. Q. You quit work for a time ? — A. Well, ves ; I did for a little whUe. Q. How long?— A. Until the 27th of March, I think. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you now f — A. I do not know whether I am or not. They notified me that if I did not quit work I would be expelled. Q. What occurred as to any disturbance or abuse received by you after you went to work ? — A. Well, I never was abused but by one person. Q. After you went to work in the shop ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was it ? — A. I would rather not mention his name : he was a striker. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yea, sir. Q. State the abuse. — A. He called me hard names. Q. Similar names to those given by the last witness? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you receive any other abuse at any other time since you have been at work for the company ? — A. Yes, sir. I was called a scab, or something of that kind. Q. State whetheryouwerecalleduponandnotifledtoquitworkafteryou began. — A. Yes, sir. That is why I do not know whether I am a member of the Knights of Labor now. I received a notice. Q. In writing? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you it with you? — A. No, sir; I have not. Q. What was that, substantially ?— A. By order of the executive board, unless I quit work I would be expelled from the order. Q. Was the seal of the local assembly upon it? — A. I think it was ; I will not state positively. 314 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. JAMES A. DURKEE' sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Where do you live?— Answer. I live in Marshall. Q. How long have you lived here ? — A. About twenty years. Q. Are you employed by the Texas and Pacific Company t — A. Yes,, sir. Q. And have been for how long? — A. I have worked for this road about eighteen years. I think part of the time for the Southern Pacific. Q. Did you go out on the strike?— A. Yes, sir ; reluctantly I did. Q. And remained out how long?— A. I think it was about three weeks. Q. You say " reluctantly." Why did you use that term ?— A. Of course I was forced to go out, you know. Q. You were opposed to going out ?— A. Yes, sir ; I was opposed to going ont. Q. Well, why did you go out ? — ^A. Well, I knew I would not be safe to stay there and work ; I knew they would heat me up. Q. What reason was given to you for quitting work ? What reason was given for the strike ? — A. I understand the strike was because Mr. Hall was discharged, sir. Q. Did you ever hear any other reason prior to your going out ? — A. No, sir ; and I have never heard of any other. I inquired what the cause was this evening. ■ Q. Did you ever hear any other cause assigned for the strike than the discharge of Mr. Hall ? — A. I never have, sir. Q. Had you been left to act of your own free will would you have struck ? — A. No, sir ; I would not. Q. You were out about three weeks ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And then returned to your work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you are still at work? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you received any notices or requests to quit work ? — A. I received notice from the Knights of Labor to stop work at once after I went to work. Q. Was any reason given why you should stop work ? — A. To the best of my rec- ollection now, it was that I would be expelled from the order if I did not quit work, or something of that kind. Q. Did you quit work ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you been expelled? — A. I do not know, sir, whether I have or not. Q. You have received no notice ? — A. I have received no notice. Q. Have you been threatened or intimidated by any of the strikers ? — A. Some of them have talked a little rough to me ; but that, of course, was no intimidation to me, sir Q. When you say a "little rough," tell us what you mean more definitely ?— A. Well, " a son of a bitch" is pretty rough, you know. Q. Did they call you that? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Any other opprobrious names ? — A. Well, sir, I do not know ; they called me several ugly names ; I do not recollect. Of course, I have had a heap to contend with, and contended with a great many persons ; they talked pretty rAugh and ugly, but that was no intimidation to me ; it was not enough to cause me to stop work. Q. You did not fear them ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. Did you return to work before the marshal took possession of the works here? — A. The last pay-day I just had in five days. Q. It was on the Ist of May, was it ? — A, No ; the last pay-day is nearly a month back now. I just had got five days; that would put me in there about the 36th of March. Q. Were you about the company's yard and roundhouses, and other property from the time of the strike until the time when the marshal took possession? — A. I was down there. Q. Were you one of the special policemen ?— A. No, sir ; I was not. Q. Did you see special policemen on guard? — ^A. I saw some men around there; I do not know whether they were special policemen or not. Q. It has been testified that forty special policemen were sworn in for the purpose of protecting the property ?— A. I understand there were. Q. You did not observe it from their being around the works ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Parkek.) How long have yon known C.A.HaIl? — A. Ever since he has been here. Q. And about how long is that ? — A. I do not recollect exactly how long he has been here. Probably four or five years, and maybe not so long. Q. Did you know the man who was there before Hall took that place ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And the man that preceded him and Hall ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, in your judgment, what was Hall's capacity as a mechanic in that place?— A. Well, sir, of course Mr. Hall was not able to fill that place. Q. He was not ?— A. No, sir. Q. Were you assaulted at any time yourself? — A. Nothing more than what I have related, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 315 V Q- (.By t^^ Chairman. ) I will ask you ■what is Mr. Crosby's competency. Do yon consider him competent t — A. Do you want me to answer that question f Q. Yes, answer the question. — ^A. Well, sir, I know what the master mechanic and I know what the general foreman said about him. Q. I do not care anything about that. Answer the question. — A. AH right, sir; I will not go any further than that. I know he is not competent. Q. Mr. Crosby f — A. No, sir. WILLIAM MAENEY sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Were you a Knight of Labor when the strike broke out? — ^Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are you one now f — A. I do not think I am, sir. Q. Did yon return to work ?— A. I was not in the employment of the company when the strike occurred. Q. Then, of course, you did not go out on a strike. Have you sought employment • since the strike f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were yon employed? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you working ip the shop now? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When did you go to work ? — A. The 6th of last month. Q. Have you been cursed and abused by the strikers because you went to work ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know of any act of Intimidation by the strikers against the parties who went to work? — A. I saw some persons have a difficulty. Q. Who were they ? — A. I saw Mr. Price. Q. Dan Price ?— A. Yes, sir. DANIEL MILLOEY sworn and examined. By Mr. Paeker : Question. Were you employed by the Texas and Pacific Company in March last T — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity ? — A. As a machinist. Q. How long had you been bo employed ? — A. Two years and four months. Q. Did yon go out on the strike ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you then a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you afterwards return to your work ? — ^A. I did. Q. About what time ? — ^A. About the Ist of April. Q. What was the occasion of yonr return ? — A. Well, you do not wish me to go into the details of the order. Q. I want to know if it was on account of Mr. Powderly's order ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. It was upon that ? — ^A. That was what it was. Q. And you went to work ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you have been at work ever since ? — A. Yes, sir. Q Are yon a Knight of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir ; I was, but I reiired. Q. Voluntarily or under solicitation ? — ^A. I was solicited, but I retired. Q. You were solicited to retire ? — A. I was solicited to quit work. ■Q. And instead of quitting work you became disconnected with the order t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you an interview at any time with Martin Irons as to the Hall matter ? — A. Well, I think you are going into the business of the order that I formerly belonged to, and I certainly would not like to injure my obligation. . Q. I do not want to inquire into anything that occurred in the hall of the assembly ; out I want you to state any interview that occurred with the officers of the road, and I do not think that will fall within your obligation. I do not want you to state any- thing that you deem (to be a secret of the order. — A. I cannot remember anything par- ticularly. Q. Respecting this question, were you one of the local grievance committee ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had yon Hall's matter in charge, in part ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you the assistance of Mr. Irons in that matter in the negotiation of it with Mr. Brown and others ? — A. No, sir ; I was not in company with Irons. Q. What action did yon take as a member of the local grievance committee ? — A. What action did I take ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. You are going a little into the details. Q. I do not mean in the assembly, but as connected with the railroad officials. The Chaiemabt. Mr. Litohman, as representative of the Knights of Labor under direction of Mr. Powderly, says he has no objection to your answering the question. 316 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By Mr. Paekeb.) State -wliat -(vas said about any alleged grievance.— A. Pre- vious to the grievance of Mr. Hall being placed in tbe bands of tbe executive com- mittee I bad proposed that a committee of employes be appointed to go to Dallas and see if it could not be settled without going any further. I had a dislike to a strike. Q. Did you prepare to go to Dallas with the others?— A. No, sir ; I proposed that, but it was rejected. Q. Rejected by whom ?— A. Rejected by the majority of the committee. _ Q. Who were the committee ?- A. Well, I really cannot remember now. Mr Bibb was one. Q. Did you go to Dallas ?— A. I went to Dallas on a previous occasion. Q. In connection with Hall's matter ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was anything ;nore done here in regard to Hall's matter ?— A. It was then placed in the hands of the executive board and Martin Irons, and he ordered the strike. Q. And that covers all of it ?— A. That is it. Q. Was there any other grievance involved in this strike, to your knowledge, than HaU's case ?— A. There were two grievances that had been transferred from Mr. Gum- ming. Mr. Gumming had them in hand previous to his leaving here, and we wished to come to a settlement about these two questions, but we have never arrived at it. Q. Did you understand that the strike was on account of both of these grievances?— A. I believe these two were included. They were not mentioned, but I believe these two were included by the executive at the same time as Hall's discharge. Q. What were these? — A. One was because a man named Bassett had been dis- charged, and the other question was in regard to the increased wages of the bridge ' men. Q. And these three points of grievance were all that you heard of? — ^A. So far as I know of. But the principal cause was Hall's case. That was the first cause. Q. Why was not a strike ordered in Bassett's case as there was in Hall's case? — ^A. I believe it originated with that. Q. Was not the strike as ordered by Martin Irons in form based upon Hall's case!— A. Yes, sir; that was; there was another cause. It was that they wanted recogni- tion of former agreements. They wished these agreements to be recognized, and they were not recognized, and we wanted the receivers to recognize them. Q. That was not set up as one of the grounds of the strike, or that the order for the strike was based on ? — A. Not to my knowing. Q. In the order to the Knights of Labor to strike that was not one of the grounds stated, was it ? — A. That was understood. It was not mentioned in the order. Q. It was not understood among the men, not talked of, not in the grounds of the order for tbe strike ? — A. Not to my understanding. Q. Was it not, in your judgment, a mistake that this matter of Mr. Hall's was transferred to District 101 ? — A. I think it should have been settled with a committee of the employes alone. If we could not settle it, then transfer it to the executive. Q. Do you not believe that if your committee had gone to Dallas and negotiated with the railroad officials in the matter you could have settled it without this strike ? — A-, I have thought before that no satisfactory decision might be arrived at by referring it to Martin Irons. Q. I am requested on the part of the Knights of Labor to ask you if you did not go to Dallas to present grievances upon the Hayes agreement and other agreements?— A. No, sir ; I did not know there were any other grievances when I went to Dallas. I went very largely to see if we could not persuade the receivers to come to some agreement about indorsing the former agreement that we had been working under ever since the last strike. That was what I was to see them about. Q. Did you negotiate upon that matter? — ^A. No, sir. Unfortunately Governor Brown's brother's death occurred at the time, and he was away at the funeral. I saw Colonel Noble, and I remained there several days, and Colonel Noble advised me to go home; that it was uncertain what time Governor Brown would return. Q. That was the end of that matter? — A. No, sir. Q. What more was done? — A. On my arrival here we had a meeting and a letter was sent, asking the same favor from the receivers to indorse these former agree- ments. Q. Was that request to indorse them 'as they were written or to indorse them as you understood them ?— A. The local committee, from what I un(5.er8tood, wished to get terms, and to have agreements of some kind whereby we might be regulated. We thought these agreements as they stood were not exactly to their wish, and we were willing to listen to any alteration that they might think fit to oft'er. Q. Did you present the agreement as a basis for the readjustment? — A. Yes, sir; and left it with Colonel Noble. Q. Have you any knowledge that they ever acted upon it ? Did you hear anything further from it ? — A. Yes, sir ; the chairman of the committee received a letter from the receivers stating that they had no power nor authority to enter upon any agree- ments, and that all former contracts were null and void. J-,ABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 317 Q. Witli whom did you leave those papers t — A. With Colonel Noble. Q. Did the propositions in the agreements contain seven points ? — A. Seven ; I do not remember exactly how many. Q. Ton may look at that and see if that is a copy of the letter [this paper is under- stood to be a copy of the one presented by Governor Brown in his testimony, to which reference is made containing the seven propositions]. Was this the letter that was sent t — A. Yes, sir. (Witness handed the original of the letter, which was made a part of the record.) Marshall, Tex., January 2, 1886. To Hon. J. C. Brown and Lionel A. Sheldon : Gentlemen : The copy of agreements left by us in the hands of Colonel Noble for your perusal and consideration are nothing new, and were entered into to create a better understanding between the officers of the road and the employes, in order that a state of harmony might be promoted, that the confidence of both officers and em- ployes in each other might be strengthened, and that any tendency towards any dis- pute might be amicably arranged in a spirit of fair impartiality for the general good of both the company and their employ^ governed by these agreements. We have found them to have been well adapted for what they were originally in- tended. They have been the means on several occasions of preventing serious trouble, and producing peace instead of war, by a friendly arbitration on the basis of the agreements. In every well-ordered institution a code of regulations, properly understood and truly conducted, is desirable for the good order and the success of that institution, whether it be the simple domestic family of home or the more extensive family of the railroad. It would give us great pleasure to learn from you that you are willing to indorse these agreements, thus you would continue onr confidence in a hearty co-operation between the officers and employes which will ultimately result in benefit to the com- pany and satisfactory to all concerned. We desire to express to yon our sympathy with you and the company in these days of difficulties, and it will be our endeavor to assist yon all _W6 can by a faithful dili- gence in the various duties we are called upon to perform, and we sincerely hope that the dark cloud of adversity which has hung over the T. P. will soon pass over and prosperity shine on her more brilliantly than ever, and long continue. Much suc- cess we all most heartilj wish you. Tours, most obediently, The Committee : A. GILMOEE. W. N. MOOEE. D. MYBEEA. GEOEGE TAMSITT, Jr. M. J. MANNING. E. P. EICHAEDSON. E. DAVIDGE. A. li. PUGH. HAEEY CEEAG. GEO. N. BIBB. J. W. LITTLE. C. A. HALL. W. W. MILLEE. C. A. JOHNSTON. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Did you read that letter ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Was that letter delivered with the Hayes agreement and certain articles attached ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; it was sent the same as this. Q. Were not they all sent together? — A. The letter was sent afterwards; after I returned from Dallas. Q. And the papers that were left there did refer to the Hayes agreement and the proposed changes contained in the seven articles which were attached ? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. Have you the reply which was sent to that ? — A. The recording secretary of the assembly here will have it. Q. (By the Chairman.) By the Hayes agreement you mean the agreement that was proposed by the governors of Missouri and Kansas ? — A. That is what is meant by the Hayes agreement. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) Can you tell how it occurred that the letter which you thought you sent after you came back is dated January 2, whUe the paper with the seven articles is dated January 26 ? — A. I believe there was a mistake in the copy of the letter. I think that was wrong. 318 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WESl'. Q. Tliat should have been February 2 f— A. There was an error in the copy ; Ithink, that it should have been February. ■,.-., Q. Are you the man that wrote the circular that was called "The spark which kin- dled the conflagration ? "—A. I talie the responsibility to myself that 1 was. Q. Will you give us a copy of it f— A. I have not got one. Q. Is this it [exhibiting circular to witness] ?— A. That is the one. Q. This was your composition and writing?— A. Most of it ; I hold myself respon- sible. * Q. Who assisted you ?— A. That I do not tell. Q. (By the Chairman.) Who helped you prepare that circiilar ?— A. I do not think that is a legal question. Q. You do not answer. Who is to be the judge of that ?— A. Well, I do not see what good it will do. Q. That is not your affair. We are here to investigate the cause of this strike, and we are trying to get at the bottom facts. Who helped you to compose that circular J— A. Well, I object to tell. Q. Why do you object to tell it?— A. I had pledged my word not to tell. Q. Suppose a man committed a murder and you had pledged your word ; would you refuse to tell ? — A. But I would not pledge my word in a case of that kind. Q. Suppose you did. — A. That would suppose what cannot be. Q. I do not know but that it might be. This strike has been attended with the killing of people in some places. — ^A. I did not see any killing. Q. (By Mr. Parkek.) You remember the commencement of your testimony! — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you sworn? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you swear in the presence of Almighty God that you would swear the truth and the whole truth ? — A. Yes, sir, Q. Who assisted you in the composition of this letter ? — A. I say I will take the re- sponsibility all on myself. That is as far as I can go. Q. That does not answer nor refuse to answer. I require that you shall answer or refuse to answer. What do you say ? — ^A. I believe that Mr. Bibb was the one that assisted me. Q. What is his name ? — A. It is that gentleman there [pointing]. Gteorge, I think. Q. Who else ? — A. I think I do not know of anybody else. Q. Have you any other document of this character that you can give us? — ^A. I have none, sir. Q. What part of the world were you born ? — A. I was born in the Isle of Man, in Europe. Q. What wages are you now receiving from this company? — ^A. Two dollars and seventy-flve cents per day. Q. What is your work ? — A. Machinist. Q. How long have yon received those wages? — A. I got that when I first came here. When I commenced with the company at first I received that wage. Then we had • reduction, and then, alter the last strike, we got reinstated to our former price. Q. You went back on Mr. Powderly's letter ? — A. That y^aa the first cause. Q. With which you complied ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you are not now a member of the order? — A. No, sir. (The circular was here put in evidence.) THE SPARK WHICH KINDLED THE CONFLAGRATION. It is rumored by some newspaper reporters that the immediate cause of the strike on the Ti xas and Pacific Eailway was the discharge of C. A. Hall, foreman of a car department at Marshall, Tex., for obtaining leave of absence to attend delegate meet- ing of District Assembly No. 101, at Marshall, for three or four hours, and that he remaiued absent for four days. This IS a mean, false, and untruthful report, and only intensifies the feelings of disgust of the employes who know the true facts, and strengthens their determinatipn to show to the world that truth shall and must prevail, notwithstanding Governor Brown's determination not to have the matter fully and fairly invested. • On February 14, 1886, C. A. Hall asked for leave of absence to attend the meetings, and if he could not get leave of absence he would not go. It might be for two or three days, and he would be in the shop two or three hours per day. J. A. Crosbie, general loreman, said all right, which can, by evidence, be proved to the satisfaction of any court of justice. On the third evening Hall was discharged for being absent without leave, although he had attended shop two or three hours per day. A com- luittee interviewed Mr. Crosbie and told him they could prove that he had granted Hall permission as stated, Crosbie then said that did not matter, as Hall was incom- petent, and could not work there again. Committee addressed Mr. Watts, master mechanic, on the case, and he would not intertere. Crosbie was again interviewed. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 319 The same result. Committee then placed the matter in the hands of the executive board, which was then in session. Judge Pardee promised the executive board that he would send a man to Marshall to investigate the case. The executive board waited four days, did all they could to obtain an investigation, were ignored, and failed to obtain one. Hence the strike ! The greatest strike the world ever beheld, just because Governor Brown would not recognize the right of the Knights of Labor to ask for an investigation of as base a lie as was ever invented. Capital may lose its millions, labor lose its millions, and the general public greatly inconvenienced ! All to cover a lie that will not bear exposure. We have truth, honor, and honesty of purpose on our side, and only ask for justice; and that we must have or fight to the bitter end. Now that the strike has increased to its present dimensions, no doubt each assembly will have some grievance to be redressed; and the longer this strike lasts, the more it will enlarge, and new difficulties must consequentlj; arise. Where will it endt Loss, misery, death. We are prepared j but truth and justice must be meted out to the poor la borer as much as to the receiver of any court. The laws and courts of this country were never intended to be used as tools for the benefit of railroad monopolists against the honest labor and horny-handed men of toil, who are the bone and sinew and creators of the vast wealth of this Great Republic of the Stars and Stripes. KNIGHTS OF LABOR. Maeshall, Tex., March 9, 1886. Q. (By the Chairman.) How did Mr. Bibb assist you in preparing that circular t — A. In giving me information and in prompting me. Q. Do you mean he stood by you ? — A. He had one partly written before I began. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You were a member of the local grievance committee at the time that this strike was ordered t — A. Yes, sir. Q. As such member it was your duty to take charge of and investigate grievances handed over to you by the assembly ? — A. Occasionally. Q. I do not ask whether they were handed to you occasionally, but was it your duty ? — A. Whenever it was handed to me it was. Q. Is it not a part of the duty of that committee to investigate the grievances? — A. The appointment is not a standing grievance committee. The.grievance is brought into the committee, and that committee appoints a subcommittee. Sometimes I am on the subcommittee, and then sometimes I am not. Q Was this Hail grievance handed to you? — A. No, sir; I was oue of the whole committee, and not of the subcommittee. Q. It was tot handed in to the full committee? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You were not a member of the subcommittee appointed on that ? — A. No, sir. Q. What time did that reach your full committee — whal month ? — A. It was in Feb- ruary. Q. Early in February ? — A. I cannot remember the date. It was the date the con- vention was here. Q. When that grievance about Mr. Hall was handed to your full committee, do yon know what was done with it ? — A. It was discussed, and it was placed, I think too early, in the hands of Martin Irons. Q. It was discussed and placed, as you think, too early in the hands of Martin Irons? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Of the district committee? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that all that your local grievance committee did with the grievance of Mr. Hall? — A. The subcommittee ; they did the work principally. Q. What did they do ?— A. The subcommittee? Q. Yes.— A. They went to see Mr. Crosby and -went to see Mr. Watts, and they re- ported back to the full committee. Q. Then what did the full committee do ?— A. The fall committee sent for Mr. Crosby. He came, and was examined by tlje committee, and we tried all we could Q. Please do not answer that way ; tell me what you did.' Is that all ?— A. We had him here and examined him, and could not get the thing settled just there, and then I think we had another meeting, and then it was handed over to Martin Irons. Q. Is that all that this local committee did ?— A. That is all that I can recolteot. If anything else can be brought to my mind I will say what it was. Q What vf as done about the proposition to go to Dallas and see Governor Brown by the full committee ?— A. I proposed it the very last day. Q. Were not passes given for that purpose ? — A. It was said that they were. Q. What was done with your proposition to see Governor Brown ou the matter ? — A. It was rejected. Q. On what ground ?— A. They said that the district committee were here and they woiild hand it in to them. . ' Q. But is it not the duty of the local committee to see that every eflfort is used to 320 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. have the matter adjusted before placing it in the hands of the district committee ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Then, why did. not the local committee go to see Governor Brown at Dallas, as suggested, and, as has been signified, avail yourselves of his willingness to meet you t — A. I cannot say what the real reasons were. Only they rejected the proposition and gave it to the district committee. Q. Then you surrendered jurisdiction of this subject before you exhausted every effort in your power to have it adjusted? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is what you mean when you say it was handed over to Martin Irons too soon? — A. Yes, sir; too early. Q. You had not exhausted every effort before submitting it to Martin Irons ?— A. The committee did. I did what I could. Q. You were overruled in your suggestions by the committee f — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the proposition submitted to the local assembly to vote whether they would or would not sustain your district committee upon the grievance of Mr. Hall, the only grievance stated ? — A. The ouly grievance stated ? Yes, sir. Q. And have you stated the only reason that was given in any session of your local committee by any member of that committee for not going to Dalla-s ? Have you stated every reason that was urged in the sessions of your local committee by any member for not going to Dallas ? — A. Yes, sir ; to the best of my recollection that is so ; I not only made that suggestion to the committee, but also made it known after the men had all come from their work that we did it altogether for Mr. Hall. Q. You not only made that suggestion to the committee but also to the whole / assembly, and your suggestion was rejected ? — A. It was rejected again by the full meeting. Q. Did you say the district assembly was in session at the time ? — A. The district assembly had just closed their session, but the district committee had not returned home. It was on the last day of the session that Mr. Hall got his discharge. Q. Was the idea of the local committee that, as the district committee was here, they might as well turn it over to them at once? — A. Yes, sir; before they left town it was handed over to them. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Was it not understood among the union men here that there was to be a strike the 1st of May, iu any event? — ^A. That has been talked of for a longtime. Q. For about how long? — A. I think five or six months; that has been spoken of, but never decided. Q. Was the time about the Ist of May when it was expected there would be a strike? — A. Well, the strike that was spoken of then was agitated by the labor jour- nals and labor papers. It was a matter agitated by those papers more than by the men themselves. It had been discussed pretty often. It was the eight-hour ques- tion. It had been occasionally a themo of discussion in our assembly from time to time, but there never had been any decision about the matter. Q. Was there ever, to your knowledge, a movement of the members or officers of the order, or was there any intention or preparation to strike about the 1st of May, or any time near that time, upon what is known as the eight-hour movement ? — A. Not that I am aware of. And the Knights of Labor have not as a body been iu favor of the eight-hour idea. They do not think the time has yet arrived for that. EDWIN J. FRY sworn and examined. By Mr. Buceuustait : Question, How long have you been a citizen of Marshall? — ^Answer. Twelve or fourteen years. Q. What knowledge have you, if any, as to the cause of the strike on the Texas and Pacific Railroad? — A. I was one of the citizens' committee appointed to try and ad- just the differences, if possible, between the employes and receivers. Q. Appointed by whom ?.— A. By a meeting of the citizens. Q. A public meeting ? — A. Yes, sir. Q, Did you proceed to discharge the object of your appointment ? — A, Yes, sir. Q. Which party did you first see ? — A. The executive committee of the Knights of Labor. Q. Headed by whom?— A. Martin Irons. Q. What did they state to you was their grievance? — ^A. They stated their griev- ance was the discharge of C. A. Hall, the discharge of J. O. Bassett, a former conductor, previous to the appointment of the receiver, and they also demanded that certain bridge-men should be given some extra pay, or additional pay, which they said had never been done under the Hayes agreement. Q. Who was the spokesman of the committee? — A. Martin Irons. Q. Did he represent himself as an employfi of the Texas and Pacific ? — A. No, Bir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 321 Q. What did he say, if anything, aliout his official position ?— A. That he was dis. trict master, or something of that kind, of the district assembly of Knights of Labor- Q. Assembly No. 101 f— A. I think that was the assembly that he claimed to be from. Q. You were there for the purpose of ascertaining what their grievances were, and upon what issues he signed the order for the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What conditions were stated ? — A. The reinstatement of Hall. Q. Did they demand that the receivers reinstate him as foreman ? — A. That he be given his employment in the shops. Q. What did they demand as to the reinstatement of Mr. Bassett ? — A. That he be reinstated as conductor. Q. Were there any other conditions ? — A. Something in regard to a bridge gang, but I never understood that fully myself. Q. What did your committee and what did you say ? — A, We sent two or three telegrams to Governor Brown. Q. Did your confer with the receivers ? — A. Only by telegraph ; I believe the first telegram was to Governor Brown, to know if he would confer with us. Q. We already have those telegrams that I presume you refer to ; did you make any proposition to Mr. Irons, and, if so, what 1 — A. Yes, sir ; after the strike we pro- posed two or three times to order the men back to work ; we thought the committee could have better grounds to get concessions from the receivers, if the men went back to work. Q. Did he ask for time to consider the matter ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see him at the end of the appointed time f — A. Yes, sir ; he asked time to consider the first day that we had the conversation until that night. Q. Was the proposition accepted or rejected ? — A. It was rejected ; then ontheseo- ond day afterwards we renewed the proposition, and he said that if Governor Browu would hear the grievances of the men aggrieved, he would order the men back to work. Q. Then followed your telegram to ask if he would receive your committee, and then came a reply ? Did Governor Brown and Governor Sheldon refuse to hear any grievances from any of their men, so far as your knowledge goes t — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know what influences prevented themen from going to work? — ^A. Tha;t no order to return to work had been given by Mr. Irons, and were not to be, until their grievances had been settled. Q. Had you any further conversation with Martin Irons besides that you have al- ready related ? — A. Well, I had three or four conversations with him as to the way that the strike arose. Q. Didyouat any timehearMr. Irons allege any reason, ontside of the one that you have stated, for the strike? — A. None whatever. Q. Have you heard any one of the strikers at any time allege any other reason for the strike? — A. I think Martin Irons, in conversation with me, said that the matter had to be settled through him ; that they had to recognize him as an official of the ' Knights of Labor, or something to that effect. Q. When you asked him to return the men to the shops, what reason, if any, besldo what you have given, did he give for not complying ? — A. After receiving Governor Brown's telegram ? I have not seen him since. p. Before he promised he would if Governor Brown's telegram was satisfactory T — A. He did not meet the committee at all after the telegram was received. , JAMES FINK sworn and examined. By Mr. Paeker : Question. You were switch engineer at Marshall and a Knight of Labor ? — Answer. I was. Q. Were you ordered by any one at any time not to move freight cars, and, if smy were attached to your engine, not to move them ? — A. I was. Q. By whom were you so directed? — A. By a committee of the Knights of Labor. Q. Can you name either of them ? — A. Stewart — Henry, I think, is his name. Q. Any other, do you remember ? — A. Not any. Q. What occurred ? — A. I got off the engine. Q. Did they require you to switch freight cars ? — A. They did. Q. And you got off the engine and left it? — A. I did. Q. How long did you remain without employment ? — A. Four or five days. Q. Did you leave the engine because of this order from them ? — ^A. I did. Q. Did you return after four or five days ? — A. I did. Q. What was the agreement or assurance of work by the company ? What did the company promise you to induce you to begin ? Was it protection, or anything of that kind ? — A. They did not promise me anything, but gave me my job back. 3984 LAB 3: 21 322 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. And you t6ok it and went to work and remained at work ever since? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was this order that you got from the committee in writing ? — A. It was not. Q. Given to you by a man just verbally ? — A. It was. Q. At the yard ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long after the strike commenced.?— A. The day of the strike or the day after; I think it was the day after ; or it was somewhere along there. Q. And it was solely because of that order you left that engine and that you left your train standing there? — A. Yes, sir; I did. , Q. Where would the train have gone ? — A. It was not a train ; it was on the house track, switching cars there. Q. Did you stop the work ? — A. I did. Q. And the carrying of cars was interrupted by your stopping ? — ^A. I suppose it was to a certain extent. Q. This happened on the yards of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many special policemen were stationed there at that time to protect the property of the company ? — A. There were not any. There was some Knights of Labor ; I could not see any officers if they were there. Q. Did they take any steps to see that the property of the company was kept in its legitimate use ? — A. I cannot say. Q. They took no steps to protect you ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Are you still a Knight of Labor? — No, sir, I am not. Q. How were you disconnected from them ? — ^A. Well, I tried to get back; I tried to have their permission to go back. They would not give it ; and I just saw it was taking bread and butter out of my mouth. I could not stand it, and I withdrew from them and went back to work. Q. Were you required to leave the Knights of Labor when you went back ? — A. I did it of my own free will. I just went to the master workman and told him that I wished a withdrawal from the order ; that I had to go back to work. Q. Were you asked by anybody to withdraw from the Knights of Labor ? — ^A. No, sir J I was not. Q. Were you asked by anybody to get a withdrawal card from them ? — A. I was not ; but let me see. I believe I got a letter. I do not remembernow what it said, though. Q. State its contents as near ds you can. — A. I cannot remember; but it stated if I did not quit work I would be expelled from the order. I cannot remember exactly how it was. Q. A regular notice with the seal of the order attached ? — A. Yes, sir ; it was. Q. Have you heard anything from it since then ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was the man who notified you to quit work " Prenohy," as he is called — was he then a policeman ? — A. I cannot say. JEREMIAH E. MEERITT sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Give your position in the employ of the Texas and Pacific Railroad Com- pany. — Answer. I am chief clerk in the locomotive and oar department of the master mechanic, sir. Q. How long have you been in the employ of the company ? — ^A. Since September 31, 1881. Q. Have you heard the men who went out on strike assign the reasons for their going out ? — ^A. The only reason that I could hear was that it was caused by the dis- missal of C. A. Hall, foreman of the car shop. Q. Have you had conversations with the strikers since they struck about the cause ? — A. Just while passing about on the streets, and such as that. Q. And would' you hear them talking about their grievances ? — A. I have approached one or two and asked them what were their grievances. They said their only griev- ance, that they could see, was about the Hall case. Q. Did you hear anything about any agreement being broken by the receivers with their employes? — A. No, sir. Q. Would you have any opportunity of knowing their troubles about pay, if they arose, and whether they were adjusted or not? — ^A'. Yes, sir. Q. Would you have opportunity of knowing that from your official position? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the practice in reference to that ? If a man was promised a raise did he get it? — A. He always got it. Q. If a man sometimes did not, what then ? — A. If he could show he had been prom- ised an increase, and it was overlooked, he would be given enpugh hours in the next month to make tt up. LABOR TEOUBIiES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 323 Q. Are yon prepared from your official position to state whether difficulties of that sort were always adjusted ? — A. I am. Q. And were they or nof?— A. They were. Q. So far as they passed through your office ? — A. Yes, sir. (5. Were there any grievances unadjusted that arose before the appointment of the leceivers, that. you know oft — A. No, sir, * 1 ' Q. Did you ever hear the men talk of any ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know anything about a black list being kept in the master mechanic's office on this road ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they have a form headed " Black list" giving a description of the men dis- charged ?— A. They had a sheet ruled as a black list in 1881, when I first came here on the road, but it was recalled by A. Talmadge. It has never been used since I have been here ; and even when it was used the order, as I understood, was "never very closely trace a man." No man was ever traced up by the black list. Q. You have never seen it since ?^A. I have never seen it since 1 have been in the office. I think I filled out one form. Q. When was that?— A. In the fall of 1881. Q. And you know of no use of them since then ?— A. No, sir. AUGUSTUS EGBEET sworn and examined. By Mr. Pahker: Question. What is your official position in connection with the Texas and Pacific Kailroad ? — Answer. I am general superintendent for the receivers. Q. Were you at any time examined by a United States commissioner? — A. I was. Q. About what time?— A. About the last days of April, in 1886. Q. Ir relation to the strike, and its cause and effects ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you look at this evidence [handing witness copy of testimony taken before the commissioner] and say whether it is a true copy of your testimony then given ? — A. It is. Q. Are the facts stated here true and correct? — A. I believe them to be so. (The document was theu admitted.) Statement he/ore Commissioner. ' Q. Please state your official connection with the Texas and Pacific Railway. — A. I am general superintendent for the receivers. Q. When did you take charge of the road. — A. On the 15th of January, 1886. Q. Please state from your personal knowledge and the information that you have received, the cause or causes that led to the strike in the shops at Marshall about the first of last March? — ^A. Well, I believe the direct cause was to give a certain organi- zation strength ; something to build on . Q. Was there any complaint from any of the workmen in the shops at Marshall, just preceding the strike? — A. Nona whatever. Q. Did you confer with the strikers after they quit work? — ^A. I did not; that is, not as an organization of strikers. Q. Was the property of the railway company interfered with or damaged in any way after the strike commenced? — A. It vras. Q. Was ther'5 any opposition to the running of trains, and was the conduct of busi- ness interfered with along the line for some time after ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What means were taken to protect the railroad property from destruction by the receivers ? — A. The receivers applied to the United States court for protection, and the court directed the various United States marshals to appoint a sufficient number of special deputies to guard the property in their respective districts. Q. Have you in your office reports or statements showing the amount of damage after the strike commenced to property ? — A. Yes, sir. Q « » « — ^ Well, I have not got it summed np; the total amount of damage by actual violence will not amount to much. Q. Was any of the property burned? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Please state.— A. The oil house at Big Springs was burned during the strike. Q. Were there any bridges burned ? — A. Yes, sir; two bridges north of Forth Worth were burned, and three between Dallas and Marshall. Q. Was the track molested in any way ? — A. It was at a point west of Marshall;- the fish-plate was removed and the rail displaced, causing a wreck to a passenger train, nothing very serious resulting, however. Q. How soon after the men went out pf the shops were they paid off? — A. Their pay was tendered them within a week after they went out of the shops. 1 will also state that the men were notified on the morning of the SJd that all who did not re- turn to work by 10 o'clock of the 4th are discharged. Q. Did these men who had lately been employes of the road show a disposition to 324 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. molest and do damage to property ? — A. They showed a disposition to interfere with the operation of the road by intimidating the men to keep them from work, and taking links and pins from cars, and disabling engines. Q. How many engines were disabled?— A. Well, I have not the total number. Q. At what point along the line did there seem to be the most danger from vio- lence?— A. Well, dnriug the whole strike it seemed to extend from Marshall toToyah, that is, from Fort Worth to Big Springs, Whitesborongh to Texarkana, Texarkana to Dallas, &c. Q. Have the receivers or any ofScers under them failed to keep any agreement with the employ^ concerning wages ? — A. ISot that I am aware of. Q. Have you ever heard any complaint from the strikers that they were not paid by the receivers, as agreed ? — A. I do not think I have. Q. Did you make personal investigation of the trouble in the shops after the men had struck ?— A. I did. Q. What did you discover to be the reason that caused the men to stop work?— A. They seemed to think that it was on account of the discharge of a man named Hall. ■ Q. Did you apeak personally with any of the strikers ! — A. I did not. Q. From your personal knowlege of character and disposition of the strikers who quit work, what would have been the condition of the road had it not been protected by the United States marshals and their deputies ?— A. I think the road would have been in the liands of a mob, and there would have been great opposition to the opera- tion of the road, and destruction of property unless the company would have yielded to their demands, whatever they might be. HISTORY OF THE STRIKB. On March 1, 1886, at 3 p. m., the whistles at Marshall and Big Springs shops sounded and the employes in and surrounding the shops at those points walked out to a man. AtToyah,4.20 p.m. same day, the shop employes and yardmen, and at 5.30 same date, all shopme ;, car-repaireris, warehousemen, and yard-switchmen at Fort Worth quit work. At Marshall the grievance given to the public was the discharge of one C. A. Hall, foreman of the freight car-shop at Big Springs ; Toyah, and Fort Worth no grievance was named, the only reason assigned was that an order had been received from the Knights of Labor at Marshall to stop work. On March 2 an order was issued notifying all employes that those who had failed to return to work by March 4, by 10 o'clock a. m., would beconsidereddismissedfromtheserviceof the road, and would bo paid in full to application to paymaster. On the same day the coal-heavers quit work at all points on the Rio Grande and Eastern Division. The first attempt to interfere with trains was made at 10.10 p. m. on this date. As train 31.5 was ready to leave Big Springs, a body of twenty-five masked men took possession of the engine, broke head and cab lights, took the fireman from the eugine by force and uncoupled the engine from train and pulled coupling-pins from the train, cutting it in several pieces, and throwing the pins away, forcing the discontinuance of freight trains. During the night a switcli engine was disabled bysame parties. At 2.30 p. m. on 'the 3d instant, several bridge gangs, and all roundhouse men atLongview Junction struck. On March the 4th between 12.30 and 1 a. m. six engines were disabled in Big Springs roundhouse by a mob of fifty masked men forcibly entering the roundhouse an^ removing part^ of them all. At 7 oVlock a. m. the strikers took forcible pos- session of the roundhouse, putting engines inside the house and allowing no one to fire them or move them ; ou the same night further disabled them by removing other parts. The strikers pulled coupling-pins in all cars in Big Springs yards and threw them away. They also removed the draw-bar keys so that trains could not be moved in the event of getting engines out of the house. Trains were discontinued this date west of Colorado. But very few of the strikers would accept their pay at Marshall, and but a few section-men at Big Springs, although paymasters were at both points with proper rolls and money to pay them off. The agent at Fort Worth was prepared to pay all striking employes at that point, but none of them would accept it; proper notices were posted at all points warning employes th»,t they who failed to return to work by 10 a. m. on the 4th instant would be discharged.' The miners employed at Gordon mines, which belong to the Texas and Pacific Railway, pulled the coupling- pins and notified the trainmen that it would not be safe to come there again until the strike was over. The telegraph operators employed by this company at Fort Worth with the excep- tion of one man walked out, and about this time great difficulty was experienced owing to obstacles thrown in the way by telegraph operators employed by this road belonging to or sympathizing with the Knights of Labor. This was notably the case in reports from the Transcontinental Division, where messages were held In some cases twenty-four to thirty-six hours, and in others destroyed altogether or so badly mutilated in transmission as to be of no service to the ofScers of the load, leav- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 325 ing them in ignorance of tlie moves Ijeing made by the KniglatB of Labor on tiiat part of the road. On Marcli the 5t]i everything was at a standstill at Big Springs, so far as the move- loent of freight trains -was concerned. Eleven men were employed at that point and set to work, but were warned by the strikers that they remained at their peril ; some left at once. On March the 7th the locomotive and ear department struck at Colorado, Mineola, and Texaikana, as well as yard crews at the last-named point. On March the 6th we received notice from the Missouri Pacific that they could receive no freight from us owing to strike of employes on that road. Ou the 2d instant we received notice irom the Missouri Pacific ofBcers that they would be unable move and haul our coaches and baggage cars, as the Knights of Labor had boycotted our cars. On the 4lh instant the officers of the Missouri Pacific advised our agents at junction points that they would receive no freight loaded in Texas and Pacific or New Orleans Pacific cars, but that all freight in such cars would have to be transferred to' cars of their own road. The men, struck at Bonham also and stopped movement of freight trains on the Transcontinental Division, and all work in Bonham roundhouse and shop, and the repairing of cars. On March the 8th the strikers took possession at Fort Worth, and killed switch en- gine 49 used by this company in switching cars at Fort Worth. Owiug to threats made at various points the running of freight trains after nigbt was discontinued as a measure of prudence. Yardmen, locomotive, andcar department «mploy^s struck at Baird and many of the trackmen and some of the firemen on the Eio Grande and Transcontinental Divisions quit work with a demand for $1.50 per day for laborers and $65 per month for foremen. On the night of March 9 a mob of strikers with faces blackened entered the shops at Big Springs armed with pistols, and disarmed the night watchman, taking guides from stationery engiues and taking them away. They disturbed nothing else, after ■examining the disabled engines to see that no repairs had been made. At Baird on the same night the strikers disabled engine 582 by taking throttle lever away and by threats drove away the coal-heavers. At Bonham strikers gathered and requested the fireman and engineer to get off engine and not go out., All the yardmen at Long- view Junction quit work. Local authorities arrested and fined a boiler-maker at work in Big Spring shops for carrying revolver to protect himself owing to threats of per- sonal violence made against him by the strikers. No trackmen were at work on the Transcontinental Division from Honey Grove to Whitesborough, and but a few be- tween Texarkana ana Honey Grove. March 10, a mob went to roundhouse at Baird with drawn revolvers driving the employes away and disabling the engines in the house except that intended for pas- senger and mail train No. 301, by taking the guides off one side of each. At 11.30 a. m. we succeeded, with the aid of the United States marshal, S. D. Jaokman, and his deputies, in getting a freight train out of Big Springs east and two west, and got an- other oat east later. An attempt to get a freight train out of Bonham proved futile, owing to strikers congregating and asking engineers and firemen not to go out. Overawed by the crowd they declined to go. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engi- neers at their meeting this date passed resolutions that they were ready to perform their duty now and in the future as they had in the past, unless forced to leave their engines, and that they were in no wise connected with the strike. The Order of Rail- way Conductors gave the same expression. i On March 11 Roadmaster Lem found switch broken at Baird, and while attempting to repair same with two of his men a mob of strikers came up and interfered with his men and threw his hand-car off the track. At Bonham the crowd of Knights of Labor drove the engineers and firemen from their engines, as fast as they attempted to move them. No protection was afforded by the city authorities, the city marsfial being a prominent member of the order and active in preventing the moving of trains. L. B.Howitt,, John Torrance, H. B. Sage, andT. W. Thornton, comprise the committee who waited upon engineers and firemen requesting them not to go out. The citizens of Bonham who belong to the Knights of Labor were in the majority and proved even a greater obstruction to moving the trains than the former employes of the road. Unable to get any freights out of Texarkana, this date. The roundhouse at Tex- arkana, Ark., is on the Saint Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern property, and was closed and guarded by Khights of Labor. Three Texas and Pacific engines were shut up in roundhouse, engines 5CJ9, 524, 662. Five section gangs between Marshall and Fort Worth quit March 12. A consid- erable number of strikers congregated in the wood about Gordon coal chutes, who difove away men sent there to coal engines and informed them that if they did not work they could get their meals at all section-houses along the line. The Knights of Labor persuaded the pumpers at Aledo and Weatherford to quit ■their posts. The yardmaster and roundhouse foreman at Texarkana are Knights of Labor and gave no assistance in getting out trains. Engine 650 turned at Transcontinental 326 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE' SOUTH AND WEST. Junction and backed into Texarkana, and dispatcher and trainmaster succeeded ia coupling on some cars of perishable freight, and train came out. Several attempts •were made by strikers to kill the engine but they were unsuccessful. On the 12th of March Marshal Reagan took possession of the property at Marshall, and Marshal Cabell at Bonham on the 13th. On the 14th thirty-eight men were at work in Big Springs shop. At 10 a. m., March 15, the employ^ in the shops at Gouldsborough, quit work and stopped No. 315, which train had to be abandoned. The water in the tanks of four engines at Texarkana was let out, thus preventing our getting them away. Strikers threw rotten eggs at yardmaster and two of his assistauts at Fort Worth. On March the 16th a freight train was moved each way on joint track between Fort Worth and Whitesborough under protection of the United States marshal. Train 315 was stopped bv strikers at Gretna and 316 discontinued to keep engine out of Gouldsborough. Engine 315 was disabled by strikers by disconnecting ec- centric from link and breaking rod and block. March 17 strikers stopped 317 at Gretna, but finally let her go about 11 o'clock a. m. March 18 train 311 was flagged 1^ miles west of Sparta by an armed man, masked, who handed the engineer the following note : March 18, 1886. Mr. Enginher. You and your brother engineers are hereby notified that the Texas and Pacific Railway is not safe for the present. Be warned in time. We are tired of tyranny. Tbxas CmzBNS. As soon as the man had delivered the note he mounted his horse and rode away. ' March 19, trains moved in and out of Gouldsborough unmolested. Coal-heavers on joint track at Denton refused to coal trains and they were dismissed, and deputy marshals were sent by Marshal Cabell to protect the persons employed in their places. On Monday, March 22, the shop whistle at Marshall blew arid a few men returned to work. The shops at all points have since gradually filled up. On March 28 all section gangs had been filled up and all the men employed who could be advantageously worked on the track. THE BOYCOTT. Boarding-house keepers at Fort Worth were visited by committees of the Knights of Labor, March 2, and for several days afterwards, and warned not to board any of the persons whom the road might employ on pain of being themselves boy- cotted. This warning was generally observed and in many cases our men were turned out altogether although the representatives of the company agreed to guarantee their bills. Merchants and other business men were visited and threatened with the boy- cott if they sold supplies to houses boarding Texas and Pacific men. One boarding- hoiise keeper persisted in keeping our men and a succession of boycotts failing to deter him, the water in his barrels was poisoned. At Marshall the boarding-houses were warned in a similar manner, and it was necessary for the company to open a board- ing-house to take care of the men employed there. DEVILTRY. J March 6, brakes were let off some cars in Marshall yards letting cars out of siding on main track, three of them jumping track, delaying passenger train 306 three and one-half hours. March 2, strikers threw switch at Toyah in face of special train of oranges and tea, running ou special time ; switch was reset in time to avoid accident. March 3, switch was disconnected in Big Springs yard ; it was discovered in time to prevent accident owing to the vigilance of the officers of this railway at that point. March 7, No. 314 found a pile of ties on the track 2 miles west of Handley's; no dam- age done. March 12, pump-house at Tiffin was burned, embarrassing us very much in running trains and causing no little expense in hauling water a long distance to supply en- gines. On March 14 freighc train 318 was delayed five hours at Marshall caused by strikers assaulting caller who was sent after engineer and fireman, and prevented him dis- charging his duties. On March 17 the spikes were drawn from rails and angle-plates were taken off 11 miles west of Marshall, derailing coach 372 on passenger train No. 305. The train was running very carefully and under perfect control at the time, otherwise a bad ac- cident, with probable loss of life, would have occurred. March 16, bridge 580 was burned on joint traoK. LABOR TEOTJBLES 5N THE SOUTH AND WEST. 327 March 17, bridge 542 was burned on joint tlack. March 18, bridge 713 was burned and badly damagad, causing a delay to passenger and mail train 304 of five hours and forty-five minutes, and to passenger and mall train 301 of four hours. On March 17 several shots were fired in the engine-room of the pump-house at Aledo. The pumper sent there had refused to leave his post when ordered to do so by the strikers. On March 9 switchman Ramsey was assaulted while in the discharge of his duties at Fort Worth, by striking switchmen, and pulled off a car and otherwise intimi- dated. March 10, during the night the brakes were let off caboose 2085 in Baird yard, while crew were asleep, and caboose ran down hill to main track for a long distance ; for- tunately the matter was discovered before passenger train 301 arrived and a dread accident was averted. March 19, coal chute switch at Big Springs was disconnected, with a view to running passenger and mail train 301 up at that track and derailing them. It was not dis- covered until the train, which was running slowly, had run up the track a short distance. Fortunately no damage was done, or anybody injured. March 20, section of train 312, at 6 p.m., found a pile of rock on track H miles east of Jndd's Station. Thei;rain was running very slowly and was stopped in time to prevent accident. March 21, a piece of iron rail 6 feet long was fouud across the track 3 mUes west of Gordon . March 22, while extra west was tied up at Strawn during the night the hose was cut between engine and tender and water let out. The water was also let out of the water car, which the train was obliged to carry on account of strikers burning pump house at-Tiffin. This disabled the engine, and train could not be moved until help was sent them. March 23, when passenger train 308 was pulling into side track at Lorraine, bag- gage car jumped the track. It is strongly believed that the trucks of the car had been tampered with during the preceding night at Colorado. Train was delayed one hour, and track was considerably damaged. March 27, one Harry Nolan, formerly a track laborer at Elmdale, in company with three or four other strikers went at night to the section-house at Elmdale, and find- ing section foreman Byrnes in bed, called him many vile names, and Nolan, before leaving, struck Byrnes with a piece of iron, causing a scalp wound 5 inches long. April 18, switch at Windom was thrown, derailing engine 514 and caboose of train 338, damaging them considerably. April 9, train 311 struct a pile of ties on track on White Eock Kill near Scyene. This train was just ahead of passengerand mail train No. 301. The ties were piled up on the track with the evident intention of wrecking that passenger train. April 8, bridge 863, 2 miles east of Mineola, was burned, delaying passenger and mail train 304 nine hours. Passenger train 306 two hours and fifty minutes late, and passenger and mail train 301 three and a half hours. April 1 1, train 312 found a piece of timber 2 by 4, 16 feet long, and two pieces of inch-timber on track near the west switch at Terrell. April 10, when train 319 was pulling out of Texarkana, a shot was fired into the caboose, but no one was injured. The vigilance of the oificers and trainmen, their zeal and fidelity in the diicharge of their duty to the receivers, and their prudence and caution in the running and care of trains is especially commended. Although obstructions have been placed on the track, bridges burned, and engines tampered with, the damage caused by the wreck of trains has been small, and no injury or loss of life has occui-red either to the passengers or the employes. At no time during the strike have the oiBcers of this railway been unable to obtain men to fill the places of the strikers, if proper protec- tion had been afforded by the municipal and county authorities. Men were employed who, after working a short time, were driven away by threats of personal violence, and in many cases our employes were assaulted, the perpetrators escaping punish- ment for their acts. This caused many of our men to leave, and deterred others from seeking employment on this road. After the United States marshals took charge . we were unable to furnish employment to all applicants where protection was ample, and but a short time elapsed before all the places were filled, even at remote points. It needed merely to be demonstrated that protection would be afforded to men in the discharge of their duty to secure all the meu we could furnish with employment in all classes of labor, both skilled and otherwise. ^ DELAY OF FREIGHT TKAIJfS AND TKAFFIC. • On account of the strike on the Missouri Pacific our passenger and mail trains have been uniformly from two to five hours late, waiting for connections with trains on that road. Freight trains have moved very slowly, owing to the many obstructions 328 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. found on tlie track, and have been laid np at stations during tiie night. Nothing but the greatest vigilance and care have prevented many and serious accidents. On the Rio Grande Division 138 freight trains weris delayed 1,483 hours and 20 min- ntes. Freight trains were discontinuad between Big Springs and Toyah March 5 to 9, inclusive ; between Toyah and Sierra Blanea March 5 to 10, inclusive. BetwtBU JBaird and Big Springs a few trains ran as far as Colorado between the 3d and 10th, inclusive. Ou the Eastern Division, between Texarkana and Dallas, freights were not entirely discontinued on any day, but serious delay, expense, and inconvenience were sustained laying up nights. On tlae Transcontinental Division all the trains were discontinued between Bonham and Whitesborough, March 7, 8, 9; 10, 11, 12, and 13 1 all freight trains discontinued between Texarkana and Whitesborough Marcli 14 and 15; all freight trains discontinued between Texarkana and Bonham, except March 8 and 9 a local freight train ran between Texarkana and Honey Grove. AH freight trains were laid up at night on this division between the date of resumption, March 16 and April 5, it being unsafe to move them at night on account of obstruc- tions on track. Freight trains between Marshall and Boyce were laid up at night March 4 to 12, inclusive. In estimating the loss occasioned by the strike I pay the amount paid men while their trains were side-tracked, the damage caused by wrecks and other vandalism, the loss of service of eiigines detained by strikers, the deteriora- tion of the track caused by no work being done, the extra cost of coal (this item is very large). The strike on the Missouri Pacific Eailway*cut off our supply of coal from the Indian Territory : the strike of the miners at Gordon cut off our Rio Grande Division supply, and we were obliged to haul our coal for locomotives from New Or- Iteans — in some cases a distance of over a thousand miles. The estimate also in- cludes cost of watching buildings, water-tanks, bridges, and the service of the United States marshals and their deputies. Likewise the damage caused by delay, laying up freight trains at night, necessarily delayed business, and our motive power ac- complished only a trifle more than one-half the work which would otherwise have been done, and the loss of traffic by diversion of our legitimate through business to other lines, owing to the inability of our connections to receive it from and deliver it to us. Damage to locomotives by strikers detaching parts in round-houses |500 00 Loss caused by wrecks • 800 00 Loss by fires. 6,500 00 Loss of links, pins, tools, &c 1,000 00 Special United States marshals will probably amount to 30,000 00 Watchmen 500 00 Extra time, paid trainmen while trains were laid up nights (includes watching) 4,000 00 Extra cost in delay in laying trains up nights, and blockades caused by slow movement 5, 000 00 Loss of service of engines tied up by strikers (estimated at |7 per day) 2, 600 00 Deterioration of track la, 000 00 Miscellaneous expenses not included in above 7,aOO 00 Extra expense on fuel supply... 25,000 00 Approximate of diversion of freight and passenger traffic incident to the strike ou this line and inability of our connections to deliver freight to and to receive it ti-om us 125, 000 00 220,000 00 H. B. PITTS recalled and examined. By Mr. Parker: Question. Looking over the names [referring to a list of special police handed in by witness], I notice H. Stewart. Is he known among the boys as "Frenchy"?— Answer. I think he is. Q. This list is a correct list of the special police appointed ?— A. I think it is cor- rect as far as it goes; there were a few names that the city marshal did not have. The following list was then put in evidence : List of special policemen of the city of Marshall, appointed March 1, 1886. A. G. Norman, T. J. Burnett, W. H. Bill, J. G. Eowe, H. A. Tanke, John Eoquemore, Joe Heartsill, R. Davidge, James Hamilton, F. Bryant, J. Kielev, H. Morgan, George W.Eice, John Ford, T.Beuj. Scott, John Roberts, John Blackburn, A. Black, J. T. Carter, J.Farrer, J. O'Connor, H.Stewart, W.Harris, W.Butler, F.Murray, J.Gill, George Bergin, H.Craig, E.Nelson, Charles Covington, B. Bull, J. Smith, W. Levis H. Walker, B. Hanson, D. W. Leach, W. L. Dearing, George Bibb, James Little, E. O'Connor. ' LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. , 329 CHARLES A. GINOCHIO sworn aud examined. By the Chairman : Qaestion. You are a citizen of Marshall? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And have been for some years ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did your hear the testimony of Mr. Thorn in regard to Mr. Hager's remark in reference to the use of guns and bayonets in the settlement of the strike ? — ^A. No, sir ; I was not here. Q. Did you hear Mr. Hager's remark to Mr. Thorn about the use of guns and bayo- nets? — Yes, sir. Q. What did he say ?— A. They were speaking about the strike, and Mr. Hager said if it was not settled very soon it would be settled w ilh guns'and bayonets. It was in my office at the time it took place. Q. Was there only one conversation ? — A. That is all I heard. Q. Do you know of any acts of violence or intimidation on the part of strikers against either the railroad company or its employes ? — A. Nothing but what I saw myself. Q. State what you saw. — A. I did not see anything myself. I have heard a good deal and seen the effect of some. Q. You keep a hotel and boarding-house ? Were you boycotted ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. By whom ?— A. By a committee ; that is, the house in Fort Worth was boy- cotted. Q. I am not talking about Forth Worth ; I am talking about here. — ^A. I do not know of anything. GEORGE MUNDEN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. State all"you know about some dogs that you had during the strike mak- ing a trail somewhere about a mile from here about one of the railroad bridges. — An- swer. They came for me to take the dogs out a mile and a half west of town, where the passenger train had been wrecked. I went there with the dogs. They had been broken down, and their feet were sore that morning. I took the dogs and went down there, and after I got out they scented around, and I got a trail and followed it to the west about one-half a mile, and then crossed the railroad track back towards town and trailed back to the big road, going over and over the line. The dogs broke dowuand went no farther. Q. Is it true-that the dogs followed the track to where some of the employes of the railroad company were ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do the dogs belong to the company, or to whom do they belong ?— A. Part of them belong to Harris County and some of them to the Texas aud Pacific Railroad Company. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What breed of dogs are these ? — A. Common hounds that we have here. Q. Are they large and powerful? — A. No, sir'; just the common hounds of the country. Q. Are they large or small ? — A. Some call them blood-hounds. Q. Will they attack a man or simply run him down ? — ^A. If they are running hard, and if he does not get up in a tree or get out of the way they will sometimes attack him unless I am close by with them, and then they will not attack him, but will check up when I call to them. Q. You say that the Texas and Pacific Railroad Company has an interest in those dogs? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What use have you made of them for the company besides what you have just indicated, if any ? — A. Well, sir, before we got these dogs here they were breaking cars open all up anddown the road, at Longview Junction and down in Louisiana, and wrecking the trains ; and we went down there once or twice, trailed the parties up that put an obstruction on the rails, and sent them to the penitentiary. Q. And the dogs are used for this purpose ? — A. Yes, sir ; they hunt 'the parties breaking into cars, and get their trail, and we find out who they are. SAMUEL T. CROSS sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Did you occupy any position in the employment of the Texas Pacific Railroad Company when the strike broke out in Marshall ? — Answer. I was foreman of the pattern-shop. Q. Do you still occupy that place ? — A. I do, sir. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. I was. • " Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Why? — A. I did not think that the cause was a just one. 330 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What was the cause? — A. I think it was the discbarge of Hall. Q. Do you know why he was discharged ? — A. T'le rumor is for incompetency. Q. Was he incompetent f— A. I do not know whether I am capable of judging or not, as I had nothing to do with him. \ Q. You testified before Mr. Henry that he was an incompetent man. — A. To my knowledge, he was, sir; that is, to the best of my ability to judge, he was an incom- petent man. Q. Have the receivers violated any agreement with you ?— A. Not any, to my knowledge. Q. Have they always paid the men what they agreed to pay them ?— A. Tes, sir. Q. Do they pay them promptly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever see Hall at work?— A. lu the capacity of foreman! I have seen him while he was working in the coach-shop. Q. Do you know anything about his work personally? — A. No, sir. By Mr. Buchanan : Q. Were you one of the first who advocated a strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Never advocated it ? — A. No, sir. Q. At any time ? — A. No, sir. WILLIAM GEAVES sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You occupy the place of yardmaster on the Texas and Pacific ? — lAnswer. Yes, sir. Q, How long have you held that place ? — A. Going on three years now. Q. Do you know anything about any strikers being on the company's grounds ? — A. TThere were men there a few days after the strike originated ; I do not know what they were doing. Q. Were you ever called a " scab " ? — A. I was by crowds on the platform ; I have heard them say there was a " scab " and a ' ' Jay Gould servant." I paid no attention to it ; I could not say who the words came from. Q. Do yon know of any employes of the company leaving it on account of being abused by the strikers? — A. A man by the name of Griffin worked in the yard for about five hours, and said he would not work any longer; he was called a "scab," and would not work any longer. He left. MAETIN HINSEY sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You live at Palestine, Tex. ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What is your age ? — A. It is fifty. Q. Your occupation is that of a merchant?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You live in Palestine ? — A. Yes, sir ; have lived there for twelve years. Q. Your business is that of a wholesale merchant ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And some of the section foremen of the International and Great Northern bought their supplies from you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the men employed by the Missouri Pacific company distribute their patron- age wnerever they pleased without being controlled by the company in their distri- bution ? — A. They always did, sir. Q. Did you ever pay any salary to roadmasters to induce them to control the pat- ronage of their respective divisions in your fiivor? — A. No, sir. Q. Did any officer or employ 6 of any railroad in this State, or any other State, ever own or control one cent ,of the capital of your business from the time you went into business until the present ? — A. None whatever, sir. Q. Do you know of your own knowledge the cause of the strike ? — A. I do not, sir, further than from hearsay. Q. Did you ever hear any strikers say what was the cause of the strike ? — A. It was generally thought that it was on account of Mr, Hall being discharged on the Texas and Pacific. THOMAS CRONIN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Your age is forty-four ; you live at Palestine, Tex. ; you are general road- master of the International and Great Northern Eailroad, which is part of the Mis- souri Pacific system, and you were living at Palestine at the time of the strike? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. How many men had you in your department at the time of the strike? — A. Seven hundred and thirty-six men. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 331 Q. Was Mr. Hawley -working for you at the time of the strike t — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you discliarge him J — A. He tried to stop passenger trains over the road — ho and his men. Q. Were yon paying Mr. Hawley as high wages as you were giving to other men in a similar position ? — A. I was giving him just the same, sir. Q. Did you ever pay Mr. Hawfoy any money to influence his trade in certain stores t — A. Never, sir. Q. At what stores did the men along your line trade ? — A. They traded wherever they felt prompted to trade : wherever they pleased. Q. Does not the road oblige them to trade at certain stores and with certain indi- viduals t — A. No ; they can trade wherever they please, in any town, or any place they have a mind to. Q. Were you in Palestine during the last strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you talk with any of the men who struck t — A. I did. Q. Did you ask them what grievances they had ? — A. Yes ; I asked them what was the trouble on the road. Q. What did they state ? — ^A. They stated they did not have any trouble on their own road, but they struck out of sympathy with the Texas and Pacific. Q. Do you know how they expected to help on the Gould system when that road ■ was in the hands of a receiver ? — A. The idea was that the Texas and Pacific would be by that means compelled to put the men back. Q. Was there an abundance of railroad labor willing to take the place of the strik- ers during the strike ? — A. I had plenty of men to operate the road. Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. The road could have been run if not prevented by the strikers. The traffic could have been carried on. Q. Do you know anything of one Conberg ?— A. I had him discharged myself. Q. What did you discharge him for? — A. Because he was a hard man to get along with. A good man to do his work, but very cranky. Q. How many men have you in your department now t — A. 663. Q. Did you get all the men 'you need ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you ever grievances presented to you from your men asking you to raise their wages from |1.15 to $1.50 a day ?— A. I never had any complaint made to me. Q. Had you any Knights of Labor employed? — ^A. I have a great many of them yet. Q. Did they show any disposition to strike ? — A. No, sir. I was talliing with one •who went down and killed two engines at Trinity, and I asked him about what the trouble was, and he said there was no troiible on the road. Q. Did you discharge a man called J. W. Lowe ? — A. Yes, sir. He formed organi- zations on both sides of him, and he left his work to go into the business of organizing Knights of Labor. Q. How often was he away from his work during working hours ? — A. Twice, to my knowledge. Q. How long ? — A. Three hours at one time, and another evening about half a day. Q. What was his business ? — A. He was section foreman. Q. The evening that he went off, was he absent during working hours ?— A. Yes, sir; that was what he was discharged for. Q. Had he permission to go away ? — A. No, sir. Q. The other time he lett, was he away half a day ? And had he permission to go? — A. No, sir; he had permission at another time. Q. You are not division roadmaster ? — A. No, sir ; I am general roadmaster. Q. Who is division roadmaster? — A. R.G. Scott. Q. Did yoQ afterwards put Lowe in section 4, the Long View division ? — A. That ,wa8 the place he was discharged from. Q. Had you discharged him prior to that ?— A. No, sir. Q. Had he not been discharged from the service of the road prior to his' being at Long View? — A. He was discharged about threatening Mr. Neyland, the division roadmaster. * Q. When was Lowe discharged? — A. He was discharged about the last of March the last time. Q. Whom did you put in Mr. Lowe's place ? — A. One of the men working on the section. Q. What was his name ? — A. I disrem ember the name, ' Q. Did you state a month before that he was incompetent to fill the position ? — A. No, sir ; I do not know anything about that. Q. Here is a complaint in my hand signed by Mr. Lowe and sent to the assembly, in which he makes this statement: "It was to Mr. Cronin's interest to put him here, as Cronin gave him an order on Cronin's store for almost his entire month's wages." What is the fact ? — A. There is not a word of truth in it. Q. You testify upon your oath that there is not ?— A. I did not know the man who was to be put in his place. Q. Is his name J. M. McGeo ?— A. I think that is the name. Q. Do you keep a store? — A. No, sir; my sou keeps a store. 332 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Have you any interest in it f — A. No, sir. Q. Have you had any interest in it? — A. My son and nephew had not enough money and I let my son have some money to go into business, and took their note for the money. ^ Q. Did you receive a share of the profits or interest on your money? — A. I did not receive any share of the profits^ and have not at any time. Q. I am requested to ask this: if you have any interest direct or indirect in the stock or the business or the profits of the store ? — A. None, only have got a note for the moniey that is loaned to it, loaned on interest. I have got the note for the money, And that is all. SAMUEL F. WOODS recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. How long have you been employed by the Missouri Pacific sys iem ? — Answer. About thirteen years. Q. You are now assistant master mechanic ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you filling that place on the 13th of March, 1886 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What notice had you of the strike ? — A. Not any. Q. What was the first intimation you had of the strike ? — A. The whistle sounding at 10 o'clock. Q. Have you examined this statement [handing paper to -witness] ? — A. Yes, sir; I have examined it. Q. Do you know the facts stated there of your own personal knowledge ? — A. Not altogether of my personal knowledge. Q. State in general terms what acts of violence were committed at Palestine during the strike of March, 1886 ? — A. At 10 a. m. the employes all left the shop and went down to their hall, and at 11.30, or thereabouts, they all came back, or a great crowd came back, and commenced with the engines, all the engines that were in the house, and all the engines that had beeu prepared to take trains out. They let the -water out of them, took the fire out of them, and disabled them so that we could not use them. They took possession of the shops. I asked them if they had taken possession, and they said they had. They continued in that way, and when an engine came they took possession of it, and would not let it be put in the round-house. They took passenger engines, took them to the round-house and killed them. We proposed to move a freight train with the passenger engine, but they anticipated us in this, and took charge of the engine, and did almost everything to harass and annoy a person. Q. How many engines did they kill during the strike ? — A. They disabled twenty- seven engines, but they killed two of these, and then killed the passenger engines «very day. Then they let the water out and pulled the fires. Q. Did they stop the passenger train ? — A. They only stopped it about 40 minutes on that account. , Q. I see a statement here that F. J. Marshall, master-workman, on the 7th of March, demanded that two good coaches be placed at the disposal of his men near the round- house ; do you know anything of that ? — A. Not to my own knowledge ; only I know that coaches were placed there every day until the 29th of March. Q. By whom were they occupied — A. By Knights of Labor. Q. How did you know they were Knights of Labor? — A. 1 knew some of them were. I had been with them, they had served on committees before me as Knights of Labor, and had presented documents from the assembly, Q. How many Knights of Labor were there? What proportion of the crowd which had charge of the coaches were Knights of Labor?— A. My judgment is that about90 per cent, of them were Knights of Labor. I guess they were all Knights of Labor. Q. Had 90 per cent, of them waited on yon in committees ? — A. No sir, but they wore the emblem of the order, and that was just my judgment. I cannot tell posi- tively whether they were or not Knights of Labor. I did not stay around here. Q. I see here a statement that a notice pnt up by order of the general superintend- ent was torn down by the strikers? — A. The notices were torn down. Q. They were i)ut up again. What was done then? — A. Taken down again. Q. How long did the strikers remain in possegBion of the yards at Paiesxine? — A.. From the 6th of March to the 29th of March. Q. Did they allow y6u to transact your business as you had been doing before tiiey took possession ? — A. They almost entirely stopped us. Q. To what extent did they interfere with yon 1—A. They took possession of the freight engines. They did not prevent me coaling up engines. Q. Were any writs of injunction served on any of them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did those writs of injunction contain? — A. They were to keep off the com- pany's premises, and warned the parties from committing other acts of violence. Q. What effect did it have on them ? — A. On the sensible ones it had a good effect. ITpon all the other ones it did not seem to have any effect. Q. Were those who came around again arrested lor contempt of court f — A. There were four of them arrested ; that is mv_recollec_tion. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTU AND WEST. 333 Q. Were yon in Palestine on tlie 23d when engine 700 came out of the round-house f — A. Yes, sir ; 1 was there. • Q. State what occurred. — A. The engine was brought out of the engine-house to do some switching and to make up a freight train. Just as soon as the sheriff's posse was there, and just as the engine started from the water-tank, a bell was rung and the strikers came down from their haU. The sheriff told them they had been served with writs of injunction, the majority of them, and they must not come. They paid no attention to him, but came right on, got on the engine, throttled the engineer, and one of them threw the switch in front of the engine and threw the engine off the track, but we got them away and got the engine on the track and took the engine from them. Q. Were you at Palestine on the 26th when engine 750 was started again ?— A. 750 was brought out again. Sam Hammel got down to the coal chute and commenced switching cars there, and the strikers got on the engine there, and tried to take pos- session of it; but there were eight or ten conductors and brakemen and some other loyal employes that kept them away. They finally succeeded in getting the blow-off cock open, and placed an obstruction on the track and got the engine off the track. After that we were paralyzed to do anything furthc r. Q. Was anybody injured during during that time? — A. An engineer was struck about the face and eyes. Q. What -finally enabled you to go on with the business? — A. The posse of the sheriff and a posse of citizens came down and took charge of the yard and kept the strikers away. We were then permitted to go on with our business. Q. How long did the citizens remain in charge f — A. From about 1 in the day to 4 o'clock the next day. Q. Is that all the time that they remained in possession ? — A. All the time with a large posse. Q. Were any of the parties disturbing the business of the road punished ? — A. Some of them were punished for violation of the injunction writs. Q. 1 see in here a paper purporting to be a Knight's of Labor address to M. J. Cor- rigan. — A. He is foreman of the round-house. Q. Did you see him recei ve it ? — A. No, sir ; he showed it to me and showed me his reply. Q. Appended to this statement is another showing the engines which were disabled by the strikers, is it correct? — A. It is correct. 1 state that of my own personal knowledge, as I examined the engines. As far as Palestine is concerned, I know that of my own personal knowledge. Q. Do youknow anything about D. O. Brown and I. Hayes?— A. I received this note on October 12 from the round house : " I would like to have this man D. 0. Brown, the colored man, removed. He is totally inefficient. He keeps the engine too long at the coal pile. He is also negligent about bringing in drinking water to the round house. For the last two years he did not have anything to do until the arrival of the men. The machinists refuse to have him help them, as they are afraid he will hurt them, he is so awkward and also careless. He came near laming yours, truly." I deemed that sufiBcient cause for Mr. Brown's dismissal, and so instructed the Knights of Labor committee. But the man demanded an investigation and went to Mr. Her- rin and he gave him an investigation, and wanted to have Brown's place filled with some other person. Q. Who did? — A. Mr. Herrin. He wanted to compromise the matter to help him, and please the men in the shop, and put him in some other place where he would not be in contact with so many Knights of Labor ; but they would not have it that way, and we sent him back. That did not satisfy the foreman, and he quit. Q. Do you know anything about E. J. Bouchard, general forenjan of the Palestine shops ? — A. I was away from Palestine when that question came up. I received a message from Mr. Herrin to come to Palestine at once. I came right to Palestine and found next morning that they had demanded the resignation of Mr. Bouchard. I got to making inquiries, and found that what led to the demand was the discharge of George Lo wry, a machinist; and the facts that led to the discharge of Lowry are these: We had some engines in the shop that we were wanting to get out in a hurry and I had told Bouchard to work his men overtime. He asked Mr. Lowry to come back that night, and Lowry agreed to come ; but when he got home he found that he had something to do, and did not come back. The next morning Bouchard asked him why he did not f ome back. Lowry told him he had some chores to do about home and he could not come. Bouchard told him that when he promised to come back he should have come, as it inconvenienced him to a considerable extent. Mr. Lowry said, " If you do not like it, you kiiow what you can do." Mr. Bouchard said, " I know what I can do ; I can let you go to the office and get your tim^." So he went to the office and got his time. When I got back I found that a committee had been to Mr. Herrin and demanded Mr. Bouchard's resignation immediately. Mr. Herrin rep- resented to them that I was not there, and that he had no one to place in charge of the ejiop. They said it did not make any difference ; they had somebody they could 334 LABOR TEODBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. place in charge. Mr. Clark also came down ; he is the master mechanic. They wanted some concession. So an agreement was made that Mr. Clark, myself, and Mr. Bouch- ard should go to a meeting in the Knights of Labor hall and settle the matter. _ Mr. Marshl master workman, presented the charge that had been made in writing, and asked if any member was there to sustain the charges. One or two of them got up and said they had no charge against Mr. Bouchard, and had nothing against him personally, or that would cut any figure in this case. Well, Mr. Marshall asked, if there were any charges— if any member had any charges to make that would sub- stantiate the charge, to get up and make the statement. No one did so. Then Mr. Marshall made a statementthat as no one could make any charges, that the charges filed were of no force, and he tore them up and destroyed them. , Then Bouchard got up and made a statement that he guessed he had acted a little hasty in the Lowry case and that Lowry had acted hasty, and if they could talk the matter over they could adjust it themselves. I suggested to one of the members there to appoint a commit- tee, and we would see Lowry. We went out, and I told Lowry that we thought he had been very hasty in his action and 1 thought he should make an apology to Mr. Bouchard. He agreed that he had acted hastily, and was willing to apologize. He did make the apology, and that settled the grievance as far as Mr. Lowry and Mr Bouchard were concerned. It was settled that he was to go back and take his job. Q. Is there any truth in the statement that the wages of the shopmen of your road were raised between March, 1885 and 1886? — A. Yes; on the International and Great Northern Railroad between one and two hundred men's wages were increased bet ween March, 1885 and 1886. Q. There is one statement my attention is called to, in which vou deny that the ■ wages were raised by the request of the Knights of Labor. — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you say they were raised by the company voluntarily ? — ^A. I have marked under those that are voluntary. Q. You do not include them in the 200 ?— A. I counted them up. I think they were included in the 200. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Those that were voluntarily raised in addition to those requested? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Had you ever any complaint about the section men and other unskilled labor having been reduced from |1.50 to |1.15 ? — A. I he|iTd some talk of it among our men after the strike. Q. Prior to the strike was there any complaint to you about wages of unskilled labor? — A. No, sir. The following was put in evidence by witness : [The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, International and Groat Iforthern Division.] Statement showing engines disabled by strikers. Date. Engine. Damage at Palestine. March 6,11,17,23 March 6 March 6,8 March 6, 11, 23... March 6, 11 March 6,17 March 6, 11 March 6, 11 March 6, 11, 23... March 6, 11 March 6, 11 , March 6 March 6 i . . March 6, 11 March 6, U March 6, 11 March 6,11 Marche,ll March 6 March 7, 11, 17... March 7,11 March 7 March 8, 23 March 8,17 , March 8 March 17 March 23 March 23 713 714 715 717 720 7« 743 744 764 755 760 771 774 775 776 778 779 788 706 738 777 772 781 782 768 773 760 Left link-lifter, throttle-lever, right valve-rod, branch-pipe, and filling. ap plug removed. Sight link-lifter and throttle-lever removed. Bight link-lifter, throttle-lever, left valve-rod removed. Bight link-lifter, throttle-lever, right valve-rod, and filUng-np ping re- moved. Throttle-lever, oil-cup, gauge-cock plugs, right valve-rod removed. Both link-lifters, throttle-lever, oilcup, gangecock pings, and branch- pipe removed. Left link-lifters, throttle-lever, right valve-rod removed. Eight link-lifter, throttle-lever, gauge-cock plugs, left valve-rod re- moved. Left link-lifter, throttle-lever, right link-lifter, and filling-np plug re- moved. Left link-lifter, throttle-lever, right valve-rod removed. Do. Left back-up eccentrio-blade pine removed. Both link.lifters, throttle-lever, gange.cock pings removed. Bight link-Ufter, throttle-lever, lelt valve-rod, and key of right valve- rod removed. Left link-lifter, throttle-lever, nut of right rocker-piu removed. Throttle-lever and both back-up eccentric blade-pina, gauge-cock plugs removed. Biith back-up eccentric blade pins, throttle-lever removed. Both back.up eccentric-blade pins, throttle-lever, gauge-cock, and oil- cup plugs removed. Bight link.lifter, throttle-lever, gauge-cock plugs removed. Both link-lifters, throttle-lever, right valve-rod, branch-pipe removed. Both link-lifters, throttle-lever, left valve-rod removed. Both link-lifters, throttle-lever, gaug6,'and oil-cups removed. Both link-lifters, throttle-lever, SUingnp plug removed. Both linklifters, throttlelever, branchpipe removed. Eight link-Ufter, top pin of left link-lifter badly hammered. ' Branch-pipe removed. Filling-up plug removed. Thi'own from track ; damaged about $5. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 335 JOSEPH HEKEIN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : • Qaestion. What position do you occupy on the Missouri Pacific t — Answer. I am superintendent of the International and Great Northern and Missouri, Kansas and Texas. Q. And have filled that position for how longf — A. For the last year on the Mis- souri, Kansas and Texas ; since May last on the International and Great Northern, for the last four years. Q. You have heard the testimony of Mr. Wood in reference to the doiuga in Pales- tine?— A. I did. Q. Do you corroborate his statements substantially ? — A. I do. Q. Have you anything further to add f — A. There is nothing further that I can say. Q. Have any comjjlaints come to you on the part of unskilled labor — anything in regard to their being paid $1.15 a day, and that not being sufijcient, and requesting that it be raised to $1.50 ? — A. There has not been a single case. Q. Do you know anything about the case of this man Lowe, at Palestine? — A. No, sir ; I do not know anything more than 'that I think there was a man named Lowe discharged. He came in to see me about it, and I took it u^ to Mr. Cronin and got him to put him to work. And I think he put him to work north of Palestine. Q. Did he write to you about it? — A. I do not remember whether he did or not. I told him I had him reinstated. JAMES W. DAVIS sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Where do you reside? — ^Answer. About two and a half miles in the country. Q. How long have you lived there? — A. About two months. Q. How long have you lived in the county ? — A. About fourteen months. Q. Did you and A. J. McMillin present to Mr. Walter Gumming, who was then gen- eral superintendent of the Texas and Pacific Railroad, any paper or document, and, if so, what was it? — A. Yes, sir; we did. This is a copy of the original (handing printed circular to Mr. Buchanan), but the bottom part was not in the copy that we give Mr. Gumming. Q. This which you handed to Mr. Gumming is dated December 15, 1885? — ^A. That is a copy of the original presented to Mr. Gumming. Q. Did you present it to Mr. Gumming? — ^A. I and Mr. McMillin did, and that is a true copy of the one we presented. Q. Have you got Mr. Gumming's reply ? — ^A. His reply was that the road was going into the hands of a receiver, and he could take no action on it ; but said he did not see anything unreasonable in it and that he would endeavor to have it adjusted. Q. He placed it on file? — ^A. He placed it on file and took the number of my box, and told me he would let us hear from him during the next month. Q. Did you receive any answer ? — A. We never have, Q. (By the Chairman.) Mr. Litchman wants me to ask you whether the grievance existed from the beginning of the year ?— A. In September, 1884, in a gang of ten men they were getting $2.75, $2.50, and $2. Two men had $2.75 ; four had $2.50, and two had $2.25, and two $2. They are now getting (in 1886) one man, $2.60 ; four men, $2.40 ; two men, $2, and three men, $1.75. The men are not allowed any overtime for any work they do, and have not been. Q. Are you employed by the company now ? — A. No, sir. Q. When did you leave the employ of the company ?— A. I left with the strikers. I was one of the local grievance committee, and have been for four or five months. Q. Were you a member of that comipittee when this grievance of Mr. Hall was pre- sented? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you one that voted not to go to Receiver Brown with that grievance ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you vote for it ? — A. No, sir ; I did not vote either way. Q. Were you present at the meeting when it was voted on ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Did you wait on Mr. Dempsey with a grievance ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When ? — ^A. I disremember the date. y. Give it as near as you can. — A. It was a month or two previous to the strike. Q. What was the grievance ? — A, A complaint came in of his overworking his men, There were several complaints of that kind. I and a fellow named Smith and a fel- low named Harry Gray were the committee appointed to wait on him. We went to Mr. Dempsey and saw him, and told him there were complaints coming in against him for overworking his men, and he said : " Davis, by God, the men cannot get along with t"heso negroes, and before I would do it I would resign." 336 LABOR TROUBLES IK THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you investigate this grievance before you went to Mr. Dempsey ? — A. Yes, sir Q. How was that investigation conducted ? — A. We talked with the darkies and with the machinist helpers. Q. How did you find out whether these complaints were true or not ? What proof had you ? — A. We investigated it. It was proven by darkies there who saw it. Q. Did you take the testimony of the boss or foreman, or whatever he might have been, wlio had charge of them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Who was he ? — ^A. Dempsey. Q. Did Dempsey admit that he had been overworking them ? — A. He said that often he would have to go in and take a hand. Q. Sometimes during working hours they had no work to do ? — A. Not that we oould find out. Q. Did you try to find out ? — A. Yes, sir ; it was proven by the evidence given in that they always had something to do, and as a rule, they had to turn No. 40afterthe whistle blew. Q. Is there anything further you want to state to the committee ? — A. I was present when Governor Brown was asked if he would indorse the Hayes agreement, and he said he could not, indorse that without permission of the court, but he would endeavor to live up to it as near as he could. We were holding an Iron Mountain coach, and I told him that we would hold that ; that we had not yet received any orders from hiio, and as we had been notified there would be no changes made, and I have never seen any notice that there was to be a change ; the coach was repaired there. Q. (By Mr. Parker. ) Were any changes made ? — A. None that I know of. Q. How long would it take to turn engine No. 40 ? — A. About 15 minutes. Q. Could they not do it in five minutes f — A. NOj sir. The turn-table was in bad shape at the time. The document referred to by witness was as follows : Marshall, Tex., December 15, 1885. W. Gumming, Esq., Superintendent Texas and Pacific Railway : Dear Sir: At a convention of the undersigned, representatives of the bridge forces on the Texas and Pacific Railway, the following resolutions were adopted, and it was resolved that the same be sn bmitted to you for your favorable consideration and such action as may be necessary to have them carried into effect : (1) That the rate of pay of all bridgemen be restored to the rates of September, 1884, viz : In a gang of 10 men, 2 men at $2.75 ; 4 men at $2.50 ; 2 men at $2.25, and 2 men at $2, and that 10 hours shall constitute a day's labor. (2) That no bridge foreman shall receive less than $90 per month. (3) That all house- repair gangs shall be rated the same as bridge gangs in the same ratio. (4) That all boarding bosses for bridge gangs shall be entitled to i rate of freight on all supplies for use of bridge outfit. (5) That boarding bosses shall charge a uniform rate of $18 per month for board of bridgemen, and that when a man is absent from his gang and outfit over one day, a proportionate deduction for board shall be made for such absence. (6) That when outfit cars are moved at night or on Sundays bridgemen shall he allowed one and one-half time while being so moved. (7) That when bridgemen are compelled to work in water at washouts, &c., they shall be allowed double time for such work, and that when such work shall amount to four hours, a full day's time be allowed therefor. (8) That when bridgemen are detached from their gang on special service, they shall be allowed one and one-half time while traveling at night on such special service and full time for all other time until their return to their respective gangs. (9) That bridgemen having families shall be permitted to travel on their gang pass to and from their homes, for the purpose of visiting their families at least twice a month. (iO) That the above rules shall be in full force and effect from the day of their adoption. (Signature of delegates :) F. Crowley, bridge gang No. 1 ; S. F. Mays, bridge gang No. 2 ; J. F. Mann, bridge gang No. 3 ; A, J. McMillan, bridge gang No. 4; J. E. Prime, bridge gang No. 5 ; S. M. Graves, bridge gang No. 6; S. M. Graves, bridge gang No. 7 ; Joseph Boylend, bridge gang No. 9 ; W. P. Robinson, bridge gang No. 10; W.P. Robinson, bridgegangNo.il; Charles Anderson, bridge gang No. 12 ; Leslie Brown, bridge gang No. 13 ; John Wilson, bridge gang No. 15 ; A. J. Killbuck, bridge gang No. 16 ; Ed. Barnety, bridge gang No. 19 ; J. W. Davis, B. & B. shop. The committee then took a recess till 8 o'clock in the evening, at which time they proceeded to take farther testimony. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 337 JOHN A. CEOSBY sworn and examined. By the Chaiuman : Question. Yon are general :^oreman of the car-repairing department on the Tezas and Pacific Eailroad f— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Did yoa occupy that position when the strike hroko out in March last*- — A. I did. Q. What cause was there for the stoppage of work at the shop on March It — A. There was no cause except I discharged one of my foremen. Q. What was his name?— A. C.A.Hall. Q. When was Mr. Hall discharged ? — A. He was in the freight department. Q. What day was he discharged f — A. On the 17th of February of this year. Q. Why did you discharge him t — A. Well, I discharged him because he was away from the shop without my leave. Q. Any other reason t — A. Well, also for Incompetency and neglect of duty. Q. How did he neglect his duty ? — A. By attending to something that did not cout cern the company or the interest of the company. Q. After his hours of labor? — A. During the hours of labor. Q. Did you ever grant him leave of absence ? — A. Yes ; I granted him leave of ab- sence for two or three hours one time. Q. What time was that ? — A. I think that was about the 13th of February. He came to me and spolie as if he wanted to be absent on some committee business for a short time, and he would be back agaiii. Q. How long did he remain away ? — A. He was gone parts of three days. Q. Did you need him very particulariy during that time ? — A. Yes, sir. I was look- ing for him twice during the time. Q. How long was he gone ? — A. Parts of three days. Q. What action did you take in regard to his further employment ? — A. Why, I dis- charged him. Q. Did he ask you why ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you tell him ? — A. I told him that he had been gone longer than I had granted him leave. Q. What reply did he make ? — A. He replied that he had not. I told him he had. I told him, furthermore, that I did not think he had been doing just right, and I had no further use for him. Q. Did he ask if he could have his old place back, under Cummings? — A. Yes, sir; he said something about that, and I told him he would have to go to some party higher than me for it. Q. Were yon asked to reinstate him ? — A. Yes, sir ; by a committee that waited on me theisame evening that I discharged him. Q. What were their names ? — A. Mr. Bibb, Mr. Little, Mr. Deariug, and Mr. Han- son. All of them were on the committee. Q. Whom did they represent themselves to be, and what did they say was their official capacity? — ^A. They said they represented the Knights of Labor; that was the way I understood them. Q. Did they request or did they demand the reinstatement of Mr. Hall? — A. Well, to my recollection, they requested. Q. What reason did yon assign for the discharge of Mr. Hall ? — A. I told them about the same that I told Mr. Hall. Q. Did you give them any reason beyond what you gave him ? Did you tell them he was incompetent ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they say they would inquire into the question of his incompetency? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you make any reply to that ? — A. I told them that they could if they wished. Q. Did they say that they could show that he turned out more work than any fore- man had done? — A. I think one of them made that remark. Q. Did Mr. Hall's work cost the 1;ompany more or less than similar work had cost the company under other foremen? — A. More. Q. What kind of men had he under him? — A. He had some very good men and some very poor men. Q. Did the committee that came to you consist of members of the shop, or were they outsiders ? — A. There were three of them under me and one from another depart- ment. Q. It is stated here that the Knights of Labor interfered with the working of your department; is that true? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In what manner? — A. In dictating what I should work the men on, and what wages I should pay the men. Q. Do you remember any particular instance in whieh they interfered. There is some reference to the foreman named Ogle? — A. I can state that I wanted to get some cars out of the shop, and I had tome colored men that could do such work as 3984 LAB 3 23, 338 . LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. that, and he said he would put those men to putting up some draugliting timbers. "They started to working, and a committee waited on him and said, "If you do not ■stop these men we will in five minutes." Q. This report was made to you by Mr. Ogle?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you say to him in regard to it? — A. I said that it was coming to a fine -thing that they should dictate as to what the men should do. Q. Did you tell him he should discharge them?— A. Yes, sir; I told him I would. Q. Do you know of any other instance ?— A. I had some cars I wanted stripped ■out and prepared for going into the shop, and cheaper labor would do just as well, but the men objected and said that that kind of business would not do ;nhat if they did aiot stop that, they would. -Q. Well, didthey stojJit?— A. Yes, sir; we stopped it rather than have another (battle with them. Q. How long have you been connected with the car-building business ?— A. Nearly twenty years. Q. Have you been actively employed in it? — A. Yes, sir. y. Was that the business in which Hall was employed by the company ?— A. Yes, sir ; when I first knew him he was working in the coach departtnent. Q. Was that his business at the time you discharged him ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You say he was incompetent ? — A, Yes, sir. Q. Was he incompetent because he did not understand his business, or did he megiect it ? — A. He did not understand it and he neglected it. Q. How long had he been foreman ?— A. About four months. Q. How was it you did not discover his incompetency earlier? — A. I thought per- 5iaps the man would do better, and I gave him a trial. Q. Did you not say to Mr. Hall that you wanted a man that was not afraid of the men ? — A. No ; not to my recollection. Q. How did his work compare with that of his predecessor? — A. It was worse, and it was more costly. Q. Who caused Mr. Hall's predecessor to be removed, and why was he removed? — A. Well, there were four or five men in the shop that got np a circular in which they said he was incompetent, and they did not wane him for their foreman any longer; and that he could not work there. Q. Was he removed on that account? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they belong to any labor organization ; If so, what organization?— A. Yes, sir ; they termed themselves Knights of Labor. Q. Was he removed upon their representations? — A. Yes, sir. ^. By whom was he discharged ? — A. By Mr. Gumming. Q. Was that previous to the time when the receivers took possession of the road ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Gumming was the former superintendent, I believe ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At whose request was Hall put in ? — A. Mr. Gumming sent Mr. Hall down there to report to me, and I knew nothing about it until be said that he wanted him to take charge of the shop. They went down there, and I did not know what to say; ■and I went on up to the office and found out that he had been appointed. Q. Was Mr. Ogle a good foreman ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you know whether the work of Mr. Hall was cheaper than the work of Mr. Ogle? — A. Cheaper than Mr. Ogle; no, sir. Q. It is reported to me that the statement does show that fact? — A. Mr. Hall's -work cost more. I can show you a statemeiit that I have that was taken irom the t)ook8. The reason why I took that month in the statement that has been handed in was because it was the best month for these men. Q. When did Mr. Hall begin work as foreman of the car department? — A. I tiink in October. Q And he worked until the middle of February ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. There is a statement handed in evidence by Mr. Woods which shows during the time that-Mr. Hall was engaged in work, that is, during the month of February, the «ost of work per car was $50.63, and Mr. Ogle's during the month of June, 1885, was .$52.48. Have you any explanation to give about that ? — A. No, sir. Q. Was it not proven before Mr. Gumming that Ogle was incompetent ?— A. Not to ray knowledge. Q. How long does it take a new foreman to get the run of his work f — ^A. Not so long, if he is put in the shop with the men who understand the work. Q. How long did it take you to get the run of the department ? — A. It took me ■quite a while, for they kept everything hid from me — the men in the department did. Q. Why did they keep everything hidden from you? — A. I do not know why. They ueemed to be backward in bringing out the books that had statements in them, and I asked for them quite a number of times. Q. What is the height of a standard coach ? — A. From the inside ? Q. From the ground — A. From the rail, I think, about 13 feet. LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND 1\'EST. 339 Q. What is the difference between a rigid and swinging main truck ? — A. Well, one is stationary and the other has a bolster that hangs. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Was Ogle a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir; not to iny knowl- edge. Q. How many hours leave of absence did you give Hall f — A. From two to three hours ; about two hours to my recollection ; I might have said two or three hours. Q. What time of day was it he commenced ou his leave ? — A. I think it was about ten o'clock that he was to be absent. Q. How many consecutive working honrs was he absent? — ^A. I think he was ab- sent four, or perhaps more, each day. Q. Can you not fix that more definitely ? — A. No, sir ; I cannot. I was looking for the man, and he was absent two days ; and I never found him until I Jiad waited for him most of the day. Q. How many working hours and working days was it before you saw him after you gave him leave of absence ? — A. I ifever saw him for two days. Q. Did he make any explanation when you found him? — A. No, sir; he insisted that he had beeu granted that time, and claimed that I bad granted him that leave of ab- sence. Q. How much ? — A. About three days. Q. Then he claimed that you had granted him all that betook? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. 'How long had you known Hall before this ? — A. Some three or four months, may- be four months. Q. Did you not know him longer than that ? — A. About seven months. Q. (By Mr. BXJCHAUAJI.) Asforemanhow manymen didMr. Hall have under him? — A. He had at one time about sixty. Q. At the time he was discharged about how many had he? — ^A. About thirty-three or thirty-four. Q. During his absence who took charge of his duties? — A. Well, there was no one except when I would go down there myself; and I had to be down there when they needed anything. Q. You say that he had some good men and some poor men ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Why were poor men retained? — A. I do not know. I objected to it, and tried to hire good men. He objected to my hiring some men and said he was a poor man, and I said, " if you can get a better man, then I will let you hire him." I took notice that he hired men that were worse men than I hired ; that is, poorer workmen. Q. (By the Chairman.) Were you examinefi by the local committee of the Knights of Labor on the subject of Mr. Hall's discharge ? — A. I was. Q. Did you tell them that there were men on the freight shop pay-roll that had never worked in the freight shop ? — A. Not to my knowelge. Q. Did you tell them that these men drew more money than any that were at work in the freight shop ? The men that I refer to were Henry Hearne and O. D. Buttrey ? — A. I do not remember saying anything about that. Q. Was it true that men were carried on the freight shop pay-roll that did not work there, and thereby increased the cost of the car department ? — A. There was only one man, and that was the watchman. Q. I am requested to ask you whether Dan Buttrey and Hearne worked on the wreckinu gang all the time? — ^A. They worked there when they were working ou the wrecking car on the road. Q. Were they carried on Hall's pay-roll? — A. I think they were on that roll, Q. Did that increase the charge or cost of cars against Hall's account? — A. Well, very little I think. I do not think they were working much on the wrecking car. Q. Did not these men make by wrecking from forty to forty-five days, counting extra work, each month after Mr. Hall was placed in charge ?— A. Well, they might. Some months they would make considerable overtime, but I know I objected to some of their overtime. Q. I do not ask with reference to the employment of them in other work, but in car-building and in charging that against Mr. Hall's pay-rolls ? — A. It is no more than under other foremen, and they had the same show. Q. So that it did not make any difference ?— A. Both Ogle and the other foreman had the same thing to contend with. Q. Were any passenger coaches built and repaired at those shops? — A. No, sir. Q. Was there anytime during Hall's foremanship when the material ran out and the men could nou lie kept fully empi'jyed ? — A. No, sir. When I first came here there were 50 car-loads ot" lumber in the y.-ird. Q. (By Mr. Pakkek.) Had Hall generally obeyed your orders when iu the shops, or did he iu any manner disobey ? — ^A. He was very good about obeying, I can say that. ■ Q. Was there any reason that you , can give why you did not discharge Hall earr lier ?— A. Well, no,, sir ; I know that I wanted to give the man a showing, hoping that ho might do better and improve. 340 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Did you retain Lim because you feared trouble if you discharged him ? — A. Well, I knew there was an element that I would have to contend with if I had discharged him, or any other man. Q. What element do you refer to ? — A. They called themselves Knights of Labor. Q. Do you discharge men occasionally ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the action as to reinstating them ?— A. Well, they would sometimes ask for th,em to be reinstated. Q. Before the appointment of receivers did you discharge men ? — A. Well, I some- times discharged men. Sometimes they would try to compel me to pay a man more money than he was worth, and I would teU them that that man would have to go to the offlce and get his time. Q. Did you discharge them in that way sometimes f — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you take them back always when they came to you to reinstate them f — A. I do not remember. I may have taken one or two back because they were willing to work, and would have worked for me if they had been allowed to. Q. What caused this strike ?— A. As I stated— that Mr. Hall had been discharged. THOMAS E. SCARBOROUGH sworn and examined. By Mr. Parkbe : Question. Are'you aKnight of Lab6r t — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Are you employed by the Texas and Pacific Railroad ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And have been how long f — A. I was first employed at these shops in September, 1876, and I remained on the books until the 1st of March, 1886. Q. Has the executive committee of the Knights of Labor power to make you stop when your wages are reduced ? — A. That is discretionary with the party having the grievance. If I feel that I have not had justice, then I turn it over to the executive committee ; otherwise, I do not know that they have anything to do with it. Q. You understand that the executive committee, under the constitution of the order, have no jurisdiction unless an appeal is made to them by or on behalf of one who claims he has a grievance ? — A. It is very like going into court and taking it up on the same principle as if a man owed me a debt ; if I did not think I could get it I would not press it. Q. You understand that they have no jurisdiction to act in a case unless an appeal is made to them to act for or on behalf of any one having a grievance ? — A. They have the power to take up a case whether it is referred to them or not. I suppose they have the power ; it is not generally done. Q. Have they power to insist upon an increase or a reduction of wages ? — A. That comes under the same management. Q. Of their own motion, if they wish ? — A. They are only there transacting the business, instead of all men acting separately. If a man wants his wages raised they attend to it. Q. Suppose they have a man who is not receiving enough ? — A. If he is satisfied it is none of their business. Q. But I understood you to say that they might act without his consent? — A. I am not posted fully as to the law. Q. Suppose the executive committee should issue an order for you and your fellow- workmen to stop work for a year, would you feel obliged to obey it ? — A. If the mat- ter was in their hands I would. Q. Well, is not a man doing so putting his liberty in the power of the order! — A. No, sir ; he does not have the power to act until a man puts it in his hands. That executive board has only to act as our counsel in the case. _Q. What is your judgment as to Hall's capacity for the place from which he was discharged f — A. I do not know that it would be proper to answer that question. I never was about the shop any. I worked with him for two or three years in the coach shop. Q. Cannot you judge from that t— A. Well, my judgment in that case would he that he was not a fully competent man ; that is my idea about it. . ^I do not believe that he ever had any experience. Q. What did you think of Mr. Hall's competency as coach builder ? — A. Mr. Hall is a very ingenious man, but not a first-class mechanic. Q. Is he not competent as a coach builder!— A. Yes, sir; he did all the work that I ever saw him undertake to do. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) What is your judgment as to his ability as a mechanic !— A. I always took Mr. Hall to be a very ingenious man, and he catches on to anything very quick. Q. What is your judgment of him contrasted with other men working at mechanical work, if you had any. observation in that regard! — ^A. No, sir ; I have had no obsor- vation. LABOE TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 341 WESLEY M. ROBERTSON sworn and cxaminecl. By Mr. Parkek : Qaestion. You are a resident of Marshall, and have been for a year and over? — An^ Bwer. Yes, sir. Q. You were here during the strike in March and April? — A. Yes, sir. Q. State the effects of the strike on the business here. — A. Well, sir, it crippled busi- ness considerably, and we are feeling the effects of the strike up to this day. Q. In saying that, what class of business do you refer to ! — A. All classes ; the dry goods and grocery business ; all of them have suffered by the shops closing. Q. What action did the citizens take as to the strike? — A. Well, sir, they did not take much, one way or the other. _Q. What was their attitude during the strike? — ^A. They were divided in the be- ginning, and during the latter part of it the greater portion were against it ; and as the strike grew larger and longer they saw the evil of it and expressed themselves more freely. Q. lu your judgment, as a citizen, could the business of the railroad have been car- ried on without aid at Marshall? — A. Not unless they could have got some officers to take charge of it. Q. What is your business ? — A. Merchandising. Q. General merchandise? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the damage that you speak of being done to business because of the men's • ini-ibility to pay money for goods? — A. Of'course the trade of the town is dependent a great deal upon the shops, and if there was no money paid out by them ^there was no money taken in. , Q. What was the effect of having 200 men here out of employment ? — A. It has just the effect of keeping trade idle. Q. What will be the effect upon business or upon collections and payments if these men have to move away without getting work here again ? — ^A. I would judge it would be rather poor. LAWRENCE BEEEN sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. I think you were present when they examined the broken rail and fish- plates. Did you hear the testimony this afternoon as to the rail that was misplaced on the line of the Texas and Pacific about a mile and a half from this town! — An- swer. I heard most of it. Q. Just tell what you know about it. — A. I know that the rail never was mis- placed, simply from the fact that I went out there — ^I went to the section foreman, and he said to me somebody had taken a wrench and taken the fish-plates off, and they had moved the rail out four inches, and then they had taken the fish-plates and thrown them on one side. Q. Please tell what you saw. — A. I went there with the sectionmen and investi- gated. The rail had been fixed and put into its proper place, and the rail had been moved scarcely better than three-quarters of an inch. The section foreman showed me where the car had gone off the rail. We also found that the spikes had bent in their places, from the mark of the spikes in the ties, being widened from an inch to an inch and a half, showing that the spikes were there. We also found that the angle-plate was bent, and right in the center there was a dent about where it touches the end of the rail, about a quarter of an inch deep, showing it was there when the rail turned over. I also went down underneath and found bolts, and I said to the section foreman, "look hero, these bolts are rusty," and finally he said they were not the bolts that had come out of the fish-plate. Next morning I went there and found the rails were made narrower than before by about three-quarters of an inch ; the spikes in from four ties back showed tha t they were pressed down by di- rect pressure, which showed that the spikes were there and not drawn. If the rail had been removed the main wheels would have hit the flanges when they came there, which they did not do, for there were no marks but only the small coach wheels, show- ing that the drivers went on the rail, which they would not have done if the rail had been removed. Q. What is the name of the section foreman that showed you these bolts ? — A. I am not acquainted with his name. Q. You do not know him ? — ^A. I do not know him. Q. How long after this trouble was it that you were out there ?— A. The afternoon of the same day. Q. Was more than one fish-plate moved ?— A, There was no flsh-i)late. The angle- irons showed dents on it where it was turned over and went over with the rail. Q. Was there any fish-plate moved at all ?— A. I cannot say ; I suppose they wera !M the place. 342 LABOK TRO.UBLES IN- THE SOUTH A.ND WEST. Q. State whetliei- any fisli-plate was inoved.— A. 'VVoll, Jesus Christ could not tell ' that. ' , J . ■ . Q. We -want no more such language. I am trying, I hope honestly andimpartially, to get at the facts as to this thing, and I desire a respectfal answer. Now, tell me whether or not you can tell that the iflsh-plateswere moved or not. — ^A. I believe they were moved when the train went over. Q. Was it possible for you to tell whether they were moved or not?— A. By my taking the angle-iron, I made my opinion by looking at the place, and it showed it was dented, which made it clear to my mind that it was there when the accident happened. Q. Did you notice whether there was any fish-jjlate that was bent or put out of shape ?— A. There was no fish-plate there that I noticed. They are both one and the same thing in effect. A fish-plate is screwed against the rail in the same place, and the angle-iron is upon the cross-tie on the bottom of the rail. Q. In fastening these rails together, is there a plate upon each side of the rail?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What is the name of the piece on the outside of the rail?— A. Well, what I would call the outside of the track on the side next to the ditch. Q. Has the plate that is on the outside of the rail any distinctive name by which it is known by a railroad man ? — A. It is known as an angle-iron. Q. And what on the inner side ?— A. It is also known as au angle-iron ; that is their proper name. Q. Are you a railroad man ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you a tracklayer? — A. No, sir. Q. What are you? — A. A blacksmith. Q. At the time that you got there thesfe spikes had been redriven into the ties? — A. Yes, sir. Q. AUof them?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you observe whether or not there were any marks of a claw-bar on the tie? — A. There were different marks. They had been working there that day. Question. The rail had been replaced and the train had passed over before you ar- ived there ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Were the ties sound ? — A. There yras one, in one place, where we pulled a spike out that was not. Some of them were sound ; some were not. Q. Were the ties sound at the point where the angle plates were ?— A. For three ties back I should .iudge they were. Q. Now, who was the section foreman there ? — A. The section foreman has changed since then ; he was another man. Q. Who was the one at that time ? — A. I cannot think of his name. Q. Was it not Tom Gordon ? — A. He went out and examined it with me. Q. He andyou werC'Strikers? — A. Yes, sir. Q. He had been a section foreman of the line at that point ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan). Do you know whether or not Marshal Eeagan brought the bplts into town ? — A. No, sir : I do not. The Chairman. Did John Hanson examine the broken rail ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you ever get the wages of 1884 that were to be restored under the Hayes agreement ? — ^A. I did not. Q. Did you ever apply for them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. To whom ? — A. I applied about four times to Mr. Crosby. Q. What reason did he assign for not giving them to you ? — A. He said he would see about it. Q. Did you ever put it in the hands of the local grievance committee of the Knights of liabor ? — ^A. No, sir ; I applied also to Mr. Ogle, and also to Mr. Walsh, in the office. I have a little more testimony I would like to give in as to the cause of the strike. I was put there in the shop six months or so before Mr. Hall came to take charge. I was work- ing under Mr. Ogle. I made lots of irons for Mr. Ogle, and they were made right as lie ordered them, and he had some of them altered, and he had to have everything altered. I made any amount of irons in the same way, and they had to be altered. I went over into the other shop, because they could not get it done in this city, and worked there. I found that they were wanting material to work up. I also found that they were shipping off what supplies I was making and throwing it into the stock pile. I remonstrated with my boss, and with Mr. Hall himself, and. they told me they were ordered to do it and that it was none of my business, and I should keep my tongue still. I was up in the hall when they said they had a pile of grievances that high [indicating]. They told me it was none of my business to go before Mr. Crosby, but it was my business to obey orders and not be talking about what I found out. Q. That does not get down to the cause of the strike.-^A. The cause of the strike? Q. Yon said you wanted to say something about the cause of the strike. You are not now telling anything about the cause of the strike. — A. The cause of the strike was simply because they would not let ns have a little investigation. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 34S Q. Investigation of what ?— A. Investigation to see wLat was tlae trouble that this^ material was causing. The Knights of Labor claimed that the cause was— so much as- I understood it — the cost of the work was so much more than it was before. Here was- a man named Butler, a spring-maker in the factory ; he had a grievance in. He was- working at a fire that he could or should get |3.75 ou, and he got only $3. These are some of the men's grievances. They did not go out on HaU's account ; and if Mr.. Crosby had allowed them an Investigation they could have settled it right there and, ■flicn. JOHN HANSON sworn and examined. By the Chairman : < Question. Did you examine the broken rail that has been spoken of? — Answer. I never saw any broken rail. Q. The misplaced rail, then ? — A. I examined the i)lace where the railroad com- pany reported that they had a misplaced rail. If the rail had been misplaced the en- gine would have gone over in the ditch. I went over there and, as Mr. Breen stated^ we found where the old spikes had been. The rail had been taken in an inch in some- places, and an inch and a quarter — from three-quarters of an inch to an inch and a quarter. The track had been- that much too wide. If the rail had been misplaced when the engine went over it would have gone off. Bat the engine never got off the- track. They had an engine, baggage-car, and two coaches, and the last coach went off. If the rail had been misplaced they would have gone off. I could tee no indica- tion that the rail had been misplaced. 1 saw the angle-iron there. We thought we- would not go over there until we saw Mr. Reagan, and he sent deputy marshals oul^ with us. When we got there we found one of the plates, and told these men that th&^ ditching of this train was by the spreading of the rails. I.have seen rails spread all over this road, and I have been all over the road from one end to the other. Mr- Reagan, I think, told me that he had the bolts and angle-irons in the office ; I think, he told me that, but I am not positive. When I went ont there to the section fore- man I asked him where the bolts and angle-irons were, and he said that, "Reagatt. has got them at the office." Q. Is it year opinion, then, that the rail was not misplaced ? — A. Yes, sir ; it is my- opinion that it was not misplaced. Q. What was the cause of the accident ? — A. I think the rail simply turned over.- The heads and backs of the spikes showed that they had been turned back two inches- from the rails and imprinted on the ties on the outside of the rails. I could see no^ print of any claw-bars whatever on the inside. Q. (By Mr. BucHANAlf.) Was there more than one length of rail turned over, in. your judgment? — A. No, sir. Q. Are these rails connected by plates and strips of iron on either side, bolted; through and through ? — A. They are supposed to be. Q. Unless these strips were unbolted could one rail only turn over ? — A. It couldi turn over in the center. Q. And the ends remain fastened ? — A. Tes, sir. Q. By the spring of the rail? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. What time of the day did you get out there ? — A. Two o'clock in the afternoon.. Q. You spoke incidentally of having gone out with the committee ; what commit- tee did you refer to J — ^A. That day there was a meeting of the assembly and they^ appointed a committee to go out there, and get some deputy marshals to go with us, to- see if we could tell whether it was a misplaced rail or simply an accident. Q. And were the committee representing the Knights of Labor T — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you remember the name of the marshal that went with youf — A. No, sir; 1 did not know one from another. GEORGE N. BIBB recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Where did you work when the strike took place in March, 1886? — Answer^ I was working at the freight shops. Q. Did you make out the record for the shop ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many cars were taken out in the four months during which Mr. Hall was. foreman ? — A. One hundred and ninety-six. Q. Had Mr. Hall any trouble in getting material? — A. During the time Mr, Hall* was there it was very seldom that we had suitable stock in the yard at all. Q. What does form 917 Bbo'y ? — A. Form 917 shows the cost of the material and: labor on each car that has gone oat of the she ps separately. Q. During what period? — ^A. It is made on*, each month. • Q. Is it called form 917 every month ? — A, it is a railroad form we call form 917. This car was repaired at such and such a station. The station is left blank. 344 LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What was done with this form 917 when filled out f— A. I made it out each month and turned it into the master-mechanic's office. , . xi. x Q. Then you kept it in your possession ?— A. I suppose it is turned into the master- mechanic's office. Q. What does it show T— A. It states the material and labor on each car separately, and how much money was spent on every car that was turned out that month. Q. If we had possession of form 917 we would be able to determine what was the cost of each car?— A. You would be able to find out by referring to the form and get the figures for the material. Form 917 will show, say : car 2049 ; 400 pounds of bolts ; 300 pounds: castings ; so many carriage bolts of such and such a size, and so forth, and you could figure out the cost in that way. All the details are given, whatever they are. ■ j ^.i, ' Q. Did you not estimate the cost of repairs for Mr. Crosby?— A. Yes, sir; tor the master car-builder and the general foreman. For instance, when a car was wrecked on the road the conductor was instructed to send a report to the superintendent as to what the damage was on this car, and when these things came in Mr. Crosby, as a general thing, brought them down and I figured on that as to what it would cost to repair that oar, and what was the damage on the car. . Q. What was your occupation at the time of the strike?— A. I was on the rolls as a car-repairer, but I was virtually shipping clerk. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What caused you to go out on the strike ?— A. Well, sir, it was to settle the grievances we had. Q. Did you settle them ? — A. I do not think we did. Q. Are you still out of employment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you a married man ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many children have you ? — A. Two. Q. How long have you been a Knight of Labor ? — A. I think I went to work in the shops at the turning mill last June. I think I became a Knight of Labor somewhere about June, 1885. Q. You have not been a Knight of Labor a year ? — A. No, sir. Q. What is understood by " a strike" ? You say that you went out on "a strike.'' What do you mean by "a strike"? — A. It is this: When all means have been ex- hausted to get a hearing of grievances, then our last resort is to strike. Q. What is a strike ? — A. It is for all the men to quit work. Q. Is that all?— A. And try and get, by quitting work, the company to recognize them and get a settlement of the grievances so that we may go to work again and work peacefully. Q. Did you know that this road was in the hands of a United States court and that the receivers were mere officers of the law t — ^A. I knew that it was in the hands of the United States court. Q. How did you expect to redress all your griev9,nce8 by going out on a strike against the Uiiited States court, backed by all the power of the Government, with its marshals, deputy marshals, and soldiers, if necessary. Did you take that into con- sideration at all? — A. Well, I did not manage the thing, you know. Q. Can you give any opinion ? — A. It was my opinion that we would have a right. We had settled grievances in the hands of the receiver on the Texas and Saint Louis over here, and we thought we could get ours settled. That was my opinion. Q. You thought that if those receivers settled grievances receivers on every road could? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you stop to consider what would have been the effect if those receivers did not act ? — A. I never thought of the consequence. Q. You know what they are now ? — A. Certainly. Q. You would not sifrike against the United States court now ? — A. I have had more experience in strikes now. I do not want any more. Q. Had you any grievances against these receivers except the Hall complaint ? — ^A. Oh, yes, sir. Q. What? — A. Well, we wanted to have some understanding with them ; we pre- sented our Q. But that is in the future. Had you any grievances against the receivers except the Hall case ? We do not want what took place before the receivers were ap- pointed. — A. I am speaking of since the receivers were appointed. We presented certainly tte Hayes agreement and another agreement that we wished to get signed, so that the men would understand how they stood. Q. You wanted to make the' receivers parties to the Hayes agreement ? — A. Yes, sir ; and we wanted to have some understanding and know how we stood. And ii we found that they would not adopt that agreement every man felt fully satisfied that he was liable to be fired any day. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 345 _Q. You say that there was some nueasiuess amoug the men. That they feared they might be turned out at any day ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, now, they had been working some little lime — several months — for the receivers, 'and had not been turned out; why, then, should this uneasiness exist ? — A. They just supposed now would be the time for them to get even with them for last year. t Q. But were the receivers parties to the matter last year? — A. No, sir; the re- ceivers were not parties to last year. I mean the local officers. The men j ust thought that if the foremen or any of them had any little spite against a man it would be a good time to get even with them and turn them out. Q. Had anything of that kind been done? — A. The only case that I know of was Hall. Q. The men were not anticipating trouble? — A. They just thought they woiild have trouble before it ended. Q. And to avoid that they wanted to have this man reinstated ?— A. Wc wanted some understanding so that we could have harmony. Q. Did the receivers decline to become parties to the agreement? — A. That is, the general officers did. Q. Is it true that there were seven propositioijs submitted to the receivers? — A. They were points that had been agreed to with Mr. Gumming. Q. Did the receivers not decline to agree to these seven propositions on the ground that they had no authority to do so because they were officers of the United States court and not authorized to act ? — A. I knew that Governor Brown's reply was that as receivers they could not sign any old contract — that the receivers were officers of the court. Q. Was not that reply satisfactory? — A. But since then I understand that they have signed the engineers' contract. Q. Have you any witness to prove that fact ? — A. I do not know whether I can prove that fact. I cannot prove it, because I cannot prove it by myself ; but, of course, you can question the engineers about it. Q. Do you mean to leave this impression, that while they said they were unwilling to enter into any agreement with you on the ground that they were officers of the court, they have since that time made agreements with some other organizations? — A. Yes, sir; with some other organization. One of them they reinstated, and have given him |2 more since he has been out. Q. You do not state that as a fact? — A. I state that upon rumor; it is a fact, but I do not know it of my own personal knowledge. Q. I understood you to say that a strike consisted of a simple walk-out of the work- men? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. And that it does not include threats, intimidation, or violence to be used against any employ^ of the company who may take the place of the strikers or the old em- ployes who remain at work. — A. No, sir. Q. It does not include, I presume, the use of violence towards the property of rail- road incorporati6ns ? — A. NOj sir. Q. It does not include the iniury or destruction of the property ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Nor the jeopardizing of the lives and limbs of passengers who may travel upon the passenger-cars of the corporation ? — A. No, sir. Q. Nor does it include the jeopardizing of the lives of engineers, firemen, or brake- men, or other employ<58 Of the company who may be on the freight-cars ? — A. No, sir. Q. Nor derailing coaches ? — A. No, sir, Q. Nor burning bridges ? — A. No, sir. Q. Nor does it include taking possession of the property and preventing traffic ? — A. No, sir. Q. It simply means that the men shall be at liberty to walk out when they please ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there any surplus of laborers in the peculiar line of labor which the railroad companies need in the management of their roads ? — A. Not here, sir. Q. Have not the places of those who walked ont been supplied? — A. I cannot tell you. Q. Have not men come in here from various places, for instance, New Orleans and elsewhere, and from other roads, who have taken the places of the strikers? — A. I have not been down to the shops for six weeks. Q. Do you not know it to be the fact?— A. I know it from hearsay that they have got quite a number of new men. Q. Just as you know that there is work ? — A. I have never seen them at work. Q. Do you not know that thej^ are running trains regularly and have been eve^r since the strike ? Could they do it without men ? — A. No, sir. Q, Then they must have secured employes somewhere ? — A. Well, the roadmen never went on strike. Q. Are they repairing cars < — A. Not very fast. 346 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. If there be a surplus of railroad employes in the country to take the places of men who go out on strikes and the strikers are not authorized by "the principles and the rules of the Knights of Labor to interfere with the employment of new men or the running of trains, whether they be freight or passenger trains, what good can ro- snlt to the strikers from a strike t— A. You just mean to say if there was plenty of every kind of labor and everything be allowed to go on what good would it do to strike ? I do not Ijhink it would do much good. ' Q. But if the strikers were not authorized to use violence towards any of the em- ployes, or stop the traffic of the country by use of force, what could possibly result to the strikers ?— A. They would be left in the cold I guess. Q. Where they had acquired homes in a place they would be required to sacrifice them and to leave, would they not ?— A. Yes, sir ; I suppose they would. A good many of them would. Q. You are recording secretary of Assembly No. 4959 ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Now I ask you as a high officer and an intelligent man, for you have shown yourself to be one, what is your opinion of strikes ?— A. That they are bad things; I think they ought never to be if they can be possibly got out of. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) What is the place of your nativity ?— A. I am American born, i was born at Frankfort, Ky. Q. Did yon serve an apprenticeship at any trade ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then when you became a car-repairer you did it without having served a regu- lar apprenticeship ? — A. I will tell yon how that was. When I first came here I went to work in the office as time-keeper. I went to Gouldsboro, and worked there as time- keeper. Then I came back here and went into Mr. Harris' office. He is the car- builder, and they would not allow another clerk to be put on the roll, so they put me down as a car-builder. Then I went to work in the machine-shops boring wheels, temporarily at a dollar and fifty cents a day. Then I went into the office and I was still kept on the roll as a machinist. Then I went down to the freight shop. They could not allow a clerk there and they did not want me to show up as a clerk, so they put me down as a car-repairer. Q. Did you work as a car-repairer ? — A. I worked as a shipping clerk. Q. Then if you took this place that did not belong to the work how did you get this. name as ear-repairer? — A. I did not care what they called me so that I got the money. Q. Yon wanted the money because you needed the employment ?— A. Certainly. I had to live. Q. When the strike was made you went out? — ^A. Yes sir. Q. And you abandoned the company that had given you this assistance ; that is the fact, is it not? — ^A. I gave them as much assistance as they gave me. ,Q. Was it not kindness to you to give you that employment?— A. Well, they had to have somebody ; if I did not get it somebody else would. Q. But there was a surplus of labor ; then was it not a kindness? — A. I thank the company very much for the position they gave me. ' Q. Still you struck on the first provocation ; does that look quite right to you? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not realize that as a workman for the company you have an obligation to the company that you shall work ? — A. I took a higher obligation than that to the company. . Q. That is to whom? — A. I joined the Knights of Labor. Q. That was a higher obligation than to your employer? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now do you not know that the wage fund, out of which the men, including yourself, were paid is made np largely by the freighters patronizing the road with their freight ? — ^A. Yes, sir; I know it is. Q. Do yon not know, sir, for you seem to treat this honestly, do yon not know it was an injustice to these patrons of the road to join in putting a strike upon them with- out any notice, throwing their whole business into confusion, side-tracking cars where they happened to be, leaving time and .perishable freight where it chanced to reach. Do you know it was an injustice to these men ? — A. We claim we did not do that. Q. But the history of the strike over the whole road shows it ? — A. Not on our sec- tion. I cannot speak for any other section. Q. Did not trains stop everywhere on the road ? — A. Not here, sir. Q- Do you not know that was the case all along the roads here for nearly 5,000 miles ? — A. I know it was on the Missouri Pacific. Q. Do you not know, as an intelligent man, that this was the case ? — A. Oh, yes. Q. Was that justice to those men who furnished the wage-fund out of which the men were paid ? — A. We claimed that they were treating ns wrong. Q. But the freighters^you are talking about the officials ? — A. Well, on that the railroad company ought to have quit eanier hauling freight. We were not responsi- ble to them. LABOR TKOUBLES IN TUE SOUTH AND WEST. 347 Q. That is all the answer you care to make, is it t — A. Yes, sir. Q. You aie recording secretaiy of a local assembly, -what number? — A. 4959. Q. Do yon know that it was in contemplation among the Knights of Labor in this part of the country to strike early in the season of 1886, before Hall's case arose t — A. No, sir ; there was no intention to strike that I heard of. Q. Until Hall was discharged f — A. Hall's case broke the camel's back. Q. What was the camel f — A. Well, I will tell you just it. The grievances, as I understood, were piled up. We had fifty grievances at least ; Hall's case came just as the district assembijy adjourned, and all the delegates had just gone over the shops, the day that his grievance was presented, at night. He was discharged in the even- ing, abont 5 o'clock. A great many of the delegates thought it was meant for an insult on them, and they came to the conclusion that now would be just as good as any time to strike. Q. Do you mean that the Knights of Labor thought that they were not treated personally with proper consideration, and that that was the cause of the strike ? — ^A. No, sir ; they did not consider that the whole cause. Q. Was that one of tie elements which produced this stMke I — A. Yes, sir. If they had no other grievances, they never would have struck for that cause. Q. Then you think their feeling that they had not been received and treated with due consideration was one of the causes of the strike? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not mean this about it — that It placed them in the dissatisfied, annoyed condition of mind which made them more ready to strike upon some other cause than they would have been ? — A. Well, there is no doubt abont it. It would not have come for months afterwards, maybe, if they could have got recognition. Q. Let us look back. Were not these grievances in substance all of them such as existed before the road passed into the hands of a receiver ? — A. Yes, sir; some of them. Q. Almost all of them ? — A. I cannot tell you personally about that, because I never was on committees of grievances myself. Q. Then you did not know really what grievances there were except this in Hall's case and Basset's case ? — A, Hall's case and Bassett's case, and the claim for unskilled labor. Q. The rest were rumors ? — A. I was told of them, and then there was the charge of the biidgemen. Q. The Bgesett case existed before the receivers were appointed ? — A. Yes, sir, it did. Q. As a recording secretary, you had access to the papers and documents and rec- ords of the assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. Was not the formal ground stated in the order that the strike was on HaU's discharge ? — A. I do not think that it was in our assembly. Q. Was not there a formal order to strike presented to your assembly ? — A. Whether it came there or not I do not know. It was written out. Q. And there was a copy put on record in your assembly ? — A. I never received any copy. Q. Did you not receive a telegram directing the strike T — ^A. No, sir. Q. Was there not formal action by the assemblies pledging them to stand by Mar- tin Irons and the executive committee if the strike was ordered ? — ^A. We never had any snch thing in our assembly. Q. Did your assembly not vote upon the question of sustaining the executive board of District Assembly 101 if it ordered a strike ? — A. No, sir. Q. Upon one proposition ? — A. No, sir. Q. Or two propositions f — A. No, sir. Q. Or three propositions f — ^A. No, sir. Q. Neither the one nor the other ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Is Jt not a fact that before a, strike can be ordered by the executive board of a district assembly that a vote shall be taken by every local as- sembly in the district as to whether they will sustain the executive in the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. I have never seen that order. Q. Is not a proposition voted upon in each local assembly, or, in other words, could Martin Irons order a strike unless he was ordered to do so by a majority of the local assemblies ? — ^A. I have never seen that letter. Q. Did not your assembly vote upon any proposition of this character : "Will local assembly No. 4959 sustain its executive board " ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Yon told Mr. Parker that you never had seen the formal order of the strike ?-^ A. No, sir. Q. How is it that you go on a strike without ever receiving the order ? — A. I heard of it somewhere. I heard it from Martin Irons. Q. He told you orally, did he ? Why did you not say that ? — A. Yes, sir ; he told me orally. / Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Do you take such important action as that upon mere oral statement? Do yon not require a written order? — A. No, sir. 348 LABOR TE0UBLE8 IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. (By tlie Chaikman.) Do youknowanyreasouwliy your assemlily was not called upon to vote upon this proposition to sustain Martin Irons if he ordered a strike f — A. Well, you mean on that proposition you just referred to, because it originated iu . our assembly. Q. Is that the only reason ?— A. I cannot tell you that. Q. What is that documentary evidence which you proposed to Introduce t — ^A. It is evidence in regard to that letter that you asked me a;bout this morning. The letter of George Tamsit, asking him to quit work. This is what I was instructed to do. Q. Do you desire to introduce this in evidence ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then you testify you have written this letter ? — A. I just want to say that 1 did not do so personally at all, but I did it officially. Q. At the joint meeting of local assemblies 3658, 3765, 4079, and 4959 were you not made secretary, and were you not instructed to nqtify all members belonging to every assembly to quit work or charges would be preferred against them ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You can state what you have to say about the matter. — A. I just understood at the meeting of the four local assemblies each secretarv was instructed to write to every member that was afwork informing him of the action of the executive board, and asking him to quit work at once, and if he came out his interests would be pro- tected. I wrote that letter to George Tampit which you have on record here. Q. Your object, I understand, in making this statement is to say that you did write this letter to Tamsit, not as an individual, but as secretary of your lodge, under in- structions of the joint meeting of the four assemblies ? — A. Yes, sir ; and on AprU 13 I was arrested and charged with contempt of court and charged with writing this as secretary to George Tamsit. Q. Is that charge still pending ? — A. I am charged with intimidation and contempt of court, and am under bond of |1,500 to appear when called on, or the second Monday of September. That is about all I want to state about it. Q. Do you know of any other charge against you but that? — A. No, sir. Q. This is the one upon which you are now under bond ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And Tamsit was in the employment of the receivers at the time you wrote this letter 1 — A. Yes, sir ; I think he went to work on April 1. Q. Had any injunction been served upon you before you wrote that letter ? — A. No, sir. Q. Had any injunction iWrits been served here before that ? — A. I had not heard of any. Q. Did you hear Marshal Reagan read his writ ? — A. No, sir. Q. What wages were you receiving? — A. Two dollars and twenty- five cents a day, and got every day in the month. Q. Were you a member of the local committee that had the grievance of Mr. Hall's in charge? — A. Yes, sir. . Q. Did you vote for or against the proposition to go to Dallas and see Governor Brown about it ? — A. You mean that proposition that has been spoken of here ? I do not rembember of it coming up ; it may have come up. There was so much I had to do — all the writing for the board at the time — and may be I was writing, and never heard it. Q. (By Mr. Paekbe.) Was not a notice given to the engineers to lookout, and that it was unsafe for them to run on the road f— A. I never heard of it. Q. Had not you a hand in advising the discharge of the foreman upon the request of the Knights of Labor? — A. Not to my personal knowledge. I knew the Eogan case of my personal knowledge, but that was before the receivers were appointed. Q. That is all that you know of it? — A. I know the full circumstances of how he was discharged. Q. Do you not know of other foremen being discharged at their request ? — A. Ogle was discharged at their request. Q. Do you not know of other foremen? — A. I do not know any. JOHN HANSON recalled and examined. By the Chairman : ' Question. I am requested to ask you whether you are still in the employment of the company. — Answer. No. Q. You had stated that you were in the employment of the Texas and Pacific road? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was employment denied to you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Upon what ground? — A. They said that I could not have employment on the Texas and Pacific road any more. Q. Why? — A. The chief clerk and Mr. Schofield and Mr. Wardrow said I couldnot work on the Texas and Pacific road, and that it was their business to see that I should not. That was the only reason they gave to me. I asked them if I was on the black LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 349 list; they said, "We liavo up blacklist; we have what wo call an objectioDable list." They said, " It is not a black list ; only you cannot work on the Texas and Pacific road.'' Q. Was any cause assigued? — A. They would not give me any cause whatever. Q. (By Mr. Pabker.) Did you expect that they would employ you after the dis- turbances which occurred ?— A. I expected they might as weU employ me as anybody else. I certainly did expect they would employ me. THOMAS L LOGAN sworn and examined. By the Chaikman : Question. Wore yon in the employment of the Texas and Pacific road at the time of the strike, on the Ist of March, 1886 1— Answer. Yes, sir. Q. What position did you occupy ?— A. I was telegraph operator in the train dis- patcher's office. Q. Did you go out on the strike T— A. No, sir. Q. Are you still employed by the company ? — A. No, sir ; I was discharged on the 6th of March. Q. Why were you discharged t — A. For refusing to sign a contract denouncing Knights of Labor and other organizations. They said we were required to do that or be discharged. Q. Who told you thatt— A. J. J. Kertin, chief train dispatcher. Q. Have yoa a copy of that contract ? — A. He said it was a contract denouncing Knights of Labor, and I would sign it if I wanted to remain in the employment of the company ; if not he would discharge me at 7 o'clock. Q. What time was that f — A. It was about 10 minutes to 7. Q. Did you agree to sign it ? — A. I told him I could not sign.any contract of that character bearing on any organization. Q. Were you discharged on that ground alone t — ^A. That was the only reason that was given. Q. How long had you been employed by the company in that capacity ?— 'A. I had been in that office something over a year. Q. Had any complaint been made to you about the character of your work f — A. No, sir; only a week previous I had made application for promotion, and he said he appreciated the work I was doing and he would take it under consideration. He gave me encouragement to believe he would promote me. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. I had joined the order, but I was not a mem- ber in good standing. I had not been to an assembly meeting except the night I was initiated in the order. Q. How long was that before the strike ? — A. I cannot say exactly, but about last June — I expect May or June ; about a year ago. I was not a member in good stand- ing in the order. My work was such that I could not attend the night meetings. Q. Was there any violence used upon you to compel you to sign this contract ? — A. No violence was used, except by the looks of it. When Mr. Kertin was talking t(\ me the porter of Mr. Dimick came in and handed him a revolver when he entered. Q. Was there anything unusual in that ? Did you look upon that as a threat to compel you? Did he point the pistol at you ? — A. I just thought it looked rather strange. Q. Is it not possible that the mere handling might have been accidental ?— A. Well, if it had not happened at that particular time. Q. Did you ever hear any person in the employment of the railroad company say that the Knights of Labor ought to be driven out of the town ; if so, who was it and when was it said? — ^A. Yes, sir, I heard Mr. Kertin make that remark a day or two before he discharged me. He made the remark there — not to me, but to the dispatch- ers on duty in the evening, that if the railroad company beat the Knights of Labor, they ought all to get out, and that one of them ought to be killed. Q.Did he express that as his individual opinion? — A. That was his individual opinion — at least I took it for that. Q. Were any officers of the railroad company present besides Mr. Kertin ? — A. There were two division superintendents in the office when he was talking, Mr. Dimick and Mr. Thorn. Q. Did he say that he was required by the company to compel you to sign that con- tract ? — A. He said he did that himself, and he told mo to go to the executive board of the Knights of Labor and tell them they could not reinstate me in that office, and that there are not Knights of Labor enough in the United States to compel him to do so Q. Did you complain to his superior officer that he had done this? — ^A. I spoke to Mr. Dimick, the division superintendent, about it several days after this trouble was all over, when he came to me. Q. Have you made any complaints since the trouble was over? — A. No, sir ; I have not. 350 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Why not ?— A. Because I have not had an opportunity ; I intended to see some of them as soon as an opportunity offered. Q. You did not think that the receivers of this company would sustain a man for discharging you upon the ground that you would not sign a contract denouncing all labor organizations in the country, did you ?— A. I did not believe they would. Q. Then why did you not go to them?— A. I saw nobody to tell it to but the com- mittee. , . T_ . , . . , Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Who requested you to come and make this statement T— 'A. As I understand, the committee that is getting the evidence together for this Con- gressional committee. Q. Did any one of these gentlemen request you to come and make this statement f— A. Yes, sir ; there were several. Q. Did they know what you would testify about ?— A. Well, almost everybody knew ; everybody knew what I would testify about. Q. Then you have stated freely the single cause of your discharge ?— A. I had no , object in asking them to have me called. I think it has been publicly known. Q. For some time ?— A. Yes ; because it was on the 6th of March that I was dis- charged. Q. Who was present when this request was made of you and this revolver was handed ? Give us the names of all present.— A. Joe Hassler was the train dispatcher on duty. Q. Where does he live?— A. He lives here. He is on duty at present. Q. Who else ?— A. Steve, I think his name is, Edwards and another porter there, I do not know what his name is, and Mr. Dimick and Mr. Thorn, came into the office while Mr. Kertin was talking to me. Mr. Thorn is now division superintendcint. There were two or three others in the room at the time. Q. Two or three others connected with the road? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chairman.) Did not Mr. Kertin discharge you for disclosing the con- tents of a message, and for not sending messages promptly ? — A. No, sir. Of all mes- sages received we keep a copy in the book on the table ; every message was handed to me. Q. Did not Mr. Kertin charge you with disclosing the contents of a message and not sending messages promptly ? — A. No, sir. JOHN WOODS sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. You have been about four years in the employment of the railroad com- pany ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. In what capacity ? — A. I worked at the time in the freight department ; part of the time in the truck department. Q. As a laborer t — A. Yes, sir. Q. As an unskilled laborer?—A. I worked with the bridgemen. Q. "Were you a Knisht of Labor on the day the strike took place? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go out ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What made you go out ?— A. I went out on the strike to get my wages raised. Q. Was that a cause upon which th« strike was ordered, and did you think that if yon went out the result would be a general rise in wages and that you would be a beneiiciary ? — A. I did not think that. Q. What did you think? — A. Oar grievances had been presented to the superin- tendent, Mr. Cummins, and he had never paid any attention to it before the receivers came here. He said the road was going into the hands of receivers, and he could not do anything for them, but would present them to the next superintendent who came. Q. Was that done ? — A. Yes, sir. I do not know whether it was presented to him or not. Q. What makes you say it was done if you do not know ? — A. Well, we put them in the hands of a delegate from every gang, and they said they had presented them to Mr. Gumming. Q. Have you ever had any grievances against the receivers since they took posses- sion of the road ? — A. We still have the old ones. Q. But they were against the former management? — A. I think they were pre- sented to the receivers. Q. The receivers were not a party to the original Hayes agreement, were they ; the road was in the hands of another management? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The receivers did not take possession until December, did they ? — A. I think it was in December. Q. And the agreement presented was entered into in March, 1885 — the H.lycs agree- ment ?— A. I was not working on the road then. Q. You must have been working on the road. Did you not know that agreement was made in March, 1885 ? — A. Yes, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IX THE SOUTH AND WEST. 351 Q. And the receivers did not take possession until December, 1885 f — A. No, sir. Q. How many meg constituted a gang in March, 1885, or before tliat timet — ^A. In March, 1885, there was a difference. There ■were ten in some gangs and some gangs there were not so many. Q. Did you work lor the road in March, 1885 f — A. No, sir; 1 worked part of 1885. Q. How do yon know this fact, then t — A. I was not working in March, but I com- menced with bridge gangs after that. Q. What pay were these men getting ? — ^A. In March, 1885, they were getting from $1.50 up to $2.60. Q. Were they getting time-and a-half for overwork ? — ^A. I never got time-and-a- half for overwork. Q. Were they allowed time-and-a-half for Sunday work and working in water! — A. In the bridge department they have no work on Sunday, but are only pn'led over the road. Q. Did you swear to this paper Tshowing affidavit before J. P. Alfred, clerk of the county court, on the 22d day of April]? — A. No, sir; I signed it after it was sworn to. Q. Did you swear to it f — A. No. sir ; Burnett swore to it and he read it over. Q. (Heading:) " Sworn to before me this 2id day of Apiil, 1886." Ifindyonrname and E. F. Cro wlej's all there ? — A. Yes, sir. [The paper not being sufficiently identi- fied was not admitted.] Q. (By Mr. Parker.) At what kind of work were you employed for the railroad company at that time? — A. Working for the bridge department. Q. What wages did you receive in September, 1884, while at work on the foadf — A. I was working in tjo track department. Q. How much did yon receive per day in September, 1884 ? — A. I only got $1.25 a day in September, 1884 ; but I was working in the track department. Q. You afterwards- made a new bargain with the company to work at something else, did you not ? — A. I hired to the foreman of the bridge department. Q. At what time was that? — A. I believe that was in August, 1885. Q. What were you receiving per day in that branch? — A. I was receiving $2, and to rise the first chance. I never got it, though. Q. You were receiving $2 a day, with encouragement as to promotion? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When the strike occurred, what were you receiving ? — A. I was receiving the $3, and I was promised a rise the first chance. Q. Then you were receiving 7') cents a day more when you struck than you did for the work you had under the agreement of the l.^th of March ? — A. I was telling you that I was not working about the loth of March. I had been laying off. I had been sick. Q. Have you seen that agreement of the 15th of March ? — A. I never saw the agree- ment, except in the paper. Q. Yon do not claim that you came under the Hayfts agreement, do you ? — A. I was not working. I came to work afler the agreement. Q. But you did not understand that you came under that agreement ? — A. I did not aSk anything about that agreement. Q. Had the foreman the power to promote you ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; he claimed to have the power. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor? — A. Not that I know of. Q. What was his name ? — 4- George Murphy. Q. You do not know whether he was a Knight of Labor or not ? — A. I cannot say. Q. He went out on the strike, did he? — A. No, sir; they came and telegraphed there that the men of the full gang were to be laid off. THOMAS MURPHY; affidavit. The following statement of Thomas Murphy it was agreed should be put in evi- dence as if he were present. It was sworn to and subscribed before C. H. Smith, notary public, Grayson County^ Texas. The wages of the bridgemen in 1884 were cut before September ; there were 4 men put in our gang at $1.75 per day tbe 1st of July ; and the $2.60 were cut to $2.50 the 1st of August. Thelstof Septemberthewages wereasfollows: In a gang of 11 men, 1 man at $2.75, 4 men at $2.50 per day, and 1 at $2.25, and 1 at $2, and 4 at $1.75 per day. We were cut to the 20th of November, 1884, to nine hours per day, and the wages were out March 1, 1885, to 1 man $2.60 per day, 4 men $2.40, and 2 men |2 per day, 3 men $1.50. There were 10 men in our gang then. The 1st of November the 150 men were raised to $1.75, and a$2 man cut to $1.75. The 3d of No vember we were notified that we would be cut od the 5th of November to nine hours per day. lu regard to moving nights and Sundays, we were moved more times at night and on Sunday than we were 352 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. during the week days. We were moved from Edgewood to Hanley Sunday, August 23, 1885, and got no time for it, and got no time for moving any niglit, except m case of a burn out. THOMAS MUEPHT. Sworn to and subscribed before me this April 26, 1886. [SEAL.] C. H. SMITH, Notary Puhlic, Grayson County, Texas. HENRY STEWART sworn and examined. By the Chairmait : Question. Mr. Litchman tells me that you desire to be examined in regard to the evidence of the officers of the road during the day session. What have you to say about it? — Answer. In one case there, I believe I heard a man by the name of Grif&n say something about my going on an engine. I was special policeman at the time, and I heard some quarreling inside the cab there. I saw they were quarreling, and I went on the engine, and said, ' ' What is the matter here ? " One fellow said, ' ' This fellow here came here and has insulted me," or something of the kind ; and I turned on that fellow and said, " What are you doing heref " I asked him, " Where are you taking," or "what are you doing with this engine." And this fellow Griffin turned around to me and gave me some words. I jumped on the engine and told him I would have none of that business at all, and told him to keep still. I told him I was an officer, and I did not intend to see any more of it. I did not have anything more to do with it. I understood another fellow to say that I ordered him off his work, or something of that kind. I do not exactly know how it is. I know there is a man that I saw about two or three nights in the yard on the railroad premises, audi asked him, "Did you hear the order that we were out ? " He says, " No." And I says, " We are ordered out, and all the Knights of Labor are to quit work. You can do as yon please. It is not forme to say, but you can do what you please about it." Q. Did you go out on a strike?— A. I did. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor ? — A. I am. Q. Were you at that time? — A. I was. Q. Were you in the employment of the company ? — A. I was. Q. Where ? — A. In the carriage department. Q. What was the cause of the strike ? — A. The cause was that they did not comply with the terms of the agreement — the Hoxie and Hayes agreement. Q. You are speaking of the receivers ? — A. Well, the receivers at that time had hold of It, and they did not comply with it either. Q. Was there any grievance presented to the receivers under the Hayes agreement that you know of? — A. I went to Mr. Brown once and showed him that contract, the Hayes and Hoxie agreement. He told us he had no objection to the agreement at all. I believe he told uslie wrote that agreement ; I am pretty sure he did. He was the founder of the contract, or something of that kind. He said be had no objection to the contract when I asked him. We told him we had some grievances, and we would like him to hear them. He did not hear them at that time, but said, " If anything happens let me know, and we will settle it." We told him there were some matters not going on right, and he said if anything was not going right to let him know and he would settle it. Q. Have you applied for re-employment on the road t — A. I need not apply for em- ployment. I saw the head clerk there, Merritt, and asked him about it. I said, '' Mr. Merritt, I understand my name is in the black list. " He says, "Yes, it is on the black list." I said, " That is all I want to know ; good bye," and I walked out. Q. When you speak of Mr. Brown do you mean Receiver Brown? — A. Yes, sir; that is the same gentleman. Q.. Where did that conversation take place ? — A. I was with Mr. Davis and two or three others when it took place. Q. When was that ? — A. Right when the road went into the hands of the receivers. I believe it was his first trip over the road. Mr. Davis was spokesman. Q. Do you mean to say ^hat Governor Brown told you that he was the father of the Hayes agreement ? — A. I understood that he said he had no objection to the agree- ment. I understood him to say that he was the one who wrote it. Q. That is, he was the one who wrote the Hayes agreement. Do you say positively also that Governor Brown said that he had no objection to the agreeihent as applied to the management of the Texas and Pacific. In other words, that he would he satis- fled to act under it. — A. I did not say he would act under it, but he had not any ob- jection to the agreement. LABOR TEOUIJLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST, 353 Q. Did lie leave the impression that he would act under it ? — A. No, he did not, Q. Did not Governor Brown positively refuse to ratify it or confirm it or become a party to it in any way ? — A. He refused to sign it. Q. He said he did not object to it just as it aflfected other roads ? — A. He did not see anything in the agreement to interfere with his business, but said he did not have any objection to the agreement. That was the way I understood him to state it. Q. What is your understanding as to his meaning — that he intended to be governed by that in the regulation of the road ? — ^A, No ; I did not suppose that he did. Q, Did you present several grievances to Governor Brown that day ? — ^A. No ; we did not present any grievances that day, if at all. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Were you one of the special jiolice? — A. I was. Q. Were those poUce armed at the time they were on duty ? — A. The biggest part of them were. Q. How t — A. With a six-shooter or pocket-pistol. I know most of them were. I know I had a good one. THOMAS MYERS sworn and examined. By the Chaibmak : Question. Have you been employed since June, 1885, in the bridge and building departmeJit ? — Answer. Yes, sir : up to the 1st of March. Q. Did you go out on the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you a Enight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What did you go out for? — A. We had been trying to get them to recognize our grievances, and they would not do it before the road went into the hands of a receiver or after. We first presented them to Mr. Gumming on the 15th of December. Q. And afterwards to whom ? — A. Well, we put it then in the hands of the griev- ance committee, and they put it in the hands of the receivers, and the receivers would not recognize them and would not receive them at all. Q. Would not meet whom ? — ^A. Meet the grievance committee of our order. Q. The local grievance committee? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they employes of the road ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; I suppose they wore ; all that I was acquainted with were. Q. Was that before the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the strike ordered because you did not get your grievance redressed f — A. Well, I do not know. At the time the strike was ordered I was out on the road. I did not know exactly what the grounds were for the strike. I think there were sev- eral demands before the strike was ordered, and not for the bridge and buil/ilng de- partment alone. From the 15th of March to 19th of Janury we were seeking for pay, and then we were put off again and asked to give them a little more time. We were out on the road when the strike occurred. Q. You did not know what the strike was for ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Yon were ordered out and went out ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Pabker.) Have you any personal knowledge yourself that anyiof those grievances were presented to either ot those receivers ? — A. Well, I think they were, but I have no personal knowledge of it. CHARLES A. HALL sworn andexamined. By Mr. Buchanan : Question. Where do you reside, Mr. Hall ? — Answer. At Marshall, Tex. Q. How long have you resided at Marshall ? — A. Four years next July. Q. Previous to that where did you live ? — A. Well, sir ; up to within six years ago I lived in Victoria County, Texas. Q. How long have yon resided in the State of Texas ? — A. Thirty-five years. Q. Where were you bom ? — A. In Texas. Q. What is your age ? — A. Thirty-five last February. Q. And occupation ?— A. I have been iv carpenter. Q. Where did you learn your trade ? — A. In Victoria County. Q. How long have you worked at it ? — A. I have worked at it about sixteen or eeventeeu years. Q. At what date were you first employed by the Texas and Pacific ? — ^A, Next July it will be four years ago, Q. What at ? — A. In the coach-shop. Q. Doing what? — A. Working on coach- work, sir. Q. Working on passenger coaches? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did you remain at that employment f — A. A little over three years. Q. From that employment what were you transferred to T — ^A. To the freight-shops, as foreman of the freight-shops. 3984 LAB 3 23 354 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. By freight-shop do you meali the shop in which the freight-cars are made and repaired? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many men were placed in your charge ?— A. There were about twenty, -I think, when I went down, and the force was increased. Q. How long did you remain in charge there ?— A. From the 1st of October to the I7th of February. . » « m. Q. Prom what cause did your connection with the company close ? — A. The causo given was absence without permission. Q. You were discharged ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had you been absent from your post of duty ? — A. I had been absent from the shop. Q. For how long? — ^A. Parts of three days. Q. Give me the parts of the three days, please.— A. On Monday morning I was in the shop from ten minutes to 7, the time when the whistle blew, until half past 9; then in the afternoon from 1 o'clock, and off and on each morning and evening, Mon- day, Tuesday, and Wednesday. Q. What were you absent for?— A. I was attending the meeting of the district as- sembly 101. Q. Knights of Labor ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Where was that being held ?— A. Here in Marshall. Q. Were you absent without leave ? — A. No, sir. Q. From whom did you obtain leave ? — ^A. Mr. Crosby, general foreman. Q. Where was he when he gave you the leave ? — A. It was on Sunday morning, and on the depot platform. Q. Who was present when he gave you the leave ? — A. J. A. Thorburn, of Missouri. Q. Were there any others near you ? — A. Yes, sir ; there were two or three others that I was talking to, just at the time I went up and askedpermiasion, and I told them I was going to ask permission next day. Q. Were they near enough to hear Mr. Crosby's conversation? — A. No, sir. Q. You are confident of that? — A. I do not say positively that no one else heard; but Mr. Thorburn was the one present that I know of. Q. What is your recollection of others being near enough for them to hear what was said 1 — A. I do not think, there was any one near enough, though there may have been. Q. What was the conversation between yourself and Mr. Crosby when that permis- sion was granted ? — A. Well, sir, I went up to Mr. Crosby and told him that I would like to get off fur two or three days to attend the District Assembly 101, which con- vened next day, but that I would come into the shop an hour or two in the morning and then a while after dinner. He said, "All right." Q. Were j ou a delegate to that assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. From your own local assembly? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What other position did you hold in that assembly ? — A. I was master workman. Q. How long had you been ma,ster workman ? — A. Since the 11th of January. Q. What otlier c^use did Mr. Crosby assign for discharging you ? — A. None other, sir. Q. In whose presence did that conversation as to the cause of discharge occur?— A. No one was present. Q. Where did it occur? — A. Just close to the shop, near the dry house, which is across from the shops. Q.' Did you present jrour grievance to your local assembly ? — A. I did, sir. Q. That day or evening?— A. That night; at the meeting that night. Q. Do you know what was done with it ?T— A. Yes, sir; I know what was done with it ; the committee took it in hand. Q. Are you a member of that committee? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you keep track of the course of procedure in connection with that griev- ance ? — A. I do not know that I did, sir. After turning it over to my local it was in their hands and out of mine. Q. Was it investigated or not? — A. They had me up before them at one time. Q. Do you know if they had anybody else ?— A. They had Mr. Crosby. Q. And both your statements were taken ?— A. They did not while I was present. 1 would not be very sure, and I am not sure whether any one else was examined or not. Q. What further did they do about it?— A. I think, sir, when they failed to adjust it they turned it over to the executive of the district. Q. What effort did they make to adjust it?— A. Now, that I cannot say. The com- mittee themselves would be the best to see about that. Q. You were not present at any of those efforts? Do you know of any proposition being made to have it brought to the attention of Receiver Brown ?— A. By the exec- utive board? Q. I am speaking of the time when it was still in the hands of the local board, be- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 355 fore it had been passed over to the board of District Assembly 101 ? — A. I do not know that the local committee took any steps towards placing it before the receivers. Q. Would it not be the orderly course of procedure for your local committee or as- sembly to use every effort to have the matter adjusted belore passing it over to the board of the district assembly ? — A. Yes, sir ; with certain conditions. Q. Name those, please. — A. For instance, the board of the district assembly being here, and having other grievances that they wish to see the receivers in reference to, that was turned over to them to allow them to bring that belore the receivers with the others. Q. Then it sometimes occurs that a local board will tarn over a grievance to the district board before they make efforts to have the grievance adjusted f — A. They did in this. Q. I am asking whether it would have been the orderly procedure t-r-A. Well, ordi- narily I suppose that the local board would have gone with it as far as they could, to the highest official of the road, and then turned it over to the district. Q. What element was there in this case which took it out of the ordinary course of procedure? — A. Well, sir, the first was the convenience of the district executive to the local board, and the executive board intended to try and see the receivers and settle other matters. That is the way it was done. I think that the District Assem- bly 101 wished to settle these other grievances. I do not suppose it would have been turned over to them at the time it was but for the fact that they wanted to see the receivers about other grievances. Q. Do you know whether the district board made any effort to see the receivers? I am speaking now of your own knowledge. — A. Only from hearsay. Q. Were propositions voted for that a strike would be ordered before the time it actually was ordered? — A. About five minutes, sir, before the whistle blew. Q. Did you know prior to the five minutes before the whistle blew that your case had been acted upon by the district executive board ? — A. I knew that the district executive board were trying to adjust it up to the time that they voted. Q. Did you also know that they had declined to po to Dallas? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know what reason they assigned for declining to go to Dallas? — A. I be- lieve one reason given was that Receiver Sheldon had failed in keeping the promise he had made with them, and that they thought if he would break one promise, why the chances were they would not get another, and that the proper way was for the re- ceivers to come here where that part of the trouble was. Q. Was it one part of the trouble as to whether they would go to the receivers or the receivers come to them ? — A. That was not a grievance at that time. Q. What promise had Governor Sheldon made to that board and broken? — A. This only : When the executive board told him Governor Sheldon promised when he went to Dallas he and Governor Brown would come back and settle the matter — the trouble in the shops. Q. That was the only promise that they spoke of him having broken ? — A. That was the promise. Q. And did they know whether or not he had been prevented from coming? — ^A. That I caijnot say. They had an interview with him. Q. Was not the trouble about going to Dallas largely that they desired the receiv- ers to come to them rather than that they should go to the receivers? — A. Well, 1 do not know that that was it, altogether. I think that if the receivers had shown that they wished to act in a spirit of fairness with the men there would not have been any trouble. Q. Was not the trouble about going to Dallas largely that they desired the re- ceivers to come to them rather than that they should go to the receivers? — A. I do not know that it was. I cannot say that it was. Q. What is the number of your local assembly ? — A. No. 4959. Q. Did that assembly vote upon the proposition of whether they would sustain the , executive board in demanding your reinstatement or not ? — A. No, sir. Q. Can you explain why that vote was not taken in that assembly? — A. Because the trouble originated in the assembly. Q. Did the assembly indorse your grievance before it was turned over to the dis- trict board? — A. Jhe assembly indorsed the grievance on turning it over to the local. Q. Do you mean the full assembly or the local board ? — A. The full assembly, and they turned it over to the local board. Q. The grievance was read in open assembly, and by vote of the assembly it was referred to the local ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How soon after the grievance occurred was it read in open assembly ? — A. It was made at half past six and it was read about nine o'clock. Q. The same day on which it occurred ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And on what day was it turned over to the district board ? — A. I do not know. Q, You do not know how long the local board had it ?— A. I do not. Q, (By Mr. Paeisek.) Did the executive board of District 101 make any formal de- 356 LABOK TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Oiand for your reinstatement ?— A. I understaucl that they made a request that I might be put back to my old job in the coach shop. Q. Did you understand that there was any formal presentation of the grievance to either of the receivers ?— A. I understand that the grievance was presented to Gov- ernor Sheldon, and he declined to look over the papers on the ground that he had not Q. How long after this grievance of your removal had been referred to the district assembly, was it before this strike was declared?— A. Five or six days after. Q. You knew of this declaration to strike ?-:-A. A few minutes before. As I stated before, about five minutes before. Q. Was the formal ground of the strike, as stated, your case?— A. I do not thmk so, sir ; to get at it exactly and fully you would have to go back Q. I want to know the formal ground upon which the strike was announced, when it was announced ; was there not some ground for the strike announced?— A. Some ground ? I do not know that I understand. Q. Was not some ground given by the board to the officer ordering the strike ?— A. I suppose they gave some ground for it. Q. Was not that ground your discharge and the refusal to reinstate you ?— A. A ground that was given by the board ? Q. Was not that it ?— A, Well, I cannot say that it was or that it was not; because, not being employed by the company at that time, I, of course, received no order to strike. Q. But did you not, from your acquaintance with the movements of the order, and your acquaintance with those having charge of the order to strike, know that that was the ground that was set forth ?— A. That was the precipitating cause ; but I do not think it was the cause. Q. ' I want to keep to the ground announced for the strike ? — A. I do not know that I can answer that. Q. There was no power to order a strike without explanation and excuse ?— A. As I understood there were several propositions submitted to the assemblies to vote upon, and in those was a proposition, " Would they sustain the executive board ?" Q. What were those specific propositions? — A. The propositions were these : I only know them from hearsay, that they were submitted to my assembly. But they were submitted to the assemblies by the board of district No. 101. One was that unskilled abor be paid $1.50 a day, and that the bridgemen receive time and a half for over time, and the restoration of the September (1884) pay. Q. Were these all the questions that you recollect ? — A. And recognition. Q. Recognition of the order? — A. Eecognition of the order was another. Q. Officially?— A. Officially. Q. And then yours is a fourth ? — A. And then my case came on at the tail end. Q. And the strike did not occur until your case arose ? — A. As I said just now, that possibly precipitated matters. Q. Were you aware at any time during the early months of 1886 that a strike during the season was anticipated ? — A. Well, I can only answer that by giving, orrather going into, the unsatisfied feeling of the men in regard to the keeping of what is kown as the Hayes agreement. Ot course it was talked about that there would be a general strike throughout the country on the 1st of May for shorter hours. Prior to the strike of 1885 the wages, as you know, I suppose, from evidence taken, had been cut time and again, which brought on the strike of March, 1885. Then there was an agreement entered into and signed by the officials of the road agreeing to do a certain thing. Well, their failure or attempted evasion to comply with this agreement, or their failure in other instances, created a spirit of discontent among the men. But a short while back the Wabash road was thrown into the hands of receivers, and the old men upon the road had their wages out, and it was found that just what the offi- cials chose was done. It was believed by the men upon this road that this road was placed in the hands of a receiver for the same purpose. These receivers refused to recognize the Hayes agreement. Of course the men lost that interest they otherwise would have had, and it created a spirit of unrest amongst them. Q. Do you mean that a feeling and an impression existed among the men that there was some bad faith in the road going into the hands of receivers? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that that was one of the elements of their disappointment ? — A. That was one of he causes of discontent among the men, seeing from past experience the fact that when roads had gone into the bands of receivers there was a reduction of wages. Q. You were aware at the time you were discharged that the road had gone into the hands of receivers ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You knew that the Hayes agreement provided for the restoration of wages to the scale paid in September, 1884 ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. You also knew, did you not, that the receivers as such would have no power to pledge this road to that agreement without the consent of the court was first ob- tained T — ^A. Well, as I have said, if the receivers had asked the permission of the LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 357 court to sign it and so notified us, or tLat they would have asked the permission of the court to sign it, then that spirit of discontent would have died out. Q. At what date was the Hayes agreement presented to the receivers? — A. lam^ not exactly positive as to that. Some time in January, I think. Q. You have said something ahout the wish for recognition on the part of the Knights of Lahor. Had the Knights of Lahor been increasing with great rapidity at that time in numbers?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And that was well known by the members of the order generally ? — A. I suppose that it was, that they were increasing in membership. Q. And that they were becoming very strong ? — A. Well, I do not know ahout that. Q. Especially on this Southwestern system ? — A. They were pretty strong in num- hers, but not exactly in the principles of the order. Q. Was it your understanding that one of the objects of the strike was to make yoiir opponents feol the power of the order, so as to respect its demands more quickly the next time ? — A. The recognition that labor had or should have with the officers of the road gained gradually in the government of the road, that is, in the wages that should be paid men for certain classes of work. Q. One of the objects was to make the railroad officials understand that they should recognize the officials of the Knights of Labor as such in adjusting grievances and differences? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And that your removal at that time was treated by the local assembly of the Knights of Labor as a slight to the officials of the order as such. Was that one of the elements of disturbance ? — A. Well, as several of the delegates present expressed themselves, they considered it an insult to the order at large. Q. And that they were in part resenting that insult by ordering this strike? — A. The delegates did not order the strike. The local assemblies themselves ordered the strike. Q. The local assemblies in their action in ordering a strike, did they express any ground for it except your discharge? — A. Certainly, sir ; the strike was for a general settlement of grievances. Q. W38 it voted upon in that form by the local assembly? — A. That I cannot say. It was not voted in the assembly of which I am a member, because we were not at that time attached to the district, and were just organizing, and there was no official union with the district when the propositions were sent out. Q. How long before the stri ke. was ordered was it that the order was agreed upon ? — A. About five minutes, sir. Q. How long have you been a Knight of Labor ? — A. Since March 17, 1885. Q. How long have you been an official of the order ?^A. Since March 17, 1885. Q. Did you approve or disapprove of the strike? — A. I do not approve of it, sir. Q. Can you state any benefits that have accrued to any one from the strike? — A. Well, as I understand, the engineers got their grievances all straightened out. They got benefit out of it. Q. Did that occur from this strike ? — A. Well, yes, sir ; they generally build up on strikes of other organizations. Q. You have no knowledge that they were benefited by this strike? — A. I know that they had a member that was suspended, or that was not at work, and had not been for some time, and very shortly after the strike was inaugurated he told me that he Could not get them to take his grievance up ; but shortly after the strike was in- augurated he came to me and said he was to get $2 a day for the time he had been laid off. Q. That is all you know of their being benefited ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you not know that another engineer has been killed? — A. Only through the papers. But I did not know that the strike had anything to do with it. Q. Did not this strike cause that ?— A. Well, you know that engineers are killed very often when there is no strike on. Because this was on you cannot say that that was the cause of it. Q. Can you not ? — A. Unless that was the cause. Q. Excepting as to this engipeer do you know that anybody else has been bene- fited ? — A. From hearsay. I have heard it expressed that the engineers had gotten their contract that they had with the Southwest system with Mr. Hayes and Mr. Hoxie made just after'the strike of 1885, and that they had got it approved by the receivers of this road. Q. There seems to bo a severity of feeling on the part of the Knights of Labor to-_ wards the engineers, is there not, arising out of this business ? — A. I do not know that there is. Q. Do you not know that there is a bitter feeling towards the engineers because they did not get off their engines ? — A. I cannot say that there is. Q. You have no knowledge of that ?— A. I have no knowledge of it. Q. Aside from them, have you any knowledge of any person being benefited by the strike?— A. *la sir; I cannot say that I have. 358 I.ABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. The causes given for the strike have not been in any way aided by the sliilie, have they ?— A. No, sir. , . ., Q. Then, as a Knight of Labor do you believe it is wise to inaugurate Such strikes ?— A. Ido not, sir. I think that the principles of the order, if adopted in the order atlarge, would be beneficial and considerably improve the matter. It is, of course, known that the order does not approve strikes. Q. Do you not believe that this strike— looking back— was a serious error ?— A. It Jias been a serious blunder and mistake. Q. Was not the first movement of it the greatest blunder of all, in your judgment I A. Well, all strikes are mistakes. Q. Do you not regard this as a serious blunder, and that the order to strike was the worst of all ?— A. I think that the strike was a mistake. Q. Now let me go in another direction. Do you not think that there should be dis- tinct boundaries made to the power of local assemblies ?— A. Distinct boundaries made to the power of local assemblies. By what ? Q. By the order ? — A. No more so than there is. Q. Do yon not believe that the national assembly should have more power than it now has ? — A. Yes, sir ; I believe that the general assembly and.the executive board, of the general assembly should have more power than they now have. Q. Do you not believe that no strike should be permitted until approved by the executive board of the general assembly ? — A. Yes, sir ;• up to, say, a strike that would involve more than aOO employes, should not bo entered into without the approval of the general executive board. Q. Is not a local strike liable to run like fire and involve a great number ?— A. Not all the time. You see, a strike comprising only that number could be controlled by the district, and the district could take care of it. It could keep eight hundred souls, about four to' the family. Q. Would it not be easier to prohibit all strikes under the control of the Knights of Labor, except where they are approved and the order for the strike is given by the executive board of the Knights of Labor of the national assembly ? — A. As I said awhile, ago, nearly all strikes are mistakes; but a local strike sometimes does a little benefit. Q. (Mr. Buchanan.) I am curious to know exactly what you mean by a recogni- tion of the order. I have seen it often, and you say one of the causes of the strike was the desire for recognition of the order. Tell me exactly what you mean by that. — A. Well, sir, I cannot. I think it is that the officials, not only of this road, bnt other roads, should recognize and treat with a committee appointed by the order to settle by arbitration the difficulties or grievances that might arise. As it is and has been, that a man employed on this railroad, for instance, is appointed on a com- mittee to adjust a grievance, and he is liable to be discharged for it. If the order was recognized so that they would be there recognized in an official capacity, it should be a man not employed by the railroad, but over whom they could have no control ; and consequently he could do better, and could make a better demand than one who is employed by that road and afraid to speak out what he thinks. Q. You do not mean simj)ly that they shall be willing the address the person, as for instance, John Smith, master workman ? — ^A. Oh, no, ^ir ; that does not matter. Q. You mean simply that they shall recognize it as an order? — A. That they should receive them as authorized by tneirlocal assembly, and that they will so recognize them. Q. You do not care about official titles ? — A. No, sir. Q. You spoke about strong impressions among the men that this road was thrown into the hands of receivers in order to avoid that recognition. Do you share that im- pression ?— A. I do not know that I do. I think I may say this, that it was done for a purpose. Q. Do you believe it was for the purpose you have indicated ? Did you do anything to correct that impression among your associates? — ^A. I do not know that I did. Q. You do not believe that the affairs of this great corporation were put into the United States court simply to evade the settlement of these grievances ? — A. £ linow that that could not be it entirely, and that there were other motives and other ob- jects behind all that. Q. And also possibly other necessities ? — ^A. Yes, sir ; possibly other necessities. Q. Did you inquire as to the real financial condition of the road ? — A. No, sir ; I had only heard Mr. Gumming, who was superintendent of the road, say that the road was financially embarrassed. Q. Do you know it had defaulted upon the interest on its bonds ? — A. I cannot say that I knew it. Q. Was there any information generally as to the financial condition of the road and the necessity for a receivership? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Did you make any effort to inform yourselves upon that point? — ^A. No, sir; I do not know of any effort made. LAIJOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 359 Q. (By the Chairman.) Have you applied to the officers of this road for employ- men t since the strike? — ^A. No, sir. ^. Did you refer personally or by letter your grievance to cither one of the re- ceivers ? — ^A. I did not, sir. I went to the man Who discharged ine, the general fore- man. Q. Did not Receiver Sheldon refer your case to Receiver Brown, and did you not get passes for yourself, Martin Irons, and others to meet at Dallas for that purpose? — There were passes given to me and three men — C. A. Hall and three— men to Dallas and return. Q. Who gave yon those passes, and what was his declaration at the time he gave them ? — A. Mr. Thorn gave them to me. Q. What did he say? — A. He said they were for myself and committee to go to Dallas. I think that was what he said. Q. What authority did he say he had for issuing those passes ? — A. I think he said Governor Sheldon had told him to issue them. Q. On account of an agreement he made with you that you should have them ?— A. He might have said that. Q. Were you made foreman by Mr. Gumming on account of some pressure that was brought to bear on him ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. How did you come to be appointed foreman ? — A. He informed me that he was going to appoint me foreman of the car shop, and very shortly afterwards he made the ajmointment. Mr. Woods asked me if I would take the place ; but as to settling any difficulty, I do not know anything about that. Q. How did the vacancy occur to which you were appointed ! — A. I understood that there had been a complaint made against Mr. Ogie generally of incompetency and drunkenness, and that he was tried and found guilty and discharged. That, though, is only hearsay. Q. Was the investigation of Mr. Ogleinitiatedby the Knights of Labor ? — A. It was by the action of the Knights of Labor in his employ, and some that were not there. That it was altogether by the Knights of Labor and others I do not know, but I sup- pose that it was some of the Knights of Labor. I will just state I have a letter of Mr. Thorbnrn, that he can make a statement of the conversation between Mr. Crosby and myself. He lives at De Soto, Missouri. Mr. Buchanan. How far is De Soto from Saint Louis ? Governor Bkown. About 40 miles. , The Chairman. X do not know that that statement amounts to anything; that is not sworn to. The Witness. It is not sworn to, but I could have got it sworn to. I did not know it would be necessary. The Chairman. We cannot admit it as it is ; if it was sworn to we might admit it. This Thorbnrn lived in De Soto, I understood, but he has left there. The Witness. I wanted to have him sworn. The Chairman. I am very sorry, but we cannot admit it. The Witness. There are parties here in the room that heard him make this same statement. The Chairman. We cannot go into that kind of an inviestigation, because it would be too extensive, and we would not know where it would stop. Mr. Buchanan. We have been refusing all the morning to receive affidavits from the railroad company. The Chairman. The railroad depositions were taken before the special commissioner appointed by Judge Pardee, and the parties were all brought before the committee to identify and swear to the truth of the contents before they were admitted. J. J. KEETIN recalled and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Have you heard the testimony of the telegraph operator ? — Answer. Yes sir, I do not remember the time when he came into my office, but some time within the last six months a complaint was made of him by the despatcher on duty, Mr. Johnson, that he vas not competent to work with him at that side of the house. Well, instead of discharging him, 1 moved him over to the west side, and finally gave' him night duty, which was very light, so as to keep him, and doing that act as a matter of sympathy as much as anything else, knowing that he had a family, until the 6th day of March, this year. A short time previous to that I understood he belonged to the Knights of Labor, and I was being pressed by Mr. Mablefield, my superior officer, to get rid of him, not because he belonged to the Knights of ~ Labor, but because he was acting very badly on the wire. Mean time news came of the general offices being located at Dallas, and. the work became heavier, and I had frequent complaints; bnt I thought this trouble was bridged, and I did not 360 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. want to discharge Lim. But after the strike of the 1st of March, while I was vetj well tsatisfied he was a member of the, Knights of Labor, I did not take action for a while bu we had some very important messages that were being sent to the general offlces,, and on one occasion I had to get him out of the office before I sent a message. I had no complaint up to that time that he had divulged anything, nor do I now think that he ever did, but on one occasion, about the 6th of March, and about that time when the strikers were all deputized, licensed to carry arms and come down very freely on the property, some of them began to come in, and Mr. Hall— I think I saw him in there talking to Mr. Logan, and others whom I knew to be Knights of Labor. About 6 o'clock on the evening of March 6 we had a message to send up to the other office, and rather than send it, not wanting him to hear,'I called him over to my desk and asked him if he was a Knight of Labor. He hesitated considerably, and finally answered me that he was. I asked him if he understood the position he stood in ; that he owed allegiance to the company or to the Knights of Labor, and said to him that some of his brothers had been ordered out, and some of them forced out, and told him about the difficulties with the operators at Fort Worth, and he would have to make up his mind to withdraw from one or the other, and if he did not do it by 7 o'clock that night that I could not and would not keep him in the office, let the result be what it would. He said he would make up his mind in that time, and I told him if he thought he couldnotmake his mind up then he need not wait until 7 o'clock, but could leave right at that time. Now as to the pistol, I will make this expla,nation. I had a pistol of my own, but I discovered that my pistol was gone. My wife had heard a good deal of this talk by the strikers, and she had urged mo to get a pistol — to hunt mine up or get another one. Some time on March 6, in the noon or forenoon, or early afternoon, I do not remember which, I asked Mr. Eiverman, chief clerk in the di- vision superintendent's office, if he had a pistol. He said he had one over at his house, and I asked him if he would lend it to me. He said he would and said he would bring it over some time in the afternoon. Just at the time I was talking to. Mr. Logan, the pistol, with a box of cartridges, was brought in and laid on my desk. It seems the colored porter had just brought it over. I did not get that pistol for the purpose of intimidating Logan, but I got it for the purpose of carrying for my own protection. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was it loaded at the time it was placed on the desk?— A. I think not ; I am pretty sure it was not loaded. Even if it was loaded it was placed there harmlessly, and might have been there at any time before or since. It just hap- pened at the time that the colored man brought it in. Q. (By Mr. Pabkbk). Did you hear the witness's statement in regard to signing a paper denouncing the Knights of Labor ? — A. There is no fact in it. I took it as an ■evidence of his unwillingness to place himself in a proper attitude in the office, and I would not take the chances of his remaining in the office. Q. Did you require him to sign that paper ? — A. No, sir ; he seemed to make up his mind that he could not differ from the order, and I told him he could leave ; and fol- lowing that I told him, " you have seen others required to go out and being forced ■out, and for some reason you have been allowed to remain." I then told him that there had been complaint of private information getting on the outside and into the hands of the strikers ; but I did not say that he had done it. Q. You mean information that came to his knowledge as a telegraph operator? — A. It was information that passed over these wires, but I told him that I would not say that he did it. I told him, " You occupy this position, and, of course, there must be suspicion." I told him, " I do not believe you have done it," but that I could not be responsible for how long he would continue, and I was firm in the belief that up to that time he had not done anything. When I began to see these men coming around that had business with him, and were watching, I did not feel easy. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Were these special policemen about the premises at that time? — A. Yes, sir. T. I. LOGAN recalled and examined. By the Chaikman : Question. What have you to say in reference to the conversation which Mr. Kertin spoke of between yourself and Mr. Hall ? — Answer. I can say that I have had no conversation about the strike in any one shape. Some time after he was discharged Mr. Hall came up into the office and spoke to me while I was working, there, and asked me to pay him five dollars that I had owed him for work he had done for me. He came up there and asked me when I could pay him, and I told him, "You can come up iu the morning, and I will give it to you in the morning." So he came next morning and I paid him two dollars. I was satisfied then that enemies of mine in the office thought that 1 was speaking to him about messages. That was the only business that I had with him. I was paying him for building me a kitchen sink. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 361 LUTHER JOHNSON sworn and esamiuea. By the Chairman : Question. State what you know of this same subject about which Mr. Logan and Mr. Kertin have testified. — ^Answer. About seven or eight months ago Mr. Logan was my copy operator, and business was very heavy on the east end. Several times he made very serious blunders ; mistakes that I overlooked and said nothing about. One evening I was very busy, and had him copying an order for me. I went out and de- livered the order to the conductor and engineer and discovered the mistake, which, if it had not been detected, would have ensued in a collision, probably. I told Mr. Kertin that if he would take this man away from there I would consider it a great deal safer to have him outside of the office ; that I did not want him to work there when he was liable, by his mistakes, to cause a collision or something of that kind. He was then put over on the west end, and afterwards assigned to duty on the west end. When the general offices were removed to Dallas, of course the Dallas business was a good deal heavier on that line, and he could not attend to the business, because he was not a competent man. I heard Mr. Kertin speak about it andsay tliat he kept him there more on account of his having a family than anything else; but we found something was working wrong on the line. Nothing was said until about the 6th of March. I did not hear the conversation between them on that evening, as I was not present at that time. I did not know what took place until next morning, and then only from hearsay. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was it a part of his duty to send dispatches by which the movements of trains on the road were regulated ? — A. It was my duty to send all train orders, his duty to copy them. Q. Would an error in one of those orders probably result in loss of life? — A. Yes, sir. The committee then adjourned to meet in the morning, at Texarkana, on the call of the chairman. Texaekana, Tuesday, May 11, 1886. The subcommittee, of which Hon. W. H. Grain is chairman, convened in the Con- ductor's Hall, at Texarkana, this day, and proceeded to take testimony. JAMES F. SMITH sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Do you reside in Texarkana; and, if so, what business are you engaged in? — Answer. Yes, sir; I reside in Texarkana, and am in the drug business. Q. Wholesale or retail?— A. Wholesale and retail; we do considerable jobbing. Q. Can you testify as to the condition of business here and the prospect for business prior to the strike? — A. Well, we thought it was really good. Q. Will you state what effect was produced by the strike upon the general business of the town? — A. Well, it created quite a depression in business afld stopped business to a very great extent. All of ns who had goods consigned by the Iron Mountain road could not get them; we had quite a lot of goods out for three weeks. Finally we got them transferred from the Iron Mountain road to the Texas and Saint Louis, and a good many other parties were in the same condition. We did not order goods. We felt an uncer- tainty of getting them, and were unable to supply our customers to a gi;eat extent, be- cause we did not have the goods; and it was similar toother disturbances; it stopped all attention to business very much and had a tendency to collapse business. Q. What city did you deal with principally? — A. Saint Louis, Mo. Q. Have you any idea of the percentage of loss to the business of this town by t he •strike ? — A. It would be almost impossible for me to make an exact statement as to the loss, because our business is so general, there are so many interests. The lumber in- terests suffered more heavily than any other; it is the largest interest we have here. Just how many dollars and cents their loss would be I would hardly be able to state. Q. How long did the paralysis of trade last ? — A. It wasvery bad for, say, three weeks, probably a little longer, and then it began resuming business. Q. Are there any Knights of Labor organizations here? — A. Itinderstand them to be; I do not know that there are. I have never been in any of them. Q. Was there an actual strike? — A. Yes, sir; there was a withdrawal from the service of the railroad. Q. Were there any disturbances here V — A. I should think there was. The trains were interfered with; that is, freight trains were not allowed to move in or out from here until the latter part of March. When a freight train came in it was side-tracked and nothing was allowed to be done to it. The trains were interfered with, and they would not allow them to come into the yards and go on the side-track. We called a meetin 382 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. of the citizens, aud appointed a committee to sec the Knights of Labor and see wlat they proposed to do. They met with us that evening and promised us that there should he no interference with trains. That was my understanding from the Knights of Labor committee, and a number of us went down next day on the incoming of a freight to see if they would act in good faith and keep their promise. It got down to the yard to the first side-traek. They had two or three hundred men there and we were totally incapa- ble of getting the train in or doing anything with jt. Then I went to one of the leaders of the Knights of Labor, Mr. Charles Wilson, and asked him how it was after agreeing to let trains pass in they did not do so. He said that they had only agreed to let local freight trains in, ind that through trains were to be side-tracked. Myself and Mr. Hamilton talked about the matter and about the necessity of protecting the trains. Mr. Hamilton decided that the only thing we could do was to have the governor order out the militia, and in a few days everything would be got out straight. The militia were ordered out and everything was straightened in a few days. Q. The captain of the militia company lives here?— A. Yes, sir; Captain Trigg. Q. Will he be here this morning?— A. I do not know; L guess he is in town. Q. We can have more details from him as to what the militia did here. Is there any- thing further?— A. Nothing further. Q. What is the population of the city ?— A. I do not know exactly; I should think probably 6,000, on both sides. Q. How many railroads come into Texarkana ?— A. The Iron Mountain, the Texas and Pacific, and the Trans-Continental; there Is a branch ont.about 4 miles from here on the Trans-Continental, and then the Texas and Saint Louis running through here. That would make five roads coming into the town. Q. To how many of those roads did the strike extend ? — A To all but the Texas and Saint Louis, the Texas and Pacific, the Iron Mountain, and Trans-Continental and branch. Q. Do you know anything about the killing of engines and interference with the trains? — A. I do not know; I did not see any of them they killed, but I heard a good deal said about it. WALTER H. McCarthy sw«rn and examined. By Mr. Pabkbk: Question. Are you a resident of Texarkana, Ark. ? — Answer. No, sir; I am a resident of Texarkana, Tex. Q. And have been how long? — A. Since 1875. Q. What is your business? — A. Keeping hotel. ^ Q. The city lies between Texas and Arkansas and passes over the State lines? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is, one paxt of the city is in one State and the other part in the otherState?— A. Yes, sir. Q. And they have separate city governments? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you know as to the organization of the Knights of Labor or Labor Union here ? — A. I know that there is a certain organization of the Knights of Labor that has created a good deal of trouble. Q. They have a lodge-room I suppose ? — A. I believe so. Q. Do you remember the beginning of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may describe it as it occurred here, so far as you know. — A. The first of the trouble of the strike was at Marshall. The men were ordered out here on the 7th; part of them stopped work three or four days after. I understood they were ordered out, and then they turned out as a body and quit work with the exception of a few yard-men who handled the passenger trains. Q. Do you know how many men went out? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you talk with them and hear them say what the cause of their going out was ? — . A. Yes, sir. They said they had no complaint here. A great many of them told me that. Q. What did they say was the cause? — A. The cause was that they were ordered out from other organizations on account of Hall being discharged. Q. Did they say anything of their having or not having grievances? — A. I did not hear a railroad man say he was dissatisfied. Q. Did you hear them say whether they had any complaint here ? — A. I believe they had no complaint here. Q. What was the effect of the strike upon business generally? — A. It was at a stand- still. Q. What disturbances did you see occasioned by the strike or strikers ? — A. There were a great deal more threats than there were disturbances. Q. What were those threats? — A. They would tell men who went to work in the yard that they would "do them up," and that they would not allow them to work. LABOB TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 363 Q. Some of the men that remained, or men who took their places ? — A. Some men that remained, and some that came here to take their places. Q. Do yon know of any of those assaults or collisions with the men ?— A. Well, there were two or three fellows had some little fights with the men. I believe they jumped on one by the switch one day and beat him up a little. Q. But no dangerous collisions or assaults that you know of ? — A. No, sir. They fired on a switchman here one night, but I guess it was more for a scare than anything else. Q. If there were any instances that would be of interest to us you may state them. — A. There was a man named MacMillan that was assaulted upon the street one day. I did not see the trouble, but I assisted to get him out of jail. They turned the other one out first through the influence of some parties here. They turned them both out. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Who made these threats? — A. Well, sir, different parties made them. Q. Were they former employes of the company or not? — A. Parties told me that they were; parties told them that they had better get out of town. They did not belong to the company and had never worked for it. Q. Is it not the case always that the lawless element in a commonity rush to the front in these acts of violence? — A. Yes, sir. The most worthless part of the population do so. That has been my experience, and I have been on railroads and in public business since I was thirteen years old. WILLIAM L. WHITAKER sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. At this place, Texarkana, Tea. Q. And have resided here how long ? — ^A. Only ten years. Q. In what business are you engaged? — A. I am in the lumber business principally. Q. Are you a member of a firm? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You say in the lumber business; doyoumeaninthe manufactureaswellasthesale of lumber? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is that a large interest here ? — A. Yes, sir, the largest. Q. Can you give the number of million feet manufactured here and shipped annually at this place, or within a certain area affected by the strike in this vicinity ? — A. I have not estimated it all, and I can only approximate it now. Q. That will be sufficient. — A. The amount of timber got out in a year here wiU be between fifty and T)ne hundred million feet. Q. Were you in Texarkana at the time of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. ' What effect, if any, had that upon the lumber business of this section? — A, It had a very marked effect upon us. Q. In what way? — A. It came to a standstill entirely; we kept on manufacturing, but could not ship any. Q. How long were yon prev&ted shipping ? — A. We did not ship any that amounted to anything for about six weeks. Q. Did this result in a serious loss to the lumber interest here ? — ^A. Yes, sir, a, great loss. Q. What number of men are there employed in the lumber interest in this section? — A. Probably four or five thousand, or probably more men. Q. That receive their living from the employment afforded in connection with the manufacture and sale of lumber ? — A. They and their families. Q. Were there any employ^ discharged because of the stagnation in business ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know how many ? — A. No, sir, I do not. Q. Since the strike has been over has the shipment of lumber been resumed ? — A. No, sir; not to the same extent that it was before the str ike. Q. Well, do you judge that the effect on the lumber interest will be a permanent one? — A. I do not think it will be permanent. We had been sending lumber to Ka,nsas and Western Missouri. Of course, they could not get their supplies during the strike here; that cut us off, and we kept on manu facturing and increasing our supplies, and that, of course, decreased the price. Q. From your knowledge of the situation., what is the probability of your recovering the loss that has been caused by the strike ? — A. I think it wiU take a year to do it. Q. I do not speak of the recovery of the volume of trade that was interrupted; but liiere seems to have been a cessation of export. My question is, when, in your judg- ment, would you eventually sell that which you would have sold but for this strike ? — A. I do not think that we wiU sell that soon, for dealers had to supply themselves from ether sections. 364 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Then the loss to trade here was a benefit to trade at some other point? — A. It prob- ably was. . „ _. , Q. What did you see of the actual occurrences connected with the strike? Did you see any violence or any injury to property, or anything of that kind ? — A. No, sir; I did not see anything of it. MAX MTJNZHEIMER sworn and examined. By the ChAIEMAN: Question. Are you connected with the wholesale and retail business here ? — Answer. Wholesale business. Q. In what business? — A. Groceries. Q. On the Arkansas or Texas side?— A. On the Texas side. Q. About what amount of business is done in the town of Texarkana on both sides of the line? — A. Well, that is hard to tell; our business is about $400,000. - Q. Was business injured by the strike? — ^A. Greatly; yes, sir. ; Q. To what extent?— A. Our sales in March fell off a great amotint, and our collec- tions were very slow. Our trade is principally with the lumber men in this section. Q. Whatever affected the trade of the- company affected your trade, I suppose; one was dependent upon the other ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was this suspension of trade to be attributed to any other cause than the strike?— A. No, sir. We were doing splendidly before the strike was inaugurated; trade was improving every day. Q. Has business resumed its former volume? — A. Yes, sir; to some extent. Q. To what section do you sell your goods ? — ^A. Our business is in Texas and Arkan- sas, extendlhg over six, seven, or eight counties around here. Q. What was the effect of the strike upon the general business of the town? — A. It just stagnated it altogether, retail as well as wholesale. JOHN C. WEED sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. What business are j'ou engaged in here ? — Answer. I am in the lumber business, and also a machine-shop in the city. Q. What effect had the strike upon your business ? — A. It simply paralyzed my busi- ness during the time it continued. Q. How many men do you employ? — A. At the mills we employ forty men; in the lumber interest we employ forty men. Q. And at the machine-shop ? — A. Six men. Q. Were you acting yard-master for one of the roads at the time of the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. For which road? — A. For the Iron Mountain Railroad. Q. Tell us what; you know about disturbances and disabling of engines and cars upon that road during the strike by the strikers. — A. The cars in the yard were pretty nearly all disabled, or the bigger portion of them. The keys, links, and pins were taken out, and the keys that held the draw-heads were removed from a great many of them. Q. As to the engines. — A. The engines were some of them blown out — that is, the water was blown out of them. Q. You mean that they were killed ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many cars were disabled, speaking approximately ? — A. I should think prob- ably three hundred or four hundred, cars. Q. How many engines ? — A. I think at the time of the strike at one time there were something like fourteen engines killed. Some of them were disabled in this way — the water had been blown out and they were killed. Q. And how many killed from first to last during the strike at this point ? — A. There were five or six that I saw killed in the yard. Q. What was done with the remainder of these fourteen engines? — A. They were put in on the tracks in the roundhouse and the water blown out of them. Q. Who did this injury? — A. Strikers. Q. Did you see any of these injuries to property done ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You saw the parties who did it in some instances? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had they formerly been in the employ of the company ? — A. Some of them had and some of them had not. Q. Did you cause any of them to be arrested? — A. Some of them were arrested, but not at that time. _Q. Why were they not arrested at once as soon as you saw them committing these violations of property ? — A. There were no oflicers there at that time. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 365 Q. Did /ou say that some of them who participated had been in the employ of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were they citizens of Texaxkana? — A. Some of them -were, sir. Q. What class of people ? — A. Lots of them were men that were just loafing here, were idlers running around here. Q. Did you receive any warning to quit work at that yard ? — ^A. Not practically from them; I had Irom other parties. Q. Who communicated the warning to you ?— A. Parties living here in the city said that there had been threats made against me; but I did not heed them. Q. None were made direct to you ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. The yaids were finally taken possession of by troops? — A. Yes, sir, Q. Do you know how many troops were here at any time? — A. I think they consisted of tiiirty-four men. Q. Was there any other injury done to property of the company besides what you have stated, that you know of? — A. There was at one time a rail taken up from the track half a mUe north of here. I did not go out there that day. Q. Do you know the name of any one who did go out and who saw it? — A. There was a man by the name of Martin Judd went out there. EDWAED A. WATERMAN sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. You are a resident of this city? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And have been for how long? — ^A. Nearly two years. Q. What is your business at present? — A, I am editor and proprietor of the Daily In- dependent. Q. As an editor have you had occasion to study the strike and its local effects? — ^A. Yes, sir; to some extent. Q. You may state the effects upon business. — A. Well, I suppose that my statement wiU be from my general observation of business in the city. The business was very much depressed during the strike. Q. Do you know anything as to what classes of business it covered ? — A. I think it would cover almost all classes. Q. Has it yet resumed its full course as it was before the strike? — A. So far as our city is concerned I think that it is pretty nearly so. Q. How as to the shipping of freight? — A. I cannot tell anything about that Q. Do you know any men among the Knights of Labor? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know any that were personally connected with the disturbance? — A. No, sir; I was not present at any disturbances. My information was from my reporters. Q. If there is any particular thing you wish to state or explanation you wish to make you^can do so. — ^A. I am here simply at the request of the committee, Q. You know of the going on of the strike and of the disturbances among men said to be strikers and others? — A. I knew of them at the time. Q. And of the general injury to business and its continuance ? — A. Business here was very largely and materially affected by the strike. Q. Was that effect injurious? — ^A. I think so, sir. I think it was injurious. EMIEL F. FEIEDELL sworn and examined. By Mr. Buchanan: Question. Did you reside at this place during the late strike? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you concerned in any negotiation arising out of the strike? Andif so, please state what it was. — ^A. I do not exactly know what you mean by negotiation. I was one of the meinbers of a committee appointed by the citizens here who went out and had some consultation with the Knights of Labor. Q. I will change it to conference and let you proceed. — ^A. Well, I was one appointed at a citizens' meeting here on the 24th or 25th of March. Some citizens had a meeting at the Marquand Hotel and while we were there a gentleman who represented himself as being connected' with the Knights of Labor, Charles Wilson, with whom I was ac- quainted, asked if the citizens would not send out a committee to have a conference, or conversation, or friendly talk with the executive board of the Knights of Labor, who were then in session up in town. A committee was appointed, of which I was.a mem- ber, and we went up there and had a conversation with the gentlemen who were present. Q. What did the conversation relate to? — ^A. Well, the principal thing we went there for was the railroad officials here complained that property was being injured and de- stroyed, and that the sheriff of our county would not give them sach protection as he ought to, and we felt that was not true. We felt that the sheriff would give them all the assistance that was necessary. 366 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. What did the conversation with the Kniyhts of Labor at that conference include?— A. It related to the destruction of property that went on up there and the taking of tie railroad yard. The railroad authorities had shown us their trains that they could not move. Q. You are speaking of freight trains?— A. Yes, sir. There has been no interference in regard to passenger trains. Q. Did you receive assurances that there would be no further interference? — A. The conversation we had there — we all came to this conclusion, that the railroad yards were not in the possession of the company, and a gentleman representing the Knights of Labor stated that it was not their intention or intent to destroy property. They con- sidered that the railroad company could not employ a sufficient number of men to move their trains, and we told them that they should see that the property was let alone. Q. What reply did they make to that? — A. They readily consented to that, and said that it was not their intention to destroy property, and that they would try to persuade their members not to interfere with it. Q. What did they say as to their interfering with the moving of trains? — ^A. They said that they were not interfering with the movement of trains. Q. Did you telegraph that fact to the railroad officials at Little Rook? — A. Then we went back to the citizens' meeting, and a report was made of the action taken and of these facts and it was sent by telegraph to Mr. Hoxie. I was appointed a committee to send that. Q. Can you give the names of that committee? — A. L. A. Bum, Captain Hayes, presi- dent of the First National Bank, and W. W. Glass. I think there were five of the com- mittee, and one of them was W. J. Hamilton. We sent the telegram to Mr. Hozie, assuring him that there would be no destruction of property. Q. Was there subsequently any interference here with the movement of trains? — A. Yes, sir; on the next day. Q. What, on the next day ? — A. Yes, sir; we received telegram next day from Mr. Wheedon and also one from Mr. Hall, here, stating that they would send a freight train if it would not be interfered with: and they wanted the citizens to see that it was not interfered with. The telegram stated that the train would be in somewhere between 1 and 2'o'clock. The sheriff, W. T. Hamilton, summoned many citizens togo withhim and assist him. This was ou Friday evening. There were some fifteen or twenty citi- zens summoned by the sheriff, and we went into the railroad yard to where the switches were. There were eight or ten left on one side, and six or eight at the other. At that time it was reported that there were some parties ahead tearing up the track, but the sheriff and two or three that were sent with us did not find that that was being done. There were two men on the road that left when we went up there, and went to the woods, and the sheriff tried to stop the train so that we could get on; but the engineer did not stop until he got past us. We afterwards got on the engine, and from that on to the freight cars and caboose. As we were going down the road we could see the people coming together in the yard, and that they congregated at first of the side switches. We were side-tracked, and then they commenced pulling out the pins. Q. Was it any of your posse that pulled out the pins? — A. No, sir; it was the people that gathered around. There were three or four hundred people around there at the time. Q. Was the train permitted to proceed? — A. No, sir; it was stopped. Q. Do you know how long that train remained there before it finally got out of town? — A. No, sir; the engineer left it. They said that it should not go any further, and we left it, and I came to the depot. Q. Did you recognize any there who were in that conference with you the day he- fore? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they put forth any efforts to prevent the stoppage of the train? — A. No, sir. There were two or three of gentlemen who were in that meeting of the executive stand- ing on the outskirts of the crowd. They were not saying anything. Captain Colze was one of the committee that was up the road. I do not know where he was after we left him on the road. Q. Were .you afterwards on duty as a member of the militia company? — A. I was a deputy sheriff and a militia-man; I was on duty on Tuesday. Q. What do you know about injury to property there further than you have stated ? — rL. Well, I do not know of any further. I remained here in the yard in a squad when that train went up the road, and we protected the roundhouse on Sunday. Q. Now, before the side-tracking of this train, do you know whether or not the engi- neer left his train before the train was side-tracked? — A. It was on the side-track some minutes before he left. Q. You are certain of that? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What do you know about taking up any rails? — A. I do not know anything of my own knowledge. LABOR XEOUBLKS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 367 Q. "Was it the destination of that train to run on to that side-track, or was it tLe desire and wish of the railroad officials that it should proceed further?— A. It was the wish of the railroad officials that the train should proceed further into Texas. It came on the main track and it was the understanding that the train was to go on through into Texas. Q. You say that the engineer remained on his engine until the train came to a stop ? — A. For some little time after that. Q. Howlongafterit was coming to a stop before it was uncoupled?— A. Immediately. They commenced taking out some of the pins when it commenced to stop. Q. Did the engineer leave his engine betbre any of that was done? — A. No, sir; he stayed there some little time. The sheriff told the citizens to help him, and the engineer stayed there some little time; but the crowd commenced getting larger and larger and the engineer left. Q. Do you say, or was there any failure on the part of the engineer or an abandon- ment by the engineer of his trust? — A. No, sir; JOHN H. TEIOa sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Are you captaiu of the Gate City Guards? — Answer. I am. Q. Were you captain of the company when this strike broke out? — Yes, sir. Q. Will you please state what you know of your own personal knowledge of the oc- currence in and around the depot and yards of the Iron Mountain Railway Company previous to the time when you called out your company ? — A. I was down on my place about 4 miles from here and I came up for a couple of days. I was summoned as one of the sheriff's posse somewhere. I suppose there were somewhere from ten to fifteen of ns. We went out to what is called the north switch, probably half a mile from the depot, and men were posted all along at thediiferent switches so as to keep the train frombemg side-tracked, and so that it would keep on. Some one stopped the train, I suppose three or four hnndred yards from the north switch, and boarded the train. There were five men left to guard the switches, and I believe five men on the north switch, and about that time the train stopped on the main track. A whistle was blown at the roundhouse, and the crowd came in, mainly down the track from this side, about three or four hun- dred of them, and possibly more, coming down the main track. We stood probably 150 yards from the north switch. We could see the minute the train was turned out one way or the other, and just when it reached the north switch I think there was about five hundred to seven hundred people there on the grounds and property all around, t As soon as it arrived at the north switch you could see that the engine was turning from the road going south. As soon as the engine was side-tracked our instructions was to come down to the north switch; but the crowd was in charge of the train as soon as it stopped. I was placed near the center of the train about four cars back of the engine, and we had no more than got into position than one of these men who worked at the yard took a pin out and walked off. I pointed him out to Sheriff Hamilton and he dropped the pin, and as fast as we got one pin put back another would be gone, and we saw that we could not succeed in keeping the train together. Sheriff Hamilton then tried to get the crowd to disperse, and they laughed at him and jeered at him in such a way that he saw they would not leave. He had not force enough to disperse them, and he ordered us not to allow pins to be pulled until he returned. We stayed there about three-quarters of an hour and did not know what to do. We did not know whether the train was to be switched. The yard engine came down in charge of eight or ten men that had been in the employ of the company, and tbey coupled to the train and disconnected it from the other engine and the switch engine carried it down on the main track and switched her off on the wood track, a track to the left ot the main track, where they have wood to load the engines., or something of that kind, and we walked out there to guard it there. We were then ordered off. We saw that we could do nothing with it. I do not know when it was switched over there, but it was probably 1 or 2 o'clock in the afternoon. I think the train came in at 1.15. Sheriff Hamilton ordered us to come back for dinner, and going up the track we examined the cars. I suppose there must have been two hundred cars; and I noticed that of the cars that were there not a dozen links were in position in the whole two hundred and fifty cars. That evening I was notified by the sheriff to call out the militia. Q. Do you remember what date that was? — A. I think it was on the 35th. I went out on the 26th of March. It was late in the evening when Judge Burn, the circuit judge, came to me and told me that if I had not authority to call out my company my- self, that he should take it upon himself to order me to call it out. I told him I would prefer to be ordered ont by the governor. He wrote a letter to me, which I received at 6 o'clock, and I was notified to report to Sheriff Hamilton for duty immediately, I knew the crowd we had to contend with, and saw the men, and knew that an effort 368 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. would be made to seize our armory. ~ Our armory was down on Main street, and I went there and put a guard over the arms. I went home about 1 o'clock and about 6 o'clock they telegraphed for me, and I was told that there was a committee waiting to see me. I asked, "A committee of what?" and was tdld a committee of the Knights of Labor. I had also telegraphed Governor Hughes in the mean time that I did not think it was policy for us to go into the yard with thirty men, and asked hira to send me a hundred stand of arms and twenty-five rounds, of ammunition for each stand. I was satisfied we should have force enough to disperse them if any trouble came. Next morning I went out with ninety-four men on duty, and when I came down Mr. Gegler, who seemed to be the spokesman of the committee that had waited on me, asked me where my authority was for calling out the miUtia. I told him the governor. Then he wanted to know if I proposed to go into the yard and protect that property. I told him that I did, and he advised me not to go into the yard. I told him my orders were from the governor, and that I proposed to carry them out regardless of who it might hurt. Well, we tiilked on probably as much as five minutes, dozens standing there as witnesses. Judge Burn told me he would be down there. We then walked up and told them we would certainly go. They told us then that if we went into that yard we would do so at our own risk and peril and would have to take the consequences, and immediately walked off. I summoned my men either on the 26th or 27th — I could tell by the report and my dispatches to the governor. At 9 o'clock we formed in the Mar- quand and marched out into the yard and Judge Bum read the proclamation to the peo- ple there. We met with some little resistance, but very little; the most of it being in sneers, and one or two parties did not seem to want to get off the platform. We did not vacate the platform until the passenger train left. We then went to the roundhouse and found a negro man who was drinking and refusing to go away, and he made at one of the boys to cut him with a knil'e. We arrested him and carried him off to jail. My instructions were not to shoot, and I only allowed the men to fix bayonets; I would not allow them to load. I told them that we were not to shoot until we were fired on. I believe we only arrested two that day. It seemed that the engines at that time were killed before we went out on the yard, at 8 o'clock in the morning. They took the last engine and carried it out and blew her out, and we had no engine. At that time a pas- senger train came in, and they took that, and w,e switched up three engines and went down and took the two engines on the north track, and found that they were damaged so much that they would not be able to run. The engines being all disabled I did not suppose we could move a train. I found we could not do it, as on examination of the cars it was seen the links and pins were gone. I do not suppose that there were ten pins in the cars in the whol6 yard. There were some links, but the majority of them were gone, and a great many of the draw-head pins were also gone. If there had been links they would have drawn the draw-heads out of nine-tenths of them. Next morning, after the passenger train left, we started out with the first train. That was a train from the Texas and Pacific Railroad. We started out very slowly. I car- ried twenty-five or thirty men with me on that train, and carried it through the county. The report was that we were only going outside of the city limits and that we had no authority to go farther. We let that impression remain. A crowd attempted to side- track that train at Mandaville, the first station, 6 miles from this town. In going into Mandaville, and probably 250 yards from it, there was a straight track, and you could see along very well. I was looking from the caboose, and I observed on the left-hand side of the track going up a car standing on the switch, and I could see under the car several men's lega standing, probably eight or ten. It seems that the car was open and empty, and there were a lot of men in it. The intention was for the men standing on their feet to throw the, switch. I did not know it at the time, but I was informed afterwards about it. We had fifteen men in one empty car just in the rear of the tender. I had told them to keep concealed, but they began to poke their heads from this car; and just before we got up there to the switch the men there saw my men and every one scattered. I suppose there must have been forty or fifty ran from beside that car. I jumped off and ordered the men out of the caboose; Judge Burn was righj behind on the passenger coach, and I asked him what to do. He suggested that they should be arrested, and I ordered my men to disperse and catch them. They dispersed quite a distance from us and we arrested some of them at least 300 yards away. We got this man Cook, who did not attempt to run, and another white man, and another one j ust over the embankment I arrested and carried him and put him in charge in a car. We staid there probably half an hour. It was raining fast, and we were all wet with rain, or probably we would have got more. We got twelve, six negroes and six white men. We carried them to Fulton, and came back on the passenger train. We carried the train through the county, and 07er Red River and returned with the passenger coach here. We kept Ihem there without any trouble. I notified the first lieutenant to meet me with a squad of men, as we feared there might be some trouble. The crowd certainly knew that we had LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 369 prisoners, and when we marched in town the sheriff had some difficulty in clearing the road in front of the Marquand as we marched them to jail. The mob was principally spectators. Fearing a little trouble, I ordered the men to load their guns and be very careful, as one of the party said he had never shot a gun in his life and he did not know how to load it. After that we had very little trouble. Occasionally a man would slip in on the yard and interfere with the men who were at work. At least they complained to me a thou- sand times that parties would come to them from one place or another and try to get them to quit work. I was on this duty from the evening of the 25th of March until the 13th of April, when I was relieved by the sheriff. The governor ordered me to report to (he sheriff, and as soon as he was able to take charge of the yard for me to be relieved. After that we had a few men selected out from my company appointed deputy sheriffs and put in charge of the loundhouse. I suppose it was at night about the 16th or 17th of April, and I hadjnst returned home, probably at 11 o'clock. I live across from there, and I could see over to the roundhouse. I heard a volley of guns, probably five or ten, and I jumped up and could see the flash of two or three of the guns. They all seemed to be straight up. They had been fired right up into the air. They telegraphed for me at once, and I went down. A party had evidently come from outside of the city to try and stop the workmen. They shot the guns off probably fifteen or twenty times. Q. Was that the last disturbance here? — A. No, sir. The guards were still kept on but that was the last I knew of the disturbances. They would still talk to the men when they could get inside the yard. Q. But trains resumed their movement after that, did they not? — A. Yes, sir; from that first day that I carried out that train. The next day I carried out others, and went some distance with them and came back, and we had no further trouble in the move- ment of trains. They moved regularly. y. Do you know what has become of the strikers ? — A. There seems to be a good many of them. They live here and the majority of them are still here, sir. Q. What was done with the men you arrested — the twelve? — A. They were brought up and tried before Justice Smithers. Cook, the ringleader of this party was tried. We searched these men after we got them in the car, and they were sitting near the win- dows. One man who happened to be on the outside of the car saw some of them drop pistols out of the widow. In searching one of them we found a pistol on him, and in searching Cook we found on him a switch-key of the Missouri Pacific. The north end of that switch we went to was unlocked and had been opened by that key. He was standing at the south end of the switch on the side of the track, and we found this key on this fellow Cook, the man who was standing close by it, and he was not an em- ploy 6 at the time. Several days after they were brought before the justice of the peace lor trial and were tried; the witnesses were kept apart,' and the doors were closed, and all of us were kept outdoors except a gentleman by the name of J. J. Vogel, who claimed to represent the defendants, and in some way they allowed him in the hall. All wit- nesses were kept out except this Vogel, who remained in there. Mr. Clark HaU, repre- senting the road, was afterwards admitted t(j a seat in the room. Cook was eventually tried by a j ory and convicted of a misdemeanor, and fined $5 and costs. The others pleaded guilty, and were fined a dollar and costs. Q. What would have been the effect if these parties had succeeded in turning the switch ? — A. The train would have been side-tracked from the main track to the switch on the left-hand side. Q. Would it have been derailed? — A. It would have been damaged in this way: it would have struck the box- car, as it was not more than 20 feet off from the switch." This car was standing alone on the track, and would have been hit before the train could have been stopped. Q. Was anything said to you by anybody, and, if so, by whom, in regard to the pro- tection of property after you received the order from the governor? — A. Mr. Gegler spoke to me about it. I told him I was a sworn officer and inten ded to discharge my duty. He said there was no use of it, and he would protect me against anything that there was in it. He said that they would give me all the protection I wanted, or assist me in any way. I told them I would protect the property. Q. Was bail refused for the arrested men ? — ^A. I cannot say as to that. Q. Were there any other arrests made during the strike? — A. Only two; there were two on the first day we went down there, and twelve, making fourteen altogether. W. M. WHITTAKER sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. What kind of timber do you use for making lumber ? — Answer. Princi- pally yellow pine. 'Q. Entirely? — A. Almost entirely. QOS/I T ATI 5? OA 370 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOlTTH AND WEST. Q. What distance from here do you obtain any lumber ? — A. Round here from ten mDes, or a few miles from the town. Q. About how far? — A. Five, ten, or fifteen miles. Q. And the timber is from how many miles?— A. We have three ways of getting logs to the mill; either hauling them with cattle, or on a log-road, and occasionally a few on the water-courses, but not to a great extent by these log-roads. Q. What distance do you bring lumber to the mills?— A. Over the log roads, Irom four to eight miles, on narrow-gauge roads. Q. And you keep it at these mills?— A. Yes, sir. Q. What dimensions do you keep? — A. Well, all dimensions, boardframing, and joist timbers. Q. Do you ship by rail from there or from here? — A. Right from the mills. Q. To what points ?— A. We ship to Western Texas, Kansas, Western Missouri, and Nebra-ska. Q. Do you not ship any abroad to the foreign market ?— A. Nothing. We go as far as Kew Mexico and Old Mexico. A good deal of lumber goes into Old Mexico. Q. What would be a reasonable estimate of the country that would be tributary to your lumber roads ? — A. It would be hard to get at that, probably ; I have never given it any thought. There is a large amount of timber here, and we have to get it not more than four or five miles .from the road. The timber beltof this country covers four orfive counties and runs back and down south in Texas. JAMES D. R03B0R0UGH sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekke: Question. Are you connected withthelumber business in this vicinity ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Do you cut lumber and furnish your own stock? — A. No, sir; we buy our stock and manufacture it. Q. Do you buy it in the log and cut it? — A. We buy it already sawed. Q. Is it sawed to order to dimensions according to your directions ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Whei* is it obtained; in Arkansas or Texas? — A. It is got in both States on the ^exas and Saint Louis road, and on both ends of the road. Q. How is it delivered to you ? — A. It is delivered by car. Q. Your principal place of business and yard is here? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. To what points do you ship? — A. To Western Texas, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, *nd the Indian Territory. Q. How many millions are covered by your business, say in an average of a year ? — A. We average, I suppose, about 40,000 feet a day. Q. Now, what was the promise, so far as you could judge, of the lumber business for this year? — ^A. We considered it very flattering until the time of this strike. Q. What effect had the strike upon it? — A. It almost killed it. Q. You may state in general terms the^^ay in which it injured your business? — ^A. It has had a tendency to lower the price and to decrease the demand very much. We were shipping from 40,000 to 50,000 feet a day when the strike came on us, and since that we have not averaged over 10,000 feet. Q. Then as an effect tending to inj ure for a time the men who oym the land, it stuped the demand for timber? — A. Of course, it has injured them in that way. Q. And the log-holders and the log-cutters and the manufacturers of the lumber and all affected in its distribution? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And this distribution was interfered with so that the prices were reduced? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are there any other facts connected with it? — A. It has materially injured it in every sense of the word. GEORGE W. FOUKE sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekke: Question. Areyou connected with the lumber business here? — Answer. Yes, sir; have ■been for six years. Q. What is the amount cut in the vicinity?— A. Our produce last year was about 37,000,000 feet. Q. What amount of that was cut in this vicinity? — A. That was the amount cut and delivered. Q. Would that include what is brought in from some distance? — A. That inclndea the delivery adjacent to this town. Q. Would it include all the amount handled at this point? — A. Yes, sir. tiABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 371 Q. What was the prospect this season for the lumber business? — A. We had a very promising prospect, and all the evidence that came to us from the north was of an as- suring character. All our mills were producing largely, and we had a great many orders on our books at the time the strike occurred. Q. What were the orders you speak of? — A. We were well prepared to stock Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska, and the Iowa trade. Q. State in general terms the effects of the strike upon your trade. — A. Our orders were to a great extent countermanded, and since we have been simply living from hand to mouth on the orders that we get. Q. And you have to carry the stock ? — A. We have the stock. Q. So you agree with the remarks of the other gentlemen as to the lumber? — A. I can say that I fully corroborate their statements. FKEDERICK W. SMITH sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Yon have heard the statement of Captain Trigg in relation to the disturb- ances. Do you corroborate his statement ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Will you tell us what amount of damage was done to the railroad company you represent ? — A. I cannot tell you the amount of the volume of damage that was done. There were some engines stopped on the road. Q. How many engines were disabled? — A. About ten, I think, and the switch en- gine. Q. Just tell us generally what occurred. — A. They were taken in, blown out, and disconnected, the water taken out of them, and one engine came very near being burned up by taking the water out before withdrawing the fire. Q. The engines were killed ? — A. They could not be handled without considerable repair. Q. What other damage was done ? — A. The water was let out of the tank, so that we could not get any water for the engines. Q. Did that interfere with the passenger trains that carried the mail ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know that any passenger or mail trains were stopped in consequence of the strike ? — A. They were all behind from five to six or seven hours all through the strike. Just as soon as a train got here it was side-tracked; they would pUe up on the engine and pull out the pins and bolts; and when we attempted to make up a train or shift it or put it on another side, or get ready to take it out, they would pursue the same courae. Q. You were a railroad station agent of the Iron Mountain road at that time? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know many of the parties who were engaged in the strike? — A. Well, I knew quite a number of them; I knew a number of my switchmen that were working for me in the yard. Q. Did they belong to any labor organization? — A. Yes, sir; they claimed to belong to one. They said they could not do it without permission of the executive. We had a car of produce which I wanted brought up for the useof the merchants, and wanted to get this car switched. They said we could not do it until we had permission of the ex- ecutive board, and they got their permission. Q. The executive board of what? — A. The executive board of the Knights of Labor, they claimed. Q. Were there any engines belonging to the Texas and Pacific road captured there on this side to prevent them from going out? — A. There were four or five of them. Q. For how long a time? — A. Up to ,the time that the citizens had a meeting in the Marquand, in the neighborhood of fifteen days, and right at that time when they agreed to assist in protecting the property. Mr. Graves, the train-master on the Texas side, and myself and two or three others captured them and brought them back. Q. And delivered them to the Texas and Pacific officials? — A. Yes, sir. They wanted to keep them from running on the road. Q. How long a time were they down the track? — A. They were taken down there on the 8th of March, and the citizens' meeting was on the 24th. Q. Who was it agreed to assist the citizens in protecting the property ? — A. The Knights of Labor, and they said that they would see that the railroad company was not interfered with. Q. But did they see that it was not interfered with? — A. They did not; but, on the other hand, they went right to interfering as much,as possible. On the strength of their promise Judge Friedell telegraphed to the authorities of the road. Q. Do you know anything about any misplaced rail or rails? — A. Mr. Maxwell, who is the snperintendent'of the Iron Mountain road, came to me and told me that the men bad gone up the track with a pinch bar and claw bar, and he thought they meant some damage; I saw Sheriff Hamilton and some four or five others, and they went oatandsaw 372 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. these two men on the track. It was reported that the two men were supposed to be puil- ing tip the track, and it was thought they could do nothing before we could take a switch engine and go out there. They got the engine and went out there, and it was reported that there was a rail taken up on each side of the trestle, the spikes pulled, and moved so that there was a space between the ends of the rails, and they had to repair the track before they could come in. Q. Were these men Knights of Labor ? — A. One of them was and one was a hostler. W. H. SWEENEY sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. Are you a Knight of Labor? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. Were you on the 1st of March? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you act as a deputy marshal at any time ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. When was that?~A. I have been acting as a deputy marshal for four years until about two weeks ago. Q. Were you delegated to the city of Marshall at any time by the Knights of Labor ? — A. I was not delegated ; I was sent down there by brothers of the order. Q. How near the time of the strike? — I was sent down there on the 3tst of March. Q. You found Martin Irons there ? — A. I met him there. Q. And others of District Assembly No. 101? — The executive board; I saw them there. Q. Was the proposition to strike consulted about there ? — A. It was talked of. Q. What was your proposition ; as being in favor of or against the strike ? — A. I was not a member of the executive board. I could take no action myself at all; our assem- bly was not connected with District Assembly 101. Q. Did you advise the strike ? — A. I did not advise, not being a member of the exec- utive board. Q. Did you learn there from those men representing a body of the Knights of Labor the ground proposed for the strike ?— A. I learned it at a citizens' meeting there; there was a meeting of citizens and the mayor of the city was present, and there was then a communication with Governor Brown. Q. I wish to know if from the Knights of Labor or the executive board of DistrictlOl, you learned the cause or ground of the proposed strike ? — A. Well, as I understood it, they would not meet a committee of arbitration. Q. Who would not meet a board of arbitration ? — A. Governor Brown. Q. Governor Brown would not meet a committee of Knights of Labor and they re- sented that ? — A. That was a portion of the grievance. Q. One of the grievances, then, was to compel the managers of the railroad to recog- nize the Knights of Labor ofilcially? — ^A. It was no business of mine; I am not a rail- road man. Q. I simply want your conclusion as to the ground of the strike. — A. That is what I understood was the ground of the strike. Q. What can you give as to the cause of the Knights of Labor interfering with prop- erty and the movement of trains? — ^A. Nothing as I know. As an officer here, upon being called upon — I was called out by the sheriff to assist, and afterwards, being an officer in the militia company, I was present with it Q. You may tell us what you know of the acts of the Knights of Labor as an organi- zation in relation to the strike. — A. Well, from the time we had trouble in the yard I had not anything more to do with the Knights as an organization. I did not attend their meetings. Q. You had po communication with them? — A. Not as a body, but individually I talked with some of them. Q. What interference with the train business did you know of being done by the Knights of Labor? — A. Well, the strike interfered with business greatly. Q. What acts do you know of having been done interfering with business by the Knights of Labor? — A. The trains being side-tracked. Q. What else? — A. I know the saw mills were compelled to close up. Q. Anything further? — A. There was a general depression of business. Q. Anything more? — A. No, sir. CLARK HALL sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. There has been something said here by Captain Trigg, of the miUtia com- pany, about a man named Cook having been found in possession of a switch key on the Iron Mountain road. Are you able to state how he got possession of that key ? ^Answer. I cannot. I know that he had a switch key, but do not know how he got it. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 373 Q. These switch keys are numbered, are they not, and the parties getting them are responsible for them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you an official of the company, and what position do you occupy ?-rA. I am trainmaster. Q. Have you not traced back to see what man had possession of that key? — A. I can^ aot find out who had possession of it. He was never furnished with a switch key. Q. Then you do not know how he obtained it? — A. No, sir. Q. You do not know who had the key before he had it? — A. No, sir. ■ Q. Was this man Cook in the employ of the railroad company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Can any man get one of those keys that works there? — A. No, sir. Q. Did this man Cook have a key? — A. He was not supposed to have a key. Q. How long have you been in the employ of the company in the capacity in which you are now employed? — A. Two years. Q. Then you would have known if he had any authority to have such a key in his possession? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Had he any such authority ? — A. No, sir. JOHN CUCKLER sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Have you been working for the Iron Mountain road — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And until the consolidation of the companies you were receiving $50 per month? A. Yes, sir. Q. When the roads were consolidated under the Missouri Pacific did yon make any «omplaint to the general superintendent, E. L. Dudley? — A. Yes, sir, I did; as the work for both companies in running the water station was too much. Q. Did he raise your wages ? — A. He did to $70. Q. How long did you receive that salary? — A. Until the 1st day of December, 1884. Q. Was your salary then reduced; if so, to what!?^A. To $50. Q. Did you continue to work? — A. I refused to go to work any more, and the fore- man begged at me to stay, and said that he would do what he could to get my wages restored; and I went on and worked. Q. Did you write to the general foreman about it? — A. I wrote to Mr. Mars here, the foreman, and asked him to get it for me; and as soon as the difficulty was settled he could demand an increase of pay. Q. He refused to raise your wages ? — A. He said he would not do it. Q. Did you continue to work? — A. I continued until District Assembly 101 caused us to quit. Q. Did you not ask for an increase to $60 ? — A. I was refused tvrice. Q. How many hours per day had you to wor^ ? — A. It was running about eleven hours a day on the average, and I had to work very hard to do it. Q. How long did you remain in your position ? — A. I quit on the 10th day of August, and I went to work on the 17th of December, in the car department of the same road, and worked untU the 1st day of February, 1886. Q. How much did you get a day? — A. I got $2 a day — less hours and easier work. Q. What happened on the 1st of February, 1886 ?— A. On the 1st of February or last ■day of January I wa« told that the assistant foreman wanted me to take the pump back. I told him I could not do it at that price. Well, he said, if you will take it back I wUl do all in my power to get your wages raised. I then said that 1 would take that back. Q. Did you go back? — A. I did. Q. Did you get your wages raised ? — A. I did not. Q. Did you quit work? — A. I did when ordered out by the executive of the Knights ■of Labor. Q. Were you a Knight of Labor? — A. I was. Q. Are yon one now ? — ^A. I am. Q. Did you think by going out you would settle the matter ? — A. When I am ordered out by my superiors I go. Q. Would you go blindly just like a soldier and obey orders ? — A. I do not go like a soldier. Q. How long have you lived here ? — A. Ever since the 10th of July, 1876. Q. Are you a married man ? — A. Xes, sir. Q. How many children have you ? — A. I have a wife and three children. Q. Did you acquire a hbmestead here? — A. Yes, sir; I have a piece of land here. Q. Did you save the money here to buy that land ? — A. I made my actual home here. Q. What are you doing now for a living? — A. I am working on my place. I am not in the employment of any railroad company. Q. What did you accomplish by going out on a strike, so far as you were afiected per- 374 i,AliOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. soUally. Did you get higher wages during the time of the strike? — A. While I was out who was I working for ? Q. I do not know. — A. I was not working. I was working on my own place, and am working there now. Q. What did you accomplish, so far as your relations with the railway company were concerned; anything? — A. No, sir. I do not think it has affected the question at all. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What were your duties? — A. I was in charge of the water station — pumping water. Q. But you did not work the pump yourself? — A. I fired for my own engine. Q. You attended to the engine, and that attention was to keep it supplied with fuel and watch this pump ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And how large a proportion of the time were you actually employed in shoveling coal? — A. We did not have any coal; we used wood. Q. Well, then, in feeding the furnace with wood ? — A. Just as soon as one fire would go down I had to build another. Q. How large a proportion of the day did it require actual manual labor ? I am not familiar with it, and I ask you so that I may know. — A. It does not take a man to stand at the furnace all the time. I do not know that I can give you the exact time. Q. About how large a proportion of the time, and I desire you to answer ? — ^A. About one- third of the time. Q. And what is done the remainder of the time? — A. I have to go between times to change my valves and walk very nearly half a mile; up to the Marquand or so and back. Q. Then you have to watch your boiler and the engine ? — A. I have to watch every- thing. It keeps a man constantly at work. Q. Now you say that when you were placed in charge the second time of the two pumps that this required you to work about sixteen hours? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many days in the week, or weeks in the month, would that be the case? — A. Well, the longest hours were in the winter, running from September to February. Q. Now you will be kind enough to notice my question and to answer it. • About how large a proportion of the time that yon were running both of these pumps were you re- quired to work sixteen hours each day? One-third or one-fourth of the time? — A. I would say over one-half. Q. When you were running one pump, about how long were your average hours a day? — A. About twelve hours. Q. How many engines on that road took water daily at that tank ? — A. I do not know that I could tell you/ j ust how many. Part of the time they would haul water for those water stations out in Texas. They have hauled as high as three, six, and eight tanks at a time. Q. And you would be required to pump the water for them? — A. Yes, sir. Q. During the season when that was not done would your daily hours of labor be less than before? — A. No, sir; never under ten hours. Q. Have you applied to the company for work since you went out on the strike? — A. I wanted to ask them for my work. I sat down and wrote to my foreman as to what would be the chance for a job in the bridge and building department. Q. How long ago? — A. Last Wednesday, I believe. Q. Did you receive a reply? — A. I have not. Q. You say you have a little place of your own; how many acres? — A. Thirty-seven acres. Q. What did you do in the car department? — A. I repaired cars before the transfer. Q. Are you a mechanic? — A. No, sir; I cannot say that I am a mechanic. Q. Did you ever learn the carpenter's or machinist's trade? — A. No, sir; I worked a jjTeat deal with machinery. Q. But you never served a regular apprenticeship? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekek.) Are you a native of this State?— A. No, sir. Q. Where were you born? — A. In West Virginia. Q. While you were employed at the water-pumping business you carried on your place, I suppose? — A. I hired it done, sir. Q. You were paid $50 a month for your services by the company? — A. Yes, sir; last December I was. Q. Do you know what the man receives who succeeds you? — A. I do not. Q. Do they not still pay $50 a month?— A. I do not know; I did not ask. Q. (By Mr. Buohanan.) Did you receive $50 a month in September, 1884?— A. I received $70. It was reduced in December. Q Yon received $70 a month in September ? — A. Yes, sir. LA.BOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 375 JAMES ASHCKAFT sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. Have you -worked as foreman for the Iron Mountain road? — ^Answer. No, sir; I am employed by the Texas and Pacific road. I have been in the motive-power department for the last four years. Q. Were yon a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did yon go out on the strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you discharged? — A. No, sir. Q. Are you still in the employment of the company? — A. Well, hardly. ' I was run- ning a switch engine in the Texas and Pacific yard when this strike tame up. There was some trouble between Mr. Clark Hall and John Cannichael, who was then yard- master, in reference to discontinuing the switch engine during the strike, and it was discontinued on the morning of the 6th of March. Alter we had the arrival of new men Carmichael came and told me he would have to have her taken off, and for me to take her to the roundhouse. Q. And that severed your connection with the road? — A. Yes, sir; I applied twice to the traveling engineer for work after the strike was inaugurated. I applied twice to him and applied twice to the master mechanic, but have received no answer yet. Q. Has that switch engine gone to work again with another fireman ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you ever been paid wages for extra time? — A. Well, no. Forfiringon that svritch engine I have been receiving $80 a month, provided I worked a full month. Fre- quently I would be short on my check when the pay-car would come— a dollar or two, say. Q. Did you make complaint ? — A. I have made complaint to the man who kept the time here, a man by the name of Caldwell, and asked him to write for it. That was when I was fireman on the road. Q. How long ago is that? — A. A couple of years ago. Q. Have you ever heard any complaint of others? — A. Oh, yes, frequently. Q. Had you any grievance, that you put in the hands of the grievance committee of the Knights of Labor? — A. No, sir; I have never had a grievance. Q. Yon say that you did not go on the strike, and you do not know whether you are going to be employed ? — A. I sent to H. Watts, the master mechanic, and have not re- ceived any aiLSwer to my application. Q. When did yon write to Mr. Watts about it? — A. About the last of this week, three or four days ago, after the strike was called off. I reported down there for work and waited some time for an answer there. Mr. Davis, who has gone off, he told me he would give me a situation on the road. I wrote to Mr. Watts myself and never received an an- swer. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) And that letter was written last week? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) John Carmichael asked you to come into the employment as a hostler and offered you a place which would have given you as much as you had be- fore? — A. No, sir; the first time that I applied to Mr. Carmichael was a few days after he came up here. That was shortly after the strike was inaugurated here; and they began asking me about having quit my job and that I hadgivenupmy job; .and they asked me "Are you readyto go to work when the company asks you?" The next time I reported here was when they got these engines from the Iron Mountain roundhouse and the other man was put to work. The first time I talked with Carmichael quite awhile, and he said to me after I had talked to him some time, " I understand you belong to the Knights, " and then said if I did he thought I had better leave them. Q. Did he not give you to understand that if you would go to work as a hostler you would be employed? — A. No, sir. Q. Had you a suggestion from any one that you could have that place ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you a family? — A. I have. Q. What work have you been doing? — A. I have had none. Q. Have you been ready at all times to go to work at reasonable wages? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In the same place, or something similar ? — ^A. Yes, sir; in the motive-power de- partment. Q. Have you been prevented by their failing to employ you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you do any act that would justify them in not employing you?— A. No, sir, I do not know of any, and I do not think any one else does. PATRICK O'BRIEN sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you a railroad man ? — Answer. I worked in the freight-house. Q. How long have you been so employed ?^-A. Just ten years. Q. In the employment of the same company? — A. Yes, sir. 376 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. The Iron Mountain Railroad ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you still so employed? — A. I have not worked for the last two months. Q. How did you lose your employment? — A. I quit at the time of the strike. Q. You were a Knight of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you been out of employment ever since? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you ever sought le- employment from the company? — A. Yes, sir. I reported when the strike was settled. Q. To whom did you apply? — A. To the agent. Q. Were you denied employment? — A. He said he was full-handed at present. Q. Was that the only reason he assigned for not giving you employment? — ^A. Yes, sir; that he had all he needed. Q. Have y6u a family ? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you get extra pay for extra time while you were at work for the company?— A. We worked about thirteen hours a day and sometimes we had to stay up all night. Q. Were you paid for the extra time? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you complain of that to anybody? — A. Well, no, sir; I did not speak of it. Q. Did you not complain of it to any person? — A. The agent said it was too bad, hut they would keep us all about thirteen hours. Q. What pay were you receiving? — A. We were getting |1. 50. We did not strike on that. We were working along at that, and our pay was cut down, and we have got only |f.25. That is all we got there. Q. For the $1.25 you worked thirteen hours? — A. We were paid for thirteen hours a day at |1.25. Q. How many hours constitute a day's work? — A. Ten. Q. And they put you on three hours extra? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you present that grievance of having worked at nights without extra pay to the Knights of Labor? — A. I guess they knew it. Q. But did you present that to the Knights of Labor ? — A. We presented it to-day. Q. Is this the first time that you presented it? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By Mr. Btjchanan.) How old are you ? — A. About 45 or 47, I cannot swear to that. Q. Are you suffering from illness ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) What are you doing for a living now? — A. Doing nothing at present. Q. How long is it since you earned anything ? — A. Not since the 14th of March. Q. Have you a family ? — A. No, sir. Q. Only yourself to support ? — A. That is all. Q. Did you quit work on the strike ? — A. I have worked one or two days since. I worked one day and a half. Q. Why did you not continue? — A. I was ordered to quit. Q. Who ordered you to quit? — A. Well, I cannot swear that. Q. Was it the Knights of Labor? — A. It was by their authority. Q. You quit, and then when you had no work you felt that you did not do so well ? — A. That is a fact. Q. Where were you born ? — A. In Ireland. Q. What county? — A. County Tipperary. Q. Was it not better to work for $1.25 than to be idle as you have been? — A. I was in the expectation of getting more. I quit. JOHN KELLEY aworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. Did you go out ou the strike? — Answer. No, sir; ■Q. Are you employed by the company ?— A. I have been; I am not now. Q. Why not now? — A. Well, they discharged me. Q. What were you doing at the time? — A. I was watchman on the platform. Q. When were you discharged? — A. On the 28th of last month. Q. What wages did you receive?— A. Fifty-five dollars a month. Q. Had you at any time received higher wages? — A. No, sir. I worked on the bag- gage and freight department. Q. Had you any complaint, or did you put in any grievance, or on what grounds were you discharged? — A. I do not know. Mr. Hall was down here, and he claimed that there was somebody in that house some nights. I never saw anybody there. The place was supposed to be locked up, and I did not know anything about anybody being there. Q. You were not conscious of doing anything that you s'aould be discharged for? — A. No, sir. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 377 Q. Have you sought work -with them since? — A. I went to work for them one day and I gpt an order to quit again. Q. From whom did yon get the order to quit? — A. From Mr. Gilman. He got orders irom the general agent of the freight department. Q. He got orders not to employ you ? — A. Yes, sir. Q- Was it on account of your failure to watch the house properly, or for some other cause? — A. I do not know, sir. Q. Do you know of any other employment you can get? — A. I suppose I can get em- ployment. Q. Do you know any, when or where? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you a famUy? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) What board have you to pay? — A. Twenty dollars a month. Q. Do you know how much farm labor gets in this section? — A. No, sir; I do not. Q. (By Mr. Pabkeb.) Then your claim is that they discharged you because you al- lowed and did not prevent persons from going into the premises of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. JAMES H. BUEK sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: Question. You occupy the position of secretary of the Knights of Labor? — Answer. I am recording secretary of the executive board here. Q. Have you any general knowledge of the men who were out on the strike applying to tiie officials of the company for reinstatement ? — A. The only knowledge I have is that since we received information that the strike was off we ordered all men to go down and report for work. Q. When this committee reached Saint Louis ? — A. I think it was on the 3d of the month or the morning of the 4th that we received the order. As soon as I received the order I notified all the railroad men here to go down and report for their positions. They reported back to us that th^y could get no satisfaction at all. They waited for orders, and the officers had no orders to employ more men. Q. So that nobody was reinstated or employed in their former positions ? — A. No one. Some of them went to work on the narrow-gauge road; but not on these roads. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Do you know whether on the 4th day of May all the posi- tions had been filled ? — A. I do not. Q. You have no knowledge one way or the other as to whether on the 4th day of May the old positions had been filled ? — A. Well, only part of them had. Q. Do you know whether any were still vacant? — A. I do not. Q. You are not a railroad man yourself? — A. No, sir. Q. ■ (By Mr. Paekee. ) This local assembly that yau belong to is a mixed assembly? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Containing men of different classes and railroad men — what you would call a trades assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is your business? — A. I am a house painter. Q. Were you helping to manage the business of the railroad men and the officers con- nected with the company? — A. I certainly assisted in that so far as the correspondence is concerned. Q. You did not work on the railroad ? — A. I was never employed on a railroad a day in my life. Q. And only helped in the interference with the business by giving the assistance you have described? — A. I assisted them as they asked me. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) What are the wages of a journeyman housepainter here ? — A. Two dollars and fifty cents a day. Q. And work all the year round ? — A. Well, no, sir. There are about eight or ten weeks in the year that we do not get much work to do. Q. This $15 a week does not include board ? — A. No, sir. Q. (By Mr. Paekee.) About how many Knights of Labor are there in your assem- bly? — A. I cannot answer that question. I do not know how many there are. Q. About how many? — A. About one hundred and fifty; somewhere in that neigh- borhood. Q. How many in the city, including both sides? — A. I expect there are probably six hundred. Q. Do you belong to District Assembly 101 ? — A. I do not. Q, What is your district? — A. We are not attached to any i^strict. We are attached to the general assembly. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Was there any proposition brought before your assembly as to whether you would sustain District Assembly 101 in ordering a strike? — A. I cannot answer that questlsn. 378 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Why; because you do not know ?— A. Well, I do know, but would prefer uott« answer. Mr. Buci ANAN. There is nothing in the principles of the order or anything m youi obligation that prevents your answering ? Other secretaries have been answering it while we have been conducting this investigation ? The Witness. I will answer. It was submitted to our assembly. Q. Did your assembly vote to sustain District Assembly No. 101 ? — A. We did not reach that necessity. Q. And so the strike was ordered before your assembly voted. Did it also participate inthestiike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. But that was only as to members employed by the railroad company? — A. Yes, rir. JOHN CUCKLER 'recalled and examined. By the Chaiemait: Question. Will you state what proportion of men are employed by the railroad com- pany now as compared to the number employed by them before the strike ? — Answer. I do not think there is very near as many as there were then. Q. Are the companies conducting the business with the same facility as they were be- fore the strike ? — A. They are. In fact they are doing better since. I was called off by the executive board, and was ordered out of the yard; and I have gotout justasif Iwaa a man on the public road. Q. (By Mr. Paekek.) What did you pay the man you employ on your iarm while you were receiving |50 at the pump ? — A. I do not think that is a fair question. Q. I think it is, sir, and demand an answer ? — A. Well, we paid different amounts. Q.' How much ? — As high as $25 or $30 a month. Q. And board them? — A. No, sir; they boarded themselves. PALMER DAVIS sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekkr: Question. What is your business ? — Answer. I am a newspaper man, correspondent of the Galveston and Dallas News. Q. Have you made something of a special study of the position of the Knights of Labor and of other union men in relation to capital and labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may state to the committee the results at which you have arrived. — A; In regard to this particular strike I will state that during the past month or more I have had a good many interviews with parties who have been examined by this committee — among others, the man named Hall, of Marshall — and several others, and I came to the conclusion that the cause of the strike was not the discharge of Mr. Hall, not the bare fact of their being ordered out by Mr. Irons, and not in any of those little causes that have been assigned ^o this committee, but that they were only the pretext, and that the real cause lay down under that, and was the same that has caused the labor troubles all over the country. Q. What is that ? — ^A. I think it is the failure of the Government to keep pace with industrial development. The primitive forms of government which answered very well about two hundred years ago are no longer adequate, and the time has arrived when the National Government should take upon itself the management of the public highways. Q. Would you have them take charge of the canals? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What would you have them to do with the mines ? — A. I think that they should direct them also. Q. And what as to the oil-wells ? — A. I think that they should take charge of any in- dustry that would be a monopoly. Q. And how as to lumber? — A. Well, lumber is susceptible of being grown or culti- vated, but if it is found to be impossible to prevent the lumber business from being a monopoly otherwise, then we should subject it also to Government management or con- trol. »' Q. What is your conclusion as to what national legislation is necessary in connection with labor questions? — A. I do not think that any legislation is called for. Q. And what would you say as' to legislation in regard to the management of rail- roads where not taken possession of by the National Government ? — A. I would prefer . that the State government should assume the management of those enterprises. Q. Do you find that any one agrees with you in those opinions ? — A. I th'nk that the majority of the working people believe that the Government should assume the manage ment of the railroads. Q. Is not that based on the idea that they think they can manage this business beltei XiABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 371? than the railroad officials can themselves? — A. They think that the Government could manage these things better. Q. Do they not put it on the idea that they are the Government? — A. They feel that they have something of the control of the Government. Q. Do they not talk that labor created all these things and that labor practically owns all that it has created? — A. No, sir; I think not. Q. And that those who have got railroad property have got it at the expense of those who created that property by labor ? — A. That is undoubtedly the final fact. Q. Is that the belief of a great many in this part of the country ? — A. I do not think that such an idea has generally obtained. Q. Do you not think from your investigation in this matter that the whole assumption of the right to strike and derange business and take possession of property has grown out of the talk among the men and the belief that they created this property and therefore have a moral light to take part in its management? — A. I do not think so. I do not think that the masses of the people have any such idea as that. Q. Have you been present at the meetings of union men so as to know whether their prevailing feelings indicate that? — A. I am not a member of any union, and have only heard what they have said at public meetings. Q. Have you ever heard Mr. Caughlan? — A. No, sir. Iwould like to state that I tjiink the trouble lies deeper than has been suggested, and that it is in the monopolization of the land and forcing the population into the centers," thus preventing its distribution. Q. I suppose you have ridden over the road from Denison to Fort Worth; from Fort Worth to Galveston, and then up to Marshall and Texarkana. Did you not find im- mense tracts of land there that were subject to cultivation and that would support a couple of million of people at least? — A. Yes, sir; but it might as well be located in the midst of the sea as there, by reason of its price, its location, and its inaccessibility to the masses of the people. Q. Is there not fine land in Western Texas which can be had at very low rates; for a doUar and a half or less an acre? — A. I am not familiar with Western Texas, but my in- formation is that it is practically valueless on account of the difficulty of getting people to it. Q. Is it not one of the troubles in settling lands that men and their families desire to get into the villages and towns and small cities so as to have the social advantages of society? — ^A. It springs mainly from the hopelessness with which young farmers regard their situation. They see that it is impossible to have farms of their own, and hence they go into the cities to work, Q. Why not go on to these farms out there and acquire them as their forefathers did? — A. Their forefathers-could get farms for the asking for. Q. If the land were given to them would they take it and live on it ? — A. There would not be enough of it to afford relief. Q. What you have stated here are the conclusions upon your theories and investiga- tions? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. And not matters of proof, are they ? — A. It seems to me that they are. Q. (By the Chaieman.) Do you not know that the State of Texas has been selling her school lands for the last ten years at from one to two dollars an acre on time vary- ing from ten to thirty years, and at from 5 to 8 per cent, interest? — A. Yes, sir. Q. An^ do you not know that the State gives the purchaser the option to pay his an- , nnal interest for the entire time given, or to pay for the land in less time? — A. That is a fact, I believe, when the lands are sold wholesale or in large blocks. Q. I will tell you as a matter of information that it is expressly provided that there shall not be sales in large blocks. Are you not aware that these public lands were lo- cated in most of the counties in Texas, and comprised some of the best lands in the State? — A. So I believe, sir; but the moment any considerable number of new settlers come in the price of the land goes up so that it crowds out others. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Is there anybody crowded in Texas ? — A. No, sir; but as soon as a city commences to grow up the price of land rises, so that the land round the cities here in Texas for small farms anywhere near the cities is dearer than land is in Massachusetts. f Q. How long have you been a resident of the State of Texas ? — A. Only two or three months. Q. Before that time had you ever been in the State of Texas? — A. No, sir. Q. What is your age? — A. Twenty-six, and nearly twenty-seven. Q. (By Mr. Paekek. ) What do you think of the desirability of encouraging immi- gration or not? — ^A. I do not think there is any surplus population. It all depends npon the distribution of the land as to whether th ere is a surplus population or not. The subcommittee then adjourned to meet at Little Rock on the call of the chairman. 380 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Little Bock, Wednesday, May 12, 1886. The subcommittee, of which Hon W. H. Grain is chairman, convened in the United States court-room, in the post-office building, at Little Eock, this day, and proceeded to take testimony. CORNELIUS GRIFFIN sworn and examined. By the Chaibman: Question. You are general road-master of the Iron Mountain Railroad ? — Answer. Yes, sir. Q. And have been how long? — A. About two years. Q. Were you occupying that position when the strike on the Southwest system took place, about the 1st of March ? — A. It was the 6th of March here. Q. The strike then did not take place here on the system the same day as on the Texas and Pacific 1 — A. No, sir, it did not. Q. Did you^now anything about the employes previous to the strike being compelled to patronize certain places of business or be discharged ? — A. No, sir. Q. Were you in a position to know if such facts were in existence ? — A. I think I was. I have 425 or 430 men under me, andthey were not compelled to buy at any cer- tain place; they were at liberty to deal anywhere they chose. Q. It has been alleged on some places on the road they are compelled to pay hospital fees, and when they fall sick they are discharged. — A. I know of no cases of that kind. Q. If such things had taken place would you have known the fact? — A. I think I would, if they had taken place in my department. JAMES T. WHEEDON sworn and examined. By the Chaibman: Question. Are you division superintendent of the Iron Mountain Railroad? — Answer. Yes, sir; of the Arkansas division. Q. Did you occupy that position when the strike broke out ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. How long have you filled that position ? — A. Since August, 1884. Q. Was there a strike here, Mr. Wheedon? — A. Yes, sir. The first information I had in regard to the strike was on March 1. While at Texarkana we received reliable in- formation there stating that the Texas and Pacific were on a strike, and that they would insist upon boycotting all Texas and Pacific cars throughout the entire Southwest system. Orders weje issued at once not to handle Texas and Pacific cars, even so far as to cut off passenger coaches that had been running for two or three years between El Paso and Saint Louis. They were all stopped at Jackson. Having taken this precaution we thought there would be no trouble on our road. Mr. Fleming remained here three days. The master mechanic said no grievances were presented to him; there were nonetome, and we felt perfectly safe in our matters. But on the 6th of March, at 10 o'clock, the whistle blew. Every man in the shop dropped his tools, with the exception of two fore- men and one man, and walked out. That was on the 6th. No action waS taken to stop trains until the 8th of March. The first thing I knew next we had deputy shsiiils reg- ularly deputized from the sheriff of our county, who, thinking they were good men, had commissioned them as a posse. Q. You mean striking employes? — A. Yes, sir; striking employes. We found the men, to our surprise, in full possession of everything on the 8th; and they told Mr. Richardson, the master mechanic, that no freight trains should run. Q. Who did that? — A. This committee. And that committee were a part of these deputy sheriffs, and ordered that no freight trains should run, but that they would allow passenger trains to run regularly. The committee remained, and they said that no one else would be allowed there — even going so far as to say that they should not coal up freight trains. They let the regular coaler remain to attend to the passenger trains, but to no freight trains. This was kept up until the 13th of March, and they did not allow any freight train to run. Mr. Worthen, the sheriff, then found that they were not doing wh2lt they told him they would do, protect the property, but that they had been disabling engines. They at last allowed a committee to be appointed, which examined the situation. Mr. Worthen then published a notice on the 14th, stating that hereafter he would take his own deputies, and that all deputies appointed by him, both Knights of Labor or railroad men, were recalled. From that time we had no further trouble. He appointed good men; they attended to their business, and things began to move. We had to send to Philadelphia to get part of the pieces removed from the engines. The /actual violence began on the night of the 8th, when a mob of fifteen or twenty or more masked men, encountering the local freight train at the Fort Smith crossing, took the train and disabled it. In the beginning they were very active in disabling engiies. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 381 Mr. DeLay stated in my presence that the easiest way to disable an engine was to take the set screws out of them. It is a little screw, probably an inch in diametei' and 2 inches in length, which is in the eccentric strap, to the best of my knowledge, and one man can take it out. They can do it in the dark, so that no one can see them, and the engine cannot then be moved. We have in the Baring Cross shops twenty-four engines that were so disabled. Baring Cross is right across the river here. Q. The shops for this point? — A. Yes, sir ; the distributing point for both divisions, north and south. That was the first real violence that was committed. On the 11th, Mr. Richardson, the master mechanid, found half a dozen set-screws and fired up a couple of engines for the purpose of taking a train south. The strikers got the best of us, and got away with that train by taking it at Nison, six miles from here, and dis- abling it. Mr. Worthing kept his offices here, and we succeeded in getting another fired up again and got along all right. On the 11th they completely disabled all the engines by taking the throttles out of them — some thirty-two altogether. Q. Did that include passenger engines? — A. No, sir; butallthefreight engines, between twenty-four and thirty- two of them. They took the valves and throttles and throttle- valvesont, and instead of running trains next morning, as we had figured on, we found that the engines were completely disabled. I thought no more of it, but sta^rted for our attor- neys, Messrs. Dodge & Johnson, to counsel me. In the mean time, Mr. Hill had conceived the plan of taking the switch engine and an engine that had been disabled, and, coupling on to a number of carSj go to Nison and pick up this dead engine taken the day previous. The first thing I knew I received information that some men had taken possession of engine 408, which was to take out a mail train that had to leave at 12.45. At the time I got the mes- sage I heard an engine running through the yard and saw a couple of men with masks over their faces in broad daylight go and jump on the engine. I had no knowledge of what had taken place in the morning and could not think of what they could be doing. I went to the telegraph office and telegraphed to the sheriff, and they came to me. Inside of thirty minutes I-heard of the engine passing Jackson, 13 miles south of here. At the same time I found out that Mr. Hill had gone there with a train, and that they were going to recapture it. I wired the sherifif at Benton, also, and notified the agent to cap- ture them or have them identified. At the time the engine reached Benton the switch engine was cut o£f and got out of the way, and this party had an engine and train and took possession of it. They then started back with the engine for Little Rock. Just as quick as they started with this passenger engine they notified us that they had taken it — ^the passenger engine — and they had come down for business. As quick as the engine came on its way back I got the sheriff and some deputy marshals with him and we went up the road, expecting that they would come back as far as the big hill and disperse. I never thought they would have the temerity to stay with that engine. After getting out there we had some thirty or forty men. I then ordered the passenger train at Baring Cross to come forward. Mr. Fletcher, the mayor there, with probably a dozen men, got on the train, and we stopped and took up a couple of deputies on the hill. We went out to EmblevUle, and there they stood, as bold as life, with the engine and caboose and a man disguised — they had a man lookmg out. As soon as the train that we were on passed the switch, it was turned for them and they threw their throttle pretty wide and started out and left us behind. I could not understand why they were stopping upon the engine, but we did not effect their capture then. Some time after that some men came to me and made some very insinuating remarks, and this, that, and the other, and afterwards they had me arrested, and I am under $1,500 bond. Q. On what charge? — A. For assault with intent to kill; I shot at the party. Q. What was done with them? — ^A. As yet nothing. Q. Are they indicted? — ^A. Yes, sir. Well, I understand they are indicted. That same night I went to the shop, after leaving Mr. Dodge's office, and I found half a dozen parties there with different communications, and they had me half scared to death. I found that they had killed the switch engine, that I had placed a watchman over to prevent it, and I gave them some pretty plain talk. I stepped down off the engine, and two men were standing there, one of them with a skull cap on. He said something that I did not get, but I at once covered him with my pistol and asked him to get out; and the others proved to be sheriffs' deputies and Knights of Labor. I asked him^what his business was on our property at that time of night, and he said he was on duty to watch. I had a very plain talk vrith him for probably fifteen minutes. I asked him what it was they struck for, and he answered me very plainly and frankly that they had no grievance, but said, "I can not say any more." Q. Did all these disturbances that you speak of occur during the time that these Knights of Labor were acting as deputy sherifis? — A. That was at night, and next day Worthing took other men there. Q. How did he explain his action in the appointment of strikers as deputy sheriffs who took charge of the property?— A. Oh, that is an old practice of the Knights of Labor. 382 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. They strucl:, then they appointed themselves as deputies, &c., and take charge of the Q. But in this case they did not appoint themselves?— A. In this instance I think the the sheriff was entirely conscdentious and was misled as to his duty. As soon as he was convinced how they were acting he immediately displaced them and put m other men. Q. Did the company ask for protection of their property? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Prior to the appointment of these Knights of Labor aa deputies?— A. No, sir; they got in ahead of us. I went on the 7th, and they were several hours ahead of us. Q. You really thought it was necessary to have deputy sheriffs appointed for your protection? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I understand you to say that afterwards the sheriff did appoint disinterested par- ties?— A. Yes, sir; men to protect our property and ourselves, and connected with the management of the road. We had also a great many little petty annoyances committed during the strike, and there were burning of bridges and trestles, placing obstructions on the track, side-tracking and stopping trains at Newport. Q. In this State?— A. Yes, sir. Q. State in general terms what took place at Jacksonville. — A. There was where 6ne of our wrecks was caused by the Ifnights of Labor. We had sent an engme from here to bring in the engine that was disabled at Newport; in fact there were two of them disabled there. On reaching Jacksonville, some 15 or 18 miles from here and while running along from 10 to 15 miles an hour, they found a switch turned on them and ran them on the side, ditching one of the engines, injuring one of the engineers, and spraining his ankle. There were switchmen, several of them known to have left here in a wagon and gone to Jacksonville, and they were known to be railroad men. Q. What do you mean by railroad men. Do you mean men employed by the rail- road company or strikers ? — A. Yes, sir, I suppose you would call them strikers. They called on the section foreman at Jacksonville for the switch-key, which they did, not get, and they picked up an ax and broke the lock. Q. The switch-keys are numbered, are they not? — A. Yes, sir; all keys are numbered. Q. They asked for the key of that switch ? — A. The keys open all switches. They are numbered simply to know who they are issued to. They have not different keys. These men, by the way, I think we will get all of ffliem: the detectives are working on It, but are not ready to make their pull yet. They are known to be Knights of Labor. Q. Was there any disturbance about the 8th of April? — A. Well, on the 8th of April, ii, was on the 9th of April, there was a mob of forty or fifty tried to take our shops at Baring Cross. We had then guards to protect the property night and day. They had captured two of our guards and sent a man named Darby, who was known as the seeie- tary of the lodge, to make a demand Q. What lodge? — A. The Knights of Labor lodge. [Resuming.] On Hamm Williams, who was acting deputy sheriff in the shops. His answer was by locking Mr. Darby up. He had no more than got back from doing this than the whole crowd was on him, and they opened fire on him and wounded him very badly, but he had nerve and staid with them and held the, property. To him alone the company is indebted for that property to-day not being destroyed, or at least engines and machinery all being disabled. Q. Do you know who constituted that crowd? — A. Well, I know of th^ one — this leader that was sent forward to demand the shops, and we know him to be a Knightof Labor. Q. Did this man who was wounded recognize any men who were in the crowd ? — ^A. Oh, yes; he knew several of them. Q. Did they belong to any organization? If so what was the name of it? — A. Yes, sir; Knights of Labor, he knew several of them to be, and they are well known to be. Q. What effect had this strike upon the business of the road? — A. It stopped traffic altogether for five days, and after that it was partly stopped, because we could not get the engines out quick enough. Q. How long did it last?— A. From the 6th to the 28th. Q. Was that about the time Mr. Powderly issued Instructions for the Knights of Labor to return to work? — A. Yes, sir; I think about that time. I think several of our men came to us to go to work, and when Mr. Irons came out in his firebrand circular we did not employ any more. Q. Did you try to employ men to take the place of the strikers when they were out on the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you succeed or did the master mechanic succeed? — A. He had written to all parts of the country and he succeeded, and at the time the strike was off he had 67 per cent, of the number that he regularly works. Q. Did the strikers interfere at all with the new employ^ of the company? If so in what manner and with what effect? — A. They had, as I understand it, a committee ap- pointed that made it a point to wait at the bridge, and if any employ^ would come LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 383 across they would follow him up. We had one or two men pretty badly used up by be- ing assaulted, and we had two or three arrested for jumping on another and pounding him up pretty badly. We were compelled to put out boarding-cars to board our men. The houses over there would not board them, and we had to board and sleep our own men there. Q. What is the reason that the boarding-houses over there would not board these men? — A. Because they were not Knights of Labor and because they were working, is what I understood. Q. Do you mean that the boarding-house keepers were Knights of Labor ? — ^A. If not, they were in sympathy with them, and would not board the men. Q. What is the reason that the strikers did not come and attack these men at the com- pany boarding-house? — A. They were under guard; we protected them, until now they are piotecting themselves. Q. Thisis the capital of the State?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did it become necessary at any time for the governor to order out the militia?— r A. Texarkana is the only point that the militia was ordered out. Q. The sheriff was suflBcient for the situation here? — A. Yes, sir. This is a sample of some of the notices our men received. Q. Do you know this of your own knowledge? — A. I know that the man received it, received it through the mail, and I know further that this same man was assailed while at work. A guard also was struck with a slungshot — a nut wrapped up in something — and struck almost along the side of the car where you slept last night. Two of them approached him, and another hit him and knocked him down, and he was very badly hurt. And ^his man here they threatened for going to work against the order of the Knights of Labor. Q. Is he a Knight of Labor ? — A. He is not. Q. Might not this assault that was made last night have been from some cause dis- connected vrith the strike ? — A. They have been sending him notices with skull and cross-bones on them, and stating that somebody would make $2 for sitting on the coro- ner's jury. After some discussion it was agreed that the following letter, addressed "NickEn- wright, esq., care of Tremont House, Little Rock," duly stamped, canceled, and post- marked "Little Rock, April 19, 12 m.," should be admitted as part of the history of the strike: 6/A^Z?^^7>^/r^/F "Little Rock. "Nick, this is for you, and do not mistake it for any one else. Some peopple think that the name Scab is not yours, but I think they make a mistake now for your sake stop work or some one will have to sit on a jurey and make $2.00. So much from a man. "This is Business." Q. Did it require just two or three deputies or a large amount of physical force to protect the company's property? — A. It required a large number. We tried to do so with a small force and we found it would not work. They kept getting in on us, and one man who could get in at the machinery and disable engines could do a very large amount of damage. Q. What became of the mass of the strikers? — A. I think about 80 per cent, of them axe striking yet. Some of the worst ones, or rather those who took the most active part in destroying property, have left. Q. What percentage of the strikers remain unemployed to-day ? — A. I think about 95 per cent. Q. Have any of them made application to the company for re-employment since the strike was declared off? — A. A great number. Q. Have they been refused employment? — A. They have; on the ground that their places are filled. Q. I understood that the railroad company would not object to the employment of men who ivere engaged in this strike, provided they had not been connected with the 384 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. destruction of property. Am I correct?— A. Yes, sir. We make no distinction between any organization our men may belong to; the only thing we insist on is that he shall be a free man and not .subject to any committee. Of course no one who has taken an active part either in violence or otherwise can be taken back. Q. You say he shall "not be subject to any committee." What do you mean by that? — A. I mean a committee of the Knights of Labor. Q. What do you mean when you say that; they shall not present their grievances through a comniittee ? — A. We mean that a committee shall not come down into the yard and say what he shall do. Q. You do not mean to imply that if the men have any complaints to make against the company they shall not deliver the grievances to you through a committee ?— A. None whatever. Q. But you mean, I presume, that a committee shall not have power to come and order them off?— A. That it shall be a committee of themselves, and no outsider. Q. Have you the same number of men employed in the company's service here that you had before the strike? — A. I think not, sir. Q. winy? — A. Be6ause the same number are not required to handle the business that ire are doing at the present time. Q. Did you find competent men to fill the plaoes of the strikers ?— A. We considered them competent, and we have been enabled to operate the road without any trouble. Q. How many bridges were burned during the strike ? — A. I should say half a dozen trestles. Q. Is the burning of bridges a common thing ? — A. No, sir; I cannot say it is; we have more or less fires in dry weather, and trestles catch fire from some cause unknown; but during the strike it was a daily affair to get report that this trestle or that trestle was on fire; and it caused a great deal of trouble. Q. Do the bridge and building records show what fires occur on the line of the road? — A. I do not know anything about their records ; but I presume from the reports I receive that they would have a record showing the number of fires. I would venture to say that 80 per cent, more fires occurred during the strike than at any time previous or since during the same month. Q. Are a great many of the trestles fire-traps on account of the old and dry lumber in them? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know that they were Knights of Labor who made the wreck at Jackson- ville? — A. As I previously said, we think we have got our men, and that it will be proven in the case as to whether they are Knights of Labor or who they are. Q. Have you discharged any Knights of Labor who went back to work on Mr. Pow- derly's order, and if so, how many? — A. We discharged one to my knowledge that went back. • , Q. On what ground ? — A. On the ground that we thought he was working in the inter- est of the Knights of Labor more than he was for the company's interest. Mr. De Lay, one of the head members, got information that we were satisfied he could only have re- ceived from those on the inside, and this party had access ta and through the round- house, and that was the reason he was discharged. Q. What were the freight-handlers paid for overtime ? — A. That was not in my de- partment; the agent here would be best able to give you the information on that. Q. Did the strike affect your business, and were you using as much coal for the serv- ice of the trains in April, 1886, as in April, 1885 ? — A. No, sir; I think not, for the sim- ple reason that we were using coal burners in April, 1885, and in 1886 we were not using them to the same extent. We have probably six or eight engines burning coal; all the others burn wood. Q. Did you receive as many car-loads at Little Rock in April, 1886, as in April, 1885? — A. I think 10 per cent, greater. Q. Did you find a scarcity of cars when traveling was resumed, and, if so, what was the reason? — A. No, sir; there was no scarcity of cars as far as my knowledge goes. I know we transacted all the business that was offered, and have been now for some time. Q. I understood you to say that yon would not receive a committee of Knights of Labor to treat with them unless that committee was composed of employes of the com- pany. Is that correct? — A. We are not receiving any committees of anybody at the present time. When our men came back to work we only recognized them as indi- viduals. Q. Would you receive a committee from any organization, or would you expect t& treat each individual separately ? — A. We would expect to treat each individual sepa- rately. Q. Then if any employes of your road had, or thought they had, any cause of com- plaint and appointed a committee of their own number to wait upon you, would they be LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 385 received ? — A. I would receive them that way. I thought your question was in relation to the strikers out now. Q. If a committee of the Knights of Labor, an outside committee, not composed of your employ&, were to wait upon you with any grievance of your employds, would you. not treat with them ? — A. We would not treat with them at all. Q. Have any persons been arrested on warrants charged with wrecking the trail* at Jacksonville? — A. I cannot say that the warrants are out, or that they are ready to bar taken out. Q. How do you know that Mr. De Layhad the inforination you spoke of? — A. I only knew it just as you would know it, irom seeing it in the papers. It was published iu> the daily press in Saint Louis. Q. It stated the facts, did it ? — A. It got pretty ctose to some of them, and aboiitr. others it was away off. Q. When you said that yon would not receive an outside committee of the Knights of Labor for the purpose of considering any grievances of your employes do you base this action upon orders from your superiors, or is it upon your own motion ? — A. It would be done of my own free will. Of course we would have to work with the employfe we have, and we are not working with outsiders. Q. I am requested by Mr. Litchman to ask you, have you received any orders of that kind? — A. The orders that we are working on have been published pretty freely and' plainly throughout the press for the last thirty days that Mr: Hoxie and Mr. Kerrigan gave over their signatures; and it is not necessary for me to enlighten them upon any- thing. Q. These published statements, then, contained the substance of the orders? — A. Yes,, sir, in full. Q. State the substance of what they were? — A. These orders were that we wUl not treat with any outside labor organization, but that we will treat with any of our own . men, and take pleasure in hearing the grievances they may have at any time, and aU times, and will treat with no outsiders. That has been published and covers every or- der I have received. We have received nothing outside of that order of Mr. Hoxie's, . and that order, as I have stated, is covered by the publication. Q. Would you take back a fireman if he was a Knight of Labor? — A. We make no- distinction between the men. I have taken back switchmen and clerks. Firemen are not in my department. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) Do you know the names of these men who attacked this - boy Stevens? — A. I can get the names. Q. Have they been arrested ? — A. Two of them have been arrested. Q. Are they under indictment? — A. Two of them are. Q. How many men in the employ of the company struck here at Little Rock and in the vicinity? — A. About two hundred and fifty. One hundred and ninety-four in the shops, and taking in the yard and bridge and building department, about two hundreds and fifty men. ROBERT M. RICHARDSON sworn and examined. By Mr. BUCHANAN: Question. What position do you hold on the Iron Mountain EaUroad? — Gnawer. I am master mechanic of the Arkansas division. Q. How long have you held that postion ? — A. Over four years. Q. Are you in charge of the shops here ? — A. I am. ,Q. Can you give me ail idea of the amount of property belonging to the company that was injured at the shops during the strike ? — A. Well, sir, during the strike forty-five engines were disabled by taking parts of the machinery away, and those parts had to- be replaced by sending to a distance for them. It amounted to something like $3, 500 — $3,000 certain., Q. The repairs did? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What other injury to property was there? — A. Well, sir, the injury to the loco- motives was about all that I could think of. Q. How was that injury done ? — ^A. By taking parts of the machinery away and other- means. Q. At what hour and on what day did the strike begin ? — A. On the 6th of March at 10 o'clock. Q How much previous notice,'if any, had you of the commencement of the strike? — A. We had no certain notice of it. I was fearful that something of the kind woulA occur from the indications of the men. Q. Did any one of your employes inform you what they were to quit your employ- ment for ?— A. They did not. 3984 LAB 3 25 386 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. I)id they leave in a body ? — A. The whistle was blown by some one, I think by tie chairman, Mr. DeLay. Q. Would you be the one who would receive notice of any party who desired to leave the employ of the company ? — A. I would, or either of my foremen. Q. To your knowledge was any such notice given by any of those men who struck ? — A. I have never heard that there was aay notice whatever. None was given to me. Q. When they quit work what did they do? — A. They all washed up and left their places just as they would if it had been six o'clock iii the evening. Q. Did you hear any of them assign a reason lor striking ? — A. One of the committee, or the chairman, or leader of the Knights of Labor, came to me and told me they had quit and gone out on a strike upon an order. Q. When did he come to you '* — ^A. About fifteen minutes after the strike. Q. What is his name? — A. J. L. DeLay. Q. What reason did he assign? — A. He informed me that there was no grievance whatever at Baring Cross with the employfe, and that they had no grievance in the shops where he worked. Q. Is Baring Cross separate from Little Eock ?— A. It is across the river. Q. How far is it from Little Rock? — A. It is three-quarters of a mile. He told me that there was no grievance on this system, and that there was not any grievances what- ever with any of the men in the shops. Q. Has the company ever issued a notice discharging this whole body of employfe in that shop ? — A. No, sir; not to my knowledge. Q. State whatever information you may have as to the strike in addition to what has been stated by the last witness, as we cannot go into the duplication of details. — A. Our engines were disabled on the second day. Mr. DeLay informed me that the pas- senger trains could run and that he had appointed men to do the work, but no freight trains could run. , . Q. Please give me his words as nearly as you can recollect. — A. He came into my office and notified me that the men had gone out on a strike; that the passenger trains would be allowed to run, and that he had appointed men, or would do so, to see that the repairs were done to the engines used for passenger trains. Q. Who had appointed hira to take charge of the company's business ? — A. I do not know. He had been in the employ of the company eight months. He was a machinist in the shop, having been there eight mouths. He was the man who came into the of- fice and gave me this information, and he told me that freight trains would not be al- lowed to run. He then said he would appoint the men to take charge of the machin- ery necessary to run the passenger trains. Q. Did he give any reasons for allowing the passenger trains to run and not allowing the freight trains to run ? — A. He said it was the United States mail. Q. Did he state that? — A. I think he stated that there would be no interruption of the United States mail. I am not positive about that. Q. Is it generally know and understood throughout this section that the detention or obstruction of the United States mail is an offense punishable by the United States courts with imprisonment? — A. I presume it is. I have understood so. Q. Well, go on. — A. For the first day we ran freight trains, and afterwards, about the night of the 8th, the engines were disabled by taking the set screws out of the eccentric, and they could not be used. , ' Mr. BuoHAif AN. That will duplicate details. The Witness. The men in the roundhouse were obstructed from doing their duty. They were told to go home; and men that I sent to work doing the necessary work to take care of freight trains, and anything we touched for freight trafBc was obstructed by them. They would go the men and tell them to clear out. , Q. Who told these parties to go home, the officials of the road ? — A. They were a num- ber of Knights of Labor superintending this. Q. Do you use the term that they were Knights of Labor knowing that they were such, or do you simply mean to say that they were strikers ?— A. I knew that they were strikers and Knights of Labor, and so understood from the fact that they were men who atdifferenttimes had come to me as Knights of Labor. Engines from the 8th up to the 15th or 16th were disabled at different times. Engines arriving at Baring Cross were run on .the side-track and parts of the engines taken away, disabling them, and the water was let out of them so that they were entirely useless. Q. Does each of your passenger trains carry mail? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any of your passenger trains detained by reason of their action?— A. One of them was stopped on the 12th of March. Q. That was the one referred to by the previous witness ? — A. That was the one. They took charge of the engine and went down the road with it. Q. In addition to the details that the last witness gave do you know anything con- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 387 ceming that? — A. I know nothing more than that the men ran off with the engine as referred to by him. Q. Do you know anything in addition to his statement as to that matter, and is his statement substantially correct ? — A. I desire to say his statements are about correct. Q. Is there any additional matter that has not been testified to that you can add? — A. The material that was taken from these engines was never returned. Outside of that, the men were driven away from the engines and when placed on them were stoned by parties. Q. As master mechanic, did complaints of the men that were thus driven away from their jjosts of duty come to you? — A. Yes, sir; they would report to me. Q. State whether that was repeated often or merely one or two assaults. — A. It was done several times. A new hostler came to my house and told me of it. I had left an engine there, and there was an engine to arrive from the North, and I put this man on the engine to take care of it, and left there about dark myself About 10 o'clock one of the hostlers came there to my house and told me that they were stoned by parties they could not see, and driven away from the engine, and that the engine was no doubt disabled. I found that to be the case in the morning. Q. What other cases of intimidation or violence came to your knowledge? — A. The men that were hired to take the place of the strikers have been intimidated several times in going to or from the shops, and in crossing the bridge there were parties who inter- fered with them. Q. About how frequently did these complaints, come to you ? — A. Every day; some- times half a dozen times a day. Q. Have any notices come to your possession, given you by the men? — A. Yes, sir; ^ven to me by name and to the. men also. Here is one : Executive Rooms of L. A. 3646, Knights of Laboe, Little Eoek, April 19th, 1886. Mr. Peibel : Deae Sie: You are respectfully requested to cease working on any railroads operated by the Missouri Pacific system during the present strike in this system, by orders of D. A. 101, Knights of Labor. By order of Local Executive Board L. A. 3646. With the seal of the order attached. Q. Who is that gentleman to whom this is directed? — A. He was a machinist working in the shop. Q. Was that handed to you by him ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was he a new employ^ ? — A. He was an old employ^ He was out for about four weeks and then returned. Q. I find among these letters handed me this notice: "To R. M. RiCHAEDSON, "M.M.,I. M. Shops: . "Beware who you hire, for at a meeting of our lodge of K. of L. we were instructed to as many of us could possible get employment to do so, and find all the chances to your weak points, to burn the shops, to poison the water, and even dynamite was recom- mended. I will leave rather than join in with such diabolical schemes; but it is to be done, so I again repeat, beware of K. of L. If one hires he is bound to report, and act .accordingly. "Yours, "K. of L., but not in such schemes." Did you receive that in due course of mail ? — A. Yes, sir; there is the envelope (it is addressed E. M. Richardson, M. M., I. M. E. R. Shops, Little Rock, stamped with a 2-cent stamp, and postmarked Little Rock, May 10, 12 m., 1886). Q. And it is postmarked? — ^A. Little Rock, May 12. Q. Yon know nothing about the truth of the statement; you simply produce it as an instance of these difficulties, and you have no knowledge by whom it is written? — A. I have no knowledge about it. I received it through the mail. . Mr. Buchanan. You also produce another, on the official letter-head of the Missouri Pacific system, headed by what seems to be intended as a representation of a skull and cross-bones, and it reads as follows: x " Little Rock Station, April 30, 1886. "Deae Sie: Being a friend to you and not wishing to see you get hurt, I would ad- Tise you to quit the Iron Mountain shops, and at once. " From one who knows and wishes you well. " Mr. LiNCH." 388 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Who is Mr. Linch? — A. A man who worked in the car department. Q. He worked up to what time? — A. He iSja man who was hired since the strike^ Several more letters of the same kind, with skull and cross-bones across them, have been received. Q. What do you know about that one ? — A. That was handed to my foreman by the man who received it at his home. Q. You have no knowledge of who wrote this, nor as to whether Mr. Linch was ia any danger? — A. No, sir; in no more danger than others who were at work. Q. Were these the only instances, or are these samples of the general course?-— A. I jna,j say that there are hundreds of them written. I have seen a dozen, or fifteen, or eighteen of a similar character. A good many of the men do not, wish to give them up. One of them says he would not give his up for a hundred dollars. Q. You spoke of DeLay being in the employ of the company about eight months. Where did he come from? — A. I cannot say, but I understood he came from Texas. Q. Is that the Mr. De Lay whose name has been mentioned in Saint Louis lately as being prominent there in the investigation of this trouble ? — A. That, sir, I believe is- the same man. Q. How long had the strikers left your shops; was it before or after the guar^ were put in there by yourselves? — A. It was somewhere about the 15th or 16th, I think, when they took possession of the shop and did away with these Knights of Labor men. Q. How long was it after the strike that Knights of Labor or strikers took posses- sion? — A. The same day as the strike. Q. The same men which quit work were on guard. Did you see them ? — A. I did. Q. Did you recognize employes who had quit work ? — A. They were all employes. Q. Were they armed? — A. Part of them were, to my certain knowledge. Q. Did you converse with them ? — A. I did. Q. What did they state was the object of their being there? — A. They said that they were taking possession of the company's property, and were to see that it was not in- jured. Q. How long did they remain? — A. About 15 or 16 days. Q. Then, if that was their object, to protect the property of the company, they failed to accomplish their object? — A. Yes, sir; we asked them what they had seen done when, these twenty-four engines were disabled in one night and they told me they did not know anything about it. They did not see. it done. Q. How many of them were there on guard ? — A. I do not remember. I think it was three or four deputy sheriffs at night and probably the same number in the daytime, but' the exact number I do not know. Q. Did any of those guards at any time they were in charge of the shops report to- you any single insjiance .where property had been injured, or did they leave you to ascer- tain it yourselves? — A. They left me to learn it from my own observation or; other sources. Q. In what respect did these guards prove to be of any use to the company byway of protecting its property? — A. They did not prove to be any protection atsU; on the other hand, I think they were either the persons who did this damage, or that it was done while they were there, and that if they had been appointed to take care of the property, they would have taken care of it; and I have always been of the opinion they knew when it was done. Q. Have you refused work to any fireman because he was a Knight of Labor? — A. No, sir; I do not know that I have. Q. Have you in any instance alleged that as a cause for refusal ? — A. No, sir; I do. not know that I have. I have refused men employment for intimidation and inducing; others to leave the company's employ, and not to work for the company. Q. I am requested to ask you whether your men that you now have are as competent' as your old men ? — A. I have got just as good men as work in any shop in the country; competent to build an engine. Q. Have you ever told men that they were wasting their time and that they were idle ? — A. I have told them that we had better men and that the company intended to do business, I have told them the best thing they could do was to find something else to do. Q. Have any of those men who acted as guards applied to you for re-employment? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you taken any of them back ? — A. I have not. Q. Have any men who were suspected by you of injuring the company's property ap- plied to you for work? — A. Men who were found on the engines have applied to me for employment. Q. Did you take them back? — A. No, sir. Q. Is it your intention to take them back? — A. I would not employe these men. LABOR TROirBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 389 Q. How many men who were found on the stolen engine have applied for re-employ- jnent ?— A. I think there have been three, maybe not more tha;n two, probably two, that have applied. Q. Have you hired any men since the strike was declared off? — A. Some I have; one or 'two, and probably three. I have hired a wiper. Q. In the hiring of men do you discriminate against members of any organization? — A. No, sir. " Q. Do you discriminate against men who were engaged in acts of violence or injury to the property of the company ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is there any other discrimination exercised by you ? — A. I do not know of any. Q. Have you all the competent men that you need ? — A. I have all the competent men I need. , Q. You mean machinists? You mean the men employed on the lathe or at the vice ? — A. There are fifteen or sixteen machinists. I have, including all, about twenty-five or twenty-seven men working on engines; that is not taking in the other shops. I may say I have got thirty. Q. And how does this number compare with the number employed previous to the strike? — A. Probably X have now 67 per cent, of what w"e had before the strike. Q. What as to the remaining 33 per cent.? — A. It is not necessary to do the work we have to do, and we can get along very well without it. Q. Do you ever receive a committee on grievances from firemen or engineers when they presented grievances, or did you refuse action upon them ? — A. I have had men who were engineers and firemen come in and talk their matters over once in a while. Q. Are you the officer to whom they would present grivances ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do they ever appear as a committee with their grievances? — A. Employes tome in, one, two, or three, apd talk to me. Q. To present their grievances, or the grievances of their fellow employ^? — A. To present his grievance. Q. Anything of their fellow- workmen ? — A. Well, there may be times when I have received them when they would state that they were talking about others; they might be grievances, or matters which might be considered so. Q. Have you received any such that were not your own employes? — A. No, sir; I never have, to my knowledge. Q. Would you decline to receive such a committee of Knights of Labor that might appear for the purpose of presenting the grievances of their fellows? — A. No, sir; I do not know on what grounds I could receive them if they were presented by Knights of Labor. Q. But suppose they were employ^ ; what objection would you have to receive them ? — A. [ never have had any such fact. I do not know that I would receive them at this time. I never had a committee of Knights of Labor wait on me in my official capacity. Q. But what objection could there be to receiving them to present a grievance ? — A. Well, we receive our employes; if anybody has a grievance we receive them at any time, but it is and has been a rule for a long time not to receive committees as general things, although I have never had a committee to wait on me. Q. To instruct you as to what action you should take? — A. I never have had a com- mittee. Q. Have you held such conference with the firemen or engineers since this strike be- gan? — A. There might have been; I did not know that it was a regular committee. They did not say that they were a committee that I remember of. I have had a confer- ■ence with engineers and firemen. Q. Do I understand you to say that they did not report themselves to you as a com- mittee ? — A. Well, I do not remember now that they did, and it might have been con- sidered so. I do not remember that they reported to me that way. Q. What do you know of the wages of these employes on this road being reduced in ■October, 1884 ? — A. There was a reduction in 1884, I think, of employes' wages. I do not remember the date here. Q. Do you know anything of the reduction of James Yates's wages from $1.75 to $1.60?— A. No, sir. Q. Were boiler-makers' wages restored at Baring Cross under the agreement of March, 1885 ? — A. There was a foreman whose wages were reduced and restored. Exactly on whose order it was I do not remember. Q. Has any grievance of any boiler-maker at Baring Cross been presented to you at any time since JMtarch, 1885, as to not having had his wages restored ? — A. No, sir; there has not by any man. The wages of all men were restored. Q. Do yoA know a fireman named Hillman ? — A. I do. Q. Do you know that he has ever intimidated any fireman from working ? — A. That is in my information, which I consider reliable. He was in the hospital, and never re- ported until'the strike was on. 390 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You say that is your information; from -what source -was that derived? — A. From- men who were, I thought, in a position to know, and that they had very good reasons; from parties in the employ of the company, as well as others. "Well, he told me him- self that he had induced men not to go to work. _ Q, When was it he stated that to you ? — A. It was in my ofB.ce about three weeks aga Q. He made the statement to you that he had endeavored to persuade others to quit ?— A. I asked him if he had done that, and he said he had not done so generally, bat in one or two cases. Q. Did he speak of the cases?— A. Well, he did not give the names, as I remember. Q. Did you ever receive a complaint of Frank Coussens, a car repairer, about the re- duction of his pay ? — A. I do not remember that I ever did. Q. Give us your best recollection as to that?— A. Well, Idonot remember that I ever did. I cannot call it to memory that his pay was reduced or that I received any com- munication about it; I am quite positive that I did not. Q. Did not some Knights come to you about that ? Did Grey, a hostler, and Mack Red- ding continue working on the engine by order of the Knights? — A. No, sir; they did stay and do their work under the committee. Q., Did they stay under yoUr orders?— A. They would not obey my orders; they would not touch freight engines, and insisted that freight engines should not leave the place, and I sent them home. Q. Then if they continued at their work they did not continue as the company's em- ploy& ? — A. They did not do any work for the company. Q. They disobeyed your orders ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And got their orders from whom ? — A. Froin Mr. De Lay. I understand he was the man who told them what to do. Mr. Redding, that you speak ot; jumped on the engine and took charge of it and run it out of the house. Q. On your order? — A. No, sir; on the orders of Mr. De Lay. Q. And against your orders? — A. I had given no orders, and I was not epnsulted. ■ Q. If either of these men continued there at work did they continue there under the direction and control of the company's o£S.cials? — A. Well, sir, there was no objection to their doing this work on passenger engines, and they staid there and were finally paid by the corapany; but the orders of what they were not to do came from the leading members of the Knights of Labor. Q'. Did you give them orders as to their work in regard to caring for passenger en- gines ? — A. I did. Q. They did care for the passenger engines ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And as to freight engines, they refused your orders, obeying the orders of some one else?— A. Yes, sir; they did not do any work on freight engines. Q. Are they now in the company's employ? — A. They are not. Q. How many men were there employed at Baring Cross when Mr. Hoxie took charge- of the road and how many when the first strike was ordered? — A. Weil, sir, I do not remember how many men were there when Mr. Hoxie took charge; I have not thought of that; I could go to the books as far as we have them. I will say that there are more men now than there were when Mr. Hoxie took charge. Q. Were there less or more men em ployed there at the time of the strike than at the time Mr. Hoxie took charge ? — A. More men. Q. Then there has been an increase under Mr. Hoxie? — A. Yes, sir; there has been an increase; that is my recollection. Q. (By the Chairman. ) Was it a fact that there was a decrease of hours of labor and an increase of men? — A. Well, in the winter time we worked nine hours, and there have been times occasionally when there was a decrease that amounted to one or two; butmy recollection is that there are more men. Q. Is it not a fact that there was a decrease of hours of labor per day and an increase ■of men necessarily ?— A. No, sir; that is not my understanding of it; I do not know of any regulation of that kind. Q. (By Mr. BUCHANAN. ) Was not that engine you spoke about Redding taking the- one that was fired to take the passenger train on March 12 and that *as stolen ? — A. No, sir; it was not fired up for that purpose; it was fired up to take the United States- marshal and deputy sheriffs down the road to try to get trains that had been stolen. It was a regular passenger engine. Q. Do you know how wages compare for skilled and unskilled labor for 1882 and 1886? — A. Well, I do not think there is much difference in them; maybe there is as to some. We have in many cases, where a man is a capable man, increased hi? wages; we have probably fifty or sixty cases of that kind where men's wages were increased 25. ■and 30 cents, according to circumstances. LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 391 HAMM O. WILLIAMS sworn and examined. By Mr. Paekee: Question. Where do you reside? — Answer. I live in Little Eock. Q. How long have you lived here? — A. I have lived here since November 1, 1879. Q. .Did you in the month of April last act as a deputy sheriff ?— A. Laat April V Yea, eii. Q. Were you a regular deputy sheriff or were you a special deputy sheriff? — A. I was appointed a deputy sheriff last June, in 1885. I never was a regular deputy. Q. You were appointed for special action, but given an appointment that continued, so that you were a regular deputy sheriff during the month of April, 1886 ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You were at the Baring Cross shops during that month? — A. Yes, sir; I was there until the morning of the 9th of April. Q. Had you charge of a posse of men there? — A. I had 20, 17, and 21; and at one time I had Irom 10 to 12 men there. Q. Were you there on the 8th of April? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long had you been there? — A. I went there in the morning. Q. And remained until when ?— A. Until day, sir. 0. Until what time? — A. Until the morning of the 9th of April. Q. Were you and your posse attacked upon April 8? — A. Yes, sir; on the 9th. be- tween 12 and 1 o'clock. Q. Do you know how many men you had when the attack was made? — A. About twenty. Q. Where were they distributed? — A. In different places around — in the roundhouse and the coaling- yard and other property of the company. Q. You may describe the commencement of the disturbance and go and give the occurrences as they took place. — A. On the night of the 8th, between 12 and 1 o'clock, I was sitting in the office of the bridge and building department on the grounds. We had occupied that as a sort of headquarters. It had a telephone. I had to have some place to keep my arms and ammunition, and they turned it 'over to me and I occupied it for this purpose. I was in there, and one of my assistants, Mr. Slick, who was sta- tioned at the south end, came and told me a gentleman out there wished to see me; that he had stopped him out there. I went out and down with Mr. Featherill and Mr. Clark, who was another deputy. The man said "they would like to see me," and I said who, and he said, ' ' Step over this way a little further. ' ' I looked out that way and saw five or six men in the dark. I remarked, " I am not in the habit of coming; sup- pose you step this way ;" and he obeyed my request and went with me 40 or 50 feet from the two deputies that were bn guard, and about 50 or 60 feet from this crowd. Then I said to him, " What isityou-want?" And he replied, "I want you to take your men and yourself and get off these premises." I said, "What for?" Hesaid, "Wehave a crowd of men that want to go into this roundhouse and shops, and we have a little work to do there." I just reached out my hand and grabbed him by the collar and said I would take him in and that would make one less, and I brought him up to the bridge and building office and put a guard over him and told the guard I wanted him to take care of that man. Q. Who was he? — A. Mr. Wellington. Q. Did he belong to the strikers? — A. Not that I know of Q. You do not mean that he is an employ^ of the company ? — A. I think he is. Q. Not the guard, but the man you took into custody? — A. That I took in? He had been, I understand, an employ^ of the road; his name is Darby. Understand, I put him in charge of Mr. Wellington and left him in that office. Just as I started off with him I left Mr. Featherill and Mr. Clark right at this south end, and told them to be sure and not let that crowd of men come any nearer to them. But after I got into the office and put Mr. Wellington over this man I heard them coming. I ran out of the office, and Mr. Slick, a deputy sheriff who generally was with me, was with me. There was an engine standing right in the middle of the track. He took the right-hand side of the engine and I ran to the roundhouse side, and when I got around there there was a big crowd of men, I suppose seventy-five men, and I could see my two guards that they had captured at the other end. They were scattered out for 30 or 40 or 50 feet. The head- light was shining on the crowd and I called to them to stop and told them to get off the premises; that the property was in my charge, and that they could not go in there) and that I would die in my tracks before they should 'go. And the answer they gave me was, "Die you .son of a . Kill him, kill him," and they commenced shooting. I thought I would not lag behind, and I commenced firing away, and there was a right lively time. Q. -But the shooting was commenced by the attacking pirty? — A. They shot at me before I raised a gun. However, it was very interesting for ten or lllteen seconds ; but 392 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. •eventually I got them turned and they all wfent their way. I found I had been hit just about the belly. One ball hit me in the belly, and I had got also hit in the back ; and I got on the track of the man that shot me in the back; I was trying to get to him but was too weak. That was about all that occurred. The strikers ran off and I began to feel my wounds. Q. How many wounds did you receive ?t— A. Two; one here in the abdomen, and I ■was shot in the back with a load of squirrel-shot. There are twenty-six or twenty- seven of them in my back. Q. Then you received two charges? — A. Yes, sir; a pistol shot in my abdomen and the squirrel-shot in the back. Q. Did they then leave the ground? — A. I never saw any more of them. I staid there a few moments and went over to the office and got one of the men to telegraph to Jlr. Worthen and also to a physician. Q. Were you confined to your bed from that bullet wound? — A. I never got up until Sast Tuesday week ; that was yesterday a week ago. Q. Were any of your men injured? — A. No. Q. Were there any injured on the other side that you know of? — A. I do not know -Tvhether there was or not. I can only state that the last shot fired in the m^l^e I fired. A man was approaching me, and I turned my pistol on him and fired, and he came on «nd fell almost at my feet, and said, " Oh, Lordy ! Lordy ! Oh ! " That was the last I saw of him. When I got there afterwards' he had been moved. I got on the track of ■the fellow that shot me in the back, and went a little way, and I concluded to sit down on the tie, as I could catch no one; and I sat down on a tie there, and while I was sitting there I saw one of my men trying to get up in that way, and he came to me and I told Shim I was hurt and I would like to go over to the telegraph office, and I said, "There is -a man pretty badly hurt here, and you had better go and try to get him off the track;" -that aie might be run over by the engine they were using. And I went on down to the -office, and I understand the man was never seen afterwards by any of the deputies on rgnard; and so I do not know whether he was hurt much or nbt. I thought he was killed 'there -when he fell; he was right close to me when I shot him. Q. Who was the leader of that gang — the atta,cking party ? — A. I do not know, except lit was Mr. Darby, the gentleman who asked me to get off the premises. Q. "What do you know of his being connected with the Knights of Labor? — A. I do mot know, -except by what I have heard. Q. Have you ever heard of his being a Knight of Labor, or that he was a member of *he order? — A. My information is from the newspaper. Q. Has any one connected with the attack described been arrested except Darby? — A.. Not that I know of. Q. Was your appointment as deputy sheriff confirmed by the circuit courts? — A. Ido -not know. Q. Did yoa understand that there was any need of its being confirmed, you having tiad a regular appointment ? — A. I did not. Q. Do you know whether you were or not confirmed by the circuit court ? — A. I do -not know., I asked Mr. Worthen if it was necessary to have a new appointment. ■Q. Did you search Mr. Darby? — A. Yes, sir. 'Q. Was he armed? — A. He was not. I do not know whether I got a penknife off him •or not. But he had no gun or pistol. Q. Was there any deputy sheriff in your posse whose appointment as such deputy had 'been -confirmed by the order of the circuit court to your knowledge? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Was there any regular deputy sheriff, if you were not one, in the partar ? — A. Mr. Oardenham and Mr. Featherill had been working around the sheriff 's office so much that I imagined they were regular deputy sheriffs; but I have no personal knowledge that they were, Q. (By the Chairman.) You were told by Uie sheriff to go and take charge of this property, were you not, and given charge of these mdh? — A. Yes, sir; and he gave me any instructions. .ROBERT WORTHEN sworn and examined. By the Chaieman: ■ Qu^tion. What official position do you hold ?— Answer. I am sheriff of Pulaski County, Arkansas, and have been since about the 1st of November, 1884. Q. Have you heard the testimony of these witnesses in regard to what occurred in con- •nection with the strike, the first witness, Mr. Wheedon, and Mr. Williams? — A. I heard j)art of Mr. Wheedon's testimony, and I heard Mr. Richardson, and also Mr. Williams. Q. State what you know about the disturbances that took place here during thestrike in your county? — A. Well, there were several disturbances at different times; I believe LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WES'i'. 393 -the last of them I was personally present. The first disturbance was occasioned by run- ning an engine out of the shops and out of the.yard near the shops; that happened after a freight train had been sent out. Q. You appointed eight members of an organization known as Knights of Labor as • deputy sherife, did you not? — A. I believe that came about in this way: On the day of the strike, I think it was that day, there was a man came to my office, it seems to me about 12 o'clock, and possibly a little earlier or later, and said that there was a strike on the Gould system on that day, and that they had all quit work at 10 o'clock that 4ay (they were a committee of Knights of Labor, I believe, that js my understanding), and they thought that there would be all kinds of loss and destruction of property; they said that a great deal of it would be charged up to the Knights of Labor when they were not responsible for it, and they asked that I should deputize a party for the pur- pose of protecting the property, to prevent any of it being damaged. I thought that was a very good scheme, and as they did not propose to charge anything for it, and that the property would be protected, I complimented them on it rather, and fixed up commis- sions and authorized them to act as deputy sheriffs during this strike. Well, next night I heard some of the railroad party, I do not know who, but I think it was the superin- ' tendent, came down and said he thought that was an old practice of theirs, and that he wished I had not done so. I instructed these men they were no longer Knights of Labor, and I would hold them responsible; that they should lay aside everything and obey the officers, while they were there. I had had no experience with strikes, and I soon found that the engines were disabled and other property taken away, stolen I called it. Q. That they had under their protection ?— A. Yes, sir. I did not suppose any one belonging to the road would do it, and did not think they would do so when they had taken charge. Q. Had youany idea that they were taking general possession of the property of the rail- road? — A. Yes; that was my idea, but the railroad people came to me and complained ■of Mr. De Lay. I found he was a head man of the organization. I looked for him and told him I did not like that way of doing; that I wanted this property protected; that I had appointed them as a matter of honor and respect to him; that they ought to return this property, and then if they could steal it it was all right. He objected to that. He ■did not think it was stealing; but said these things would be returned; it was all where it could be got at. He left me under the impression that it would all be returned, and done at the expense of the Knights of Labor when the matter was settled. I told him that it would not do to be in charge and yet to take that action; and I made a demand from time to time for them to return the property. As it was getting worse and worse I went over there, possibly it may have been on the 1st or 2d, and put some men of my own in charge. You see the shops cover quite an amount of ground, and seven men cannot guard it completely. I have since learned that a great many of the things were taken off prior to the strike; I have heard so at any rate. Q. Why did yon take that property in charge? — A. Because I did not intend that they should act as deputy sheriffs any longer. Q. Why did you not intend to have them as deputy sheriffs any longer; why did you lose your confidence in them ?— A. Because of the acts and deeds that had been done — the disabUug of engines that had been carried on while they were in charge as my -deputies. i Q. You say that seven men could not protect the property of the company there? — A. Seven could not guard it in the day with perfect safety, as men could slip in there and disable an engine in a very few minutes. Q. Do you intend to leave theimpression on the committee thatyou thought that there was no necessity at first for the appointment of deputies ? — A. Oh, yes; I told them that I did not suppose that there would be any protection necessary, and I supposed that I would have the moral support of the Knights of Labor, and that by that means property would be easily protected. I supposed that the Knights of Labor through their organi- zation had ordered this committee to come to me, and that they did not intend to take any property and destroy it, but that this organization would just watch it. Q. I suppose you were looking to the moral support of the organization? — A. Yes, sir; I was looking to their moral support rather than expecting that a few men could protect the property. Q. Did you come to the conclusion that the Knights of Labor were not giving you their moral support? — A. I came to the conclusion that they had not been guarding the property. Q. Do you know of your own knowledge of any stoppages of freight trains or forcible seizure of the company's property or intimidation of employ^? — A. I was just trying to think if I was personally present when any acts of violence were done. I do not 'remember of any now. 394 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST Q. Were you present at any of those acts ? — A. I was present wTien we started a freight train afterwards and some man was trying to get on the engine. I believe there was one instance, and I could not get at the man with my hands, but pushed him off with- my feet and followed him about three or four steps with my feet. Q. Did you make any arrests at Baring Cross?— A. My deputy, Mr. Williams, arrested. Mr. Darby. Q. I am speaking of yon. — A. None that night. I was not there myself. I arrested three men that night coming over. Two of them were armed. Q. Who were they? — A. Well, they were men named Cook, McAllister, and another named Schoepf. Q. Did they belong to any labor organization?— A. Well, I do not know. I under- stood that from the outside. I am not positive. Q. Did they tell you that they were members of the Knights of Labor; I presnme- you are not a member yourself? — A. I do not know personally who is a member. Mr. Darby I supposed to be a member, because he appears to be some ofiScer in it, and came- to me and had a conversation with me prior to this shooting scrape. Q. Did you object to his wanting members of Knights of Labor appointed special deputies? — A. I do not know. I never paid any attention to them. Some of them, may have been trying to spy upon their action. I had no idea of having any attack made upon the shop or any of my men. Q. On the night of April 8, when Ham. M. Williams was shot, did or did not the- Knights of Labor Assembly in Argenta have a meeting, and were they addressed by one Trevelick, a Knight of Labor, a traveling orator for the organization? — A. That was the information brought to me that day, and to make my preparations accordingly. Q. What information was conveyed to you, by whom conveyed, and what steps did you take, if any ? — A. The governor sent for me and said he understood that this man was going to give a lecture, and that they did not know what sort of a lecture it would be. If it was something to excite the people to acts of violence he wanted me to take steps to protect the property and to keep anything of that sort down. I had a lot of extra, men summoned that night and had thtem kept in the State house. I do not remember whether that was the riight that Hamm M. Williams was shot or not. I made my pre- parations so that if Mr. Trevelick came here to make incendiary speeches I was going to- stop it. I did not intend to let it be done, and I expected to be backed up by the gov- ernor if it was necessary. Q. What took place? — A. I never even went to the speaking. I understood before- hand that there would be nothing of that sort. I have a number of Knights of Labor acquaintances with whom I conversed, and I learned from them that there would be- nothing of the sort. I never even went to the opera house. I went in company with- one of the law and order stripe of the Knights of Labor, and I did not expect that there would be anything to need any extraordinary exertion, and as I had been up two or three- nights before I went home. Q. Did he make a speech? — A. He made a speech in Little Eook and afterwards made- a speech at Argenta. Q. Did he make a speech there? — A. I understood he did. Q. Do you know at what hour the assembly adjourned prior to the attack made on the- shops ? — A. I do not know. I do not know whether that was the night of the 8th that they had this meeting in Argenta or not. Q. Were you compelled to employ an extraordinary force of deputies during the pend^- ency of this strike; if so, how many? — A. They went all the way from five to fifty. _ Q. What is your ordinary force? — A. I have ifive or six men in my employ, probably eight or nine of them, and keep in the jail four regular men and other men in the dif- ferent parts of the county. Q. What increase of force did you make? — A. I doiibled it, and sometimes had »■ many as fifty. Q. Did you deem it necessary for the preservation of law and order ? — A. I deemed- it necessary to keep twelve or fifteen men. ' Q. Was this witness, Hamm O. Williams, one of your ordinary deputies? — ^A. Yes,, sir, and had been since last summer. Q. He was appointed under the laws of Arkansas provided for such cases? — A. Well, yes; I told him to go into the county court and have his appointment approved. I gave- it him for the purpose of collecting the delinquent taxes. Q. Was he a regular acting deputy of yours when he was guarding the shops? — A. Yes, sir; he had complete charge of this thing, and was specially deputized to let no- man go into these shops. He had complete charge of them. Q. What amount of property was there belonging to the railroad that these men over at Baring Cro.ss were to guard, and were you also to guard the depot at Little Rock?— A. Well, the amount of property that I expected these men to guard was very large^ LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 395 but I did not expect them to be able to protect all the property over there, as it is over a mUe long. Q. Did you intend them to guard all that property ? — A. As I told you before, these seven men were put over the roundhouse to protect the property there from destruction, for that would be the place if there was to be any damage done. They said that that was the property that they wanted to guard; and when I appointed them as deputy sheriffs I did not suppose that those men could guard and protect that amount of prop- erty unless they had the moral support of the Knights of Labor. Q. Was Schoepf indicted and tried tor anything in coifneetion with that night's pro- ceedings, and, if so, upon what offense? — A. He is indicted, and gave bond. I do not re- member what it is for. Q. Has he been held for carrying weapons? — A. That is what it is for. He had a double-barreled gun, and he could not account fully for his actions. It was thought he was there for devilment. Q. Where was he coming from when you arrested him? — A. From the other side of the river, right after the attack on the shops. Q. Was that the night of the shooting that Williams testified about? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You arrested him coming from that direction, did you? — A. I met him coming over the bridge. I was told before I got there that some fellows were waiting for me on the bridge, and I went prepared and met these three men. Q. Has jeither McAllister or Cook been indicted or tried for any offense; if so, for what? — ^A. McAllister, I believe, is indicted for carrying weapons, and has given bond. Q. When you arrested him did you search him to see if he had a pistol? — A. I did not there, but did find it after we got to the jail. Q. Do you know whether his pistol had been discharged or not? — A. I do not know. I did not see that. Q. This shotgun affair, do you know about it yourself? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the shooting of Hamm Williams before Trevelick's lecture at the opera house? — A. I do not know whether that lecture was that night or not. I am under the impression that it was not that night; and at any rate I was under the impression that Trevelick's lecture was not going on at any time before I took the precautions that were thought necessary. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan). During the time that this guard of seven were in possession of the company's property did any of them report to you any injury done to the prop- erty ? — A. I do not remember that they did. It is possible I might have gone over there and been told that it was done. Q. You received your information as to these injuries to the property from sources outside of them? — A. It is my understanding of it that I went immediately and got it direct from them. Q. But you had learned of it before you went there; and when you stated to them that it had been done, what reply did you get? — A. Why, I remember a part of one re- ply, " that it was no larceny at all. " fAN.) Have yon sought work in this labor market, or railroad work where men receive $1.50 or $1.75 aday ? — A. I do not want any at present. Q. Why not ? — ^A. Simply because I do not want to work while it is so hot. Q. Do you lay off during the heated portion of each year ? — A. Yes, sir. WALLACE W. WILSON sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Qaestion. Were you watchman at Red River upon the Iron Mountain Railroad at any time? — Answer. Yes, sir; I commenced there the 1st of July, 1885, and left in October, 1885. Q. Why did you leave ? — A. Just an order for me to leave by the bridge and build- ing department. Q. It was a removal, as you understood ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What were you removed for ? — A. I could not find out. Q. Have you ever learned what was the cause ? — A. No, sir. Q. What were your duties ? — A. To keep the draw in order and watch the bridge generally ; twenty-four hours' watch ; I was to see the bridge after all trains passed, and make a report of all high water and drift, &c. Q. How long were you upon the bridge ? — ^A. I was there nearly all the time from July 1 to October 25. Q. Had you an assistant ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. How much time each day did you spend on the bridge ? — A. Twenty out of the twenty-four hours. Q. Who had charge of the other four hours ? — A. It was left without a watchman because no trains were running. Q. You took your sleep while no trains were running? — A. Yes. Q. What pay did you receive? — A. Sixty dollars per month'. Q. Were you ever in the hospital ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. When was that? — A. From May till June. Q. What was the trouble with you there? — A. I had rheumatism from working in the Red River the latter part of April. Q. Did you remain there until you were well? — A. No, sir; I was discharged, be- cause they could not do me any good I suppose. Q. Were you discharged on the advice of the physician? — A. Yes, sir; he had done no goad for me, and did not think he could. ,Q. Do you claim that your discharge as a watchman was in violation of the agree- ment of March 15, 1885?— A. Yes, sir. Q. On what grounds ? — A. Without notice or without any cause. 424 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. You claim that yon should have had notice or some excuse t— A. They could giv* me some reason, and gave me no notice. JAMES F. HANFORD sworn and examined. , By Mr. Parker : Q. Where do you reside? — A. At Beattyville. •Q. How far is that from Little Rock?— A. About 80 mUes. Q. What is jour business? — A. I am in the lumber business. Q. Are you Jamiliar with the lumber business done on this road? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And'have been for some time ? — A. I have several mills. Q. Can you tell me about the amount of lumber annually handled upon the road, or any portion of it? — A. Only about our own. We handle about 800 cars a year. Q. From what p6ints is the shipping of lumber done ? — A, ITrom the South to the West. ^ ., , Q. Are there lumber riills along a large portion of the road ? — A. The mills are on . an average two or three miles apart. Q. What is the lumber cut ?— A. Yellow pine and oat. . Q. And for what markets ? — A. For the Western market. Q. What dimensions are cut ? — A. Cut in building material and flooring, and bridge timber,.and such stuff as that. Q. Is it shipped to other States ?— A! It is shipped to Kansas, or the greater portion of it. <}. Give me your idea of the number of men employed in that business upon this Iron Mountain Railroad. — A. If I give about 40 men to a mill, I guess there will he 5,000 men among all the mills from nere to Texarkana. Q. And from here North how is it ? — A. I am not acquainted with the mills North. ■Q. What was the effect of the strike upon the employment of these men ? — A. Well, all of ours were laid off ; and I understand the rest were, too. ■Q. Would you judge that to be caused by the strike?— A. We could not ship any- tTiing. .Q. You may explain the effect of the strike upon the lumber business and the men -employed. — A. It was very detrimental to the lumber business while the strike was •on. Some of them had to turn their cattle out, for they could not get feed there oa account of the trains not running, or provisions, and it stopped the lumber business. Q. How as to the shipment of lumber ? — A. That was very detrimental, for we could mot ship it. Q. How was it as to the stoppage of orders? — A. If we cut to orders we could not fill them on that account, and the consequence was that they had to go elsewhere for their lumber. ■Q. What effect had the fact of their going elsewhere ? — A. It had this effect. They got their orders filled, and we missed the season's business by it. Q. Did the season promise well? — A. It promised better than usual. •Q. What proportion of mills are there, Comparatively, north and south of Little Eock ? — J^. Well, there are a great many more south than north. Q. How far north does this lumber business extend upon that road ? — A. I do not know the northern part of it ; I am only acquainted with it about Beattyrille. JOHN C. WEED recalled and examined. By Mr. Parker : IJuestion. Where do you reside ? — Answer. At Texarkana. Q. Have you been engaged in the lumber business in this State ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have. Q. Have you made an estimate of the number of men employed in the lumber busi- ness upon the Iron Mountain Railroad ? — A. The secretary of the - association, with headquarters at Texarkana, and myself, made an estimate of the number of men that were thrown out of employment in Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana — all those that were within the scope of this lumber association. We estimated that ■90,000 men are employed by the 3,000 saw-mills that comprise this lumber associa- 'tion, and we estimated the general average number of men employed in the mills at 30. Q. Then you computed that 90,000 workmen were thrown out of employment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And they would represent how much on an average? — A. Three persons. Q. Then there are 90,000 workmen, and an average of three to the family in addi- ■tion, that yon would make as the nnmber failing to receive support ou account of the strike ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are there any other statistics that you can give us ? — A. We computed the gen- eral average of wagos at |1.50 a day, and a general average of those who were de- pendent upon the pay would be 360,000 people, who were virtually, for the time being. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 425 •«nt off from supplies for the support, including workmen and their families, and that they were virtually thrown out of employment for that time. Q. How lon^ were tbey thrown out of employment? — A. In some portions of the Territory for six weeks and some probably two weeks, different times. Q. What is your judgment as to the average time they were all thrown out? — A. I would say one month. Q. Are there any other results that you can state that occur to you? — A. One bad feature in connection with the strike, as regards the Iron Mountain Road was, the mill men on that road were compelled to get their supplies, or a good many of them were, by express, owing to there being no freight fs^cilities ; and this was done at a large expense. Q. What kind of lumber does your yellow pine come into competition with ? — ^A. White pine. Q. What effect has the stoppage had upon your trade as to points where parties usually stocked up ? — ^A. We know of instances within our trade where parties in- formed us that their yards had to be stocked up, and they were compelled to have a supply to meet the demand. Consequently they bought white pine where they would have bought yellow pine if they could have had it snipped over these roads. Q. And therefore they have formed other relations with other business men, who ■handle a different kind of lumber to supply the market that you were supplying ; that is a fact, is it ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Anything further occur to you ? — A. No more than it has injured bur general '1>usiness in the spring trade, as we call it. HENRY J. ROBERTSON sworn and examined. By the Chairman : Question. Are you a Knight of Labor?— Answer. I am sir. Q. How long have you been a Knight of Labor ? — A. About fourteen months, sir. Q. What position do you occupy, if. any, in the local assembly to which you belong? — A. I am simply a member, sir. Q. Have you occupied any position in the assembly ? — A. Well, I was a member of the executive board about three weeks. Q. The local executive board, or the district executive board? — A. The local execu- tive board. Q. Why was the strike ordered ? — A. Well, on account of grievances that the men had against the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Q. On what questions did the assembly vote? — A. They voted on the question of -Hall's discharge, on the question of raising the wages of unskilled labor to the amount •of 11.50 a day, and the recognition of our order by the railroad officials. Q. As such, or committees of your order ; which do you mean ? — A. The recogni- tion that the order should send committees to be recognized by the officials. Q. Were you an employ^ of the railroad on the 6th of March? — A. I was, sir. Q. What position did you fill ? — A. I was transfer clerk. Q. Do you still occupy that position f — A. No, sir. Q. How does that happen ? — A. Well, I went back to work on the 2d of April and -on the 28th I was discharged. Q. Who discharged you ? — A. Mr. Powers ; he relieved me ; he put a man in my 4)lace. Q. Who is he ? — A. He is the freight agent. Q. What reason, if any, did he assign for your discharge? — A. None, sir; I did not ask him for any. Q. Had any difficulty occurred between you and him, any misunderstanding ! — ^A. -Not in the matter of business. Q. Had yon any misunderstanding ?—^A. I had some sharp words with him astothe interests and rights of laboring men. He did not quite agree with me. Q. Was it on tho.t account he discharged you? — A. I do not know; I never asked •him. I did not ask the reason of my discharge. Q. Do you know why you were discharged ? — A. No, sir. Q. Have you any objection to stating how you voted upon the proposition submit- ted to the local assembly by the district executive board before the strike was or- dered ? — A. Not in the least. Q. How did you vote upon the proposition to strike in case Hall was not reinstated ? — A. Well, 1 voted on the three general propositions on one vote. Q. Were not they submitted to you singly ?— A. Not if 1 understand and recollect aright ; 1 have a recollection thait we voted on them collectively. Q. I understand that before a district executive board has the power to order a strike the local assemblies must by vote agree to sustain the district assembly in which you belong. Now, there were three propositions submitted ; did you vote upon them ■separately or vote upou them collectively? — A. I am not prepared to say, but I voted •on each nronosition. 426 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Do you know wlietlier the majority of your local assembly voted as you did f — A. No, sir ; it was a secret ballot. Q. Does not somebody know how eacb assembly votes ?— A. I never knew. Q. Who does know ?— A. Well, the district executive board. Q. How do thev ascertain ? — A. By counting the ballots. Q. The ballots are sent up to them ?— A. That is as I understand it. Q. Then the local assembly does not know how it votes ? — A. That is how I under- stand. ' . Q. Did not the officers of the local assembly connt the ballots and determine whether the assembly voted in ihe affirmative or negative? — A. I do not recolleot. Q. What is the rule ? — A. I am not acquainted with the by-laws at all. Q. cBy Mr.BucHANAN.) You know what you did?— A. I know I voted in the affirm- ative on the three questions. Q. (By the Chairman.) What security have you that the district assembly (we will presume they are honorable men) did not give a result that was different to what the vote would have been it counted by the local assembly ? — A. None at all. Q. Do 1 understand you to say that the ballots are cast secretly and sent up to the district assembly, and that it is with them to decide whether there shall be a strike or not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not think your system needs remodeling ? Do you not think that the local assemblies ought to have some rights in determining how the vote shall be- counted?— A. We have ; we send a man to the district assembly, so that he should, carry out our purposes and see that our wishes were carried out. Q. Did this local assembly have a representative on the district executive board at Marshall? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How many local assemblies are fembraced in District Assembly No. 101?— A. I; cannot tell. ' . * Q. How many constitute the executive ? — A. One member from each assembly. Q. Are you not mistaken about that ?— A. That is as I understand it ; we send one delegate. Q. Have 5,000 assemblies 5,000 members on the executive board, or each local as- sembly a representative on the district executive ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you not confound delegates with members of the executive board of each, assembly? — ^A. I am speaking of delegates going to Mn.r8hall. Q. But I am talking of the distiict executive board, of which Martin Irons is chair- man; has your local assembly a representative on that ? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. Has every local assembly a representative on that board ? — A. No, sir, Q. Do you know anything about any grievances in your local assembly, and, if so, . by whom were they prepared ? — A. I know of two that were prepared by the bridge- and building department. Q. Were they submitted to the local grievance committee ? — A. Yes, sir; I will not be certain as to whether the first one was or not. Q. Was the second one ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How do you know it was submitted ? — A. I was present. Q. Did you present the grievances to the local grievance committee ? — A. No, sir ; I did not present it, but I wrote it myself. The first was sent by the men of the de- partment themselves and I wrote them an answer. That was relative to the mea^ waiting here so long for their pay after being discharged, and Mr. Dick said he would rectify it as soon as possible. Then this other grievance was gotten out. I wrote it myself and delivered it to Mr. Moore, the foreman of the bridge and building yard at Baring Cross. Q. What disposition was made of that ? — A. It is my impression it was delivered to- Mr. De Lay. He could give you some slight information on that matter. It was pub- lished in the Laredo (Missouri) Republican. I saw anjf number of copies of that grievance petition, and almost word for word as I wrote it. If I recollect right, it stated there that the petition had been sent to Mr. Hayes to be brought before this- committee. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) But we are trying to'find out if it ever got to the railroad officials ? — A. That I cannot say. Q. (By the Chairman.) You have no general knowledge of what the bridge and i building men testified about, have you ? — A. I think they testified to what were the facts. I used to be the bridge and building department clerk. Q. Do you know that any records are kept in that department of the trestles burned and the number of bridges burned? — A. Yes, sir; there is a record of that kind kept. Q. Do you know whether snch a record was kept during the time of the strike? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you go out on the strike ? — A. I did, sir. Q. Why did you go out in the strike? — A. I have to say I went out on the strike after all other means had been used to bring about an adjustment of grievances that we had as Kuights of Labor, and that it was the last resort, and ordered for that pur- pose. LABOIl TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 42 T Q. Was that a fact, or was it because yoa were ordered ont by your superior ofScei f — A. It was because I was ordered ont. Q. Did you say that all other means had been exhausted for obtaining redress of the grievances complained of? — A. I did, sir. Q. Why did you not go out on a strike by yourself prior to being ordered outt— A. Well, I would have been isolated. Q. Is it not a fact that you went out because you were ordered out? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did Martin Irons order you out on account of the grievances that you had pre- pared ? — ^A. I stated that to be in part. I said that that was part of the grievances. Q. When did you get your first knowledge that the strike was ordered?— A. I was working at the Fort Smith crossing, which is about a quarter of a mile below the shops. My business took me up into the yard, and I found the shops all closed down, the machinery stopped, and the men all gone out. Q. Then you were surprised, and you knew no cause of strike ; you had no idea that the strike had been ordered, had yout— A. Previous to that I had no knowledge that the strike was going to be ordered. Q. Did you know that these grievances were under consideration and if not re- dressed the strike was going to be ordered ? — A. Yes, sir ; I presumed so. Q. Then, at the time the strike was ordered, you did not know the cause that led to its being ordered ; but yon supposed that yoa knew ? — A. I supposed that tho grievances had been properly presented. Q. Did you think that the discharge of Hall and the failure of the Texas and Pacific officials to reinstate him was the cause of the strike ? — A. Not that solely. Q. Did you think the strike had been ordered previous to the presentation of all grievances ? — A. No, sir ; I did not. Q. I am requested to ask you whether you thought the superior officers of the com- pany always courteous and polite to their employes? — A. Well, yes; where I have been employed ; they have always treated me with courtesy, except I had some little difierence with Mr. Powers upon the question of labor. Q. Do you know anything about a black list? — A. Yes, sir; I know something about a black list. Q. What do you know ? — A. I have some papers in my possession giving the his- tory of how a man who was discharged from Fredericktown, Mo., was unable to get work on the Northern and Chicago and Minneapolis Boad on account of being followed by a black list. Q. How do you know that ? — A. I have the papers here ; they were given to me specially to present to you gentlemen. Q. What do they purport to be ? — A. This is a letter from the man to rae, but I know nothing of the facts myself. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan. ) At the time you found the strike was ordered did j ou im- phcitly obey the order and go out ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you did so because yon had faith in the propriety and justice of the sti'ike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And you also had faith in your superiors having exhausted every reasonable means to reach an adjustment of the difficulty before they ordered it? — ^A. Yes, sir; I had. Q. And you exercised that faith without making any independent investigation of your own into the facts as to whether they had or not? — A. Yes, sir. Q. If it should appear that they had not exhausted every reasonable means to secure an adjustment after ordering a strike, you would feel that you had been imposed upon, would you not ? — A. Well, yes, I should, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge or any testimony, or any means of determining in your own mind, that the grievances formulated by you ever reached the proper official of the road ? — ^A. I have not, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge as to whether Martin Irons exhausted every reason- able means to secure an adjustment of the Hall difficulty before he ordered the strike? — A. I have not. Q. \Yhat wages did you receive at the time yon left the employment of the com- pany ? — ^A. Seventy dollars a mouth. Q. What were your duties ? — ^A. I was transfer clerk. Q. What were the duties of transfer clerk ? — A. To receive and record the numbers- of all cars in the yard at Baring Gross, and I was afterwards employed in receiving cotton at the compress for some time. Q. What were your hours of duty at the time of the strike? — A. About ten and eleven hours a day ; in the winter time a great many more. Q. They would vary with the amount of traffic over the road ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You stated that at the time j'ou left the employment of the company you had some sharp words with, I think, Mr. Powers. Will you state whether that conversa- tion became personal in its terms ? — A. There was nothing personal, except that his- 428 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. views and mine did not agree, and we were rather pointed in our remarks. There was no abusive language, no insinuating remarks, and nothing insulting passed. Q. Did you refer to each other in uncomplimentary terms ? — A. No, sir. Q. You say that one of the causes of the strike, or one of the propositions upon which you voted, was the recognition of the order. Tell me what you mean by that term, " recognition of the order "?-^A. That the company should recognize a commit- tee of the Knights sent to them with any grievance from any members of our order. Q. But what do you mean by the word "recognize"? — A. That they would receive them as a body and treat with them. Q. You do not mean necessarily to receive them as a committee of any particular order, but receive them and listen to their statements? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Then this phrase " recognition of the order" is what you understand to mean simply a desire that the company shall receive a committee sent by one of your bod- ies bearing grievances ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. And is not a mere stickling for the name of being "officially recognized"; am I correct? — A. I do not quite understand "official recognition." Q. I mean that you do not contend that the officials should receive any member in that committee as a committeeman, or as a master mechanic, or as a member of the •executive board, but shall receive him because of his official position as a bearer of grievances from your order f — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Do you understand that a committee of Knights of Labor fromeome otherplace, and some other employment, entirely disconnected withtheroad, shall be recoived,by the railroajd officials to submit grievances of employes on this road ; is that what you mean? Or do you mean the committee is to be constituted of i em- ployes of the system ? — A. I think it is the same principle. I think if a committee is sent from the Iron Mountain Eoad, it should be presented by Iron Mountain men. Q. Mr. Martin Irons is not on the Iron Mountain road. He lives at Sedalia, which is on a different division of the Missouri Pacific from this; he is not on the Iron Mountain road ? — A. No, sir. Q Do you mean that Mr. Martin Irons should be received or not received by the Iron Mountain road ? — A. I think that the Knights wish that he should be taken into the committee and that he should be received. Q. That is just where the officials and you differ ? — A. If the Iron Mountain road and the Missouri Pacific were under different managements it would be a different thing. Q. The meaning of the reply you give is that all employes under one system, if the «mployes be thousands of miles apart, should be recognized to present grievances of members here, for instance? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Is this one of the reasons that were assigned: That with employers proposing to mediate for them and to present their grievances to the raUroad officials, some excuse would afterwards be made to have them discharged on account of the official act they took in presenting grievances? — A. No, sir; I think not. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) Then you regard the parties that take the grievances as ■simply a vehicle of transmission ? — A. That is all. Q. And for your purposes it is indifferent to you whether they are employed on this roaji or any other road ? — A. I do not want to go on record in that way. I do not think that a man working for the Fort Smith road ought to be brought into a com- mittee to present grievances for men working on the Iron Mountain road. Q. Do you not understand that is what is claimed in the phrase ' ' recognition of the order" ?— A. I do not. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) How many strikers were there on the Iron Mountain road?— A. I cannot say. Q. Have you not some knowledge of the number of strikers that have gone out on the Southwest system on this strike?— A. No, sir; I have no idea. Q. (By the Chairman.) You believe in strikes as ordered ? — ^A. I believe in arbitra- tion first. Q. I did not ask that question. — A. I believe in strikes as a last resort. Q. What possible good would a peaceable strike effect ?— A. In the future, when all labor is recognized and the organization which we are striving for is completed, I do not think that when men walk out peaceably there will be meu found to take their places. Q. You think that the future result will be beneficial? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Meanwhile what becomes of your families in case yon do not get employment ?— A. Personally I can get employment. Q. If these meu who know nothing else but the railroad business strike peaceably, and their places are immediately filled and business goes on in its usual channel, is not the result disastrous to the strikers ? — A. For the time, certainly. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You have heard Mr. Powderly's views on strikes ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you agree with them ?— A. Yes, sir. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 42^ Q. Doe8 not he oppose stTikes ? — A. I tliink he opposes too great use of them, but does not go to the extent of no use for them. Q. In his last circular does not he oppose thera under all circumstances f — A. I think not. Q. Does he oppose violence to persons and property ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you ?— A. I do, sir. Q. Do you not regard the man, a Knight of Labor, who takes possession of property ■which is not his, prevents its use, or who uses violence to persons who have obtained employment in the place of the strikers, as an enemy to the members of the order ? — A. I do. Q. Is notthat position held generally by the better informed members of the order f — A. Yes, sir; decidedly. Q. But have those views been publicly proclaimed by any of them here since the commencement of the strike ? — A. Well, I am not a public man. I have counseled against violence of any kind either to person or property, and for two reasons : first, that I considered it wrong and unbecoming a Knight of Labor to do so ; and another cause, it was something for the railroad company to get a hold on us for. Q. In other words, that the use of violence either to person or property would hinder rather than help the progress of your order ? — A. I do think so. I think it would hinder rather than help the progress of all laboring classes. Q. (By Mr. Paeker.) Of the 10,000 men on the Southwestern system that were thrown out of employment by the strike about 3,000 were Knights of Labor ? — A. I cannot say what proportion of men were Knights of Labor ; the proportion is not veri- fied here in Little Rock by any means. Q. You have heard a statement of a witness here that about 90,000 men were thrown out of employment in the lumber business? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, to the 90,000 lumbermen add, say, 10,000 men employed in the railroad business not striking, and rating their wages at $1.50 a day, will you tell me what right you had to strike and prevent these men from earning |l.')0,000 a day t — A. W& never prevented any of them fcom earning $150,000. Q. That ia the way you answer it t — A. Yes, sii. The Bubcominittee then adjbnmed to meet the other subcommittee at Saint Looia^ Mo. TESTIMONY TAKEN BY COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE AFTER REUNITING. Saint Louis, Friday, May 14, 1886. The special committee to investigate the labor troubles in the Southwest, in lUi- nois, Missouri, Kansas, Texas, and.Arkansas, which had been pursuing their labors in two subcommittees, met at Saint Louis this day, in the judges' chamber in the custom- house, and proceeded to take the following testimony as of the whole committee, Hon. A. G. Curtin presiding : TIMOTHY J. CANTY sworn and examined. By Mr. Buenes : i Question. State wherein you have been wronged by the testimony of any witness, and anake your own statement in contradiction of it. — Answer. I live in East Saint Louis, and I was a deputy sheriff. The sheriff c}aim8 that he requested me to disperse the ■crowd where the shooting occurred. I have a paper here to show how matters were. I told him that my family was sick, and that I was on my way home to them. He said there was a crowd he wanted me to disperse. I had requested his vote for secretary, and I told him I was not going to disperse that crowd, and he then said " I will fix you," and he started up, and he was actually drunk at the time ; I thought so to the best of my opinion. At this time I think he was doing more cursing than anybody else, and he was making more noise than any of the strikers. I am not a Knight of Labor at all. Mr. Daltoil was standing close' by me at the time it happened — this gentleman here. Q. Is there anything else you desire to state ? — A. I can state that I am a special ■deputy marshal there now, and he is always trying to get up a row. Mr. BURNES. Just make yonr statement as to what affects yourself and as to what you think is wrongly charged to you. The Witness. To the best of my opinion it is this way : that if we had had the right kind of sheriff we would not have had this riot or strike there in East Saint Louis at all. JOHN DALTON sworn and examined. By Mr. Buenes : Question. What has the newspaper said about you ? — Answer. Nothing, sir. Q. Do you desire to make any personal explanation ? — A. I do not know that it would be of any use. Q. Have you been assailed by any witness ? — A. No, sir. Q. Then you have no testimony to give ? — A." Unless you want to make any inquiry ■about the shooting and all that. GEORGE M. JACKSON sworn and examined. By Mr. Parker : Question. Where do you reside ?^An8wer. At Saint Louis, Mo. Q. Did you hear or read the evidence of E. F. Walsh in relation to the statement made by Martin Irons about the 17th of April last ? — A. I was present and heard the testimony. Q. Did you hear that speech ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The witness is reported as having said that Martin Irons Said " Talk to the scabs ; go to their houses and talk to their wives ; make them quit. If they won't quit, give them some pills. To hell with the Chinese. To hell with the scabs. We fought the Chinese fight and won ; we will win this fight." Did Martin Irons use those words ? — A. He said the first part of that. Q. Just state how much of that he stated. — A. He said to go and persuade them, and do everything in the world to get them to quit, but to do no violence ; and he 430 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 431 might in tlie latter part of the speech have said something about purging them out ; bat he never said anything so that it could be construed that it meant violence. Q. If you can, give his language.— A. That they must be peaceable, and that the committee was prepared to make a peaceable iight, and if they would only do it peaceably they could win this fight. That they must go to the parties at work and go to their wives and persuade them and tell them they would pay their grocer's bill and board them, and that they would support them; but that no violence must be done. He did probably say in connection with that that we are going to win this fight, if you will be quiet and peaceable ; and there was something said about giv- ing them pills; but in a jocular way, that no one could construe as meaning any vio- lence. • Q. He spoke of giving them pills ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What kind — lead pills ? — A. I do not think he meant that. Q. What kind of pills do you believe he meant? — A. I think he meant something about purging them ; I went over there with Mr. Irons, and at his request. Q. Did he in substance or effect say " To hell with the scabs" ? — A. I never heard it ; I do not know that he did. Q. You must know'definitely whether he used that extravagant language. — A. I -am not definite about that; but in my best impression nothing of that kind was enid. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you speak on that occasion ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you one of their orators t — A. I hold no position at all ; I sometimes talk for them. Q. You addressed that meeting ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you wish to make any statement as to what Mr. Irons said to you as to his intentions in his meeting ? — A. In going over the bridge with him he said he merely wished I would make a talk to them ; as we were going over the substance of his con- versation was that we should advise the men to keep cool and commit no violence. It was just after the shooting there, and men were greatly excited. Q. Is there any other matter that you wish to state ? — A. Not particularly. Q. (By the Chairman.) What is your business f — A. I am engaged in stock raising -on a stock ranch. Q. (By Mr. Burnbs.) Was Easper Heep at that meeting ? — A. No, sir. Q. You did not see him at that meeting f — A. No, sir. Q. Did you take any part in the strike of the 6th of March ? — A. I took part to do .all I could to make peace. Q. Did you take any part in acts of violence as against the railroad company t — A. No, sir. I think I am charged with being in a conspiracy to cut the telegraph. Q. You are charged with that ? — A. I am charged and indicted for that, but did not Ao it. JOHN H. OSBORNE sworn and examined. By Mr. Bubnbs : ' Question. State your residence, full name, and occupation. — Answer. My residence is Chamois, Mo. ; and I am a stationary engineer ; my name is John H. Osborne. Q. (By Mr. Parker.) Were you one of the strikers at Chamois? — A. I am not a railroad man. Q. Are you a Knight of Labor ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was your business at that time ? — ^A. My business was running a station- ary eisgine. Q. In connection with what business ? — A. Working for a contractor. Q. What was the contractor's business ? — A. Supplying piles for the railroad. Q. Which road ? — A. The Missouri Pacific. Q. Were yon an official of that assembly of Knights of Labor of which you were a member? — ^A. I was a member of this executive board, and I wish to say I am master workman of Local Assembly 3771. ' Q. Now, as an official of that assembly, would you have knowledge of the matters which led up to the strike at that place ? — ^A. Will you permit me to make a state- ment as best I can in answering your question ? The proposition was submitted to the assembly in this way : First. " Will you sustain the action of the executive board of your assembly ? " Being a mixed assembly in which I was a member, we hesitated In regard to complying instantly or directly with the order as to the matter of going out ; but finding that a strike had been ordered, we decided to act with them. That was on the 7tli, I presume. Q. (By the Chairman.) The day after the strike?— A. That is what I remember about the date. The assembly, as I was saying, before going out, being a mixed as- sembly, we thought we would ask of our executive afterwards if that action should be taken. We had canvassed that question, and had thought it best to let it remain 432 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. ■until tbe executive ofacei-received some instructions, and he came into possession of certain information that led him to believe that it was to our best ' interests to go out immediately, and we went out. By Mr. Parker : Q. You are an official of the Knights of Labor here, I suppose ?— i. No, sir. Q. How many railroad men were there in that assembly ?— A. About how many I cannot say; I presume half of us. , . , j j. * -i « » Q. What was the formal ground of the strike, as stated in the order to strike?— A. I did not see the order myself. Q. What was the tbrnial ground of the strike, as stated in tbe formal resolution^., preliminary to the strike?— A. I do not know whether I understand your question. I. , did not see the order. Q. Not the order, but the formal resolutions acted upon by the assembly; so far^as your assembly was concerned, what was the ground of the strike f— A. Tbe grounds- were upon the presumption of general grievances between the railroad company and the Knights of Labor. . Q. What specific grievances ?— A. I do not think it was any particular grievance; I think it was a culmination ; judging from observation, it was a culmination of grievances ; 1 cannot say explicitly. Q. Was not the subject of it stated in your formal resolutions ?— A. I have not given . any formal resolutions. Q. No ; but were there not some ? — A. I do not know. Q. The strike was not made at random ; what was the basis of the order ?— A. I say- I did not see the order. Q. What were the formal resolutions upon vihioh your assembly acted, or what preliminary action by your assembly was taken immediately preceding the order to strike? — A. I do not know of anything except the order to strike. Q. Do you know of any specific grievance upon which you struck ? — A. I know the alleged grievances, which I saw with our board of grievances. Q. Do you mean those that were talked of in any general discussion, or a demandi that was embodied in some resolutions or proposition ? — A. I must say that I am not aware of any preliminary resolution or proposition. Q. Or embodied grievance ? — A. As being the basis on which we struck ? Q. Yes. — A. If you ask as to grievances Q. I ask as to grievances embodied in a written proposition or resolution forming: the foundation or basis for the strike before the order to strike came. — A. I do not> know that I can answer your question, unless it was on my own inference; upon an,, accumulation of grievances. Q. What specific grievance? — A. That brings me down to the order. Q. Yes, that was Specified in the order or not, or some resolution or some document t' — A. I do not know of any. Q. No loose general talk, but specific complaint ? — A. They are the specific griev- ances of railroad men in their particular localities. Q. Do you wish to state them ?— A. CTs, sir ; if it is your wish. Q. Was it upon these grievances that you struck ? — A. They were part of the whole, I presume. Q. Well, you must know about them, I reckon ?— A. I say they were part of the whole. Q. Upon which yon struck ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You may state what they were. — A. I think they were that the wages were not restored to what they had been in September, 1884. Not being a railroad man, my wages were not in that comjilaint. That was the complaint. Q. Who were they whose wages were not restored? — A. Yard men. Q. Do you know what they had during September, 1884 ? — A. No, sir. Q. Do you know what they were reduced to ? — A. I do not. Q. You have no specific information on that ? — A. Only genera,l talk as a member of ihe executive board and a member of the grievance committee, and that statement of grievances which were submitted to our district officers embodying these specific grievances. Q. You may go on and state if the grievances came before yonr board ; yon may state what they were and what became of them. — A. The grievances were that the wages have not been restored according to the- understanding or contract made in 1885. Q. You refer to the agreement made March 15, 1885 ? — A. That they had not been re- stored to the wages from which they were reduced in September, 1884. When the re- duction was made I did not know and I did not inquire what was the particular date of the reduction. Q. What grievance have the section men in that respect? — A. Those that I refer to were the yard men. Q. Are there any other grievances that came before you as a member of this griev- ance committee ? — A. The blacksmith and his helper at Chamois were discharged on. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 433 three days' notice. That was reported to me as a grievance. These were all the griev- ances that were subuiittel to our district officers. Q. What was done with them ? — A. They were left in charge of the chief executive officer. Q. Do you kuow whether they were presented to the railroad company ? — A. I know they were transferred to our district officers, and I understood they were presented. Q. You are informed that they were presented, but you have no personal knowledge of the fact ? — A. I have no personal knowledge, but it was reported to me that they were. Q. You understand that those grievances were a part upon which the strike was ordered t — A. That is my understanding. Q. Had the strike the effect of throwing you out of employment ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you any knowledge of the station agent at that place advising this strike ? — • A. It was so reported to our assembly. I had no conversation with him in regard lo it, but I saw one of the committee who informed him that the men had gone out. He said that that was right, that they had acted as men to quit ; and the committee in- formed him that the yardmen struck. Q. Was there a law and order league composed there at any time ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When f — A. I do not kuow the exact date. Q. Abont what date ? — A. It has been originated and passed since the strike. Q. Of whom was that law and order league composed? — A. Who are its members f Of course, not being a member, I do not know anything abput its real membership. Q. To answer the question yon ought to have definite information ; if you have no knowledge about it, of course you cannot answer ; if you have -we would like to have an answer. — A. I have talked with our citizens on the street who professed to say- that they are members of the law and order league. Q. Taking the statement of the men who say they are members of the law and order league, of whom is the league composed? — A. I have talked with three or four, and as well as my knowledge is, it is that the proprietors and barkeepers of saloons are members. The last defeated mayor of our city is a member, is my understanding, and some several deserters from the Knights of Labor; I recognized several of them f and possibly some others. ' Q. Have you any further knowledge in that respect as to the making of the law and order league there ?-^A. Well, if this means any answer to your question I may say that one member of the law and order league was sent to the penitentiary for two years for stealing horses and a second one had been held for trial. Q. They are not now active members of the law and order league? — A. I presume not. Q. Can you give us any further information as to the law and order league ? — A. lb depends upon what you desire as evidence and whether you would take rumor, and not as to what my knowledge is. Q. What is the name of this station agent? — A. H. A. J. Sexton. Q. Was he a Knight of Labor at any time ? — A. I am. Q. Did he become a member of the law and order league? — A. Yes, he did. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) You never saw the formal order for the strike?-^ A. Na, sir. Q. At the time it was issued what position did you occupy in your assemWy ? — A. I was simply a member. Q. Was it read in your assembly ? — A. My recollection is that the officer of the as- sembly to whom the order came announced the information to the assembly in his 'twn language. I do not remember him reading any particular order. Q. Is it possible to procure for this committee that order, or that copy of it which <;ame to your assembly, or any copy ? — ^A. I do not know. My presumption is that it could be. Q. But you only have a presumption in that respect ? — A. I presunae that all of our oorrespondence with our officials is on file with the recording secretary. It is gen- erally at his disposal, and such matters are generally required to be kept on file. Mr. Buchanan. Mr. Chairman, I wish to inquire whether a copy of that order ha.9 been procured. We have not been successful in obtaining a copy. The ChaikmaN. We have not obtained a copy. We have endeavored to get a copy, but have not obtained one to put in our record. We have no copy of the formal order. Mr. Buchanan. We have had the substance, or the alleged substance, of the order detailed by witnesses, but not a dngle copy of the order has been produced; and it seems singular that an order which has been so widely disseminated as that cannot be procured. I for one hope that some assembly will furnish a copy. Q. (By the Chairman, to witness.) Do you think you can get a copy of it? — A. I think I can if I had time. Q. (By Mr. Buchanan.) At the time you spoke of, when certain grievances were presented to your assembly to vote upon, do you remember whether or not the iffopo- 3984 LAB 3 23 434 LABOR TKOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST.' fiitions wliich your assembly were to vote on were in writing ?— A. The propositions— the grievances do you mean ? Q. Yes, sir.— A. There was no proposition of grievances. Q. I will put it in other language. Your assembly voted whether or not they would or would not sustain the district executive hoard in a certain line of action ?— A. My recollection was that the question was "Will you sustain the action of your executive board?" ' Q. In what respect?— A. I cannot say. ■, ^ . , , x, Q. "Was not the "respect" or the matters in which the hoard desired to be sus- tained laid before your assembly in some formulated manner?— A. Not at that time that I am aware of. 'Q. At any time?— A. I have no recollection. Q. How many propositions were voted upon?— A. In what connection do you mean? This proposition was voted upon : " Will you sustain the action of your executive f" Q. Was that the only proposition voted upon?— A. No, sir. Q. Give me the others.— A. The other proposition was, " Shall we strike ? bhall •we go out ?" . ., , T 1 i Q. In those words?— A. "Shall we obey the instructions," possibly; I do not re- Q. Instructions of whom ?— A. The executive of the order ; members of the district Aboard. Q. Instructions of what character?— A. As to a strike, I presume. Q. I ask for no presumption, I ask for the fact. What was embodied in the thing -voted upon ?— A. Well, sir, that is it as I understand it, " WiU you strike, or will you i ' Q. To what point did you go after leaving New York?— A. New Orleans. Q. How long did you live in New Orleans ?— A. Two years. ^ Q. And from that place where did you go ?— A. To Lexington, Ky. Q. How long did yon live in Lexington ?— A. I do not recollect how long. Q. To what place did you go after leaving Lexington ?— A. To Cincinnati. Q. Do you remember liow long you lived in Cincinnati ?— A. I think only a few months. ■■.■,■., ■ Q. From Cincinnati to what place did you go ?— A. I think I went to Hannibal, Mo, Q. Do you remember how long you lived in Hannibal ? — A. I think about a year. Q. From there you went to Saint Louis ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. How long did you live in Saint Louis ?— A. I think about a year. Q. Did you then remove to Sedalia?— A. No, sir; I moved to Lexington, Mo. Q. And'froQi Lexington to what place?— A. I think to Knoxville, Tenn. Q. How long did you live in Knoxville ?— A. I think about a year, sir. Q. And when you left Knoxville to what point did you go ?— A. I think I came to Eichmond, Mo. ;"that is my recollection. Q. How long did you live in Richmond ?— A. I am not positive how long, sir, but about a year, 1 thinlc. Q. Do you remember some of the names of the citizensof Richmond who lived therfr at the time you did ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You remember Judge Dunn, perhaps ? — A. Judge Dunn was one of my particular friends. Q. Was ex-Governor King, Mr. Hughes, and Mr. Wasson? — A. Yes, sir; I was^ pretty well acquainted with them. Q. When you removed from Richmond to what point did you go ? — A. From Rich- mond to Kansas City. Q. How long Q. Is the membership confined mainly to the employes of the Missouri Pacific System? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What is the relation between District Assembly 101 and the general organization, of which Mr. Powderly is the head? — A.' Well the district assembly is composed of all the locals in a certain district, taken up in a certain territory, subject to have their own government and laws. Something like the same as a State would have under the Constitution of the United States. That is about as near as I can describe it. Q. You would then liken your organization, or the principles of the organization, to the Government of the United States ? — A. Y'es, sir. Q. And the relation of the general government of your order to the organization of Assembly No. 101 is like unto the relation between the Government of the United States and the State of Missouri ? — A. 1 think so, sir. That is the way I construe it. Q. You understand that the President of the United States and the Government will not interfere in matters pertaining lo the local government of the people of Missouri without the request of the governor ? — A. That is my understanding. ■ Q. Is it your understanding that, in like manner, the general government of the order of Knights of Labor will not interfere in a matter pertaining to the local gov- ernment of a district assembly except upon the request of the organization of that assembly ? — A. That is my understanding of the condition of the district to the gen- eral assembly. Q. When this strike on the Missouri Pacific system was first agitated, what posi- . tion did you hold in the order and in the organization of District Assembly 101 ? — A. I held the position as master workman of the local assembly, and was likewise recording secretary of the district. • Q. What position did you hold in the order of Knights of Labor and also in the organization of District Assembly 101? — A. I was master workman of the local as- sembly, recording secretary of the district, and likewise chairman of the executive hoard of the district. Q. You were chairman of the executive hoard of District Assembly 101 ? — A. Yes, «ir. Q. What were the powers of the executive hoard of the district assembly ?— A. To carry out the instructions of the district assembly. Q. What representatives of the local assemblies constitute a representation in the -district assembly ? — A. A majority. 438 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. "What Tepresentatives of the local assembly meet in this district assembly; it is not a mass meeting ? — A. A delegate. Q. And these representatives meet and form the district assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That is a representative assembly of all local assemblies? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What representatives from a local assembly meet for the purpose of forming a, district assembly? — A. The local assemblies are represented in a district assembly by delegates. Q. Specially appointed by each local assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. The official position of a man in a local assembly does not give him the ri^ht to- be the representative of his assembly in the district assembly? — A. Not at all, sir. Q. But he is the representative of a local assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you one of the representatives of your local assembly in the district assem- bly ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. When those representatives met and organized who was the chairman prelimi- nary to organization ? — A. N. M. Loviu, of Fort Worth, Tex. Q. What are the officers of the district assembly?— A. Master workman, venerable sage, foremen, recording secretary, financial secretary, and what wo call " unknown knight," and inside and outside doorkeepers. Q. The officers of the district assembly are about the same so far as names and style are concerned as the officers of a local assembly ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. When this assembly of 101 was organized what position did you receive and, hold in the organization ? — A. When it was org'anized ? Q. Yes, sir. — A. That of recording secretary and chairman of the executive board. Q. You have said you were a member of the executive committee? — A. Yes, sir, Q. Were you a member of the first executive committee that was appointed ? — ^A. My recollection is that I was. Q. Have you ever since that time been a member of that committee ?— A. Ever since. Q. And you are now a member of that committee ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you chairman of that committee? — A, Yes, sir. Q. When were you first made its chairman ? — A. My recollection is, at the organi- zation of the district assembly. Q. In this organization when did you commence consideration as to the propriety of the employes of the Missouri Pacific system striking? — A. Ever since the strike of 1885. We have local grievance committees at every point, and these local grievance committees have been annoyed by employes coming to them at any, or almost any, time of day, and almost every day, bringing cases to them of tlie violation of the cou- .tract of 1885. The thing has gone on until shortly before the meeting of the district assembly in Marshall, Tex., when I found it necessary to is.sue a circular to each local assembly on the system. I found that men on the system— seotionmen and others — had not had their pay restored according to contract. I found men were not paid for extra time, according to contract. I found that men were subjected to abuse by petty officers, and the question was considered in my mind until the meeting in Marshall. Previous to the meeting at Marshall I issued a circular to each assembly, asking these two questions. One of these questions was largely discussed in the local assembly, and was the wage that was being paid sectionmeu. I asked these two questions: " Will you sustain your executive board should they demand or request $1.50 per day for unskilled labor— that no less than that be paid for unskilled labor ? " I found that in trying to adjust the grievances of these men with the railroad com- pany — fliat is, the sectionmeu and the yardmen — that the companies refused, or rather ignored, the idea that the contract entered i nto in March covered anything but shopmen, &c. The only way that I could see to settle the matter was to have areoog- nition of the organization, and that the eniployiSs, as belonging to that organization, should have their representatives admitted as counsel for them. So that one of the questions asked was, "Will you sustain your executive board in demanding the rec- ognition of the order?" That was before the meeting at Marshall, and these points were brought before each of the locals, and it was only a question of time, in my mind, when the strike would have been ordered. Considering that we were not pre- pared enough at that time, I tried to put it off as much as possible I had prepared a statement in regard to the matter, which I think will more intelligently bring the- subject before you than by an isolated general statement, and more speedily than by examination. It is a written statement. Q. Can you furnish the secretary of the committee with it?— A. I can, by putting it down in shorthand or having it copied. (Witness proceeded tlieu to read the following statement :) The contract of 1885 reads that the rate of wages paid in September^ 1884, would be restpred to eniploycSs. This part of the contract, at least outside of shopmen, has never been complied with, thus leaving out seotionmen, yardmeu, bridgemen, and- others. This stHtement has been substantiated to you at most points in your travels , on the system. One notable point near at baud, namely, at Chamois, none of the em- LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 439 ploy^s at said point having their wages restored up to the time of the strike, althongB the matter was freqneiitly brought to the notice of the railroad officials by the local hoard. This case is not an isolated one by any means. Again, the contract reads that should it become necessary fOr the company to re- duce expenses it shall be done in the hours worked and not in the number of hands- employed ; said section of the contract has heen repeatedly violated by master me- chanics or superintendents discharging numbers of men without any previous noticft- heing given. Such cases have come to my personal observation both in the Missouri! Pacific Railroad and in the Missouri, Kansas and Texas shops ; one case in particularj. where a whole gang of seotionmen were discharged in Sedalia, and no cause alleged' or notice given except that expenses must be reduced. So it has been time and again in the Missonri, Kansas and Texas shops at said place. Again, accordin g to contract, tea hours should constitute a day's work, and all time over ten hoilrs should be paid for at the fate of time and one-half time. No notice has been paid to this clause, at least outside of shop hands, and in shops only partially. The clause has been flagrantly violated in the ease of bridgemen and night round- house hands, the former having frequently, literally speaking, to be on duty as high: as thirty -six hours at a time. The way that this is done is this. In moving from point. to point the men are required to work all day, and after the day's work is done they are slapped on flat cars loaded with lumber or tools, withont'chance of sleepy, or Sunday is utilized by the company for moving purposes. For this the hands re- ceive no extra pay. In the case of the latter they are compelled to work from twelve- to thirteen hours and get no extra pay. If they complain, the foreman, often with a curse, tells them if they do not \ike it they can go home, and that he (the foreman > will put some one else in their places. On an effort being made by the executive board to adjust the grievances of section,, bridge, or roundhouse men they were flatly told that the contract only covered shop- men, thus leaving out in the cold the very men who needed the most protection,, namely, section or yard men, earning only $1.10 ner day, and perhaps only half time at that. Said cases have been brought before the railroad oflSpials and either ignored or put off by a promise that was never intended to be carried out when made. Local committees in Saint Louis have presented to the highest officials here the articles, setting forth these wrongs, but they have gone on unredressed. But a time comes, when "patience ceases to be a virtue," and the culminating point is reached in th» discharge of C. A. Hall, of Marshall, Tex., a statement of which follows: On February 15, 1H8S, a meeting of District Assembly No. 101 was held in Marshall, Tex., Mr. C. A. Hall, of Marshall, being one of the delegates to said meeting. On. the morning of the 18th the said C. A. Hall, on going to his usual place of work,, namely, the Texas and Pa^iiio shops, according to'promif'e made by him to the gen- eral foreman, Mr. Crosby, said promise being that he, C. A. Hall, should at stated houra each day daring the district meeting visit the shops and give instructions to the meni and likewise see that they had the necessary material. Mr. BuoHAH^AN. I should like to know whether that part of the statement is givers from witness's own knowledge, or information received? The Witness. That will be given as information received. Q. Will you be kind enough to state whether it is from the conversations of Mn, Crosby that it is given, or information from him f A. It is from information by others. ^ The Witness (resuming statement). On attending to said duty and having occa- sion to open his desk, he found a letter therein from Mr. Crosby stating that his serv- ices were no longer required. On reading said letter he immediately went to see Mr„ Crosby, and asked him the reason of his (C. A. Hall's) discharge, to which qnestioni Mr. Crosby replied, " absence without leave," and that he did not want him. any- longer. Mr. Buchanan. Were you present at that interview, or was it reported to youhy others ? The Witness. I was not present, but I have got evidence to prove it, and before I get done you will see it was so. The Witness (continuing). Mr. Hall then came to the district meeting and re- ported his case, thus causing a commotion in said meeting. The almost unauimou» opinion prevailing among the members was that the discharge of Mr. Hall' at that time was a direct thrust or insult offered hy the railroad officials to the organizatiouy and on action of the members the case was referred to the district executive board for immediate action. Of that board I am chairman. On the case being presented to me I immediately went to work on the same in the following manner : Finding: that there were four local assemblies in Marshall, and that each assembly had a Iboal grievance committee, 1 immediately called said grievance committees together and' consolidated thenj, instructing them to elect their chairman, which resulted in the election of C. M. Moore. I then instructed said chairman to have his committee go- and see, or endeavor to ha-ve Mr. Crosby brought before them, and ascertain, by quea- 440 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. *ioning Mr. Crosby, why Mr. Hall was discharged, said committep to report to me at •the close of said conference, which they did, reporting as follows : That Mr. Crosby refused to reinstate Mr. Hall, and that Mr. Crosby had changed his caiise of discharge to that of incompetency. n j ^ j.t. On hearing said report I determined to see Mr. Crosby myself, and called together the executive board for that purpose. We had a conference with Mr; Crosby in. his - office, and put to him the following questions : "Q. Mr. Crosby, what are your reasons for discharging Mr. Hall?— A. Absence ■without leave." To this I replied that T had sworn testimony in my possession from two pai-ties who heard Mr. Hall ask leave of absence and knew that said leave of absence was granted. Mr. Crosby then replied that he had discharged Mr. Hall because he was iucompe- , tent. I then told Mr. Crosby that I had very flattering recommendations in my poa- fiession from some of the highest railroad ofBcials, stating that Mr. Hall was thor- oughly competent, and had put out more work than his predecessors. Mr. Crosby answered he did not care ; he did not want Mr. Hall to work for him, and that if he -was reinstated, it must be from higher authority. Then I put the question to him : " Q. Mr. Crosby, will you, to harmonize matters, believing it to be to the best in- terest of the railroad company and employes, reinstate Mr. Hall ? — A. No ; the men ■would look down on me. " Q. Do you not believe that instead, of looking down on you that the men would Jiave more affection for you in reinstating Mr. Hall ?— A. No ; I cannot reinstate Mr. Hall. He would do me dirt and undermine me. " Q. Mr. Crosby, will you reinstate Mr. Hall if we give you our word of honor that if Mr. Hall neglects his duty or does any dirty work that we will not only sustain you in his discharge but insist that you shall discharge him, we believing such a man detrimental to the organization ? — A. No ; it would be too humiliating to me. "Q. Mr. Crosby, will you, to save trouble and harmonize matters, reinstate Mr. Hall, if not as foreman, in the position he held in the coach shop previous to his ibecoming foreman? — A. No, I will not reinstate him." At this 1 left Mr. Crosby, satisfied in my own mind that we had reached the cul- minating point or straw to break the camel's back, and that I could no longer smooth over the long list of grievances of the employes of the Southwest System, or hold back the demand from them that said grievances should be adjusted. But know- ing that we had'just passed through a severe winter, and many of the employes had no money ahead, I determined to make one more effort to stave off, for awhile at least, the almost inevitable strike ; and hearing that Judge Pardee would pass through Marshall, I determined to board his car and lay the matter before him, which I did on his arrival. After introducing myself to the judge, I asked him the following questions : "Q. Judge, is the Texas and Pacific road now in the hands of the United States Government? — A. Yes. " Q. Judge, if in the hands of the Government, will the workmen be considered as Government employes ? — A. Yes. "Q. Then, Judge, if Government employes, they wiU be subject to laws and regula- tions governing such, will they noij, such as eight hours for a day's work ? " This question rather touched the quick, and his answer was evasive, citing a depuii» marshal in pursuit of e, prisoner and when within reach of him said deputy ceasing IjuTsuit when his eight hours were up. The comparison, I thought, was lame. Re- ferring him to the trouble on the Texas and Pacific, he said that if any trouble ex- isted that if I would send to the receiver at New Orleans, naming Governor Sheldon, that he, the governor, would either come or send a man to Marshall and investigate the matter. I immediately telegraphed to Governor Sheldon stating the case, and received answer that he would be in Marshall next day. On his arrival I boarded his car and had a very short conference with him, he stating that his business was so pressing that he oduld not stay over, but on his arrival in Dallas he would see Gov- ernor Brown and Colonel Noble, as they had more interest in that end of the road than he, and that he would bring them down on Saturday and look into the matter. I asked Governor Sheldon if I, with the executive board, had not better go up with Jiim. He answered "no ;" that he thought everything would be right. I then asked bim — handing him the evidence in my possession, namely, the questions put to Mr. ■Crosby and answers, with the statement of Mr. Hall, and also Hall's recommendations from railroad officials, aud asked him if he had not better take them along. He an- swered that it was not necessary, as Governor Brown Would come with him, as they had other business at Marshall. Saturday came, but no governors. On Sunday Governor Sheldon came alone, and again, ou plea of pressing business, said he could not lay over, but thought that I had better go to Dallas, as they had taken their side of the evidence and were ready. I asked the governor if he would give passes for myself and board. He tried to evade this iu every way, but finally consented to give two passes for the board and one for LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 441 Mr. Hall, and was careful not to give the passes to me, but gave them to Mr. Hall, thus, of course, ignoring us as a committee." Governor Shelden had seen Gould's tool, Brown, and was not himself studying over the situation. With the reluctance in giv- ing passes and the manner of giving them, also that going to Dallas would cut me off from the hooka of the company, also all oral testimony, I thought that it cost nothing for railroad o£Bcials to travel and that Marshall was the proper place to investigate, and I concluded that they had better come there and so telegraphed Governor Brown and Colonel Noble. Receiving no reply to said telegram, after waiting until next day, I telegraphed Colonel Noble asking why he did not answer my telegram. An an- swer came back purporting to come from the operator, stating that Colonel Noble was not in the office. I immediately telegraphed that if Colonel Noble did not answer my telegram by next day at 2 o'clock that I would call out the employes of the Texas and Pacific. Receiving no reply, I did so, at 3 o'clock, instructions having previously been given to all employes to abstain from any act of violence, and that all local committees should see that any one committing violence be punished to the full ex- tent of the law ; also, that committees be appointed to protect company's property -and see that passenger or mail cars be kept running and a requisite number of hands should be furnished at employes' expense. Thus the ball opened. After the employes of the Texas and Pacific had been called out, at the request of the mayor and others a citizens' meeting was held at Marshall and a committee of -citizens appointed to endeavor to bring about a settlement. After several telegrams had passed to and from railroad officials and said committee, the committee gave up their efforts in disgust, finding their services utterly ignored by said officials. Think- ing that we could perhaps settle the difficulty on the Texas and Pacific, and in said set- tilement the grievances on the Missouri Pacific, 1 telegraphed and wrote to Mr. Ker- rigan at Saint Louis to have the railroad officials at said place use their influence to have a speedy settlement of the difficulty and save calling out the Missouri Pacific. The answer was that they would be snubbed for interfering, thus bringing very forcibly to mind my first impression that the placing of the Texas and Pacific in the hands of a receiver was for the purpose of breaking up our organization ; to give, if possible, a -quietus to the effort of organized labor in the eight-hour movement, and, by depre- -ciating the stock of the Texas and Pacific, fill more rapidly the coffers of Jay Gould. •Seeing it was useless to attempt the settlement of grievances aniicably, the Missouri Pacific employes were called out. Instructions were also given to them that no vio- lence be permitted, and considering the number of men out I think said instructions have been well carried out. Leaving Marshall on the 10th of March, I set out for Sedalia, and after being there for a few day.s, received a letter from Mr. Brelton, labor commissioner of Kansas, ask- ing if I would consent to the governors of Kansas and Missouri acting as arbitrators to settle the difficulty, to which 1 replied that 1 would be pleased to have said gov- ernors bring about a meeting of the railroad officials and the executive board of Dis- • i;rict No. 101. After waiting several days for a reply to said letter, I again wrote Mr. Brelton, asking if any steps had been taken by the governors towards the end aimed at. I received a reply that Governor Martin had telegraphed Governor Marmaduke, but had received no reply. Previous to this I had received a communication from District S7, requesting me to call a meeting of five districts, namely, 93, 101, 107, 82, 17» I did so, and telegraphed Mr. Powderly to meet said districts at Kansas City. All responded that they would be represented. The meeting was called for the 18th. ■On said date all of said districts were fully rejiresented, and Mr. Powderly was pres- -ent. On the 20th, Mr. Powderly was notified that the governors of the two States named wished a conference with him and the executive board of 101, said conference to be held at the Coates House. Said conference being held, resulted in the following plan of action : That the governors proceed to Saint Louis andhave a conference with Mr. Hoxie, they, the said governors, to demand of Mr. Hoxie as a basis of settlement the carrying out of the contract of March; 1885, to the spirit and the letter, and to bring around a meeting with said Hoxie and the executive board. No good resulted from said meet- ing, Mr. Hoxie stating to the governors that the contract had not been violated, and that he would not treat or meet a committee of the Knights of Labor and would only treat with employes. But let us for a moment go back to Sedalia. On learn- ing at said place that Mr. Hoxie had signified a willingness to treat with a com- mittee of employes, I telegraphed to him that such a committee would wait on him at any time and place that he might name. Said telegram was sent by Mr. Sibley. Mr. Hoxie answered that he could not see any advantage to be gained from such meeting then. Let us to Saint Louis again. Immediately after the meeting of the governors with Mr. Hoxie, Mr. Hoxie again tried to impress on the public mind that he was anxious to settle the matter, and would meet a committee of employes for that purpose. To test his sincerity in tpat assertion, and to show to the public at whose door the continuance of the strike lay, I determined to again offer a committee ■of employes, and fortunately at this time a committee from Sedalia was suggested, con- 442 LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND "WEST. I sisting of firemen, brakemen, and shop-hands, who went immediately to see Mr. Hoxie; hut again Mr. Hoxie ignores the committee, stating that he could only treat with in- dividuals, but referred them to Mr. Kerrigan. Mr. Kerrigan asked some of them the question if they were strikers, and on answer being made that they were out with the boys, he answered that he could not treat with them at all. So the, committee left him. Shortly after this the general executive board of the Knights of Labor arrived in Saint Louis, and at the request of myself and others visited Mr. Hoxie, and were by him completely snubbed, he (Hoxie) refusing them the common courtesy of being seated ^ and you will remember that Hoxie even refused to see Mr. Powderly as a citizen, he to- use his influence as such in bringing about a settlement. Things went on from this until a committee of citizens of Saint Louis endeavored to arbitrate. They also were ignored by Hoxie, but having the good of the whole community in view, they appealed- to the executive board in the interests of the citizens, and with a like request from your committee, the executive board declared the strike off. You know v.'hether or not the railroad officials have met the action on our part with the magnanimity expected of thera by your own and the citizens' committee. Mr. BuKNES. Now, let me call your attention to the executive board and to the con- sideration of questions bearing upon the strike. What would you say was the first ques-s tion to which the attention of your executive board was directed after you were made- chairman of that board ? The Witness. You have reference to the grievances? Q Or to any matter or thing that induced you to believe that a strike would become necessary in order to secure the rights of the men ? — A. Well, sir, as I said before, the- local grievance committees were being approached by men at all hours and times, by men bringing to them instances of a violation of this contract. It was in regard to over- time and to men being discharged without notice being given. Q. When did you commence the consideration of these grievances ? — A. Shortly after the contract was entered into. Q. Then when your executive committee was organized you went at once to the con- sideration of such questions ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. (By the Chaikman.) Did I not understand you to say that you had been a mem- ber for nine months ? The Witness. Over a year, sir. Q. (By Mr. Bubnes.) These grievances that came before you were first in regard to- the bridges. Was that a subject aboUt wages ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You have stated the grievances, and it has been stated by others, as matters of which the bridgemen complained ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did the trackmen present any grievances? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did they do it directly or through others? — A. Directly in the locals, and the local assemblies have presented them to me. Q. You do not know that they presented them to the local board? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Were you present when trackmen presented them to the local board ?-^A. I have been present on several occasions when these men have come before the local board and. stated their grievances. Q. Do you remember when these grievances were presented to the local board?— A- No, sir; I can only state that it has been ever since the strike in March, 1885. Q, Commencing with March, 1885, when did the first complaint come to you, o"f youD own knowledge, directly from any trackman?— A. Well, I cannot tell you any more definite than to say that shortly after. The men would be telling me about them all the time, and I would refer them to the local assembly. Q. Did these grievances as a rule come from the men themselves or others represent- ing them? — A. Mostly from the men themselves. Q. I will ask you if the local assembly did not direct some one or more members to- go out among the men and ascertain from them their grievances ? — A. Not at that time. Q. Was any such action taken ? — A. Not that I know of. Q. Were you present at our examination at Sedalia?— A. No, sir; understand this, that each local at each point has a grievance committee. It is not their duty to pry- into grievances, but simply to try and adjust grievances after they are brought before- them. Q. Then these grievances came to you as chairman of this district board ?— A. Yes, sir. Q. From the bridgemen, irom the trackmen, and from the switchmen. Did any come from the wipers and hostlers?— A. Now, in regard to the bridgemen, I will aay this, that the grievances have been presented to me in writing by one or more locals. About the bridgemen I personally knew very little until the point had been presented to me- by the local board. Trackmen I know of. Q. What do yon say about switchmen, wipers, and hostlers ?— A. That I know of. LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 443 Q. You know that they were complaining? — ^A. Yes, sir; continually complaining; and just as I say in my statement here, that when they did complain the foreman would curse them. Q. What other class of men in the shops ? — A. The apprentices are complaining a great deal in regard to the small pay they get. I have got a paper here on that very subject that would he of some value to the committee. I think I have got it here. Q. What paper is that? — A. It is a paper referring to apprentices and their pay, and gives you the addresses and everything else. Q. What knowledge have you that this is a correct statement ? — A. To the hest of my belief it is correct. Q. What investigations have you made as to the facts ? — A. I have made only a par- tial investigation. Q. Have you consulted with the men ? — A. I have with some of them. Q. Have you seen the pay-rolls ? — A. No, sir; I have not. Q. Have you seen them with their checks ? — A. No, sir. You have the addresses of the parties there and everything, and the facts can be easily ascertained. Q. What particular cases ou this paper have yon investigated? — A. Well, I do not know that I could state the particular names. I conld not even, give you names of mes in the shop. I know the faces of many of the men that come before me, but I am a poor hand for names, the same as I am with dates; and in the shops the hands are more or less known by their given names. For instance, in my case I am called Martin, and am never called anything else in the shops. It is more familiar. Mr. Btjenes. This may go on record for whatever it is worth. The document is as follows : Names of appren- tices. Time served. Amount paid. Address. Trade. Missouri Pacific. Ed. Tnssey Mike Scalley Jas.Mulcahy Mike Burns Barney Drew Julius Fisher Frank Roper Creiald Holcroft.. Frank Holcroft.. Ed. Kent Ed. Howe Jos. Geiruer Jaa. Drew John Gladhill.. Flank Nevill... John Shack Tim Sullivan... Dan Nevell B. McComas...., Theo. Slack Frank Izenheart.. B. Brady Jos, Goldstein John McClain Years. 3 li U 5 2 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 »3 3 24 2 2 Missouri, Ka/nsas and TexcLs shops. W. Weidermorn... "W, Bumgardner... Hy. Hanson Jno. Jamison ?1 50 1 25 75 1 40 1 00 2 00 2 25 1 65 1 50 1 60 1 00 1 25 1 25 175 1 50 1 25 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 15 1 00 175, 1 25 75 175 2 00 1 75 1 75 East Fourth street, Sedalia East Third street, Sedalia East Howard street, Sedalia East Fourth street, Sedalia East Ninth street, Sedalia Washington avenue, Sedalia East Broadway, Sedalia Corner Sixth and Summit, Sedalia 503 New York avenue, Sedalia West Sixth street, Sedalia East Fourth street, Sedalia Corner Grand avenue and Main street, Sedalia. West Fourth street, Sedalia Latour*s block, Ohio street, Sedalia , East Ninth street, Sedalia Sedalia 732 East Third street, Sedalia , East Ninth street, Sedalia East Fourth, corner New York ave- nue, Sedalia. Sedalia 1116 East Third street, Sedalia East Howard street, Sedalia Sedalia East Howard street, Sedalia East Fourth street, Sedalia^ : East Thirteenth street, Sedalia East Thirteenth street, Sedalia Twelfth and liamme streets, Sedalia.. Boiler-raakor, Do. Do. Do. Do. Machinist. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Tinsmith. Machinist. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Do. Tin and coppersmitib Do. Carpenter. Do. Do. Tinner. * Part of time in Ohio. The above is statment of apprentices at Sedalia. There are several others who have- not yet-handed in their account, but this shows condition of them on an average. H. J. MURRELL, JB. S. 3654. Q. (By Mr. Buknes.) What other classes of men had grievances that were presented to you ? — A. The bridgemen. Q. We have spoken of the bridgemen, trackmen, wipers, and hostlers; were there any complaints from other classes of men ? — A. Not that I remember of. 444 LABOK TEOUBL:ES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. When your executive committee did seriously begin consideration of the strike, •what questions were taken up ? On what did you deliberate ?-^A. We decided to strike. Q. When you were considering the question of the strike? — A. Well, as I have stated, the violations of the contract in not restoring the pay; the overtime worked that was not being paid for, the bridgemen who had been hauled about or traveling without be- ing paid for it; the section men not receiving their pay back — that is, the wages re-, etored; and, then, we considered that the wages even were too small for them; that they could not live on them, as they frequently have only half time. Q. When did you finally conclude as a committee to order the strike ? — A. As I told j-ou, we were prepared to order a strike at any time. I told you that that circular -asked these two questions. That was before the discharge of this man Hall. That was before the meeting of the district assembly at Marshall. Q. Did you receive responses from any of the local assemblies? — A. All of them. Q. They had all answered you that they would sustain you, prior to the discharge of Hall ? — A. Yes, sir; in demanding these questioris. Q. How long before the discharge of Hall had your committee reached the conclu- sion that if it were sustained by the local assemblies a strike vvonld be ordered? — ^A. Well, we had not thoroughly made up our minds when the strike would occur. We thought the submission of those two questions were necessary, and I took that precau- tion individually. Q. When did you first conclude that it was necessary to strike ? — A. After the dia- •charge of Hall. Q. So that you would not have given the order to strike at the time you did but for Ihe discharge of Hall ? — A. That precipitated it. Q. You regarded that as the last straw upon the camel's back ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. You say that these men, your associates in the employment of the company, had all these grievances for eight or nine months, probably suffering in consequence of the .alleged wrongs that were done them. To what general officers of the company, who had power to redress wrongs, did you ever present any of those grievances? — A. I have not presented grievances to the general officers. Q. Not any ? — A. I do not consider it is the place of an employ^ to present grievances to the general officers. If I had gone to see Mr. Hoxie to put grievances beforehim, Mr. Hoxie would refer me to Mr. Kerrigan, Mr. Kerrigan wotfld refer me to somebody else, .and the third one to some one else. And I do not consider that Mr. Hoxie or Mr. Ker- rigan are the proper parties for the employfe to leave grievances before. I believe these grievances come before the master mechanic in the case of the shop men, and in case of the yard men to the yard-master; and it is then their place to take it to the higher -officials. I predicate this belief on the fact .that if I was master mechanic and a griev- ance was presented in the shop and the employ^ wasto take the grievance before higher authorities without first submitting it at least to me, and the higher authorities — that is my superiors — would act upon that grievance without referring it to me, I would con- sider it an insult certainly. Q. How many master mechanics are there — only one for the whole system ? — A. There is one at every point where there is a shop. Q. As the practical head of the order in this district, and certainly an intelligent gen- -tleman, are you not aware, or were you not aware, that there should be some general offi- •cer to establish rates for all these shops; or should one master mechanic establish a rate independent of another, each on his own judgment? Did it not occur to you that you should have a settlement of these grievances, as far as the men in the shops were con- •cerned, with some general officer, who had power over the whole line and over the whole, subject? — A. There is no question bnt what a general officer ought to be over that, but when a grievance exists with an employ6, the master mechanic represents the higher ■official to them, and only through them ought to come their grievances. Q. Would it not have been better for you, who have undertaken to represent the la- boring men so largely, if you had overstepped mere questions of etiquette and propriety and gone directly with the grievances to some one who had the power to redress them ? — A. Understand me, that I do not stoop to a question of etiquette. That is not the pur- pase; no, sir. I meet you, and you will say that I had to deal with Mr. Kerrigan, and -so on. Q. Did ynu tell Mr. Kerrigan of these wrongs that were being done the men? — A. Well, I think I told him of the Texas and Pacific, that is, in regard to Hall. I have told Mr. Kerrigan one or two points before. Q. You say you told Mr. Kerrigan about the wrong done to Hall? — A. Yes, sir. Q. That was only a few days before the strike? — A. Yes, sir. Q. In all the preceding months of these wrongs what communication did you make ■to Mr. Kerrigan? — A. There have been communications made by local boards; per- sonally, I have none. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 44& Q. You made no personal application to Mr. Kerrigan? — A. I have made them per- sonally, but not before him, and for the simple reason that several of the grievances I was led to believe had been presented to Mr. Hoxje prior to me becoming ctairman ot the executive board. Q. Did Mr. Kerrigan ever refuse to listen to any proposition that you had to present, to him for the happiness and rights of these men ? — A. I have never had but one con- ference, in regard to one grievance, vrith Mr. Kerrigan. Q. What was that? — A. In regard to the discharge of the man at Kansas City, named W. T. New. This man had been a nuisance. He was a tyrant among the men. Thes& matters had been brought to the notice of the officials, and I believe to Mr. Kerrigan's notice by the local board at Kansas City. They had been brought very forcibly to the notice of Mr. Sibley, and when there was no likelihood of their being redressed I took hold of it. I knew Mr. Sibley knew all about it. It had been going on for some time, and it was known that this man New was selling jobs. The man that, gave him the most money got the best job. The man that made him the biggest present got the best job. These facts were brought to the attention of Mr. Sibley; and . once I went to see him about it. He said he had investigated the matter, or sent one of his subordinates to investigate him, and he told me that he could not see anything to dis- charge the man for. I referred him to the statements, where Mr. New had been taking, presents, &c. I told him if he could not see anything to discharge the man for in Lhat 1 iid not think he would be treating the company right, and certainly not the employes;, and that if he did not discharge him after the efforts that had been made I would be compelled to call out a strike. Finally Mr. Kerrigan was sent for, and he came out and. adjusted the matter; but this had been going on for some time. The propositions are that I should have taken the grievance to Mr. Hoxie personally, that he would have re- ferred it to Kerrigan, and Kerrigan would have referred it back to Sibley. From that now I would just like to explain the modus operandi in this case. I know that men. have subordinates that are favorites, these subordinates have their favorites, and so on we come down to the laboring man. The consequence is, if webring the case before Mr. Sibley, he sends his subordinate to investigate that matter. These grievances may occur; on account of the one next in charge. Mr. Sibley,, very-probably, will send his subordi- nate to investigate the matter; but we having no person present when the testimony was taken, it was all one-sided. I mention this to show you how it is done, so that you. may understand how they manage to mate the testimony. I know of a case of an engi- neer giving his testimony. I believe he was the second or third witness taken. The- testimony was taken by the railroad officials,, and he refused to sign any such thing. We find that our greatest grievances come from the abuse of petty officers. There is no- question of that. Q. Then the petty officers, so far as the trackmen and the shopmen are concerned, mu.st be confined to other matters than the pay or compensation of them? These local foremen have no power over the general subject of regulating the wages for any part oif.' this system of railroad? — A. No, they have not as I believe. Q. The failure to pay workmen time and a half for certain work, the wrong to bridge- men in transporting them at night time without compensating them for the time con- sumed in traveling, and other like matters, must necessarily come to some general offi- cer? — A. These grievances have been put before the general officer by the proper author- ity, and since the strike was made. Q. You did not present any? — A. No. Q. About that inatter of Mr. New, which you. say Mr. Kerrigan rectified by discharg- ing him, do you know if Mr. New had been complained of at Atchison, and out of regard for the men that the management had sent him from that place to Sedalia? — A. I do- not know ot his ever working over at Atchison. At Sedalia Mr. New went there and the- same thing was pursued by him there as at Kansas City, I have known that man come- into the shop and curse a man for comparatively nothing, and order him to quit forth- with. Q. There was an unbroken line of witnesses at Sedalia/ in support of the liberality and. humane and gentlemanly consideration of all grievances on the part of Mr; Sibley. Did. you ever find Mr. Sibley indisposed to listen to any grievences that you presented? — A. I found Mr. Sibley always a gentleman; bu* he has been led by subordinates in investi- gating matters there, as in New's case. Q. Sometimes a man may be misled by subordinates. . But as far as you knoiv have yon found that Mr. Sibley was always willing to listen to grievances that you had to- present? — A. He did everything in his power to rectify wrongs done to the men. He- must have done everything in his power. I have always considered that he was a gen- tleman and treated any employ^ as such. Q. You never had any difficulty in approaching him? — A. The men all agree that Mr. Sibley is a gentleman. 446 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. Had you any difficulty in approaching him ? — A. Not at all. Q. He always listened to you attentively? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you not find Mr. Kerrigan justas willing to he&r you? — A. I will say for Mr. Kerrigan the first impression I had of him was not a very good one; but I believe Mr. Kerrigan is a gentleman. Q. Do you not know that Mr. Kerrigan, among his associates on the line, is consid- ered as the most gentlemanly superintendent on this line of railroad and that he has at all times manifested a willingness to listen to grievances and to have them considered ? — A. As I said, I have had only that case before Mr. Kerrigan. In the case of New. My idea of Mr. Kerrigan is that I believe that Mr. Kerrigan is a man that would go as far as- he could and be as fair as he could with the employes; but then he is subject to the orders of the officers. Q. And may be misled. Is not that the general estimate of Mr. Kerrigan by the em- ployes of the road? — A. "Well, I believe it is, sir. Q. Do you renlember when the first demand was made for the boycotting of the Wa- bash system of roads ? — A. No, sir. Well, I remember — yes, I remember it. Q. Who was the mover in that matter ? — ^A. Well, it was the organization, not the district assembly. There was what was called a grievance committee — a general griev- ance committee. I do not know all the members that composed that committee; but I think at that time R. W. Drew, of Sedalia, was chairman of it, and a man by the name of Palmer who testified before you the other day was in that boycott. This man Palmer had presented the grievances from the committee to the officials of the road — the same grievances that are represented here. Q. Were you acquainted with the circumstances that led up to the demand for this boycott on the Wabash? — A. I do not know that I am conversant with that thoroughly. Q. Do you understand what reason your associate officers or brethren gave for that demand lor the boycott on the Wabash? — A. Well, yes. The principles of the order are broad. We consider that the "injury of one is the concern of all," and at that time we considered that the men on the Wabash were badly treated, and they had just gi;iev- ances and that it was our duty to support them as far as we could. Q, Then your understanding is that the employes of the Wabash system had griev- ances against the management of that .system, and that under the principles of the broth- erhood this demand was made upon the Pacific road in their behalf? — A. That it was done to enable the men on the Wabash system to obtain Redress of grievances against the Wabash system. Q. Do you remember about the time that this occurred? — A. lam not positive about the time. Q. Was it last year, as late as last summer or fall ? — A. It must have been early ia the summer, if my recollection is right. Q. Was the Wabash road then in the hands of a receiver or nfeceivers? — A. I believe it was, sir. Q. I understand that the Wabash has been in the hands of a receiver since May, 1884. This was since that time. Were you not aware, then, that you were asking for a boy- cott against a road that was under the control and operation of the United States court? — A. I had no action in the matter at that time. Q. Did you ever talk with Mr. Drew upon the subject?— A. I do not believe that I •ever did. Q. Did you ever go with Mr. Drew to any general officer ?— A. I do recollect one morn- ing that Mr. Drew talked to me something about bringing out the employes. I told him he had no authority to do it. I do not recollect of having any talk with Mr. Drew about the boycott. Q. Can you tell me what were the demands made on the Wabash ? — ^A. As I told you, I am not very well conversant with that action so as to talk intelligently upon it, for I did not study anything in regard to it. » Q. Do you not understand what that boycott demanded?— A. I think I saw a few cir- culars there were printed. Q. Did it apply to transportation on Wabash cars?— A. I camnot say. If there was a boycott that would be the natural result. Q. Did it extend to a refusal to interchange business between the two roads?— A. As I say, I am not thoroughly or anything like conversant with that subject at aU. It is a matter, that I did not study at all. Q. Then you can give us your general understanding.— A. I would rather not answer questions that I am not conversant about. ^^.^: T^® "^'^^ "l?'^® ^^^ ^"® allowance.— A. The only thing I know of about the Wabash that I may say I am conversant with is I know there were subscriptions taken upamong the men for the support of the Wabash hands, and outside of that I do not know any- thmg. That is the only thing that I can intelligently give testimony about LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 447 -Q. Do you say that you had no general understanding of what was to be done as against this Wabash road ?— A. I do not, sir. Q. Do you know that on the Missouri Pacific system when the demand was presented by Mr. Drew there was a consent to the demand, and that the officials did consent to ■what we call the boycott on the Wabash? — A. I do not know. Q. Did you ever see any Wabash cars set out of trains ?— A. I cannot say that I have for that purpose. Q. Did you ever see any Wabash cars where the freight was taken out of them and put in cars of some other line? — A. I never have, sir. I have never known that to be -done for that purpose, and, in fact, I do not know that I have ever noticed Wabash cars ■l3oycott«d at any time, either before or since. Q. Was any demand made upon the general management in regard to boycotting the Texas and Pacific prior to the discharge of Hall ? — A. Well, yes, sir. Q. When was that?— A. Shortly after the discharge of Hall. Q. None was made before that? — A. None that I know of, sir. Q. Do you remember to what the boycott extended ? What was the Missouri Pacific -to do or refuse to do with reference to the Texas and Pacific? — A. The object of a boy-j cott was to stop, as far as possible, the traffic on the Texas and Pacific road. Q. Well, it was to prevent the Missouri Pacific system from transporting freight over the Texas and Pacific to Texas ? — A. Yes, sir. , Q. You have heard the testimony in regard to' the car-load of hogs at De Soto, and you Temember that it was said the reason that your brethren interfered against the trans- portation of that car was that it was a Texas and Pacific car, which the Missouri Pacific had no right to transport under the existing boycott? — A. I did not hear the testimony, ■nor have I beard it. Q. Do you know of any case in which the strikers or Knights of Labor objected to the transportation of cars of the Texas and Pacific? — A. Personally, none, sir. Q. Do you know of any instance where freight has been changed from a Texas and Pacific car to a Missouri Pacific or other car? — A. I do not. Q. Was the matter in regard to this strike and ordering boycotts ever talked over be- tween you and anybody? — A. Well, yes; I believe I have talked about boycotts to sev- ■«ial Q. I am not speaking of boycotts in general, nor of the boycott in this strike; but was that a boycott against the Texas and Pacific ? — A. Against the Texas and Pacific ? I have talked about a boycott, but as far as talk is concerned that would not be affected by anything that I could say. I would be simply a request. I might simply request, and the Missouri Pacific had a right to do what they wanted about it. I could not have the power to make it, nor had I given any orders for it. It was simply a request that it should be done. Q. Mr. Irons, you were the chief officer of Assembly No. 101, and had the government of and control over several thousands of human beings. Itseems that your action was to be sustained by all local assemblies, or by the brotherhood of all local assemblies. Is it not fair to assume that a large majority in those local assemblies were ready to act without understanding your motives or your objects, merely on their faith in you, and that they were willing to follow your leadership? — A. Yes, sir; I believe I had the authority to order the strike. Q. I am not speaking of the authority but simply the influence you had. You were in a position as practical governor of your order in this district, holding a position to your people similar to that of Governor Marmaduke with the people of Missouri. Being in authority, holding that position, and enjoying the confidence and trust of so many thousands of laboring men, many of whom were suffering alleged wrongs connected with their wages or compensation and with other grievances — knowing this, did you not know that they were called upon for assessments to sustain their striking brethren on the Wabash system, and that they were lending you and Mr. Drew and other represent- atives of the order necessarily subordinate to you their power and their influence in be- half of the boycott against a connecting railroad which furnished business for the- very line for which you all worked ? You must have known that the ability of the company to pay wages to these men depended upon its ability to do business, and when you were depriving the company of the business that it could do by a friendly connection with another road were you not diminishing its revenues and resources and disabling it so that it was less able to raise the wages of your brethren and reward faithfulness and good conduct on their part? — A. That was a question that could not be very well put at that time ; and, as I stated before, I had no authority except simply to ask the men at the different points to request the Missouri Pacific to do it. Q. Have you protested against this boycotting of the railroad? — A. No, sir. Q. Did you take any part in the direction of preventing it? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Will you, as an intelligent representative of your order, tell me what good can be Accomplished for the masses of men whom you represent by such a demand? Is itpos- 448 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. sible for you to conceive of any good to them that could follow the establishmentof this, boycott? — A. Well, yes, sir. .,, Q. Please state what it could be. — A. I believe it would he less needed in ourorgan.-i ization when the employes had the power to get their rights without resorting to aboy-i cott and stopping the trafiic on the road that was boycotted. I think certainly it would, benefit the different men running that road, and I believe it would do a great deal of good* to the men by adjusting their demands. , ' Q. Are you aware, or is (it a fact, that the laws of the State of Missouri require that one railroad shall have practical connection with another, so as to receive and inter- change business the one. with the other ? — A. I am well aware of that, and am likewise- '; aware of another thing, that the charters of the railroads compel the AUroads to rnU' them and without any question of the law as to what wages they may pay their em- ployfe. Q. You are aware of the fact that the laws of Missouri require a company to inter- change business with all other railroad companies connected with it? — A. I do. I have said that it was brought to my notice. Q. Were you not then aware that Brother Drew and others, in demanding this boycott' on the Missouri Pacific system, were making a demand that was a violation of law ? — A. I do not know that any such demand was made. Q. If it were made, were you not aware that it was in violation of existing law ? — A. Well, no, sir. - Q. I understood you to'say that it had been brought to your notice that such a law as that was in existence ? — A. I likewise say I do not believe we have the power to demand' a boycott. It is only a request. Q. You mean that Mr. Drew did not make a demand, but simply a request? — A. I do not know that he either made a demand or request. I do not know for certain that he did — that is on the Wabash. (J. You said that was your understanding, did you not, that a demand was made on the- Missouri Pacific to refuse to interchange business with the Wabash? — A. As I told you, I was not conversant with that at all. I do not know whether a boycott was asked for by Mr. Drew or a demand made that they should boycott that road. (J. What position did Mr. Drew hold? — A. He was chairman of what is called the grievance committee, a committee in existence before the organization of the executive board. Q. How 4oes it happen in your organization that the chairman of a local grievance com- mittee can undertake a strike and make a demand that affects the whole system of the Mis- souri Pacific without the knowledge or consent and without the power or authority of the- representatives of the joint assemblies of District No. 101? — A. Well, Mr. Drew was chairman of a committee previous to the organization of District Assembly 101, and as chairman of that grievance committee he had greater powers than I possess now. Q. Then the boycott was ordered before the constitution of 101 ? — A. Yes. To explain • myself in regard to him having more power than I have now, I will state that I have always opposed one-man power, and have so advocated both in the local assemblies and,. in the district assemblies. We have a government of a majority, depriving the chairman, himself of that power. The chairman of the executive board now can only order a strike aiter referring it to every local assembly on the system or in the district. He is simply ■ an executive officer, and has no legislative power. Q. You have said that this executive committee of District Assembly No. 101 was organized about nine months ago? — A. It was organized in September last. Q. The Wabash was in the hands of a receiver in May, 1884, a year or more before the organization of your executive board? — A. Yes, sir. Q. At the time that Mr. Drew made this demand, if he made it, there was no execu- tive board of District Assemb].y 101 ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Was each local board acting independently ? — A. No, sir. > Q. Was there any general authority over the local assemblies prior to the organization ■ of District Assembly 101 ? — A. There were delegates sent from each assembly or each division. For instance, there may be four or five assemblies in one town. Very probably these assemblies would get together and send only one or two delegates from that town; but do not understand that each assembly was represented in this convention. In this convention this grievance committee was formed with power to act. Q. Then this committee was in the nature of the executive committee of District No. ' 101 ? — A. Yes, sir; only with larger powers. Q. Had you ever any conversation with any of the authorities of the road in regard to- the matter so far as you are concerned? — A. In regard to the boycott on the Wabash ?■ No, sir. Q. Did you in regard to that on the Texas and Pacific?— A. No, sir; I did not. Well, LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 449 hold on; I had, hut it was after the strike, not previous to the strike. I had a conver- sation -with Mr. Sibley the day after the strike. Q. Will you state what that conversation was? — A. Well, I believe Mr. Sibley asked me why I did not hold on the boycott. I think that was all that passed. He said, to the best of my recollection, "Why don't you hold on the boycott, and rest at that?" Q. To what boycott did he allude? — A. The boycott on the Texas and Pacific. Q. Had you demanded a boycott? — A. I never asked them to put it on. Q. What did you understand Mr. Sibley to mean by that remark? — A. Well, I un- derstood there was a boycott on, and he asked me why I did not hold on to that. Q. Do you mean that Mr. Sibley intimated that he desired the boycott to be con- . tinned? — A. He thought that there was more to be accomplished by a boycott than a strike. • Q. He preferred a boycott to a strike; but that was all the conversation you had with him? — A. That was all the talk we had that day. Q. Have you any other answer than that to make ? — A. No, sir. Q. Had you any conversation with Governor Brown in regard to the boycott?— A. No, sir. Q. You spoke of a desire to get recognition for the order. In making such a demand as that, or in acting in reference to securing recognition, had you the consent and co- operation of the general organization, as represented by Mr. Powderly, or were you acting unaided and alone as the representatives of District Assembly No. 101 ? — A. I was acting as the representative of District A ssembly 101 , and had no conference with the gen- eral assembly on the matter. I was thinking by having recognition for the order I would gain a great deal for the employes, and that it would by that means we could bring in these men who were not considered as being covered by the contract. Q. Had you or your executive board at any time asked for the interference of the gen- eral representatives of the order? — A. No, sir. Q. Did,you call upon them for assistance ? — A. For assistance? Not until the general board had offered it. Q. Not until they had tendered it? — A. No, sir. Q. When the tender was made, you understood by whom it was made ? — A. Well, in making this statement, I want it understood that the proposition was made not by a quorum of the general board, but simply as individuals; not acting in the capacity as a board. There was no quorum of the board in the city at that time, hence they could not.act as a board; and anything I would say on that subject would not be taken in the actions qf the general board, nor of myself as representative of 101. Q. Will you give, me the names of the gentlemen who tendered this assistance and service? — A. Well, yes, I can give you the names. The ones I had a conversation were Messrs. BaUey and Hayes. Q. Had you any tender from Mr. Powderly ? — A. None, sir. Q. What did they tender? — A. They did not make any tender; they simply asked me questions; if they should do certain things, what benefit would it be to the employ^ of the Southwestern system. There was no real tender made, because they could not make a tender of it. They had no authority. Q. Did you request them or authorize them to interfere then ? — A. No, sir ; it simply came round in rather a conversational manner. Q. Did you consult your committee in regard to accepting their tender or offer? — A. I did not, sir. Q. Was there a special offer by the committee of their services? — A. No, sir. Q. You have said, I believe, that there was no quorum of the general management of the order present when these gentlemen were sent out here??— A. Yes, sir. Q. Then these men who called upon Mr. Hoxie were not duly authorized by the gen- . eral government of the order? — A. Well, I am not so sure but that there were three of them then ; but I would not be positive about it. Q. Under the system of government of your order they had no authority to act here without your consent? — ^A. I think not. Q. You did not authorize them to go to Mr. Hoxie as your representative?— A. We asked them to go. Q. Did your committee, or did you individually, request them to go ? — A. Yes, sir. Q. I understand you to say that you did not consult your committee in the matter ? — A. Yes, sir ; they were requested by myself and the committee to go to Mr. Hoxie. I wanted anything done that could be done for a settlement, and have taken every means in mypowerto bring about a settlement. But, as I have said, in making any settlement, I wanted something that would be hung up in the hall or in the shops so that we could do away with this continual making of little grievances that was so annoying — ^it was cer- tainly annoying to the committee. I wanted something substantial, and if an employ^ 3984 LAB 3 29 450 LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. violated it I wanted him thfown out as quick as I would have the company redress a violation they made. Q. Were these contracts of March 16, 1885, and May 25, the same year, read out in your assembly ? — A. I think they were both read in the assembly, and posted in some of the shops, at least. Q. Were they posted up in the rooms of the assemblies ? — A. No, sir; not as a gen- eral thing, at least. Q. Were the men generally informed as to the provisions of these contracts ? — A. Yes, sir; I think so. Q. In any of your consultations concerning the strike, were any other causes of griev- ance considered than those you have mentioned? — A. Than those enumerated? Q. Yes, sir. — A. Well, I believe that embraces the grievance* on the system; bntl* would rather ycu would go over the list of grievances. Q. Did you ever take into consideration the effect of the existing mode of payment by the company to the men? Is it a disadvantage to them? — A. The mode of payment? Well,, not that I know of, sir. Q. It never has occurred to your committee, then, that there wasany cause of com- plaint because of the mode of payment — say on or about the 15th of April, as pay day for the work done in the whole month of March? — A. Well, that has been frequently spoken of to myself by individuals; but that has never been brought forth as an exist- ing grievance. It has been frequently complained olj and I thinlj it amounts to a greater disadvantage to those that have to pay for their meals, &c., than if they were paid weekly. Q. Does it become a necessity that the men should create bills for the necessaries of life at stores under the control or management of any one connected in any way with any officers of the company? — A: Well, I think not, as a general thing; but in some cases I btlieve it does. Q. Did the stores at which the men procured their supplies sell at the ordinary rate, .at a reduced rate, or at an increased rate, on account of the credit they had to give? — A. From what the general impression is, they charged a higher rate. Q. Do you know whether the bills of the stores are deducted from the pay-roll and paid ■directly by the company to the merchants? — A. As far as my personal observation goes, I have not seen it; still I have been told that it is done on some parts of the system. Q. Suppose your committee had power to order a boycott, have you any reason to be- lieve that the order would be obeyed? — A. Suppose that our committee had the power to order a boycott; our committee has no authority to order a boycott without first put- • ting the matter before the assemblies. This old committee had the power, perhaps, to do such things; but, as I told you, I am not given that much power.' Q. When you had fully considered the questions of gtievances on the part of the em- ployes of this system you submitted resolutions- to the local assemblies for their action. Have you copies or can you give us copies of the resolutions sent to the local assemblies for their consideration and action? — A. This circular that I issued, you have reference to that? Q._ I do not know the form in which you do it, but as I understand it, when the ex- •ecutive committee have made up their mind that a strike is necessary, you send out a document, as a precautionary measure, to the local assemblies, asking them if the action of the executive board will be sustained in case it orders a strike. Have you copies of 'the papers that were thus sent to the local assemblies ? — A. I have not, sir. Q. Can you furnish us copies? — A. I might not be able to get one. -Q. Do you not keep a record of Assembly No. 101 ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 'Q. Would there be any difficulty in obtaining a copy of those records and sending them to us? — A. At what place ? Q. At Washington ? — A. No, sir. Q. Will you do that?— A. Yes, sir. (Mr. Buchanan here handed to Mr. Humes the copy of the hectograph circular con- taining the propositions referred to the local assemblies which had been obtained by the subcommittee from Mr. Lovin at Forth Worth, Tex.) Mr. BuENES (to witness and handing him the paper). Look at that, and see if it is a correct copy ? The Witness. It must be my signature. That is not my signature, sir. Q. Do you believe that to be a copy of the circular sent to the local assembly ?— A. I do not know, unless their seal was attached; and there is no seal to it. • i **■ '^^^ *^® subistance of it and say do you recognize it as a probable copy ?— A. Well, it may be; I believe it is pretty near a copy, if not a copy. Q. Then we will rely upon you to send a copy to our chairman, Governor Curtin, at Washington. Does that order relate to the Texas and Pacific as well as the Missouri Pacific?— A. I havis not read the whole of it -^i * n LABOR TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 451 Q. Were there more than one order issued? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Will you send copies of all orders?— A. I will try and do it. In regard to the sig- nature on that paper, I will say it is not my signature, but might have been put thero by my authority. Q. Were you personally acquainted with Mr. New?— A. Yes, sir. Q. He lived in Sedalia?— A. Yes, sir. Q. Was there any complaint against him while he lived in Sedalia?— A. Yes, sir; fre- quent. Q. Do you know why he was removed to Kansas City?— A.. Well, I think when the superintendents were removed he was changed to Mr. Sibley at Kansas City from the fiict that there had been a discharge made at Kansas City. Q. Are you certain that complaints were made against him while yet at Sedalia and before he went to Kansas City? — A. They were to the master mechanic at the time that he was general foreman at ^dalia. Newall was the master mechanic. Q. In speaking of complaints that were presented to your executive board by the local assembly, do you remember whether any of them antedated March 15, 1885 — any -complaints by the bridgemen or any other employes prior to March 15, 1885? — A. That would have been presented to me? Q. You did not consider anything prior to March, 1885?— A. Not until after Sep- tember. Q. Are you not aware of the fact that the compensation to apprentices, or the prices paid to them, was increased just prior to the strike? — ^A. It did not come to my knowl- edge if it was. It certainly was not in Sedalia, sir. I know that it was refused the apprentices on their own application. Q. Do yon know whether the persons whose names are on the paper that has been presented here are members of the order? — A. The names of these apprentices? Q. The names of those apprentices? — A. Well, not all of them. Q. What proportion are members of the order? — A. I do not know. Q. Did yon formulate a list of grievances after the strike of March, 1886? — A. For- mulate a. list of grievances ? I got up a regular list as a basis of settlement, to be ready should we come to that point. Q. Did the list of grievances that you got up after the 6th of March extend beyond the grievances that were passed upon by the local assemblies and transferred to the general executive board? — A. Well, yes, sir. I aimed to embody all the grievances, to bring up the general thing and settle it all at once. This was never presented to the raUroad corporations, from the fact that they never gave us a chance to do it; but I made out that list as a basis of agreement, and of course we expected to get it in. Q. Have you knowledge of the tact that individuals were selected to go round among the employes to find out grievances so as to secure as universal an expression of dissat- isfaction as possible after the strike? — ^A. I have no knowledge of it. Q. On your trip to Marshall, Tex., did you not meet Mr. Sibley and Mr. Kerrigan in Sedalia, and have an interview with them? — ^A. I had an interview vrith Mr. Sibley; yes, sir. Q. Had you an interview with Mr. Kerrigan also? — A. At Saint Louis ; yes, sir. Q. Did you mention to either one of them at those interviews any causes of grievance mentioned by you now? — A. I think not, sir. I was npdh other business then. Q. (By the Chaieman. ) Did I understand you to say that Mr. Sibley said to you he preferred a boycott rather than a strike ? — A. He did not say that he preferred; he said that he believed a boycott would be more effectual, or at least have as much effect. Q. Are you not aware that Mr. Sibley yielded to the demands that were made upon him in regard to that road, and that indulgences were given to him to take some cars over the road which were then held under that boycott? — A. Personally, I do not. I have been told that he did. Q. Are there not instances of boycotting railroads and individual citizens doing bus- iness, not members of your order, for the reason that they do not seem to agree with the order. Is that not done in the case of merchants? — A. A boycott is never placed on any one by authority of the local assembly, or any other branch of the order, without we can find no other way of adjusting the case. Q. To boycott a man because he did not sympathize with the order, would that be justifiable? — A. No, sir. It has never been done here. Q. Are yon not aware it has been done? — A. If it has been done at any time it has been done without the sanction of the order. Q. Boycotting a newspaper, or freezing it out? — ^A. Boycotting a newspaper that had been hard upon the order may have been done. Q. Boycotting a merchant ?—A.- Boycotting a merchant ?■ That might have been done. I voted against anything of that kind. Q. You are aware that it has befen done ? — A. I suppose that it has been done. 452 LABOE TROUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. Q. It is just to you to say that we have evidence in our examinations showing .that it has been done to a large extent, and that it has been sanctioned by the local assemblies; but you say that no local assembly has the right to issue a boycott? — ^A. No local a* sembly has the right to issue a boycott on any one without just cause. Q. I am only speaking of men who did not agree with you. — A. I do not agree with that, and do not care for them not agreeing with the Knights of Labor. I do not think a boycott has ever been put on for that purpose. Q. I only want to know how far yon, who are in authority in an organization con- trolling so many thousand men, favored boycotting an individual and interfering with his business ?— A. I look upon a boycott in this way, sir. I have opposed boycotts a good deal myself; still I believe the boycott in some cases is a good instrument; bilt it is like all other good tools, it is liable to abuse. Q. I do not speak of any impropriety in organization for protection at all, but I merely wanted to know from you whether boycotting individuals because they do not sympa- thize with your movement would be considered proper ? — ^. I say emphatically no. Q. You say that you are not aware it has been done? — A. No, sir; I am not. Q. Are you aware that Mr. Sibley was censured by the railroad authorities for his concession at the time when the railroad was boycotted ? — A. I am not, sir. Q. Are you not aware that Mr. Sibley went to the Knights and asked that certain trains be permitted to go over the road? — A. No, sir; I am not. Q. (By Mr. Pabkee. ) Have you ever belonged to any other labor organization than the Kn'ghts of Labor? — A. Yes, sir. Q. What was it?— A. The Grange. Q. The Farmers' Grange? — A. Yes, sir. Q. Any others? — A. Not strictly labor organizations. Q. Well, organizations to protect laboring men, other than insurance companies? — A. No, sir; I have belonged to no other. I belonged to several organizations, such as the Ancient Order of Workmen and the Odd Fellows. Q. Are you an Odd Fellow now ? — A. No, sir; not now. Q. When did you leave them?— A. The Odd Fellows? I left the Odd Fellows a short time after the war. Q. Did you live in New Orleans at that time? — ^A. Yes, sir. Q. What business were you in ? — A. In the grocery business. Q. In the saloon business? — A. No, sir. Q, But it was a grocery business. Have you a family? — A. No, sir. Q. You have none now ? — ^A. Yes, most decidedly. Q. Consisting of whom? — A. Well, I have got'some children; I do not know as that is a question that I have a right to answer, these questions about family. Mr. Parker. If there is any objection to it I do not insist. The Witness. I do not know; I think these are private matters. Q. At the tinie of the strike, March 6, had you any interest in the property of any of these railroads ?— A. No, sir; not that I know of. Q. Do you own a house and lot? — ^A. No, sir. Q. Had you any amount of means, or any financial means, at that time ? — ^A. Well, I do not know that I can intelligently say what, is meant by financial means. Q. Whether you had anything substantially beyond your earnings at that time ?— A. Well, yes, sir; I have a lot or two. Q. Located where ?— A. In Rosedale, Kans. Q. Worth how much?— A. I do not know what the lots are worth now; I suppose they cost me about a thousand dollars. Q. Are they worth that or more now ?— A. They are worth about half that now. Q. Whatotherproperty except your household goods had you at that time?— A. That is all, I believe. Q. How long have you been employed on the Missouri Pacific road ?— A. About three years. Q. What has been your position among the men, as foreman or otherwise ?— A. Well, I have been about a high private all the time. Q. You never received any promotion, then ? — ^A. No, sir. Q. You spoke of the organization of one of these assemblies and of an "unknown knight". Is there any objection tp telling what is known of the " unknown knight "?— A. Well, that IS the title of the officer; simply a title. ^ Q. Is he known or unknown, or is there some secret about that?— A. I think he is known as well as the balance of them. Q. Has he any private duties to perform that are of a secret nature?— A Nothing outside of any other officer. Q. Will you repeat the words of the order for .the strike?— A. I do not know that I can intelligently. LABOR TEOUBLES IN THE SOUTH AND WEST. 453 Q. Well, substantially. We have trayelcd some Ihousands of miles and -we have not found one witness -who can give the words of the order.— A. I shall take this upon my- self, that I shall fiirnish one and send it with the other papers to yon at Washington. Q. Very well, that will be acceptable, and the Chairman snggests that there should be some authentication of it by some official. The Witness. The seal of the order? Mr. Paekbe. That will identify it. Mr. BUCHAISTAK. It seems singular that this gentleman can not give the words of that order. We have traveled nearly 2,000 miles to find out, among other things, the terms of this order, and we have not received anything but the form of a telegram. It seems strange that this gentleman, who issued the order, can only give us the substance of the order. Q. (By Mr. Parkee to witness. ) Suppose you try and repeat it as far as you can. — A. I would rather give yon a verbatim copy, Q, Confine .yourself to the question, and state the words of the order for the strike. — A. I do not know that I can; it was simply an order. Q. You are not answering my question; if we continue the examination you will have •to answer the question. State the words of the order. — A. The words I can not teU you intelligently. Q. State the order for the strike ; if you can not state it exactly tell it as nearly as you